Both Wake County Commissioner Paul Coble and challenger Jack Nichols are talking about education in their campaign material.
In a television ad, Coble, a Republican, introduces himself and says "we all want our tax dollars spent wisely to strengthen the economy and create new jobs." He adds that "I've stopped over $40 million of wasteful spending and reinvested it in our schools to make them stronger."
In this campaign mailer, Nichols, a Democrat, asks "what's going on with education in Wake County?" He says he'll "restore sanity and civility." He promotes a "third way."
Nichols, a past chairman of the Wake County Democratic Party, has been a sharp critic of the Republican school board majority. In the mailer, Nichols touts how the Wake County school system has been an engine for economic development but says that "the prosperity that we have enjoyed is threatened by partisan fights and failed leadership."
"Leadership is about listening to people and building consensus for policies that are fair, based on research, and make sense," Nichols says in the mailer. "Our children, our tax dollars, and our economic future are too important to make our schools the chief battleground in ideological warfare."
Nichols says that a third way for schools can be found "that moves us beyond division on assignments, and puts our focus on student achievement."
Nichols, who served on the board of commissioners from 1990 to 1994, lists past accomplishments such as "adopted salary supplements to attract and retain the best teachers" and "funded magnet schools to fill empty inner city schools."
UPDATED WITH COLOR VERSION OF NICHOLS' MAILER
Here's the text of Coble's other TV ad:
"I'm Paul Coble. My daughters got a great education in the Wake County school system. In tough times I've worked hard to make sure our schools were a top priority and pass a budget that will help keep our schools strong. I'm Paul Coble."
Comments
last bond fight & reassignment now
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 17:57 — turnerk1I think that the whole MYR fiasco is a good example of what happens when decisions by the board are rushed. I remember the board meeting when the amount was set for the bond. The board was under pressure from the CC to keep the amount under 1 billion, and from parents not to have any forced YR conversions. They had spent almost a year talking to the CC about the amount but one of the guiding assumptions had become changing just about every school to MYR. They literally called a break and in about 10 minutes a few administrators and a few board members had agreed they had to have extra seats for about 3000 students in order to keep the bond under a billion, which meant converting 22 schools, and they went forward with that. Of course, we all know what happened after that decision. The board was stuck with it then, and a lot of problems for the whole county resulted. I'm glad they've decided to think more carefully about the ramifications of the assignment plan beforehand, not afterwards, when they were committed to a course they may have come to regret.
Mr. Hui question?
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 13:59 — DrActualFactualDuring the school board elections you posted the records of the donations the candidates received--will you be doing that for the CC race? TIA
Possibly. I did it last year
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 13:05 — KeungHui (author)Possibly. I did it last year because it was the school board contests and because the information wasn't as accessible as it is now. Starting this year, the Wake County Board of Elections has been posting campaign reports online as soon as they come in. You can find them by clicking here. The next reports must be postmarked by tomorrow.
Coble's A Joke
Fri, 10/22/2010 - 21:50 — jgegbgmgOne of Coble's biggest accomplisments since being a Commissioner is teaching and helping his buddy Gurley on how to become chairperson this past year. Remember how the two of them went for it when another member had to excuse herself to the restroom. This in itself should show everyone that Coble can't be trusted. In his television ad he mentions that he has supported the previous school board with financial help (REALLY) - Go back and check his record - He and Gurley did everything in their power to defeat the previous board by not funding the schools as needed. It doesn't pay to LIE to the people Mr. Coble !!!!!
...
Fri, 10/22/2010 - 20:18 — SideburnsMr. Coble stepped up and did what he could to rescue families from the burden of MYR. He recognized that not all families could make YR work and that the School Board at the time wasn't willing to listen or offer any compromise. Because of Mr. Coble (and Mr. Bryan, Mr. Gurley and former commissioner Kenn Gardner), parents were provided a traditional opt-out from their MYR assignment in order to keep their children on the same calendar. He gets my vote (and I'm a Democrat).
Gurley voted for
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 10:40 — WhalerCaneGurley voted for MYR. And there was no promise of a traditional option, but the fact is almost every parent who asked for one, got it. Less than 100 actually did not get an option. Even John T has said there were no MYR's. It was actually the old School Board that stepped up and did that. It had nothing to do with Coble or Gurley. What Coble has done is looked to gain every political advantage from the situation rather than governing and working to bring our community together.
Coble has been a cancer, and the most divissive force politically in this county for 25 years. He hasn't nor will he ever fund our schools to the level that you want and is needed. Like his poltical hero and Uncle, the Late Sen. Helms, he has been Commissioner No, and constantly penny wise pound foolish.
If you ever considered yourself a Democrat as i know you do, I implore you not to vote for Paul Coble because if you do, you might as well change your registration. We will never pass a needed school bond if we continue down this path, and there are so many issues with witch you are diametrically opposed to him on.
Steve Rao and Jack Nichols are both committed to finding a third way and listening to the concerns you have so passionately worked for these past few years, and you agree with them on so many other issues, like using impact fees to help pay for school construction so our property tax dollars can be kept in the classroom.
Respectfully,
Perry
"Steve Rao and Jack Nichols
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 23:17 — Apexter"Steve Rao and Jack Nichols are both committed to finding a third way and listening to the concerns you have so passionately worked for these past few years, and you agree with them on so many other issues, like using impact fees to help pay for school construction so our property tax dollars can be kept in the classroom."
While I don't know very much about Rao (other than the fact that he supported WCSA until he didn't), I've seen very little evidence that Nichols understands the very strong disenchantment that resulted in the sea change in the school board with the last election. I have the strong feeling that the "third way" they keep touting is really just going to be "the old way is just the way it's going to stay, and those folks are just going to have to get over it." I continue to see insults and contempt from the Democratic party rather than any evidence that they have made an attempt to understand, let alone recognize the legitimacy of, the complaints.
Speaking for myself, and not Sideburns, you're quite right in that I can't stand Paul Coble, and disagree with him on most issues. However, by observing Stan Norwalk and the noises coming out of the local Democratic party, it's clear that one of their goals is to use the County Commissioner's purse strings to force school board policy --- in effect, voter nullification. Because I consider the need for change in the old Raleigh-centric school system policies to be important enough, I am put in the difficult position of becoming a one-issue voter in determining my votes for County Commissioner this time in order to make sure that the work of the school board candidates we worked so hard to vote in is not undermined.
The local Democratic party would do well to recognize that not all local Democrats toe the party line on school issues that has been decreed by party leadership. It has been a huge turn off for me when I see candidates whose job roles have nothing to do with the Wake County Schools shoot their mouths off on Wake County School System issues. In my case, it has cooled off my support of some Democratic candidates.
Apexter, you've described
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 07:29 — jenmanApexter, you've described exactly how I feel as well.
What she said. Steve
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 07:50 — CaryCurmudgeonWhat she said. Steve Ford's editorial in the Sunday edition accused the Republican party of seizing on last year's school board election momentum to boost Republicans in other races. I happen to agree with him. This time around, the Democraticy party is trying to capitalize on the board's current dysfunction and the ineptitude of it's chair to rally votes for Democrats in other races. The opportunism of both is disappointing.
There's One Critical Difference
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 19:57 — fiveblindmice....that is very relevant. The Democrats in those "other races" - we're primarily talking about County Commisioners here - are on the right (pro-school) side of the one issue that's MORE critical to education in Wake County than ANYTHING the BoE has a say in - money. And the Republicans in those "other races" were and are absolutely on the other side in that battle.
Got it, you have no problem
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 20:38 — CaryCurmudgeonGot it, you have no problem with the Dems doing it because they happen to agree with you. In the past several months, the state legisture has coincidently chartered an investigation into how NC school systems are managing diversity. And Bev Perdue recently gave Bill Barbor the golden pine code award for his "work with the school board." I guess those are ok too.
Nice Try, But That's A Lie
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 08:20 — fiveblindmiceIt's not because "they agree with me"- it's because they are for improving our schools.
And the fact that you - and your supposedly "non-partisan" Republican front group - don't think that's an important distinction tells us an awful lot about you and your motivations.
Given you are operating on
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 09:23 — CaryCurmudgeonGiven you are operating on an assumption that no Republicans are interested in improving our schools, I can understand why you see it the way you do. Have you ever voted for a Republican in your whole life?
Republicans are obviously
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 14:57 — virginiadareRepublicans are obviously not interested in funding our schools adequately.
Neither is the public
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 17:27 — FSandYOUThey're broke.
Agreed. Their broke,
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 17:38 — DrActualFactualAgreed. Their broke, jobless, perhaps in a double-dip recession, looking at cap-and-trade and Obamacare, endless bailouts, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac/AIG, foreclosures, inflation, you want money.....get in line.
...
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 15:23 — SideburnsPlease. What have the Dem Commissioners done recently to improve funding? Talking about it doesn't count.
Well Just To Name One Example
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 17:58 — fiveblindmice....all but one of them voted for Stan Norwalk's effort to set aside more funds for the school system in anticipation of state cuts that we knew were coming. An effort that was killed by one solitary rogue (sound familiar?) Dem teaming up with a unanimous GOP side in opposing school funding.
Any other sily questions?
Who was the rogue member
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 18:30 — DrActualFactualWho was the rogue member that opposed?
Just Like Virginia, Perry helps assure a Coble win
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 20:43 — FSandYOUHow absolutely hateful to compare him to a cancer. Have you ever dealt with cancer in your life or had a family member who has been treated for cancer or God forbid, died from it? To even suggest someone is like a cancer is lower than I even thought someone like you could stoop, you political pimp.
I hope you do better with your support for the next bond than you did with the last school board elections. It doesn't have a prayer.
Not cool
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 21:40 — gregishereDiscourse in politics and elsewhere sometimes uses the metaphor of cancer to hone points. To tee-off on this person for using that metaphor may be understandable under certain personal circumstances. So, if that is the case, I am sure that person regrets the metaphor. However, if you honed in on that construction just to call this person names, that's just ignoring the points made to take a cheap shot. Whalercane more than truthfully described Coble's record and points of view. Any person who cares about a fully-funded, well-run system that takes care of all children would never vote for Coble to hold the partial purse strings of our Wake County schools. Regardless of what Whalercane does for a living or his viewpoints, I dare say he cares as much about education as any person participating on this blog. I like name-calling just as much as the next guy, but your post uses name-calling for no good reason other than to be mean.
Maybe you should get a tissue
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 09:32 — FSandYOUI don't use the term "cancer" as a metaphor for anything mostly because yes, we have been affected by it. It's the pimping of metaphors and politicians by people such as this guy with his one sided views that have helped facilitate the divisiveness this country is now embroiled in. I doubt he regrets anything he's ever done because he is clearly so self-righteous up on his pedestal.
If all this is being "too mean" for you, get a tissue.
Maybe you need to take your
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 16:36 — doctorjMaybe you need to take your issue up with Merriam Webster too.
Definition of CANCER
Thanks, I've spent so much
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 17:14 — DrActualFactualThanks, I've spent so much money on cancer treatment I just couldn't afford a dictionary. Plus, with all the medicine it makes my vision blurry, and I'm toooo weak to turn the pages. Now, can we drop the references to diseases and get back to the topic.
Should you ever have to go through treatment
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 17:31 — FSandYOUI hope you live through it and can afford to pay for it.
Unlike many.
Woodstock?
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 09:45 — Dove314Woodstock?
Interesting, WhalerCane (a
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 21:02 — DrActualFactualInteresting, WhalerCane (a democratic political strategiest) begs/pleads with democrat poster to vote Democrat or (not so subtle) get out. I hope she votes her conscience may the best man win! (The cancer reference was horrid, and in particularly bad taste.) Mr. Hui--thanks for the link on the campaign finance records---whew, what a wealth of info there!
Time To Change
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 13:44 — jgegbgmgSideburns - Do us all a favor and change parties - We Democrats don't have the need for people like you (and I really don't think you're a Democrat) - You're more like (lying) Coble & (sneaky) Gurley anyway !!!!!! I'm sure you're proud of these guys and their lies (which they call accomplishments) !!!!!!
...
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 15:22 — SideburnsBelieve what you want, I'm a registered D. I just have a mind of my own to support those who support my family. There are many Republican issues that I am completely on the other side of the fence on -- but this one affects my family, my neighborhoods and my community. I will continue to support elected officials that understand the importance of those -- regardless of party affiliation.
Coble, Gurley and Bryan all understood that YR was not being implemented as promised and did what they could to assist families. The Democrat commissioners did nothing. I will not forget that.
MYR
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 17:43 — turnerk1I think that you are misremembering some of the details. It was clear that the Board were going to force people into YR, which is what people fought about all through the lead up to the bond vote. It wasn't until after the election when people were really up in arms because the bond had passed that the commissioners stepped in and tried to stop it. Before that, they all had supported the bond and YR. But either way, some commissioners did step in.
I realize the commissioners
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 22:01 — SideburnsI realize the commissioners didn't step in until the bond passed. I remember it well. They did support the bond and YR but with the understanding that the Board would provide options for families who couldn't make a YR schedule work.
4 of 5 elementary schools in Apex were scheduled to be and eventually became MYR. Many people were certainly "up in arms" well before the bond vote -- and spent a lot of time speaking with Board members and commissioners as well as other elected officials. Gurley, Coble, Gardner and Bryan listened.
It may be worth your while
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 14:36 — DrActualFactualIt may be worth your while to use a little more caution when calling people liars via the media (I don't know the rules on slander/libel) but nobody wants to go that route anyway do they? I'll agree with you in that politics is "icky" but both parties are equally icky. As an Unaffiliated I watch the dems endlessly engaged in stall then appoint strategy (Webb voted via phone) etc. workin the system and then stepping down instead of an election. Betty Ward has been a commissioner for awhile, she should have called a recess before leaving the room. Good governance is not NC's strong suit. Are you in favor of kicking moderate democrats out of your party?
We wouldn't have had to have
Fri, 10/22/2010 - 21:59 — virginiadareWe wouldn't have had to have MYR if they had funded the schools properly and been willing to support a bond large enough to build all traditional schools. They and their buddies from the Wake County Taxpayers' Association are the ones who pushed having YR schools in the first place so taxes wouldn't have to be raised.
You must be kidding yourself if you believe that
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 20:48 — FSandYOUBut I have no doubt that you do.
You need to go back to the zeroth place.........
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 22:16 — Apexter"We wouldn't have had to have MYR if they had funded the schools properly and been willing to support a bond large enough to build all traditional schools. They and their buddies from the Wake County Taxpayers' Association are the ones who pushed having YR schools in the first place so taxes wouldn't have to be raised."
To get the true picture, though, you need to go back to the zeroth place.
Before the bond was floated, the Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce generously offered to do a poll about the bond to help the school board and county commissioners determine the optimum size of the bond. They then created a push poll that determined, first, that a pretty sizeable proportion of the population didn't really understand how year round schools worked, and second, that if you briefly explain the concept of year round schools making them sound great while ignoring any of the negative aspects to them, and then ask a question such as "If you knew that building year round schools would increase capacity, thus requiring far fewer schools to be built, would you be willing to vote for a less-than-a-billion bond", you will get more people who would favor that option over a billion-dollar-plus option. The results of the GRCofC poll were the backbone of the decision not to ask for the money that was needed to avoid MYR. The decision was driven by folks whose goals for the school system is that they be a tool for economic development, and have no concern about academic achievement or equity. They just want things to LOOK good.
No, the decision was driven
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 13:19 — virginiadareNo, the decision was driven by the Wake County Taxpayers Association and their supporters and the elected officials who were beholden to them. THEY are the ones who refused to consider raising taxes to fund more schools. The leaders on the school board and the CC at that time could not risk having ANOTHER bond referendum fail in the face of the massive growth that was taking place. So you can blame everyone who voted against the previous referendum also, which put us even more behind and made passing the 2006 bond even more critical.
I still don't understand why people don't think it's good for the school system to be a "tool for economic development." Isn't it good for EVERYBODY when the local economy is doing well and property values are rising, so the county can get more revenue to invest in the schools to make them better? The downside is when the growth happens so fast that the infrastructure can't keep up. Seems to me it would be better to work for impact fees or other measures that would help growth pay for itself so schools could be funded adequately, rather than fight the school system and make it even harder for them to focus on the achievement everyone wants to improve. The school board was only trying to deal with an impossible situation when they were forced by anti-government zealots like the Taxpayers' Association to make unpopular decisions like MYR. They certainly didn't want to have to do it!
Sorry, I still disagree.
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 20:41 — Apexter...
Fri, 10/22/2010 - 22:35 — SideburnsThe commissioners were led to believe that the YR conversions would be implemented and choice would be given to those families who couldn't make it work. The then-School Board reneged on that deal. We can thank Gurley, Coble, Bryan and Gardner for recognizing that and doing something about it.
If the schools aren't being funded properly, why hasn't the Democratic majority commission done something about it? What are they waiting for?
No, it was the commissioners
Sat, 10/23/2010 - 12:02 — virginiadareNo, it was the commissioners who reneged on the deal. They knew MYR would be required for the new schools which would be opening as YR. Options were given to families who couldn't make it work, just not the schools they wanted.
You know very well that the Democrats did not have a majority on the commission until the economy tanked. At that point all they could do was try to keep more from being cut.
Pfft...
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 09:25 — Bob_SconceTraditional calendar options were given only after Judge Manning ruled that the district could not assign students to year-round schools without their parents' informed consent. At that point, the district scrambled to find traditional calendar options with clear goal of dissuading parents from taking that option -- that's why they were all so far away.
The democrats on the commission could have raised taxes or could have moved money from other parts of the county budget. The fact that the economy tanked only made those options less popular; it didn't make them impossible. The import of your view is that the Democrats on the county commission lack courage.
No, traditional options had
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 13:00 — virginiadareNo, traditional options had been available all along, well before the lawsuit was filed. In fact, when the lawyers were making their arguments before Judge Manning, Majestic pointed out that almost all of the families who had requested traditional options because they could not make YR work had been accommodated, so the case should have been declared moot. It is absolutely not true that options were not given before the court case!
The Democrats on the CC could not have raised taxes or moved money because they did not have the votes before they got the majority, and by the time they had the votes, those options would not have been the correct thing to do in the face of the draconian cuts they as well as the state were having to make. It wasn't a lack of courage, it was being responsible. It shows that the Democrats didn't base their decisions on pure ideology, but were trying to govern in a responsible way and to consider the facts of the situation at the time.
I don't think it was until
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 07:03 — jenmanI don't think it was until the year of the conversions that TR options were ever offered and I think it was only after WakeCares filed its lawsuit. WCPSS only did it when they pushed to do so.
Mandatory YR assignments existed before the conversions and TR options weren't offered. Parents could apply for a transfer, and then appeal, but they would have had to provide their own transportation. Of course, the majority of the MYR assignments then were of low income kids for diversity reasons so giving them options was not on GM's agenda.
I don't think that is
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 08:28 — magnetParentI don't think that is true. My child was at Penny Road (TR) when they required all YR schools to have a base assignment area. They received a bunch of families at that opted out of Oak Grove (YR) and chose to go to Penny Road as their traditional option. These families were not in or near Penny Road's base "neighborhood". And I am pretty sure they were provided transportation as well. This was back in, I think, 1996.
That is interesting. I
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 13:09 — jenmanThat is interesting. I wonder if that was because YR was mostly voluntary at that time. I have heard that when Durant ES was first built, the neighborhoods bordering it were assigned there as their base school. But I don't know if they were offered an 'opt-out'.
I remember the push for YR schools to carry their 'fair share' of low income kids (I didn't get here until 98 so it was sometime after that). At that time, YR was voluntary so I remember it being somewhat controversial. I really don't think that an official 'opt-out' trad school was designated until recently. I remember when Dulaney presented the list of opt outs for each YR, and I remember that the page on the WCPSS site with your school options changed to show a trad opt out if you assigned to YR.
It seems that somewhere along the way, things changed a bit. I even remember that when I first started looking at all of the school stuff, people who lived ITB (or at least some areas ITB) didn't have a year round school listed as one of their options. I always thought that was unfair--what if somebody down there wanted YR? I think I even asked somebody at WCPSS if that was indeed correct and they said yes. I can't remember the details now. Anyway, at some point that changed and they now have a YR option.
Jenman, the designated YR
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 07:28 — DrActualFactualJenman, the designated YR base nodes also had no opt-out for calendar options. Everyone that I know that appealed for transfers were denied prior to Manning's ruling/WakeCares lawsuit. Many of the bases were not low-income assignments. I'm sure you recall that there were parents that didn't want YR forced into it and parents that did want it were denied due to SES status.
You're missing the point
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 16:52 — Bob_SconceI agree that a majority people who had applied to go to a traditional calendar school were accommodated before Manning's decision. *Some* weren't. Manning's decision required the district to make traditional options available to them.
Even so, that's a bit of a fake bargain -- didn't all those people have to provide their own transportation? And what about all the people who either weren't aware of the calendar switch, couldn't figure out what to do about it, or who thought the chances of getting their application approved were slim, and thus didn't bother? What about all the the people who didn't know what traditional school they were applying to?
Here's the biggest farce about the whole scheme: If you recall, there were two optinos for the bond: (1) convert no schools, (2) convert some schools. The powers-that-be elected to put choice (2) before the voters. But, because it takes time to float a bond, get the revenue and build schools, neither choice would have affected district capacity for two years or so. So, why was the year-round conversion immediate, for the following school year?
Not an option
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 13:51 — SDR25618 miles away is not an option in my book. Its empty lipservice.
That isn't an option
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 21:01 — FSandYOUIt's horse squeeze.
Unlike VDare, I believe the voters firmly understand and will not support another bond anytime soon. This school system has a long way to go in correcting the poor decisions her beloved previous boards have forced upon so many and it's going to take years to retool that trust.
Then maybe you should have
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 14:37 — virginiadareThen maybe you should have become active decades ago (or as soon as you moved here) to ensure that the voters understood the need to fund our schools and to vote for bonds that would be needed to build enough schools to accommmodate the massive growth (which was especially great in your area) without having to have MYR! I sure don't remember a groundswell of support for a bigger bond!
"I sure don't remember a
Sun, 10/24/2010 - 22:51 — Apexter"I sure don't remember a groundswell of support for a bigger bond! "
I, among others, wrote letters to the editor and spoke out at school board meetings telling them that they should ask for the amount of money they needed for new schools, and not just rely on a poorly written poll to determine what they thought people might support. Did we constitute a groundswell? Maybe not. I don't think that enough people understood the mechanics of the whole situation well enough, and we were certainly far out-voiced by the "Friends" group that went around and lied to people that MYR was still negotiable, and that voting for the bond didn't mean a vote for MYR.
And, though the previous failed bond pre-dated my involvement/activism in school issues, it is my understanding that part of the reason that it failed was because the bond didn't just include school construction, but a large chunk of money for technology and other items. I think this allowed the no-tax-em groups to proclaim that the school system was getting greedy and asking for things it didn't need. ("Need" being a matter of opinion, of course.)