You can soon say goodbye to the Children's PAC.
Leaders of the group have notified the Wake County Board of Elections that they're shutting down the PAC. Dana Cope, who founded the group following this year's contentious student reassignment fight, says they've decided to work with the Wake Schools Community Alliance.
Cope, who is also executive director of the State Employees Association of N.C., says they'll officially announce next week that they're endorsing the same school board candidates as the WSCA. He said individual members of the soon-to-be-former PAC have been and will continue to raise money for candidates.
"It doesn't quite make sense to replicate a web site, to replicate a fundraising arm," Cope said. "Why don't we just support what's already in place?"
Cope said they formed the group with the plan on being independent. There was talk of raising $100,000 by getting $1,000 from 100 people.
But Cope said they eventually decided to not to compete with the WSCA for resources.
Even though the group hadn't filed anything since the initial organization report, Cope said three people in the Bleinheim Woods area of Raleigh have already held fundraisers.
Comments
I do get a sense there is
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 19:05 — jenmanI do get a sense there is some resentment against ITB folks who some feel get special privileges which I assume will change if others are elected
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speaking just for myself I do think that ITB has gotten protection for a long time. I don't have resentment against the parents, but I do get frustrated that the BOE/WCPSS often gives them special treatment.
I do hope there are some changes in magnet schools. Not because I have some grudge and want to take those programs away from some base families. Its because I don't think that people living in $700K neighborhoods (or any middle to high income neighborhood for that matter) have any business getting magnet schools as their base. Especially not when other families are denied entrance to those magnets because they are 'needed' to help diversify another school. And the rest of us are prohibited from offering programs at our schools because then not enough of us will be lured to the magnets.
I'd like to see our 2 tier magnet system end. We have magnets designed to actually help low income schools and then we have magnets that are designed to keep certain middle to upper income families from leaving for private school. The magnets need a major overhaul.
Again, just my personal opinion.
what is a "neighborhood school"?
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 11:59 — EqualtreatmentI've always been puzzled by what exactly a "neighborhood school" is. Let's take Lacy as an example. Which neighborhoods should be a part of Lacy's base if we move to a neighborhood school model? Does that mean the neighborhoods closest to the school? That sounds like a reasonable yardstick.
As it currently stands, much of Lacy's base lies as close or closer to Underwood, Wiley, Olds, Joyner and Root as to Lacy. At the same time, many neighborhoods much closer to Lacy (outside the Beltline) are not assigned to Lacy.
Posters here are saying that the Lacy parents support "neighborhood schools." Does this mean they would support a large scale reassignment of their current base to place their children in schools closer to where they live? Given their reactions on being reassigned to Root and Stough in the last reassignment, I suspect the answer is "no."
I'd like to hear more specifics from the neighborhood schools candidates about how this works in practice, particulary when schools are not evenly placed around the county relative to where the population is now (much less in the future).
More generally, I think that the groups calling for change are not necessarily calling for the same things. For instance, what is the position of a "neighborhood schools" candidates to jenman's suggestion that magnet schools have a much smaller base area? This would work against the interests of some parents who are now part of the neighborhood schools coalition.
Let's move beyond slogans and see some specifics so that voters can make an informed decision.
Well, considering that
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 15:27 — lacyparentof3Well, considering that neither Stough nor Root were the closest schools to the reassigned neighborhoods, I don't think you can predict the reactions based on that.
I am convinced and agree
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 19:55 — user12345I am convinced and agree
User1234--I don't know where
Sat, 09/12/2009 - 16:00 — jenmanUser1234--I don't know where you're getting this rhetoric about WSCA or their candidates want to destroy magnet schools or are anti-magnet. Chris Malone was asked directly about whether or not he would eliminate magnets like Hunter, Enloe or Ligon. His response was something along the lines of 'why would we end a successful program?'. Some candidates have stressed the need for a more fair acceptance system but none have said they would eliminate magnets.
As for Lacy, it would look pretty much the same as it does now under a 'neighborhood schools' policy. They get one small low income node bused in from downtown and they actually have low income apartments within walking distance from the school. From speaking with the few Lacy parents I know, those children and their families are wanted at the school, and their families participate in all kinds of activities at Lacy. When I told these Lacy parents about Chuck's comment that it doesn't matter how far away you bus low income kids because their parents won't participate anyway they were appalled. That's not been their experience at all.
You know, I have been pretty hard on Lacy parents in the past but I've gotten to know some of them in person and from reading their comments here on the blogs. They are just like the rest of us--they care about their school and *gasp* they even care about the low income children assigned there. Some of them may have a lot of money but that doesn't make them bad people or elitists. Hard working and fortunate, perhaps. lol According to an acquaintance I have who worked at Lacy, they are very generous with their money and do what they can to help all the kids assigned there not just their own.
Fair enough ... the problem
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 09:55 — user12345Fair enough ... the problem I have is understanding who speaks for groups like WCSA ... from my view, it appears there are a number of people here in the know who might be part of WCSA ... so when other rail against the magnet program and when I suggested we get rid of the program and there were many positive responses, I assume those positive responses were WSCA leaders / members? You are right, they could just be non-affiliated ... and maybe comments on dumping the magnet program referred to other magnets not all magnets or successful magnets ... I do get a sense there is some resentment against ITB folks who some feel get special privileges which I assume will change if others are elected … thus, I assumed that status quo would be better for ITB …
Just for the record - I've
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 10:05 — NWRaleighMomJust for the record - I've been critical of magnets/ITB schools but I am not affiliated with WSCA. Although I do wish their candidates get elected, I do not believe things will change magically overnight after October 6 or even in several years.
Valid question
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 17:47 — Apexter"the problem I have is understanding who speaks for groups like WCSA"
[For the record, I am not in the leadership of WSCA, but I approve of their platform and what they're doing]
That's an absolutely valid question, and uncertainty over who can speak for the group can end up shooting such an organization in the foot. I've been in the leadership of a couple of similar groups in the past. Even when there is a formally elected Board of Directors or group of officers, it can be a very sticky situation defining when an individual is speaking as an individual, and when one is speaking on behalf of the group. I've been on a board with someone who I disagreed with on many points, yet we still shared the overall goals of the group. It was very painful seeing this person make idiotic statements in editorials, followed by a tagline after his signature identifying that person as a board member of my group. Anger over this came close to destroying the group until we, as a group, decided to insist on the right to review statements that were going out identifying the author as a board member of our group.
Keep in mind that you need to have different standards from a paid spokesman for a corporation vs. members of a volunteer organization who are stealing time for the operation after working a regular job, taking kids to school and practice, etc. It's much harder for such a group to get together and draft formal statements with the agreement of the entire group.
They have a website which lists much of the information you ask about their group. I would use that, and printed materials that they provide as the absolute opinion of the group. Likewise, anyone quoting from these could be considered giving the absolute opinion of the group.
It is a very powerful
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 20:03 — user12345It is a very powerful strategy not to have visible public leadership with a designated spokesperson in that it allows a group to disavow anyone and anything … very little can be traced back or pinned on the group …
That's a very Machiavellian
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 20:56 — Apexter"It is a
very powerful strategy not to have visible public leadership with a
designated spokesperson in that it allows a group to disavow anyone and
anything … very little can be traced back or pinned on the group …"
That's a very Machiavellian interpretation of something that has a very simple practical explanation.
Do you think you may be predisposed to think bad things of the group?
I think it is good to be
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 08:38 — user12345I think it is good to be cautious of supporting groups I don’t know or can not research using public documents, sending money to Nigeria to collect my inheritance, or ordering medications over the internet … I think there are many powerful interests that try to manipulate public opinion of the masses for their benefit anonymously through the internet so it is prudent to look behind the curtain (e.g. Wizard of Oz) … as I have told SDR (who I think is the leader), I admire their work and organization …
Pig in a poke
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 13:51 — SDR256Unlike buying medicine over the internet, we have offered tons of opportunity since our formation in February to come out and meet us and see for yourself. We have another one coming up - Pullen for Change on Sept 19 at Pullen Park. Tickets at www.wakesca.org. We have to sell tickets to cover the catering, but its a great way to meet these four candidates and there will be fun for the whole family. Whaddya say, user1234? Willing to meet the monster in the closet? :)
...
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 14:24 — SideburnsSDR,
I'll buy you a beer if he shows up
heck, buy user the beer IF
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 14:26 — AngelaWheck, buy user the beer IF he shows...
yup, and the mob
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 20:31 — AngelaWyup, and the mob assassinated JFK AND Lincoln....
(*sigh*)
I read that somewhere on the
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 20:36 — CaryCurmudgeonI read that somewhere on the internet!
Executive Directors?
Sun, 09/13/2009 - 10:44 — SDR256If you're thinking that WSCA functions like some kind of executive board of a formal corporation or something like that, you've got it wrong. This has been a much more organic experience. I think it must be similar to other grassroots efforts. We have simply found each other - parents and citizens who discover that we've all been thinking the same thing in our various little pockets around this county. Once we've gotten together we realize that we're not alone. And we vehemently agree. We need candidates who will put education first and will work with parents to figure out the path back to that priority. End of story. Just like the other scary scenarios the status quo wants to wave around like a red blanket, getting rid of magnets has never been something we've talked about. As Chris Malone has said "why would we get rid of a program that works?"
Some of us who have been more vocal are simply conveying what has been synthesized in various meetings, discussions, phonecalls, emails, coffee discussion across a large group of people. We're not making independent 'decisions'. Its more like swarm theory maybe? I've worked for large and small corporations. WSCA isn't anything like that. Its more like one big wide coffee klutch. Some of us are just a little mouthier than others. As I've tried to explain before, User, there are a lot of folks out there - especially Moms - who do NOT want to engage in this kind of cyber-debate. Its too stressful and risky for them (that was me two years ago believe it or not). Their lives are much more hand-on, at the bus stop, in the classroom, doing homework, carpooling, getting to their jobs or whatever needs to happen to keep their lives going - or as my spouse says 'tending the homestead'. So, WSCA is kind of a bridge between here and there. Most people can't afford the time and maniacal obsession required to get a PhD in WCPSS for Wake children to get a good education and our drop out rates to stop hemorraging children. Doing this - blogging on a Sunday morning, digesting data, writing writing writing, building websites, putting out roadsigns, hosting fundraisers, calling people - takes away from the homestead and its a calculated donation. Some are more willing to donate time, some talent, some money, but there is in fact a large coalescence of agreement.
We do believe there is a Door #3 - beyond the CMS vs Wake mind-numbing debate so loved by the N&O. There are elements of this solution that we would definitely like to have considered - like KIPP. But beyond that, what the final solution will be cannot be micro-identified until the candidates have a chance to work together with parents after the election. Alls-we know (as they say from where I came from) is that the discussions and decisions will be based on these priorities:
These candidates will work for:
A refresher for those just joining in
Sat, 09/12/2009 - 16:48 — Dadof3While it's important to constantly rebuke u1-x's calumnious attributions, u1-x is disingenuous in "wanting dialog." He has and no doubt will, continue to assign false motives to whomever and whenever it pleases him, facts be damned. He is not dialoging in good faith, nor has ever done so.
Nevertheless, Charlie Brown continues to try to kick the football in Lucy's hands.
You Must of Stole The WSCA Handbook
Fri, 09/11/2009 - 11:28 — JanisTangoYou must of stole the WSCA handbook and now you know about all our dasterdly plans to create one super school that gets all the funding and if you are a member your kids are the only ones that get in!. In fact this school will be called WSCA High!
Get serious user12345. I usually appreciate some of the posts you have on these blogs and then you create something as absurd as this!
Right there with you
Fri, 09/11/2009 - 12:41 — TrailerParkGirlRight there with you on the absurdity factor.
So you think a
Fri, 09/11/2009 - 12:50 — user12345So you think a non-pro-diversity, anti-magnet BOE will continue Lacy's special status? You have heard it said enough here the resentment for ITB special privileges ... so ending those special perks is absurd?
It's your imflamatory way of putting things
Fri, 09/11/2009 - 14:18 — TrailerParkGirl"WSCA plans to dicimate ITB" - you make it sound like people will be lobbing grenades over the beltline - too funny. I'm never sure if you actually think in those extremes at times (because other times you are rational) or just intentionally try to inflame and stir the pot for excitement.
In either case, given WSCA is a cross-county organization with people and support from all parts of the county, by defination it can't be out to decimate any part of the county. Besides, WSCA is not about decimating, it's mission is improvement for all.
User, even when
Fri, 09/11/2009 - 13:57 — NWRaleighMomUser, even when anti-status-quo supporters take all NINE seats, they won't be able to remove ITB special privileges...
I was surprised because I
Fri, 09/11/2009 - 10:46 — user12345I was surprised because I thought this was going to be a PAC fight between OTB (WCSA) and ITB (Cope) ... WCSA plans to decimate ITB (magnets, ITB, diversity) schools so I was surprised Cope supports them … Lacy's days are numbered ...
Big imagination
Fri, 09/11/2009 - 14:25 — SDR256Please don't let it get away from you. You're reaching and its really noticable. What we have said is that we stand by the four bullets on our website. End of story. How we get there will be up to the citizens and parents of this county talking to the candidates about reasonable paths toward:
Why don't you add vocational
Fri, 09/11/2009 - 14:55 — user12345Why don't you add vocational training so you are on the hook for it?