The Wake County school board majority is getting some online love to counter opposition from backers of the old diversity policy.
Local conservative activist Judy Keener started Monday an online "petition of appreciation" for the school board that thanks them for putting up with "relentless and unfair attacks & pressure." Among other things, the petition thanks the board for "keeping your word," "providing ALL FAMILIES choice in education,” "recognizing the importance of FAMILIES” and "willingness to abandon failed policies and practices.”
"Please keep up the good work," according to the petition. "Do not get discouraged. Remember that we support you and are deeply grateful."
Since Monday, 242 signatures have been collected. The names show on the list show a number of supporters of the board majority, including WCTA President Russell Capps, SEANC President Dana Cope, Jennifer Mansfield of the Wake Schools Community Alliance and Allison Backhouse of Wake CARES.
Cope wrote that he was applauding the board for "standing up for the rights of all children in Wake County" and "doing away with an outdated policy that was harmful to our low performing students by busing them away from their communities in order to conceal their low test scores."
"You truly have the higher moral ground and I applaud your bold leadership," wrote Cope, who backed the new board members and later saw his neighborhood reassigned back to Lacy Elementary. "Finally, elected officials who do what they say after election."
CORRECTION
The petition website originally mistakenly listed the Wake County Taxpayers Association as being the creator. It was created by Judy Keener. The WCTA is only encouraging people to sign the petition.
Comments
Very Entertaining Week For...
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 22:39 — Apexcitizen1Very entertaining week for the WCPSS BOE debate. The insane asylum certainly opened its doors this week to let the crazies out on both sides of the isle.
Here's a sampling from both sides:
Please add others the the list. Its a good way to put some of these items into perspective. In reality its pretty scarry in that both sides of the board only seem to be listening to their hard core constituents. Best course of action in the long run will be to get about two to three more election cycles beyond this board and the previous board.
Shutting down Project
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 13:54 — jenmanShutting down Project Enlightment demonstrates the board majority does NOT CARE about families.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also wish that PE's budget hadn't been cut (they weren't shut down). But you should be holding the minority members accountable for this as well. I don't recall any push from them to save PE from budget cuts.
We don't know that costs will go up with a community schools model. That is merely speculation.
Where can we sign to question the petition?
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 13:06 — RonBThe families of students reassigned from Garner High to SE Raleigh without a hearing had NO CHOICE.
Years of overcrowding in existing schools to build a school in the middle of nowhere is not acting in the best interest of students or tax payers, since costs will go up,
Creating high poverty schools will cost more than the current economic diversity system.
Shutting down Project Enlightment demonstrates the board majority does NOT CARE about families.
There is plenty of examples that low income neighborhood schools fail; how could anyone with a clear conscience sign a petition encouraging that? They either have a complete lack of understanding of the reality of the school board majority's actions, or they want select parts of the county to succeed at the expense of the rest of Wake.
"Shutting down Project
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 14:01 — woodstock"Shutting down Project Enlightment demonstrates the board majority does NOT CARE about families."
-----------------------------------------------
WRONG! It means they understand the role and responsibility of a public K-12 school system.
They didn't shut down project enlightenment...
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 15:00 — midtownmomthey cut funding for positions that interacted directly with parents of mostly preschoolers. Project Enlightenment is still very strong.
It should be surprising
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 12:18 — WhalerCaneIt should be surprising that the Wake County Taxpayers Association would support bringing New Jersey style highly segregated small school districts to North Carolina since they result in such high taxes there, but unfortunately, it is not.
As usual, penny wise and pound foolish. They should change their name to the 'Waste County Taxpayers Money Association."
You're right Whaler. The
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 13:53 — virginiadareYou're right Whaler. The Taxpayers Association is largely responsible for the problems in WCPSS today. They lobbied the county commissioners year after year not to provide the funding needed for the programs to increase achievement, which is why we are one of the lowest-funded systems in the state and nation, even though we are one of the wealthiest counties. They advocated for year round schools to save money and caused the school board to reluctantly make the MYR decision, in hopes that they would back the bond needed to build new schools. They campaigned against bond issues over and over again, causing the defeat of the bond referendum one year which directly led to the school board limiting the amount they asked for in 2006 to build new schools to handle the massive growth. If anyone is to blame for this mess, it is the Taxpayers' Association!
just wondering
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 21:26 — prescott2Just wondering how Taxpayers Association justifies paying Farr $50K for zilch, or hiring the highest cost headhunter for superintendent search, or saddling the taxpayers with Forest Ridge? Maybe Paul Stamm can't find his megaphone.
?
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 23:45 — Bob_Sconce(1) WCTA has had a long-standing contention that the district was paying too much for legal services. The board paid Farr $50K for an audit that came up with solid recommendations for improving the service and decreasing the cost of the district's legal need. Unfortunately, the political mood is so poisoned that actually implementing any of those changes will be a complete distraction.
(2) It was the previous board that saddled the taxpayers with Forest Ridge. And, they're not really saddles -- they just have an asset that's somewhat less liquid than what they traded for it.
Farr Report
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 23:59 — Solon77Did we read the same report ? The Farr report came up with nothing, other than a potential cost savings if we self insure our own buildings. They confirmed Tharrington was more than competent and doing a cost effective job. Their only justification for an in house attorney was - because the overall wcpss budget was $1.2b and an entity that size should have it's own attorney.
With the high temperatures perhaps drinking a little to much kool-aid
I wonder if we did read the same thing
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 10:10 — Bob_SconceThe most compelling justification for an in-house attorney that I saw (indeed, the most important part of the entire report) was the section that talked about the ability of an attorney to avoid "legal calamity." The idea is that the district needs somebody internally to monitor the district's legal compliance -- this is a job that outside attorneys cannot do effectively -- you need somebody is there every day, involved in the day-to-day operations of the district. That section ended with "The current absence of even a single full-time attorney, for an organization with a billion dollar operating budget, poses an untenable risk to each Board member's fiduciary duty to the school system and the public."
Pfft...
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 12:40 — Bob_SconceNo wonder you political types are so distrusted -- you couldn't have put more spin on that if you put it on a carousel. You're the only person talking about creating small school districts or importing New Jersey's many problems.
Northern districts have high taxes because (1) their schools are largely funded by property taxes, not income taxes [A choice that NC should make, considering the budget crunch caused by reliance on income taxes], (2) unionization leading to much higher labor costs, (3) just general overall high cost-of-living. Their assignment model has nothing to do with it.
Small district talk?
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 08:21 — logosisdeadVia WRAL, March 11:
"On Thursday, Margiotta also mentioned the possibility of dividing the district into pieces.
“There is a big difference in what goes on in Zebulon and what goes on in the southwestern part of Cary,” he said. “They should have their own school districts or, at least, assignment zones and have a certain amount of autonomy.”
And...
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 13:01 — Bob_SconceA few days later, he said that breaking the district up wasn't a serious proposal, and there was no way it would work.
It's not on the radar screen.
Do we know that?
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 13:55 — Dove314Do we know that assignment zones won't be geographically specific to say Garner and, once established, won't have central office staff realigned to match the zones creating a level of autonomy for Garner that did not previously exist? Isn't that an aspect of "stability" being built in to the new assignment policy? Or did I misunderstand?
So...
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 14:22 — Bob_SconceAssignment zones, by definition, will be geographically specific, but their boundaries are very much up in the air. I don't think I've heard anybody talking about assigning district staff to different zones, although I note that the district does have area superintendents currently -- I suppose they could get realigned to match clusters of zones. I think JT was talking about having about a dozen zones, so there wouldn't be one A.S. per zone.
Yes, I think that I've heard
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 16:00 — jenmanYes, I think that I've heard about aligning Area Supts with the assignment zones as well. Makes sense to me. It's been brought up before by different people that it's a bit odd that the AS don't currently line up with the districts.
So
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 17:02 — Dove314So then add in that most likely they'll bring in a business person to run the district. I don't think it is at all far-fetched that you will find the creation of autonomous zones that relate to each other but are independent at the assignment zone level. And those zones will most likely be structured around municipalities at least in part to match the geographic spread of hte population. I don't think you can say that Mr. Margiotta isn't dividing the district into more autonomous zones or clusters. It may not be at the district level but it isn't much different if it is just below the district level.
But funding is still
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 17:11 — jenmanBut funding is still district wide. I really don't see it as that much different than what we've got today with all the area supts. I don't know, nobody's convinced me it's the worst idea or the best idea. I'm just kind of 'eh' about it.
Eek...
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 17:08 — Bob_SconceI hope they're not drawing along district lines, which are redrawn every 10 years after the census results come out -- late this year or early next. Trying to line up the zones with the districts would be a nightmare. Besides, with the locations of high schools, I don't think that would work particularly well.
hadn't thought of that
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 17:46 — jenmanhadn't thought of that Bob. Good point.
Frankly, it doesn't matter
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 12:54 — jenmanFrankly, it doesn't matter what Margiotta wants to do regarding this. He can't do anything--it has to be done in the legislature and that's never going to happen. Before it could go any further, the entire Wake delegation would have to approve. That's traditionally how things are done--legislators in other parts of the state don't feel right voting for or against something affecting another area if not all the delegates from that area are in agreement. This is why the move towards at-large elections never went anywhere. It fell along party lines with Dems opposing it.
I don't even think one other BOE member would vote for breaking up the district, let alone a majority.
Plus WhalerCane gets paid to
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 15:25 — woodstockPlus WhalerCane gets paid to dream up this stuff. It is futile ...and he and the extreme left know it, which is why they are so desperately grasping for attention by any means possible. All he is doing is preaching to his small fringe choir of socialist race-baiters who we are getting to know by name: Barber, the Meekers, Gatewood, Brannon, Fitzsimon, Petty, Tyson, Goodmon and Quarles ...and there isn't anything anyone can say that will sway them from pursuing their ultra-left-wing goal to restore the status quo. As with their quest for school board seats last fall, this too will fail.
Woodstock, What's the matter
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 23:57 — Apexcitizen1Woodstock,
What's the matter tonight? Tired? I only see three bait phrases in this post.
Whalercane as always frames up very logical positions that make for good debate.
Could you answer a simple question? Why do you post Mr. Quarles "ultra-left wing" website? Did you realize your participation helps to add hits to the ad meter on this site.
More click = More add revenue
More add revenue = More fuel for his ultra-left wing agenda.
Strange how your support Mr. Quarles "ultra-left wing" agenda here. I'm beginning to sense there's really an inner liberal in you trying to get out. Have a nice weekend.
You must be dizzy from all
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 06:50 — woodstockYou must be dizzy from all that spinning.
One thing: WhalerCane "logical?" Now, THAT is funny. Thanks.
He has added
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 06:20 — Athey01"socialist race baiter"... I don't remember hearing that one before.
Redundancy costs plus rescue
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 12:55 — WhalerCaneRedundancy costs plus rescue funds for high poverty schools = higher taxes = New Jersey.
Ha!
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 14:31 — Bob_SconceWell, that's an interesting shift. I thought your position was that the high poverty NJ districts couldn't spend any money on their schools. Now, those high poverty schools are absurdly expensive? As to redundancy, I suspect that's offset by bureaucracy -- you don't need multiple layers of administration if you have a district of, say, 9 schools.
In 2007, Average NJ teacher salary was about $60K. At the same time, average NC teacher salary was about $46K. We can hire 4 teachers for what it costs them to hire 3. That's huge, and it doesn't include the significantly larger benefit costs that NJ state employees enjoy.
My position has been
Thu, 07/08/2010 - 22:48 — WhalerCaneMy position has been consistent. I am glad people from New Jersey have moved here, but do not want to turn us into New Jersey. Average Teacher Salary is higher in part to get them to stay in high poverty schools.
High poverty schools cost more money and do not deliver results. You can discount me because of my profession, but I pay attention, and would advocate for a controlled choice community schools model.
New Board says they do not want to segregate schools, but you can't get there ignoring social economic status and race. It doesn't have to be either/or, there can be a third way.
Questions...
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 04:59 — JanisTangoHonest questions.
Do you feel we have the right for force any family to be bused if it is not their 'choice'?
Do you feel that forced busing would be OK if the 'choice model' results in creating a few 'high poverty' schools because of the families that 'choose' to stay in their own community?
"Do you feel we have the
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 10:02 — zande"Do you feel we have the right for force any family to be bused if it is not their 'choice'?"
Well... of course! If that family cannot drive their child to school then their child will be "forced" to take a bus unless that child's family chooses to home school them.
This whole "forced busing" word choice is ludicrous. Attendance in school in NC is mandatory. Lots of families cannot drive their children to school.. therefore all school busing is "forced."
Since you Want To Deal With Semantics...
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 11:42 — JanisTangoOK Amelia Bedelia, let me rephrase the question....
1) Do you feel we have the right to force any family to attend a school outside of a 5 mile radius of their home if it's not their choice? If so, why? I'm using the 5 mile radius because I've heard time and time again that 90-95% of the kids don't go further than 5 miles of their home (excluding the magnet kids that go to magnets by choice). If that is true (which I don't believe to be the case) then anything this new board is doing should not ever be a problem Right? Why should 5-10% of the kids be 'forced' to go further than 5 miles if it's not their choice ?
Let me rephrase my comment...
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 17:13 — zande"Do you feel we have the right to force any family to attend a school outside of a 5 mile radius of their home if it's not their choice?"
Let me rephrase my answer. Or make my answer a question to you. "Does a family in Wake county automatically have a right to attend a school within 5 miles of their house if a free bus ride is provided by the system?"
How about this answer....
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 17:27 — Bob_SconceStudents have a right to attend a reasonably proximate school, and the district must obtain their consent before assigning them to a non-proximate school, even if the district would provide the transportation at its expense.
I don't think you can put a 5-mile limit, because some students don't live within 5 miles of a school at their level.
Let Me Ask A Question Back...
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 17:22 — JanisTangoOK...I'll answer my question with another question.
Why do 90-95% of the people get to attend within 5 miles of their home and the other 10% don't? If you look at my school, the majority of the kids that travel farther that 5 miles (quite a bit farther for some) are mostly AA kids. Why should they be penalized and singled out? Please don't get into a argument that says I don't want these kids at my school. That couldn't be further from the truth. I happen to know many of these children and some of their parents. I know it's a hardship for their families to get to certain events at the school. One of my son's friends wrote in his essay for the 4th grade writer's celebration that he loves school and he's sad when he misses the bus because he can't come. There is nobody to bring him.
"One of my son's
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 11:33 — zande"One of my son's friends wrote in his essay for the 4th grade writer's celebration that he loves school and he's sad when he misses the bus because he can't come. There is nobody to bring him."
A couple of points. Firstly, how close would that child have to be to school in order to get there if he misses the bus? Would he have to walk? There are very few walkable schools.
Second, I have no idea what school you are referring to or from what node this child was bused. But, for discussions sake, if this child lives in SE Raleigh (and I have no idea if he does or not but that is the part of the county I am the most concerned about) then I really hope that he still likes his school in a few years. I hope for his sake that the SE Raleigh schools do not become the very high poverty schools that I fear they will be. See the above posts regarding Hunter, Ligon et al. If they do become very high poverty schools (as is predicted in the neighborhood assignment model) then I would contend that he is being "penalized and singled out" simply because of where he landed in this world. He has no choice in who his parents are or where they must live.
Also, if what Bob Sconce said is true (I had not heard this before):
"Students have a right to attend a reasonably proximate school, and the district must obtain their consent before assigning them to a non-proximate school, even if the district would provide the transportation at its expense."
...then his parents would have already given their permission for this child to attend your school (if it is that far away from his home) so I really do not see the "penalized and singled out" issue here at all. I do see thrusting him into a very high poverty school as a much greater grievance to this somewhat hypothetical child.
...
Fri, 07/09/2010 - 10:33 — SideburnsYour answer reminds me of David Holdkzom's response to a parent who was attending her first BAC meeting -- and new to the area. In trying to understand the assignment policies of WCPSS she asked "Why does Wake County bus children long distances for diversity?" His answer, "To get them to school".