The Wake County school board has racked up $67,113.71 so far in legal bills defending the district against the various complaints filed or supported by the state NAACP.
According to page 1 and 2 of this handout presented during last week's budget work session, Wake has compiled $154,298.61 in legal bills dealing with the Open Meetings lawsuit, the federal civil rights complaint and the AdvancED review.
School officials are hoping insurance will pick up $87,176.90 but Wake is rapidly reaching its insurance cap. This means the district would pick up a larger share of any new legal expenses.
Wake has compiled $56,293.90 in bills defending the Open Meetings suit. The NAACP is one of the groups providing legal representation to the supporters of the old diversity policy who filed the lawsuit.
Wake has compiled $55,883 in bills responding to the federal civil rights complaint filed by the NAACP.
Wake has compiled $42,113.71 in bills dealing with the AdvancED complaint filed by the NAACP.
While insurance has covered the majority of the costs so far, Chief Finance Officer Mark Winters said there's a $100,000 cap on how much insurance will cover legal bills on non-monetary lawsuits.
Winters said this is the first year of the cap but that it had been set at $100,000 to help lower the insurance premiums. In response to a question from school board vice chairwoman Debra Goldman, Winters said he didn't think Wake's premiums would rise because of the money spent this school year.
School board attorney Ann Majestic said that this is the first year insurance is picking up complaints at the administrative level before it become a lawsuit.
School board member Chris Malone, who had requested the information, also asked Tuesday for data on the school district's security costs at board meetings and how much Raleigh Police have spent. Staff will try to have the data at the April 26 budget work session.
While school board majority members are trying to blame the legal costs on the NAACP, supporters of the old diversity policy are putting the blame back on the board.
"This Board of Ed has been quite irresponsible with spending," Ann Overton said at last week's school board meeting. "You've spent tens of thousands of extra dollars on hiring more attorneys. Tax dollars to pay lawyers to defend your decisions to hold closed meetings, limit public involvement in board meetings and fight a civil rights complaint."
Comments
I wish you all the best as
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 16:29 — woodstockI wish you all the best as your work though your anger and emotional issues. Good luck with your journey back to rationality.
Practicing psychiatry?
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 20:06 — Dove314Unless you are a practicing psychiatrist, it would perhaps be wise to stop with the armchair, very glib and superficial throwing around of psychiatric illness as a form of name calling in support of your political arguments.
Oh... nothing political in
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 20:35 — woodstockOh... nothing political in my response at all.
...
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 20:24 — SideburnsBut "lemming dittoheads" is OK.
Use of invectives
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 08:16 — Dove314Childish use of invectives is a favored retort by many posters of all persuasions here. Those very posters and others defend that right and dismiss the juvenile nature of the insults as appropriate in the context of this blog. Keung and the N&O sanction all but the most vile insults. Asking people to not use invectives and instead use intelligence and a strength of argument on this blog is like asking the earth to reverse direction of spin -- neither is going to happen. But asking people to avoid the pretense of having a background in mental health and having such professional skill as to make a judgement on the mental health of a poster on a blog -- that perhaps has more of a chance of success.
Hmm...
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 09:24 — Bob_SconceI don't think any reasonable person would think Woodstock was practicing psychiatry -- it takes a lot more than just saying what amounts to "You're crazy and I hope you get some help."
In any case, the original poster has a history of trolling -- check out the comments section to any N&O story which is remotely politically interesting and you'll see him/her there.
As to Keung and the N&O 'sanctioning' anything -- I think a better word is 'tolerate.' They're trying to take a light hand and, IMO, that approach has been reasonably successful -- I think the level of discourse on the blog is about as good as you're going to get in any venue where people can post pseudonymously.
Thus
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 11:23 — Dove314Thus confirming that this blog is NOT the place to come for intelligent discourse on WCPSS. It is either filled with trolls such as the first poster, trolls such as Woodstock or defenders such as yourself of trolls (which is exactly as I stated). If you accept Woodstock's invectives then it seems as if you have little to support calling anyone else a troll in comparison. To say that the "light hand" has been reasonably successful and this should be the norm is like saying WCPSS has been reasonably successful either past or current. But, as always, we shall have to agree to disagree. And that is enough said on foolishness instead of on thoughtful discourse.
Maybe you need to find a new
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 12:23 — woodstockMaybe you need to find a new place to engage in discourse that better suits your tastes. As should be clear by now, I am not going anywhere until this race-hustling idiocy subsides.
DISCLAIMER:
Woodstock is not a professional nor certified decider of where others should engage in online discourse. All statements expressed by Woodstock are his and his only. Any suggestion that they reflect the opinions of other individuals or entities is purely unintentional and may be the result of excessive reliance on reading-between-the-lines.
Disclaimers?
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 14:10 — starsonoursHas it come to the point that we have to have disclaimers? (Thanks for the laugh Woodstock)
These blogs are like a huge cocktail party that is hosted by the N&O. We hope others behave and have conversations that are to our liking, but it is not always what happens. If we are offended by the conversation, we should ignore them and only converse with those whose conversation we enjoy. Since we are all guest the host is the only one that can ask someone to leave. If we are offended that the host isn't asking someone to leave, maybe it's time we left.
Animal House
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 18:06 — Dove314More like an Animal House frat party, Porky's, or Coyote Ugly than a "cocktail party". Are there worse? Yes. Are there worse blogs focused on education of children? That's the question to consider.
...
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 18:14 — SideburnsAnd yet you continue to read and post. Hmmm....
Huh?
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 11:36 — Bob_SconceI didn't say I accepted it. I said nobody would reasonably claim that he was practicing psychiatry. Big difference.
The blog has its share of trolls, as do all blogs, but there are also substantive discussions. If you want to see some flaming, check out the triangle.politics newsgroup, circa 1996.
Oh, that is precious. "...
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 09:04 — woodstockOh, that is precious.
"... avoid the pretense of having a background in mental health...??" LOL!! In the words of John McEnroe, "you CANNOT be serious."
Lighten up Dove....I do not
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 08:48 — shearertwLighten up Dove....I do not see anywhere that woodstock claimed some level of psychiatric background. Woodstock's response was a perfectly reasonable, lighthearted response to the hate filled nonsense dribble spewed by USA_Today. The fact that you only found fault in woodstock's response show your own clear irrational bias. Perhaps you need to dig deep...
To save him the
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 20:19 — Andrew95To save him the trouble:
"When hell freezes over, I will."
You're welcome, woody.
Why didn't the N&O investigate Elgart?
Mon, 04/11/2011 - 19:03 — red_balloonEven 'diversity' supporters cannot be blind to Elgart's crude attempts to undermine democracy.
It’s not undemocratic to usurp elected school board members’ authority when they misbehave, Elgart argues.
http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/private-agency-public-power-904451.html
It appears Elgart, and AdvancED, are in this for power and money. AdvancED has an enviable track record when it comes to holding hostage its customers and fleecing taxpayers. When it comes to improving the quality of education, look elsewhere.
SACS: Too powerful? Read On
Mon, 04/11/2011 - 22:26 — local23Dr. John Trotter
April 10th, 2011
2:44 pm
http://www.theteachersadvocate.com/id137.html
The above article is the first entry that comes up nearly every time that you Google “Mark Elgart.” It is an article that I wrote about him three years ago yesterday (when the AJC’s article came out in the Early Edition). This “April 9, 2008″ article was not by any means my first salvo against Mark Elgart and SACS. Mr. Norreese Haynes and I have been constantly criticizing Mark Elgart and SACS for over three years now. Again, just Google my name juxtaposed to Mark Elgart’s name, and you will see how long my constant drum beat has been against the hypocritical Mark Elgart and the phony SACS money-making organization. You can doubt me if you wish, but Norreese and I were the only lone wolves howling in the desert on this one for the first few years. Catlady has too been harping against SACS in more recent times and calling upon the AJC to investigate this boondoggle called “SACS accreditation.” By the way, Elgart’s been causing a real mess in other places outside of Georgia too. Check out the two storms brewing in North Carolina — Wake County and Burke County, I believe.
The Southern Accrediting Commission for Schools (SACS). This new organization of mine will grant “SACS Accreditation.” Lest anyone tries to jump on this bandwagon, I am announcing its existence now on this copyrighted blog! Ha! So, if any of you superintendents and headmasters are tired of Mark Elgart and his mess, just contact me and my new organization, the Southern Accrediting Commission for Schools (SACS), and we can do “business.”
I remember when some people scoffed at the notion that I could start a new teachers’ union. They’re not laughing anymore, are they? My new organization will be putting together an illustrious board composed of people with hundreds of cumulative years of educational experience. (By the way, Catlady, would you like to be a member of the board?) I will be the CEO, and I guarantee you that I know more about education, have more experience in dealing with schools, and have far better credentials than Mark Elgart. You folks know that I am a straight-shooter and treat all folks fairly. No hidden agendum or agenda. I probably won’t even throw around these do-gooder phrases like “quality,” “excellence,” “togetherness,” etc. I will not expect school boards to sit around and hold hands, singing “Kum Ba Ya.” If board members want to slug it out when fighting over policies and practices (yes, practices!), then great! They were elected by their fellow citizens to do such. And, if their fellow citizens don’t like what they are doing, then they can vote them off the school board. This is how democracy works, and the Southern Accrediting Commission for Schools (SACS) will respect this. School board members arguing and disagreeing in public will not affect its SACS Accreditation, but will only serve as an example to the school children of democracy in action.
Let me stop for now. I’m just too excited to type right now! Ideas of bubbling all in my cerebral area! Website design, brochures, marketing blitz, etc. I have so many things to do right now! Spread the word! John Trotter has formed another accrediting organization, the Southern Accrediting Commission for Schools (SACS)! (c) John Rhodes Alston Trotter, EdD, JD, April 10, 2011.
More blog info:
http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2011/04/10/sacs-too-powerful-too-petty-or-is-its-heavy-hand-needed/
"Why didn't the N&O
Mon, 04/11/2011 - 20:30 — woodstock"Why didn't the N&O investigate Elgart?"
Why? There was no ideological upside for the N&O to find any negative or controversial about him. But, it didn't take a whole lot of investigative expertise to figure out Elgart is a shyster imposing his far left wing ideology on elected school boards.
And in other news not provided here
Mon, 04/11/2011 - 17:13 — nancyncEducation Week (the very publication we read about here with their story loosing claiming Tea Party and School board affiliation, mentioning Wake County) ran another story, this time it won't appear here because, well, it talks about the behavior of AdvancEd. An associated press article that Education Week posted on their site.
www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/04/10/419586gschoolccreditationcritics_ap.html?tkn=RTXFS3dJBE8Fy%2FTUsK%2B2s2Qzo9geVvCtwzGX&cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS2
ABC had the AP article on
Mon, 04/11/2011 - 20:04 — AngelaWABC had the AP article on their website last night too.
see also:
Private agency, public power
At the center of the controversy is a Georgia-based nonprofit that gobbled up other accrediting agencies in recent years to create a juggernaut whose mere mention rattles the nerves of school districts throughout the region. Accreditation is voluntary, but students at schools without it may risk scholarships and college admissions.
AdvancED, run by hard-charging President and CEO Mark Elgart, has since 2006 built a brand that boasts it drives quality education for 27,000 schools and 16 million students in 69 countries.
But with a seemingly magnetic attraction to discord, AdvancED is rapidly accumulating critics who say the agency has no place meddling in the politics of elected school boards. Accreditation, they complain, has become a weapon wielded by powerful interests — such as the business lobby — when they don’t get their way. And AdvancED stands to benefit.
http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/private-agency-public-power-904451.html
Most telling
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 09:45 — Bob_Sconce“We know systems will progress, make progress, when there is stability in the direction that they are headed,” he said. “Stability in their focus, stability in their leadership.”
So, basically, he doesn't like it when voters decide that there needs to be a change on school boards. His world has no room for reform.
Seemingly so
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 10:40 — nancyncThat's the way I read it to, and the stories of his actions in Ga. school districts is the same approach he used in WCPSS - nothing about the schools, but all about focusing on the school boards.
He's not truly interested in education of the students, only control of the direction of school boards.
And their financial
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 08:10 — nancyncTheir financial footing is questionable as well. From being in a hole to massive influx of funds virtually overnight.
AdvancED, run by president and CEO Mark Elgart, said it helps deliver quality education for 27,000 schools and 16 million students in 69 countries. While tax records examined by the newspaper show it was more than half a million dollars in the red in the 2009 fiscal year, it took in more than $21 million in each of the past two fiscal years.
Elgart told the Journal-Constitution his organization is careful with money and uses funds to boost services to districts. SACS focuses on school boards because of the problems politically motivated changes in policy can create for school systems, he said, denying accusations that his agency promotes anyone else's agenda.
Uses funds to boost services? How do they do that? What services have they boosted, anyone know?
He must mean the school
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 08:43 — CaryCurmudgeonHe must mean the school board's legal services and all the money they had to spend on haggling over a bogus complaint.
KUENG THIS IS WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT
Mon, 04/11/2011 - 22:05 — cmalone1This should be on the front of the City and State part of your paper.. not a tiny paragraph I accidently ran across I think it was today. References to this should also headline a blog..
Everything's on hold this week
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 14:27 — FSandYOUThis happens fairly often as apparently only one person can cover anything news worthy. Check back next week.
Yes, it should indeed be
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 08:25 — woodstockYes, it should indeed be front and cneter in the N&O, but you know as well as I do that isn't going to happen. What passes for news in that paper -- and the local media in general for that matter -- must pass through a left-wing filter... this story won't make it through.
Give the guy a break.
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 08:56 — magnetParentGive the guy a break. Keung is on vacation this week.
Are you kidding. News stops
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 09:01 — woodstockAre you kidding. News stops because one guy takes a few days off? What is this Mayberry? I know the N&O keeps laying off folks and is about to fold, but surely they have more than one reporter to cover relevant news.
Well, I don't think Mr.
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 09:40 — magnetParentWell, I don't think Mr. Malone is aware of it - he's complaining to Keung about it. Besides, I don't really consider this "news". It's more just "investigative reporting" done by ABC. Most of it we already knew.
So you KNEW AdvancED had far
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 10:25 — woodstockSo you KNEW AdvancED had far left-wing political motives and that its' mission is to gain power/control over voters and elected officials? Most people already know this?
You see, that is what you
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 11:14 — magnetParentYou see, that is what you read into it. Not fact, but conspiracy theory. We knew that AdvancED pulled the accreditation on some school systems in Georgia. We knew that AdvancED investigated and put on probation the Burke County schools.We knew that they recently investigated Wake County schools. We knew that AdvancED has critics. Where exactly in the article does it show fact that their motives are far left-wing and their mission is to gain power/control over voters and elected officials? Seems like a theory to me.
One thing I did not know, but learned from the EdWeek article was that "State legislatures are responding differently to the accrediting agencies. Georgia passed a law last year that makes accreditation more important. Meanwhile, North Carolina lawmakers are considering a bill that would make the state the primary accreditor and would bar public universities from taking SACS credentials into account when making admissions or scholarship decisions." Interesting fact to me.
No...
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 12:34 — Bob_SconceA conspiracy theory involves, well, a conspiracy. And that implies multiple organizations. I haven't seen any claim of that.
But, what does seem clear is that AdvanceEd is throwing its weight around a lot more than the other other accreditation bodies. I've looked around at accreditation actions by other regional accreditation agencies and have not found any instances where they threatened a school's accreditation because of actions of the school board. (Each agency has a few every year where a school's accreditation is in jeopardy, but always for school-related issues.)
The real question is whether AdvanceEd is off on a bender of its own and, if so, what the check on AdvanceEd's power is.
Funny, I thought the
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 14:10 — magnetParentFunny, I thought the conspiracy was that AdvancED was in collusions with the NAACP?
I see that the accusation is that AdvancED is throwing its weight around, but I do not know how its actions compare to other accreditation agencies. Not sure you can conclude that from a Google search. Maybe there needs to be an agency to accredit the accreditation agencies ;-)
ETA: A quick search uncovered this:
"The Pearl River County school board was presented with results of a recent accreditation audit performed by the Mississippi Department of Education Accreditation division, and not all of the results were positive."..."Her findings showed that some members of the board at times acted on their own away from the rest of the board members, shared private information about school matters with members of the community and went outside of their duties as board members in attempts to override the superintendent, such as hiring and firing staff members and acting in a manner that kept the superintendent from being able to resolve matters in the district."..."there also were issues found in the audit concerning incidents that have kept the board from focusing on education. "... "The use of favoritism and retaliation by some board members was also cited in Vanderford’s findings. She also said she found instances where decisions were made that benefited a single board member, and not the district as a whole"
http://picayuneitem.com/local/x977547082/Pearl-River-County-School-board-accreditation-audit-finds-faults
Interesting
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 14:29 — Bob_SconceThat's a state accreditation agency. I was looking at the regional ones. In any case, the article you pointed to doesn't say anything about schools being at risk of losing accreditation.
I agree that I haven't done a thorough investigation.
On a completely separate question, MagnetParent, I've heard a rumor of a proposal to stop giving existing magnet students preference in magnet admissions at new schools. So, for example, going to Ligon would not give you an advantage in getting into Enloe. The concern is that the existing scheme favors long-time residents over newcomers -- if you move here in middle school and tried to get into Enloe as a 9th grader, you're at a disadvantage compared to students who moved here in elementary school and got into Ligon as a 6th grader. What's your opinion of this? (And, no, I'm not the source of the rumor, although I admit to thinking similar things.)
A lot of that depends on the
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 15:33 — magnetParentA lot of that depends on the magnet program. If a MS program feeds into the same program in HS, the student should be given preference. (IMO, of course). If, for example, you are in the Middle School IB program, you should get preference into the HS IB program. That student has invested a lot of time in preparing for such a program. That is kind of how they do it now. (See the Program Pathways on WCPSS Magnet page).
However, if you were to say that a magnet student that jumps to an unrelated magnet program/path (ie. a Museums Magnet MS to an IB Magnet HS), then I don't see a need to give preference to that student over any other student in the system.
Ideally, the next school program should be able to accomodate the existing feeder program plus more. (ie. There should be more seats available in all IB HS than the sum of the IB MS seats).
All that being said, to give preference to students already in the magnet program helps build the program - Many families might not opt into an ES magnet if it did not give them preference into a MS magnet and eventually a HS magnet. There is a commitment being made by these families at an early age.
You realize, with the school choice program you are going to have a similar issue - if they give preference to students at feeder schools the newcomers will have a difficult time getting into that favorite HS. Should the concept of feeder pattern guarantees be dropped?
ETA: Here's a followup article on that Pearl River County article above:
http://picayuneitem.com/local/x1332408962/PRC-completes-hammering-out-reply-to-MDE-audit
So...
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 15:55 — Bob_SconceThere is a commitment being made by these families at an early age.
It is, but it also seems unfair to deny that opportunity to families who either weren't here when their kids were that early age, or were just unaware of the tracking when they were applying for Kindergarten.
On a side note, if the purpose of the ES magnets is to get into the MS magnets and then the HS magnets, then why offer magnet programs at the ES at all? Just say "If you want to eventually go to Enloe, then you have to go to this downtown elementary school. You won't get any extra programs, but it's the only way to get into Enloe"?
I am a long time resident
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 22:03 — NWRaleighMomAll my kids were born in Wake and I was fully aware of the tracking. Unfortunately, we've been denied every time we applied. So, long time residents have been denied of magnet opportunities as well. Not just newcomers.
True but
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 07:27 — Voice_of_Reason_If you live and you have young children starting school inside the beltway, your chances of getting a magnet is much higher than somebody moving to Wake County with children already in school...wat,way higher. The fact it is so hard to get in indicates we don't need to spend so much extra money on them too.
I agree
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 09:24 — NWRaleighMomThis is a wonderful opportunity for the chosen few and it negatively affects the rest of us. Unfortunately, I don't believe that anything is going to be done about this.
.
Wed, 04/13/2011 - 07:28 — Voice_of_Reason_.
I did not say that was the
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 16:29 — magnetParentI did not say that was the purpose of ES magnets. I said that many will commit at that early age because they have hopes that it will help them get into their desired MS and HS. Would you be okay with them being guaranteed into Enloe if they went to <given> downtown ES even if that ES was not a magnet? Is that any different than what you have rumored to be removed from the program? Is that any different than the <possible> school choice program guaranteeing a MS/HS as a feeder from a given <chosen> ES?
I said that ideally they should be sure to have more seats in the HS magnet program than is in the MS magnet program so that they can accomodate non-magnet MS students as well. Wouldn't that be another solution to the problem? Also, not all MS magnet students will even apply to the feeder HS program. I have known many to return to their base HS instead, leaving their seat for someone else.
So....
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 20:08 — Bob_SconceI agree that my idea WRT just going to a downtown magnet wouldn't really help.
The problem is that people who are new to the district should have the same opportunities as people who've lived here their entire lives. I know that galls some people -- especially those who, not only were born here, but whose great-granddaddy was born here -- but it seems fair.
Personally, I suspect that there wouldn't be much change in magnet enrollment if the 6th and 9th grade admissions criteria no longer considered whether the student was in the same magnet program the previous year. The Elementary and Middle programs are strong enough to attract students without that extra benefit.
Program equity and access is
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 16:34 — woodstockProgram equity and access is something that needs a lot of attention. The magnet system as it is isn't getting it done. The fate and quality of a student's education can note be left to the unfair magnet selection process.
“Maybe there needs to
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 14:18 — shearertw“Maybe there needs to be an agency to accredit the accreditation agencies”
I realize you’re joking (based on the smiley face) but I just about threw up….
All this “accreditation” stuff is just a racket. How ‘bout we just let the states/locals manage their public schools? If we don’t like how they’re running, we can elect different people to run them. Get the Feds and the accreditation agencies out of the way. If this is about getting into college, that’s what the heck SATs and admission boards are for. Gees, when are we going to get a clue?
And as for Keung being on vacation…..he’s been on vacation with regard to the AdvancED issue for 6 months now. Andrew95 could do a better job of investigative reporting than Keung has on this issue…..and it IS for a lack of trying.
"You see, that is what you
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 11:20 — woodstock"You see, that is what you read into it. Not fact, but conspiracy theory."
Huh? Did you read the article???
Of course. And you did not
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 11:31 — magnetParentOf course. And you did not answer my question.
There is no one fact. It is
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 12:18 — woodstockThere is no one fact. It is an accumulation of things including what I've witnessed here in Wake County, accounts from other school systems, and this recent article, which summarizes the harassing antics of AdvancED. Most intelligent human beings not driven by ideological obsession like you seem to be can see pretty clearly that this organization -- this monopoly -- is not about education or student achievement, they are about power, influence, and radical ideology.
But, fortunately for you, you will not have to take my word for it. This will play out in the courts and in legislation and in the end, Mark Elgart and AdvancED's gang of left-wing zealots will be revealed for what they are, politically motivated shysters.
Thank you Yes
Tue, 04/12/2011 - 09:53 — cmalone1I was not aware he was on vacation. However if some of the things that made it onto the blog and even headlined are newsworthy so is this... Just a point of view I want him to understand. Its not the biggest of deals but a perspective I want him to consider.
Deja Vu?
Mon, 04/11/2011 - 21:59 — local23For a moment there, I thought I was reading about WCPSS and Advance Ed..this company seems very very dangerous, way to much control and power over school systems and boards. I feel sorry for Georgia.