Here's a case of looking at the same data and coming up with radically different interpretations.
The conservative Wake Community Network issued a press release last Tuesday blaming the state NAACP and the Great Schools in Wake Coalition for greatly increasing the Wake County school system's security costs. GSIW fired back on Thursday with a press release blaming the additional costs on the school board majority.
Between December and April, the school system spent $14,719.39 for private security and off-duty police officers to provide security at board meetings. That doesn't include all the security who were at last week's board meeting.
In contrast, the school system spent $451.58 on security between July 2009 and November 2009.
"Beyond their manufactured turmoil and attempts to sully Wake County’s image are very tangible costs brought on by the NAACP and Great Schools’ antics," Joey Stansbury, founder of the Wake Community Network, says in the press release. "Data provided by the Wake County Public School System shows dramatic security cost increases directly attributable to their ongoing chaos creation activities."
Stansbury is also the campaign treasurer for school board chairman Ron Margiotta, who may or may not run for reelection next year.
“If the Board majority created an environment that offered transparency and fostered open, constructive debate, there would be no need for the expensive, excessive show of force that we've witnessed at recent meetings," said GSIW chairwoman Yevonne Brannon in the group's press release.
Also in the press release, Brannon faults the school board majority for voting on first reading to scrap the standing committees and to limit public comment to one meeting per month.
Comments
Just think of this. Take
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 14:20 — aquaman4life68Just think of this. Take Barber, and his crew out of the picture...how much security would be needed? NONE...nothing additional would be need, other than what they normally had in the past. We all know that!! Some of us just don't want to truthfully admit that.
The new board hired another
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 13:41 — user12345The new board hired another lawyer, abandon a HS site, raised the acting Supt salary by $60k and could not find the right wording on diversity to capture a magnet grant ... so, the extra security seems like small potatoes ....
?
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 22:02 — Bob_SconceWere we denied a magnet grant? I was only aware that we had applied for one.
And, in my view, the new board should hire another lawyer permanently. Farr's recommendation for in-house counsel is a good one -- the board is taking a big risk by not having somebody in-house. It's not a disparagement of Majestic, just an observation that it's much easier to run stuff by legal when they're next door and you're not worried about getting approval for the expense. And, every time legal's not brought into something they should be, there's an increased risk that something will go wrong.
Magnet grant results won't
Wed, 07/28/2010 - 00:54 — KeungHui (author)Magnet grant results won't be announced until later this summer. The U.S. Education Department historically allows winning grants to be announced by the local congressman for the district. Last time around, Bob Etheridge made the announcement. Considering the political situation in Wake now, it's not as certain this time if Etheridge would still do it or leave it up to the Ed Dept. But it would be a moot point if Wake doesn't get the grant this time.
I would follow you opinion
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 22:27 — user12345I would follow your opinion on the lawyers since you know that area ... it just would not have been my opening shot and first vote ... I would preferred they had started off with something academic ... e.g. policy to increase ED graduation rate by 2015 to xx. ... save hiring a lawyer for meeting three ... my only point is the amount above is not going to break the system ...
I agree
Wed, 07/28/2010 - 07:21 — Bob_SconceIt wasn't one of the things that was campaigned on and starting it on day one was an odd choice.
That said, Farr really did a good job, but it's unfortunately being lost in politics.
I don't get it.
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 21:53 — Apexter"raised the acting Supt salary by $60k"
I don't get your obsession with the $60K bump in pay that was given to Dr. Hargens. The woman is doing two jobs at once ---- her titular job as head of academics, and then adding on the tasks of Superintendent as well. We are no longer paying Del for doing nothing, so we have not added on an additional salary obligation. We're getting a bargain for her doing two jobs for the salary of one. And, though I don't know the total, I expect that the one salary she's getting paid is still less than the bloated salary that Burns received.
It's money that is being earned, not a boondoggle as you seem to imply.
Personally, I don't see how
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 22:24 — user12345Personally, I don't see how she goes home Friday worth X and comes in Monday worth $60k more .... what did she learn over the weekend to make her so much more valuable? Just because she has more responsibility does not mean she can handle it or will do it well ... only time will tell ... maybe the right approach would have been to eliminate one of the jobs ... the system is working fine without Del ... Hargent may be leaving for a new job ...schools will still open on time, teachers will be at their seats, the AC will be running come Aug 25. And none of that will be due to Del or Donna.
I'm with Apexter on this
Wed, 07/28/2010 - 21:21 — CaryCurmudgeonI'm with Apexter on this one, it is refreshing to see you have finally realized how little Del Burns did to help this school system.
Than who is at the top is
Thu, 07/29/2010 - 08:44 — user12345Than who at the top is responsible for 50% of the HS making the top list? Who at the top would have been responsible if none had made it? Your credits toward Del don't seem to be consistent. It is as if you hate him and blame him for the bad things and won't give him credit for the good things.
I think it was just the
Wed, 07/28/2010 - 20:52 — ApexterI think it was just the board finally coming out and offering her what she deserved for the greatly increased role she has taken.
It's odd that you have been crediting Del Burns for recent good scores, but now all of a sudden you say we never needed him anyway, and maybe we should get rid of the position altogether.
Which positions in the school system have merit-based pay? Whether you feel she can handle it or do it well, and whether time will tell is irrelevant. She has taken on the responsibilities, and deserves the pay.
your point?
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 14:42 — loriacThat doesn't change the point that all the increased costs can be attributed to a small group of people, who were arrested.
Your examples were decisions made by elected officials.
As usual, you try to muddy the waters .
great points, User!
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 14:15 — jeannie84great points, User!
Ms. Brannon is a vile foul
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 13:19 — stop_the_liesMs. Brannon is a vile foul mouthed woman. Her behavior off camera is much worse than on camera. She shouts personal insults at board members and speakers. Putting a duct tape on this woman's mouth is necessary for having great schools in Wake.
Next meeting???
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 11:01 — PACK_MIKE77Can't wait until their next strategy meeting to protest the board. I hope I am able to attend.
It should be interesting. I want to see if they are willing to spend more time in county jail for the cause..
Yup....
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 11:04 — Bob_SconceAfter 10 stays, the 11th is free.
Wow
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 20:25 — hmoncelleHarry_Moncelle
Bob, you crack me up! Well said!
I just love how people
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 09:51 — aquaman4life68I just love how people rationalize their actions. TYPICAL, TYPICAL...a sad state of affairs of modern day society. Instead of calling it what it is, the noisy group blames everyone that doesn't agree with them as making them act in a disorderly manner. I wonder why Ms. "I love the children" Brannon wasn't up there with the protestors and got arrested along with them since she is ALL FOR THE CHILDREN. I guess it isn't good enough to get arrested for. I love how the.."Who's to blame for the security cost increase" is even a discussion. We all know why, however, that groups will never be blamed!
Kinda like it's the night
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 10:04 — CaryCurmudgeonKinda like it's the night club's fault for having all those bouncers around because they wouldn't tolerate all the fighting and carousing from the drunks.
you made me do it
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 09:39 — loriac'“If the Board majority created an environment that offered transparency and fostered open, constructive debate, there would be no need for the expensive, excessive show of force that we've witnessed at recent meetings," said GSIW chairwoman Yevonne Brannon in the group's press release.'
The classic 'You made me do it' defense.
Ms. Brannin is a real gem.
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 09:34 — CaryCurmudgeonMs. Brannin is a real gem. "Open, constructive debate?" Watch her antics at the last board meeting, acting like a child with her gesticulations, hissing, sidebars, etc.
And she needs to read up on NC statutes. The board is only required to conduct one monthly meeting with public comment. Currently, the public is given an opportunity to comment at the twice-monthly meetings, and they are given far more than the 30 minutes allowed (except when the GWIS gang can't muster enough speakers to fill that time slot).
The intent of public hearings is not for members of the public to participate in a debate, it is to afford them the opportunity to share their thoughts, and board members are prohibited from responding.
Ha...
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 09:33 — Bob_SconceSo, in a nutshell, Brannon's position is "You made us so mad that you forced us to break the law!" Funny -- that's logic my kids gave up when they were about 6 years old.
Keung -- Was it always board practice to have public comment periods at every meeting? I've looked at the minutes of several older (~2001) board meetings that didn't appear to have public comment section. It also appears that meetings were shorter then -- ending before 6:00 in many cases.
There's been public comment
Tue, 07/27/2010 - 12:32 — KeungHui (author)There's been public comment at every full board meeting since at least 1999 when I began covering Wake. There were a lot of times that no one showed up to speak in the old days.