Tuesday's Wake County school board meeting will include the swearing in of new Superintendent Tony Tata, a state of the system address by school board chairman Ron Margiotta and the vote on the 2011-12 student reassignment plan.
Things kick off at 4 p.m. with N.C. Court of Appeals Judge Doug McCullough giving the oath of office to Tata. The Rev. Marion Robinson, pastor of St. Matthew AME Church in Raleigh, will give the invocation.
Tata had met with African American leaders who support the diversity policy earlier this month at St. Matthew.
Next comes the reception, which runs until 5:30 p.m. School board vice chairwoman Debra Goldman told board members that Tata is "low maintenance" and didn't want the board to make a big to do about his swearing in.
No dollar estimates are in but Michael Evans, Wake's chief of communications, said it would be a "simple affair." He said that Child Nutrition Services will cater the event with funding coming from the board line item for meals at their meetings.
Some fairly elaborate events were held when Bill McNeal and Del Burns were sworn in. But the economy is a lot tougher now.
The swearing-in ceremony is open to the public and should draw a big crowd. Board members went out of their way to not schedule a work session before the swearing in.
Once the regular meeting begins at 5:30 p.m., Margiotta will give the state of the system address. Public comment will follow at 6 p.m.
During the meeting, the board will vote on the bulk of the 2011-12 student reassignment plan.
The agenda also include a vote on allowing an additional $25,000 be added to the amount that attorney Kieran Shanahan can bill the school system. Evans said that Shanahan's law firm is reaching the $25,000 limit that was set in an contract approved Aug. 10.
Tuesday's vote will allow additional money to be spent in the possibility of future consultation and potential pending litigation.
Shanahan has most recently been advising the school board on the accreditation fight with AdvancED.
Comments
Another $25,000 to Shanahan?
Sun, 01/30/2011 - 07:46 — IDoverWhere is the accountability for this? I thought that Margiotta et al. were going to be transparent? $25,000 to be paid to a criminal defense lawyer....no questions asked? Shanahan has already blown through the first $25K for the benefit of the few who can't come clean with an educational audit? Now let's just stick another $25,000 in a slush fund for some more biased consulting!
How sound is Shanahan's advice so far?
Wed, 02/02/2011 - 23:39 — integritypleaseI wonder if the BOE is getting their $$'s worth with Shanahan? The advice re AdvanceED and threatened loss of accreditation was pretty durned embarrassing for our community! The Chamber was rightly concerned about how that smelly bit of counsel made our area look to businesses that might otherwise (re)locate here.
Our community doesn't need a BOE lawyer beholden to a particular ideology whose instinct is to be a scrappy fighter refusing to back down as much as we need someone with good sense, a balanced eye on the big picture (what's best for kids in our community), and who has some useful expertise in education law. School boards are nothing like the clients his firm's website says he typically represents. This is a new area of law to him, and it appears the citizens are paying for his training as he gets his feet wet, ramping up to represent his first BOE. Education law, and especially school board law, is a complex area of law, which takes years to become expert in. Since Shanahan is jumping right in to the thick of things, gaining experience as he goes, we're footing the bill for his learning a new skill.
His advice -- and bills -- so far leave me feeling nervous about the long-term value of this particular BOE expenditure.
So...
Sun, 01/30/2011 - 12:10 — Bob_SconceFirst of all, Shanahan is a litigator, not a criminal defense attorney. But, interesting that you'd try to twist the facts like that. Second, the other thing that he did under this $25k was win the NAACP lawsuit seeking to undo the diversity policy change by claiming the meeting violated open meetings laws. The NAACP is appealing that, and I'm sure part of the $25k went into defending the appeal.
Finally, the AdvanceEd review is NOT an audit. AdvanceEd does do regular audits -- they did several here last year, in fact, without issue. This is a more sweeping investigation. The investigation is to an audit what a colonoscopy is to an athletic physical.
Shanahan may be a litigator......
Sun, 01/30/2011 - 21:27 — IDoverfor white collar crimes, per his website. I guess that's different...... they really aren't criminals, are they? BTW, his firm also specializes in Charter School Law, whatever that is. Funny, Civitas provides seminars to our BOE members and Shanahan provides legal counsel.to some of our more honorable BOE members. Spend, spend, spend.
The problem that I have w/ Shanahan is that he has no accountability as to how he spends the $25K. In August he got his 1st $25K and now he needs more? Let's see some invoices listing his billable hours!
And why are Wake Co. taxpayers also paying Tom Farr? Remind me again?
Huh?
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 13:06 — Bob_SconceSo, point of fact, "litigation" is generally considered to deal with civil matters -- you don't generally say a "litigator for white collar crimes." In any case, that's my word, not his -- he lists his practice areas as "business disputes, professional licensing, corporate compliance." I know that he's a former federal prosecutor, so it wouldn't surprise me if he deal with occasional white collar matters. But, it seems clear that those are not the main thing he does.
If you want to see his invoices, ask the district for them. I think they should be covered by public records laws.
As for Farr, are we paying him for anything now? He did a legal audit that came up with some good suggestions, some of which really deserve to be followed up on. He has some experience with election law, so the board might need to call on him to make sure that any redistricting plans they come up with are legal.
"...they really aren't
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 09:00 — woodstock"...they really aren't criminals, are they?"
By "they" I will assume you mean Rev. Barbar and his gang of race-hustling malcontents who have been arrested twice and are seeking to cause further disruption with baseless accusation while working in collusion with AdvancED.
I don't see your point. What
Sun, 01/30/2011 - 10:36 — woodstockI don't see your point. What is not transparent? Who is not accountable? I believe the process is for the board to vote on the matter in a public meeting. What would you suggest they do?
Also, I hope you understand that bogus lawsuits have been filed by the Rev. Barbar of the NAACP at the direction of Jim Golomon, right? And the "audit" is clearly a politically motivated attempt to bully WCPSS into adhereing to extreme left-wing race-hustling ideology. So, having someone with litigation expertise is merely being prudent.
Your apparent anger seems to be fueled by a lack of information. Maybe you'd feel better if you were better informed.
Events
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 09:02 — mommy59There may have been elaborate events held for the past superintendents but times have changed.If the school system can cutback for the valedictorians then they can cut back for the new superintendent.Tata is former military so he very familiar with cutting back!!
Then again the board of educations wants us tobuy pizza at Papa Johns for each school to earn $33.00 each.Last October when they offered this I was a sucker who was drawn into this scam.I spent $20.00 thinking that each school would get thousands of dollars.
Military Cutting Back???
Sun, 01/30/2011 - 09:03 — occum_sharpeBeing military will make "cutting back" very difficult. They have never had to cut back on spending. We have cut back on what we provide our soldiers, but the bill isn't getting any smaller.
I think Tata deserves a chance to show what he can do. Budget and having to "cut back" will be one of his biggest obstacles. We can't forget that this guy had to do a lot of work to get to his station in life. Let's judge after we see him in action.
I think Tata deserves a
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 16:36 — jenmanI think Tata deserves a chance to show what he can do. Budget and having to "cut back" will be one of his biggest obstacles. We can't forget that this guy had to do a lot of work to get to his station in life. Let's judge after we see him in action.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree. Let's give him a chance.
Count me in
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 18:12 — Dove314Count me in. He is here and in the post. Let him be judged for his actions now while on the job not prejudged on his past history. Let's hope he has more wisdom and patience than our BoE members have shown in the past year.
Are you kidding me?
Sun, 01/30/2011 - 16:29 — Voice_of_Reason_Having been in the military from 1979 to 2006, I can tell you we have have to cut back many times. Yes more money is spent, but it is congress that does most of the spending. While not necessary, the military gets things because a congressman or a senator wants the work in their district. You cannot look at the DOD budget and say field commanders are plush with money. Commanders have to really work to get the money they need most of the time. We do a lot more with less these days.
The troops don't make the spending decisions for new weapons systems, we can only make requirements based on our mission. We have spent huge sums because we do a lot more with less people. Our weapons systems are far more accurate, lethal, and technologically superior than any other country in the world. BGen Tata probably never made a decision that involved asking for anything he didn't absolutely need. Probably, only in his last job in R&D at the Pentagon did have a "big wallet." BTW- I also disagree with your statement on cut backs to what we provide our soldiers in the field. We are much better equiped for the most part than any other time in our history.
Wishing Tata well....
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 22:20 — zandeI am sure we all wish Gen Tata well in saving our now floundering school system. Our children deserve better than the track they are now on....
LOL "...now floundering
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 15:30 — woodstockLOL "...now floundering school system?" You get nuttier by the day.
I completely agree our
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 08:08 — red_balloonI completely agree our children deserve better. So when do we plan to hold all parents accountable for their children? When do we plan to fund all students equally? When do we plan to quit feeling good winning sham national accolades for racial balancing of schools and instead focus on student achievement?
So kids should be punished for being born to bad parents?
Tue, 02/08/2011 - 21:16 — integritypleaseWithholding support to kids because their parents suck -- or are busy working two and three jobs, or don't have a car, or are sick (or on drugs or whatever makes them "unaccountable"!) -- does not seem reasonable. Holding a child responsible for the sins (or inadequacies, or misfortunes) of his father or mother is no way to help him achieve his potential.
So many of us in Wake County are so so so lucky to have all we do, and yet too many of us (at least who post on this blog) would willingly deny a hungry or neglected child needed help because it costs some money. Well, we'll pay now, or we'll pay later -- when kids unable to overcome the limitations they're born into fail, give up, or turn to crime -- which, hello, harms innocent people like we privileged suburbanites! -- and end up in prison. A stitch in time saves nine. A child pulled back from the abyss is a priceless gift to the world.
There is something to be
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 15:08 — HJ2ss2There is something to be said for parent accountability. There are numerous reasons parents are not involved in their child's education as well as methods for encouraging these parents to become involved.
Given some of the comments of the new superintendent, I believe the sham is over and a serious attempt at improving student achievement will be made.
Aren't you already?
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:05 — Dove314Aren't you already holding all parents accountable for their children? The question I ask instead is do I hold the child accountable for their parents or not? My tax dollars pay for the common school system, not for assessing parenting skills and punishing the children of those parents found deficient. As for those past accolades based on policies which have been changed, why are you not questioning the current BoE on why they have not done more on student achievemnt, instead choosing to focus so much of their attention on assignment? Why are you not wondering about the harm done by the infamy and negative notoriety the current BoE is creating? Why not focus on where we are going and what can be impacted instead of on the past and on items such as personal parenting skills which are not something the BoE can impact?
Wrong on multiple counts. -
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 17:41 — red_balloonWrong on multiple counts.
- Taxdollars pay for many services and facilities. Unless there is an infinite supply of taxdollars waiting to be tapped, you need to be concerned about how public resources are being used. This applies for public services beyond education too. If today's responsible parents too imposed a greater burden on the school system, I am sure you will start wondering about parenting skills. I guess you are willing to ignore some parents behavior because others are required to fund that behavior come 4/15.
- It appears the current BOE has done a lot more for ED achievement than prior BOEs. What was done by prior BOEs other than focusing on balancing whites and blacks using yellow buses? Or building schools-within-schools?
- I am willing to question the current BOE's focus on assignment. I would rather they focus on achievement. But democracy, for all its imperfections, demands they focus on assignments. They got elected based on the assignment issue. If they go beyond that, like with MS math placement, then they exceeded expectations.
- The harm done to WCPSS is on account of those upset by the shift away from racial balancing. Add the performances by the NAACP and magnet parents and soon you have petty people pursuing petty gains and invoking every aspect of segregation possible because it serves to inflame the public and obfuscate the fact that WCPSS plays a zero sum game with students.
- The BOE can impact personal parenting skills. By shipping students to the suburbs, past BOEs have sent the debilitating message to the NAACP and others that parenting skills in the community are unimportant because those in the suburbs are involved enough in their schools to make up for the paucity of parental involvement in other schools.
Finally, my response to zande was to refute his/ her implication that WCPSS was doing great prior to this BOE. Unless one is a magnet parent or a person delighted by the sight of seeing a black child in class between two white children (and education be damned), WCPSS is another run of the mill public school system.
..
Sun, 01/30/2011 - 09:00 — Dove314Tax dollars pay for many services -- true. But what specific line item(s) or programs are currently in the WCPSS budget or proposed that can be used to mandate a sufficient level of parenting skills? You seem to imply that nothing more than the change to the assignment model will improve parenting skills. Alternately, your argument is that all the WCPSS issues with achievement were solely the result of the diversity policy and that all previous BoE's ever focused on was assignment. Neither of those are accurate. This BoE is making some efforts on student achievement. But, there were ongoing efforts on student achievement and you, more than most, are aware of those efforts.
The reality is that parenting is a challenge. Do parenting skills matter -- of course. For many reasons, though, not every parent will meet some unarticulated threshold of perfect parenting skills that others judge they should have. No one who posts here would appreciate being told by others how to parent. Neither would most parents here appreciate the BoE sending home a parent skills assessment to identify weaknesses to be addressed by the next parental evaluation. I just don't think the BoE has many options open to them using tax dollars to either force or insist on improved parenting skills. TPG talked about a suite of programs that would accompany a neighborhood or community school but, in the budget shortfall, there is not funding available for those programs so this is just a reassignment plus those programs were optional, not mandatory. Just moving some children to a closer school will have some beneficial impact on parenting skills for some parents who make use of the proximity but not nearly the magical perfection pill many here seem to think and comes without consideration of whether there could be any downside effects. The children in the classrooms are what the BoE and WCPSS work with at the bottom line, not the parents. And while parenting skills will always matter, programs designed by WCPSS and the BoE using tax dollars cannot all be based on assuming parents will be have this unarticulated threshold of perfect parenting skills. To make that assumption in designing programs just penalizes the children. That is my point.
This BoE eliminated 20 jobs from Project Enlightenment
Tue, 02/08/2011 - 21:30 — integritypleaseHow tragic that this Board eliminated positions at Project Enlightenment that helped (young, troubled, or otherwise-struggling) families. They had several valuable programs aimed directly at providing practical tools and training for struggling parents to become better at this all-important job.
All that's gone now, and so is the positive impact these programs had on countless families and kids, especially the disabled and at-risk. This truly is an unacknowledged loss to our entire community.
I went to a program there years ago called "Raising your Spirited Child," about dealing with ADHD and otherwise hard-to-handle kids. It completely transformed our family, and kept my spouse and me from committing child abuse on our much-loved but maddening resident Wild Thing. A decade later I still use the lessons I got there with my kids. Project Enlightenment, in its former scope, will be sorely missed.
Additional programs would be
Sun, 01/30/2011 - 18:49 — HJ2ss2Additional programs would be nice but the school system already has a department that could help with the parenting aspect, without telling them how to parent their child. It's time the system recognized their assetts and used them appropriately rather than worrying about territory.
...
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:43 — Sideburns"Why are you not wondering about the harm done by the infamy and negative notoriety the current BoE is creating?"
You are correct. I do wonder why some Board members would choose to wear buttons that mock our school system. I wonder why one Board member would allow her mayor-husband to bad mouth those who have chosen to move here. I wonder why some Board members continue to allow the misinformation to fly and maliciousness to perpetuate. I wonder why some Board members publicly state that they want "consensus" but then do nothing but dig their heels in, cling to old policies and fan the flames of racism and segregation. I wonder why one Board member would publicly berate the qualifications of our soon-to-be superintendent.
This Board is not solely focused on student achievement. They could be spending much more time on other issues but some Board members chose to go back to the archaeic node-driven system and to have meeting after meeting to micro-manage student assignment.
The present BOE was elected
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:31 — willynillyThe present BOE was elected based on what they said they would do for the system. People voted for them based on that. Now some have "backdoored" the voting process and tied the hands of the officials (BOE) elected to do certain things. Call it keeping promises, doing what the voters asked, or whatever you wish. This is the way our system was supposed to work. I can't blame the new BOE for not implementing what they said they would.....I would be leary, too, if I were being asked to enter a meeting in which I was denied an attorney and then having someone/thing go (apparently) beyond the scope of their own mandate (ADvanced).
As for accountability, the state has blame here. There is no law in this state that requires a parent to provide a phone number for contact. That is a fact. A parent can drop off their child at school and at that point they are no longer legally responsible. I have had scores of students who have up to 5 phone numbers in NCWISE and none of them work. Yeah, I get it, some people are homeless. That does not preclude accountabiliuty. Should soemthing hbappen to their child at school there is no way to get in touch and there is NO law that requires that contact number. So if a child does inappropriate stuff at school what do we do? \
This is not to mention that I have witnessed boys grope girls in the hallway Holly Ridge Middle School (grabbing them betwene their legs) and when I say something and the student gets in my face yelling at me I am the one who is told that I am being unreasonable. Do any of you have daughters?
I even witnessed a boy being bullied at school....had a bloody nose.....and would not point out who did it. When I called his mother she asked the boy and then sent me an email telling me that she was sure nothing was going on. How do we (teachers) deal with that? Students KNOW not to say anything because they KNOW that principals and APs will do nothing to the perpetrators with the exception of talking to the poor child who put a beat down on another child and then "buy into the tears of remorse" and allow that child back into the school. THIS is what many chuildren endure day in and day out in the WCPSS.
Teachers will also be "covered" if they are the right sex and of the correct political affiliation. One language arts teacher I worked with chased a girl into the bathroom at Holly Ridge Middle School. It was so intense that the father came to school the next day and confronted the teacher in the cafeteria. That was almost a "beat down." The admin did little to help, that teacher stayed in the school and that girl stayed in her classroom. No one did a thing.
Yes and not all the rest were even elected or challenged
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:56 — Voice_of_Reason_That is a point that needs to made again and again. For example, nobody ran against Kevin Hill because even if they did win, they wouldn't have changed the dynamics of the board policy. Perhaps this next election will put to rest what the people want. The Dems have to win everything (all races) to change the direction completely back the way it was.
Kevin Hill was NOT unopposed
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 15:22 — virginiadareKevin Hill was NOT unopposed in 2007. He ran against Alfreda Wilson and Martha LaVance.
You really seem to have trouble lately getting your facts right! Maybe a little research before posting would help.
I was repeating a post from a while back
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 15:52 — Voice_of_Reason_You are correct, sorry, I should have checked. At the time of the election, the MYR policy was not widespread and our school was doing well. I had just arrived here less than a year before, so the election wasn't that memorable to me. I do remember the two appointees, I started getting engaged with the BoE in 2008. But I should note that there was little difference in policy and Mr Hill was best qualified.
Actually VOR was not the
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 15:26 — willynillyActually VOR was not the only person to say that.....it seems to be a major misconception in several other strands from both sides. If I recall there were 2 appointees on the board, not sure who.....or at least that is what is "out there."
Keith Sutton was appointed
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 15:38 — virginiadareKeith Sutton was appointed to take Rosa Gill's spot when she was appointed to the state legislature and Carolyn Morrison was appointed to take Beverley Clark's position when she resigned. Just seems like people should know what they are talking about before they post. It's hard to take what they have to say seriously if their "facts" are not accurate.
Same goes for you
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 22:29 — FSandYOUClark didn't resign, she quit. Just like Del and Chuck. Period.
It's not only accidental,
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 18:33 — willynillyIt's not only accidental, but also on purpose.....the FEDS and other govt intities love the "let go of disinformation" and keep people guessing. In the agency in which I worked we used to joke "deny everything and make counter accusations." This is one of those instances....take for instance that this post is in a line of others that focused on who opposed (or didn't) Kevin Hill and the young lady whose crotch was grabbed in a crowded hallway at Holly Ridge Middle School and young boy who was beaten in a bathroom by 4 boys was simply dismissed. These are the problems that no one seems to want to address.
Hill was not the only
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 13:16 — willynillyHill was not the only one....who was unapposed....or were they appointed?
Hype It Hui Hype It .....
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 20:07 — AgentPierceHow many blogs will you write about the reception and it's costs - despite this board doing it on the cheap unlike past WCPSS Supts that the N&O did not try to undermine .... I'm betting a minimum of three blogs to gin up the mob for Tuesday.
How many days before the big rally TKH?
Did you read? "Some fairly
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 00:08 — Andrew95Did you read?
"Some fairly elaborate events were held when Bill McNeal and Del Burns were sworn in"
A bit over the top AP......
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 22:19 — zandeI read this post three times and I really see no hype here at all. For an announcement like this it seems actually rather understated. It seems to me that you are really a little overboard in this instance....