Joe Ciulla - at large school board voting - WRAL

[Jackie]

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/2531446/

Jackie

[Brent]

And watch the video, too!

Mr. Blue exaggerates just a bit (as in "9X")...Wake County commissioners, who run county-wide, typically win with around 100,000 votes (not 900,000).

I think that Keith and Joe make a much stronger case.

Way to go, Joe!

[chaboard]

I wasn't impressed by the piece as a whole. It was particularly disturbing how they gave the most important objection - the dilution of minority representation - only one throwaway line at he very end of the piece.

I asked Joe awhile back if he also thought all Cary Tow Council members should be elected At-Large and if I recall correctly he said no. I don't see any logical a priori reason for the distinction. Geographically specific representaton is fundamental from smaller levels (Cary Town Council) to very large levels (I only get vote for 4% of the US Senate, less than half the input I get into the Wake County School Board).....what's so special about the school board that we need to risk the higher expense campaigns and the racist overtones of no minority boards?

[JoeCiulla]

I wasn't impressed by the piece as a whole. It was particularly disturbing how they gave the most important objection - the dilution of minority representation - only one throwaway line at he very end of the piece.

I asked Joe awhile back if he also thought all Cary Tow Council members should be elected At-Large and if I recall correctly he said no. I don't see any logical a priori reason for the distinction. Geographically specific representaton is fundamental from smaller levels (Cary Town Council) to very large levels (I only get vote for 4% of the US Senate, less than half the input I get into the Wake County School Board).....what's so special about the school board that we need to risk the higher expense campaigns and the racist overtones of no minority boards?

That was a while back, and I think I said I could settle for something for the BoE like we have in Cary Town Council where we have districts but still vote for a majority. I've studied the issue and gotten a lot smarter since then.

The biggest disappointment to me has been finding how partisan this issue is. At the municpal level, I believe most or all Mayors & Councils support at-large, regardless of their party affiliation. Don't know whether Mr. Meeker will weigh in. At the General Assembly level, this is purely partisan. All of the Republican reps I've heard from support at-large, the Dems do not. When asked about at-large, the Dems talk about concerns with the Voter Rights Act. While the Dems have 'concerns' about this, they have done nothing (to my knowledge) to pursue alternate legislation. Other counties in NC already have at-large elections for BoE, and I'm sure the GA has some really good lawyers to figure out how to do it here.

Dems have also said they are worried about minority representation. Our CC's are elected at-large and we have greater minority representation there.

Rep. Blue's point yesterday was that it is impractical to expect BoE members to convince the whole county that they should be re-elected. The BoE likes to make grand statements about how we don't have neighborhood schools or town schools, the schools belong to all of us. If the schools belong to all of us and the BoE spends all our money, then I think they should have to convince all of us that they are doing a good job.

Bottom-line, I dismiss all the arguments the Dems are presenting are a smokescreen. They will not give the real reason they are against this, and I won't publicly speculate.

Back to your point chaboard...
Given the Dems are deeply entrenched on this issue, I think at-large across the board (pardon the pun) is the only way to go. To pursue a Cary-like approach would require redistricting from scratch, and provide opponents an opportunity to drag this out forever and to engineer the districts to their maximum advantage.

I was very please to at least see some media coverage of this story, even though I have a face made for radio. The one disappointment to me was that the story came across as "parents vs. the man" and did not reveal the ugly partisan politics which are really in play.

[Wuptdo]

Joe -- on behalf of the thousands of the victims of the Wake County School Board, thank you. Keep up the good work.

What I find surprising is that WRAL ran this story. In the past, WRAL & NandO have worked very closely to ensure the policies of the WCPSS are presented in the most favorable light to the public in general. I will remind all of you that both WRAL & NandO were (and probably still are) "Friends of Wake County" first and foremost.

Joe -- my cents. Try to get other local media outlets interested in this story, including the "Independent" (which will call you a white, elitist, & racist) and the Durham newspaper (they love trashing Wake County).

Politics is all about power. The the power elites in Raleigh and their wannabe supporters in the County want this issued "nipped in the bud." Press on, because this a good & noble fight.

And Dan Blue....:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Jackie]

The biggest disappointment to me has been finding how partisan this issue is..

That is disappointing.


Dems have also said they are worried about minority representation. Our CC's are elected at-large and we have greater minority representation there..

I reckon I need some clarification.... will hopefuls still be required to reside in a particular district, with voting as if all candidates are at large? Or is the suggestion to completely do away with districts, as is being discussed in Morrisville?

Jackie

[JoeCiulla]

I reckon I need some clarification.... will hopefuls still be required to reside in a particular district, with voting as if all candidates are at large? Or is the suggestion to completely do away with districts, as is being discussed in Morrisville?

Jackie

Jackie,
The 2007 proposal was to establish "District-based" at-large, ie. everyone votes in all districts, but candidates must live in the district they are running for. Same as CC's today.
Joe

[chaboard]

Bottom-line, I dismiss all the arguments the Dems are presenting are a smokescreen. They will not give the real reason they are against this, and I won't publicly speculate.


You're welcome to your opinion but I think you're way off base here. There's a LONG history in this state and the South in general of using at-large elections to prevent minority representation....it was a very effective tactic of outright racists for many years. That doesn't mean that everyone who wants at-large elections is racist or has a motive even remotely concerned with race...I'm positive you don't, for example. But it DOES mean that to those who have fought those battles (and those battles typically HAVE been very partisan due to the fact that one particular party has flagrantly courted the racist vote in the south for a generation) there is a strong presumptive hurdle against the very idea.

You need to clear that hurdle with a strong argument FOR at-large elections...and frankly, I haven't heard one. All I've heard is "I don't like the way they vote and I want to get a say in electing more of them". And as I sad before that's a very generic argument that applies just as well to everything from the US Senate to the local PTA. Why specifically are district elections a problem for BoE but NOT for Town Council, State House, US House,Senate, etc? What's different?




Back to your point chaboard...
Given the Dems are deeply entrenched on this issue, I think at-large across the board (pardon the pun) is the only way to go. To pursue a Cary-like approach would require redistricting from scratch, and provide opponents an opportunity to drag this out forever and to engineer the districts to their maximum advantage.


I'm still waiting to hear why any change is needed. And I am listening with an open mind. Skeptical, but open. Convince me.

[Wuptdo]

At-Large School Board seats in Wake County? Sure, why not. If it is good enough for Mecklenburg County, why not Wake County? Until this year, Mecklenburg-Charlotte School System was the largest in North Carolina. The "Voters Act" stuff was not an issue down there. But then again, when you have someone as powerful as Uncle Jim Black on your side, anything is possible. How come we have no "Uncle Jim's" in Wake County looking out for us?

http://www.cms.k12.nc.us/boardeducation/index.asp

The more you know........

[JoeCiulla]

You're welcome to your opinion but I think you're way off base here. There's a LONG history in this state and the South in general of using at-large elections to prevent minority representation....it was a very effective tactic of outright racists for many years. That doesn't mean that everyone who wants at-large elections is racist or has a motive even remotely concerned with race...I'm positive you don't, for example. But it DOES mean that to those who have fought those battles (and those battles typically HAVE been very partisan due to the fact that one particular party has flagrantly courted the racist vote in the south for a generation) there is a strong presumptive hurdle against the very idea.

If this were 1970 I'd agree with you... but it's not. I appreciate what you said about me, but I really do not think the other people pushing for at-large are doing so out of racist motives. Maybe I'm a purist, but this is more about competency than anything else. I certainly would not expect a minority BoE member to provide unfair advantage to minority students, nor would I expect a white BoE member to go the other way. I don't see that happening on the board today either, at least not on race. I do see board members who go out of their way to protect their districts, but that is because they are their districts. The partisan politics truly disgust me, and both parties are guilty.

[QUOTE=chaboard;41473]
You need to clear that hurdle with a strong argument FOR at-large elections...and frankly, I haven't heard one. All I've heard is "I don't like the way they vote and I want to get a say in electing more of them". And as I sad before that's a very generic argument that applies just as well to everything from the US Senate to the local PTA. Why specifically are district elections a problem for BoE but NOT for Town Council, State House, US House,Senate, etc? What's different?
[QUOTE]

We could debate this all day, why not at-large for every office in America. I prefer to handle one debate at a time, and right now that is regarding the BoE.

I'll start with a loose quote from Rosa Gill.... We don't have neighborhood schools, we don't have town schools, the schools belong to all of us. While I think we should have neighborhood schools, this statement is true -- the schools belong to everyone in Wake County and board members should be accountable to everyone in Wake County.

I have kids in the system, so do you. In my opinion, the BoE has more power over what happens to my family than the Town of Cary government. If my town government lets my family down, it means my taxes go up, I get another pharmacy across the street, my property values go down, whatever. I'll steal your thunder here and say yes, in the worst case, we run out of water. When (not if) the BoE lets my family down, my children's education suffers and my family structure is impacted. On top of that, they can have the same negative effects as poor town government... increased taxes due to efficiency issues, decreased property values because I live in a node which has MYR or is sent to a low-performing school. My kids don't get a do-over on their education, they only get one shot.

We are just coming out of four years of strip-mining Cary with development everywhere. Traffic is worse and we have strict water restrictions. I do not see a wave of people leaving Cary. On the other hand, given the debacle which is WCPSS, I see parents running away in droves. 18% of Wake students are either in private school or home school, and the number is rising.

I'd like people to have a chance to vote at the ballot box, not with their feet.

[StanN]

Speaking as a candidate for county commissioner, I'd suggest we would get a lot more people who represented the folks in Wake, rather than special interests, if we elected the W Commissioners from districts rather than having them run at large. Have you ever thought of the problems and cost of getting your message out over 864 sq. miles to ~400,000 voters. BTW, e-mail or call me if you want to stop special interests from controlling county government. 363-4685

Also, those who are promoting changing the way the BOE is elected are proposing to break the law. Whether you agree or disagree with the BOE, and I have my gripes as well, we all should obey the law. You should ask yourselves. Are the elected officials promoting this scheme simply ignorant..or are they just saying stuff to inflame the public and build their base? I can't read minds but the last thing I would do is call them ignorant.

You know where the big bucks are in this county. If you want them to control elections have the school board elected at large. Better would be to elect both from districts. Better yet in the same year.In the present system it is difficult to say who is to blame for the #@$% mess...excuse me, accountable.

True, big bucks don't always win...but they sure do help. Caryites beat the odds. Smear campaigns don't always work. Keep defeating those kind of campaigns and they will stop.

Elect Stan Norwalk as County Commissioner

[JoeCiulla]

Also, those who are promoting changing the way the BOE is elected are proposing to break the law. Whether you agree or disagree with the BOE, and I have my gripes as well, we all should obey the law.

Stan, you're drinking the Dems' Kool-Aid. The GA staff has not determined that the proposed legislation is illegal. Every member of the Wake Dem. delegation is talking about 'concerns' or 'worries' over voter rights act. If they knew it was illegal, they'd be the first to say so.

Even if the legislation were illegal, it could be written in such a way that it would not cause problems with the VRA. We have plenty of templates in other counties who today have at-large BoE elections.



You should ask yourselves. Are the elected officials promoting this scheme simply ignorant..or are they just saying stuff to inflame the public and build their base? I can't read minds but the last thing I would do is call them ignorant.

Wakey wakey. The public is already inflamed, and has been for some time. Is this issue being leveraged for political gain? Absolutely. The shame here is that some Democratic legislators who do a great job and opening themselves up to great damage because they are united on this one issue -- and on the wrong side of it.

[StanN]

A lecturer on the law at Duke Law School says its illegal. You would prefer I believe the local politicians who are pouring gasoline on a fire to see the flames shoot higher. Is it any wonder when nothing ever gets accomplished.

And if you really believe this is a solution why aren't you meeting with the Wake delegation face-to-face. If its important to you its worth the effort. The folks in the NCGA have seen hundreds of petitions. More often than not they are ignored.

Rather get the CTC to spend hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars to produce another study that will go no where like the first one.

I read your site about Mecklenburg having at-large voting for the BOE.
Isn't that the school system which Judge Manning accuses of Academic Genocide for their inner city segregated schools.

We need win-win solution to our problems, not win-lose. We need straight talk rather than "wacky wacky". Tell me whats wrong with my solution?

StanN
Change is possible.
Elect Stan Norwalk County Commissioner

[Wuptdo]

Stan -- ROFL,ROFL -- Because a Duke professor says so. You have do way better than that. There is nothing at all "illegal" about trying to change any law in North Carolina. It all start with people letting their elected officials know they want change, or they change the official. It really is that simple. Seems to me you are once again part of the "nip it in the bud" crowd. Many of us have been "talking" to elected officials for years, but no results (just a bunch of lies). People are sick & tired of the "status quo" that you represent, and screwing with peoples children goes way beyond partisan politics.

Stan wrote:
"And if you really believe this is a solution why aren't you meeting with the Wake delegation face-to-face. If its important to you its worth the effort. The folks in the NCGA have seen hundreds of petitions. More often than not they are ignored."
Seems like a good time to "sweep" them into the unemployment line. They are either for this or against this, there is no middle ground. Let the voters decide what they want.

Stan again:
"Rather get the CTC to spend hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars to produce another study that will go no where like the first one.
So it is OK for the School Board/WCPSS to spend hundreds of thousands of our tax dollars to fight the Judge Manning's MYR decision? For some strange reason, hypocrite comes to mind.

Stan again:
"I read your site about Mecklenburg having at-large voting for the BOE."
Yep, if they can have it, why not us?

"Isn't that the school system which Judge Manning accuses of Academic Genocide for their inner city segregated schools."
And this is relative to the discussion why? Strawman, perhaps?

"We need win-win solution to our problems, not win-lose."
Agreed.

"We need straight talk rather than "wacky wacky".
From whom? The BoE? WCPSS Management,which by the way, are our employees.

"Tell me whats wrong with my solution?"
Talk to the Wake Delegation? Is that your solution? Fine, when and where?
It has been my experience, that they will not show up, nor will they engage with the general public.

Stan from a few above:
"BTW, e-mail or call me if you want to stop special interests from controlling county government."
Oh like it isn't already controlled by "special interest." Who were the "Friends of Wake County? Or how about the Board of Directors for WakeED?

http://www.wakeedpartnership.org/about/directors.htm

Almost everyone on their "Board" has an opportunity for making a little money off WCPSS. Conflict of Interest?

Time to take out the trash in Wake County, and changing the dynamic of the BoE is one of those ways. I'm sick & tired of Raleigh money & elites calling the shots for the unwashed masses out here in the county. Let the voters decide.
:):)

[JoeCiulla]

Stan,
What really disappointed me about your post was that it was purely partisan. You have some really good ideas on a lot of things, and I wasn't expecting you spout the party line -- you are more original than that. With that, I'll respond to your comments....


A lecturer on the law at Duke Law School says its illegal. You would prefer I believe the local politicians who are pouring gasoline on a fire to see the flames shoot higher. Is it any wonder when nothing ever gets accomplished.

Why would you or the Democratic Wake County legislators look to a Duke Law professor for legal advice? The General Assembly has a crack legal staff. Here's an idea, put them to work on it. And don't ask them to go figure out how the bills as proposed might violate some statutes, ask them to find legislation which WILL NOT violate any. That is what the Dems can do, today, if they will support at large. This is a mere smokescreen.

Are other politicians pouring gasoline on the fire? Yes, but it is a fire that has been burning for a long time.




And if you really believe this is a solution why aren't you meeting with the Wake delegation face-to-face. If its important to you its worth the effort. The folks in the NCGA have seen hundreds of petitions. More often than not they are ignored.

I have spoken with several members of the Wake delegation, and I'd be happy to meet with them face-to-face. I'm just one citizen, so I'm not sure I'm worth their time. There are thousands of citizens who have been tortured by the school system, so a one-at-a-time approach might not be productive for the GA members.

If we have leaders in office who continue to ignore our petitions, then we clearly need to vote them out of office.




Rather get the CTC to spend hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars to produce another study that will go no where like the first one.

I think the old study is fine, it is the Board of Education's failure to take substantive action on any of the recommendations that is the problem.



I read your site about Mecklenburg having at-large voting for the BOE.
Isn't that the school system which Judge Manning accuses of Academic Genocide for their inner city segregated schools.

Then you must have also read about Currituck County schools which are completely at-large for their board of education. Give me a little time and I can find a bunch of other counties which are also at-large.



We need win-win solution to our problems, not win-lose. We need straight talk rather than "wacky wacky". Tell me whats wrong with my solution?

Stan, I too would like to see straight talk and a win-win solution. The children of Wake County, including mine, are caught in the cross-fire between parties. This is an absolute disgrace. The Wake delegation is meeting in April, Dems and Republicans together. We should expect them to act like adults, set aside personal agendas, and come away with the solution which is best. They owe it to our children.

[chaboard]

Stan, I too would like to see straight talk and a win-win solution. The children of Wake County, including mine, are caught in the cross-fire between parties. This is an absolute disgrace. The Wake delegation is meeting in April, Dems and Republicans together. We should expect them to act like adults, set aside personal agendas, and come away with the solution which is best. They owe it to our children.

It's very hard to find a "solution which is best" when the problem is so ill-defined.

And it's gonna be very, very hard if you're wanting a solution to a "problem" - such as
the way we elect school board members - which a whole lot of people don't think
is even a problem to begin with.

I'm just sayin'.

Just out of curiosity, have you got any numbers on how much is spent on a typical county-wide CC race vs. how much is spent on a typical single district BoE race?

[JoeCiulla]

It's very hard to find a "solution which is best" when the problem is so ill-defined.

And it's gonna be very, very hard if you're wanting a solution to a "problem" - such as
the way we elect school board members - which a whole lot of people don't think
is even a problem to begin with.

I'm just sayin'.

Just out of curiosity, have you got any numbers on how much is spent on a typical county-wide CC race vs. how much is spent on a typical single district BoE race?

Chaboard,

One thing I think we can agree on is that some very hard work needs to get done by our state legislators, and that it is immoral to put party politics ahead of the interests of our children.

I went down to the board of elections three weeks ago and changed my registration to independent. At 47, I no longer have patience or enthusiasm for party politics, so I'm going Switzerland.

Good question on BoE campaign costs, I plan on digging into this on the next trip downtown.

[StanN]

What would really be interesting is if you asked Neale Hunt, Richard Stevens and Nelson Dollar if they would support a school impact fee if the other side approved voting at large for the BOE. Or better yet ask them if they would support voter owned elections for both CC's and BOE in return for voting at large. Or home rule for Wake and its 12 muni's in return for voting at large. Any bets? I'll offer odds.

Lets see... we need a slogan. "End the tyranny of the NCGA. (Put a flag in the background draped over the Declaration of Independence.)
Let local government be free of the oppression of Dillon's Rule." Have a soul group sing "I wanna be free". Put it on Broadway and you would have a smash hit.

When Stevens/Dollar/Hunt turned you down it would then become quickly apparent why they submitted their bills. When legislators want something to pass they are prepared to negotiate. Introducing a bill is a no brainer. Staff does most of the work. Passing a bill is a whole other thing.

And if you are asking for impact fees make sure the t's are crossed and the i's dotted.

[Brent]

Stan, I have a hard time understanding how you can run for a seat on a body that uses an electoral system that you oppose to fill the seats of that body.

How can you use an electoral system you oppose to get yourself elected?
Do you think that the current electoral system for the County Commissioners has led to problems (underrepresented minorities, disenfranchisement, difficulties for candidates, etc.)?

I would really like to know why you so adamantly oppose the use of the very same (or similar) system for the BoE that you have chosen to participate in yourself?

[d4vendel]

Stan, I have a hard time understanding how you can run for a seat on a body that uses an electoral system that you oppose to fill the seats of that body.

How can you use an electoral system you oppose to get yourself elected?
Do you think that the current electoral system for the County Commissioners has led to problems (underrepresented minorities, disenfranchisement, difficulties for candidates, etc.)?

I would really like to know why you so adamantly oppose the use of the very same (or similar) system for the BoE that you have chosen to participate in yourself?

I have a more basic question. Having read Stan's postings here, columns in the newspaper, other blogs, etc., how is a vote for Stan not a vote for "special interest?" Different interests? Yes. Specific agenda of his own "special interests"? Da&$ skippy.

[Wuptdo]

Going down the "off-topic" road with Stan driving-----------

Stan wrote:
Lets see... we need a slogan. "End the tyranny of the NCGA. (Put a flag in the background draped over the Declaration of Independence.)
Let local government be free of the oppression of Dillon's Rule." Have a soul group sing "I wanna be free". Put it on Broadway and you would have a smash hit.

Elitism at its finest. This is exactly the same attitude I have seen in dealing with most School Board members. "Do as we say, not as we do." tsk-tsk

Stan again:
What would really be interesting is if you asked Neale Hunt, Richard Stevens and Nelson Dollar if they would support a school impact fee if the other side approved voting at large for the BOE. Or better yet ask them if they would support voter owned elections for both CC's and BOE in return for voting at large. Or home rule for Wake and its 12 muni's in return for voting at large.

And what exactly does this have to do with "at-large" elections for school board members? You have been around long enough Stan, start a new thread. I think Joe's group is trying to focus the issue with Wake's voters. What is wrong with that? Who would ever be against more or better representation for elected officials?

Stan again:
And if you are asking for impact fees make sure the t's are crossed and the i's dotted.

Joe's group is not asking for Impact Fees. Unless something has changed, I understand WakeUp is leading the charge for "Impact Fees" -- and that's a good thing. However, you only mentioned Republicans above and not Democrats. Funny, for a State that has been dominated since Reconstruction by the Democratic Party, why don't we have "Impact Fees?" Could it be, and heaven forbid the notion, that perhaps Democrats at the State level are also held by "special interest," specially home builders, developers, and bankers? :eek::eek:

For a political party with little or no political power, they seemed to be blamed for all of North Carolinas problems, IMHO. Now if you ask me, both sides of the aisle are GUILTY of fraud, waste, and abuse, against the citizens of this State.

For Joe -- some Yahoo wrote a way back that "all politics is local." Thanks for canoe and may many folks help help paddle it upstream.

[Don]

What would really be interesting is if you asked Neale Hunt, Richard Stevens and Nelson Dollar if they would support a school impact fee if the other side approved voting at large for the BOE. Or better yet ask them if they would support voter owned elections for both CC's and BOE in return for voting at large. Or home rule for Wake and its 12 muni's in return for voting at large. Any bets? I'll offer odds.


How about we elect school board members at-large, then give them the taxing authority for schools?

[JoeCiulla]

How about we elect school board members at-large, then give them the taxing authority for schools?

Don,
I'm all for that. Do think we should go through one election cycle before people would be ready to hand this over.

[DarylB]

How about we elect school board members at-large, then give them the taxing authority for schools?

Don,
I'm all for that. Do think we should go through one election cycle before people would be ready to hand this over.

I'm personally just not sure where the checks and balances come from with direct taxation by the BoE. I think it also will be a very long time and very hard sell where so much trust has been sacrificed for so long. Somehow I just don't see this coming to pass in Wake in my lifetime.

[JoeCiulla]

How about we elect school board members at-large, then give them the taxing authority for schools?

Don,
I'm all for that. Do think we should go through one election cycle before people would be ready to hand this over.

I'm personally just not sure where the checks and balances come from with direct taxation by the BoE. I think it also will be a very long time and very hard sell where so much trust has been sacrificed for so long. Somehow I just don't see this coming to pass in Wake in my lifetime.

Daryl,
I agree that Wake County voters today would not support giving the current board the authority to take the change out of parking meters, let alone levy taxes. If we get responsible leaders, the checks and balances come at the ballot box. This works in many other parts of the country. It gives the BoE 100% accountability, something they have never had. They would have to answer for spending (which today they slough off to the CC's) and answer to policy and educational results. They can't blame any of their problems on someone else, and voters will not be patient about paying higher taxes to fund educational experiments or fiscal mismanagement like the land deals and bus scandals.

Again,
First things first, let's see about getting quality people on the board. Your signature of the petition would be appreciated.

[Don]

How about we elect school board members at-large, then give them the taxing authority for schools?

Don,
I'm all for that. Do think we should go through one election cycle before people would be ready to hand this over.

Or maybe even 2 election cycles.

I really want to hear stan's thoughts on this - he, after all, is the one who continually blames the WCC for the BOE's problems; claiming we don't adequately fund education.
Giving the BOE the taxing authority removes the finger pointing from the equation and instills acountability.

[chaboard]

I really want to hear stan's thoughts on this -


Me too. In the meantime, though, I'm going to jump in.



he, after all, is the one who continually blames the WCC for the BOE's problems; claiming we don't adequately fund education.


That's strange phrasing Don...are you implying that we DO fund education adequately and that the sysatem of having to go beg the voters for new school construction bonds every couple of years is working? ;)



Giving the BOE the taxing authority removes the finger pointing from the equation and instills acountability.

It would be a VERY good first step. I don't see that it has anything at all to do with at-large elections, though. Why couple the fixing of a real problem with making a change to "fix" something that most don't see as a problem? Doesn't that just politicize the solution to the real problem and make it less likely that IT will get solved?

[Don]

he, after all, is the one who continually blames the WCC for the BOE's problems; claiming we don't adequately fund education.


That's strange phrasing Don...are you implying that we DO fund education adequately and that the sysatem of having to go beg the voters for new school construction bonds every couple of years is working? ;)

Not at all - I'm saying that maybe if the school board were more accountable they might look for ways to become more efficient while respecting the wishes of parents. I think it is backa$$wards as hell to use taxes to pay for convention centers or other "amenities" and bonds to pay for education.

For example - why does it take 20 acres of land and 20 million dollars to build an elementary school when the private sector can do the same for less than half of that? They never have to worry about a tax increase - they aren't the ones who have to raise taxes.




Giving the BOE the taxing authority removes the finger pointing from the equation and instills acountability.

It would be a VERY good first step. I don't see that it has anything at all to do with at-large elections, though. Why couple the fixing of a real problem with making a change to "fix" something that most don't see as a problem? Doesn't that just politicize the solution to the real problem and make it less likely that IT will get solved?

Nope - it instills the same accounability the WCC's had to the school board. BTW - you also get to vote for a majority of the CTC. I would also disagree with the comment "most don't see as a problem".

[StanN]

Don,

At large voting didn't keep the CC's for voting for the convention center or a $20 million dollar subsidy for a luxury hotel or fopr proposing a parking garage for high-end apartments.

I recall your post when you said you were very unhappy with the CC's over the convention center, as I was. Was I correct in remembering that you said you would show your displeasure the next chance you had to vote? Well here is your chance. I am running against one of the perps who masqueraded as a fiscal conservative - voted for Wake County pork, then raised your taxes anyway.

Here is your opportunity to endorse a real fiscal conservative.

Stan N

[JoeCiulla]

I do think our schools are under-funded. We certainly do not pay teachers what they are worth; A nationwide issue, but worse here. But, Wake County schools have huge problems which have nothing to do with money...

- Very poor balancing of resources. Classrooms in some schools which require NC waivers for
class size, while other schools are under-enrolled or have complete tracks shut down.
- A failed MYR agenda. School Board leaders have been in love with YR school since I moved
here 16 years ago. Last year's capacity 'crisis' was a convenient excuse to push that
agenda. Their growth projections turned out to be over-inflated, and the reality of their
MYR solution was that no additional seats were gained.
- F&R busing without common sense. I know, depends on your definition of common sense.
My definition says gutting neighborhood schools does not make sense. It also says putting
a F&R kid on a bus for two hours a day may not be helping them. I have heard from
parents of F&R kids who are forced to do this, they don't like it either, and they
say their kids are learning less, not more. Again, this could spawn a whole new thread,
point is it has nothing to do with money.
- Land, cafeteria and bus scandals abound. This is not about having enough money, it is
about knowing how to manage it.

All the signs of a sick school system are there
- Dropout rate 17.4% and rising, highest since 2000
- Parents are fleeing, 18% private/home school and growing. Thales will probably be full
before they open the doors
- People resort to lawsuits or threats of lawsuits because they are not listened to.
WakeCARES... KeepLocalSchools... the Garner Showdown

The last bond passed by a 2% margin. I think since then parents have become even more disenfranchised with schools, and wonder whether the next bond will pass.

On a personal note, the annual reassignment letter just landed at the house. We have lived in the same house for 10 years. During that time, each of our elementary, middle and high schools have been redistricted three times.

I can complain to Margiotta and he will empathize, but he is always on the losing end of an 8-1 vote.

[DarylB]

Here is your opportunity to endorse a real fiscal conservative.

Stan N
Stan,

it's my belief that a real fiscal conservative would be outraged at the very thought of spending money on "FailRail". Can you say, loudly and clearly, that as a fiscally conservative county commissioner, you would work with all your effort and passion to prevent this boondoggle, and would serve to prevent with all your might our money being spent so foolishly?

[chaboard]

I do think our schools are under-funded. We certainly do not pay teachers what they are worth; A nationwide issue, but worse here. But, Wake County schools have huge problems which have nothing to do with money...

- Very poor balancing of resources. Classrooms in some schools which require NC waivers for
class size, while other schools are under-enrolled or have complete tracks shut down.


Right. And since the funding of new schools and the limiting of new development are out of the school board's control the ONLY real solution THEY can imlement to balance those resources is constant reassignment. Which is exactly why you're pissed at them in the first place! Mighty hypocritical to complain about this, imo.



- A failed MYR agenda. School Board leaders have been in love with YR school since I moved
here 16 years ago. Last year's capacity 'crisis' was a convenient excuse to push that
agenda. Their growth projections turned out to be over-inflated, and the reality of their
MYR solution was that no additional seats were gained.


The "reality of their MYR solution" is that it wasn't implemented due to lawsuits. You simply cannot truthfully say "no additional seats were gained" as if their plan had been given a chance.



- F&R busing without common sense. I know, depends on your definition of common sense.
My definition says gutting neighborhood schools does not make sense. It also says putting
a F&R kid on a bus for two hours a day may not be helping them. I have heard from
parents of F&R kids who are forced to do this, they don't like it either, and they
say their kids are learning less, not more. Again, this could spawn a whole new thread,
point is it has nothing to do with money.


Oh, come on. OF COURSE it's about money. If you want to give those poor kids from lousy neighborhoods the same level of education as the kids in Cary you have to do one of ywo things - you have to either BRING those kids to Cary to the same schools. OR, you can spend a WHIOLE LOT MORE MONEY to those poor neighborhood schools - you can pay the best teachers huge bonuses to teach there, hire a lot more teachers to get the ratios much lower than in Cary, etc.

And as soon as you do that, the parents in Cary will start bitching about how they're paying the most into the system and yet the kids in East Raleigh are getting so much more spent on them. They'll start filing lawsuits and trying to change the way BoE members are elected, demanding their own school systems it's about and other unimaginable things like that. ;)

OF COURSE it's about money. When it's not about race.



- Land, cafeteria and bus scandals abound. This is not about having enough money, it is
about knowing how to manage it.


Right. Like the way to get rid of land scandals is to make it much more important to have money to get elected and thus give he developers *more* power.

....more stuff snipped.....



On a personal note, the annual reassignment letter just landed at the house. We have lived in the same house for 10 years. During that time, each of our elementary, middle and high schools have been redistricted three times.

I can complain to Margiotta and he will empathize, but he is always on the losing end of an 8-1 vote.

Sorry, to hear that. But I don't think making BoE big money races is the answer

[JoeCiulla]

Right. And since the funding of new schools and the limiting of new development are out of the school board's control the ONLY real solution THEY can imlement to balance those resources is constant reassignment. Which is exactly why you're pissed at them in the first place! Mighty hypocritical to complain about this, imo.
[QUOTE]

The numbers speak for themselves, entire tracks empty while other classes require waivers. Doesn't matter what I'm pissed about, demonstrates poor use of available resources.

[QUOTE=chaboard;41530]
The "reality of their MYR solution" is that it wasn't implemented due to lawsuits. You simply cannot truthfully say "no additional seats were gained" as if their plan had been given a chance.
[QUOTE]

The BoE's MYR solution, whatever that was supposed to be, wasn't implemented because it was ILLEGAL.

[QUOTE=chaboard;41530]
Oh, come on. OF COURSE it's about money. If you want to give those poor kids from lousy neighborhoods the same level of education as the kids in Cary you have to do one of ywo things - you have to either BRING those kids to Cary to the same schools. OR, you can spend a WHIOLE LOT MORE MONEY to those poor neighborhood schools - you can pay the best teachers huge bonuses to teach there, hire a lot more teachers to get the ratios much lower than in Cary, etc.
[QUOTE]

Whoa there, big guy. I did not say no child shall ever be bused, I said more common sense needs to be applied. We have kids spending two hours a day on the bus, and last I heard they don't learn much on the ride. Parental involvement is crucial to a child's educational success, and simple math says the longer a child spends on a bus, the less time they will have for parental support. And, parental support across Wake County has taken a hit because parents are hesitant to commit their time to a school when their kids may be elsewhere next year.


[QUOTE=chaboard;41530]
And as soon as you do that, the parents in Cary will start bitching about how they're paying the most into the system and yet the kids in East Raleigh are getting so much more spent on them. They'll start filing lawsuits and trying to change the way BoE members are elected, demanding their own school systems it's about and other unimaginable things like that. ;)
[QUOTE]

Pure speculation, at best. State tax money flows out of Wake County every day and I don't see an uprising.

As to the lawsuit filed by WakeCARES, it has nothing to do with distribution of funds.

As to the separate school system (which I am not pushing for), that movement has been fueled by parents who are tired of being ignored by the BoE. Make the BoE accountable to all those people and maybe they won't push so hard for their own school system.

[QUOTE=chaboard;41530]
OF COURSE it's about money. When it's not about race.
[QUOTE]

Figured that would come out sometime.

[QUOTE=chaboard;41530]
Right. Like the way to get rid of land scandals is to make it much more important to have money to get elected and thus give he developers *more* power.
[QUOTE]

No, the right way to get rid of land scandals is to have competent leaders who are accountable to all.


[QUOTE=chaboard;41530]

Sorry, to hear that. But I don't think making BoE big money races is the answer


My youngest son has five years left in the school system, and I don't see any quick-fix ways to get the right 'answer' for him. This is about way more than money. I'd be willing to bet that if Rosa Gill ran at-large and you gave her $250K, she still wouldn't have a prayer against a candidate who demonstrated competency and a willingness to listen.

If, as you suggest, 'most' people think the current BoE electoral process is just fine, then this should be a non-issue come election time.

[chaboard]

The numbers speak for themselves, entire tracks empty while other classes require waivers. Doesn't matter what I'm pissed about, demonstrates poor use of available resources.


So you'll blast them for poor use of resources if they don't reassign and blast them for reassigning if they do. Nice Catch-22. Even your at-large winners will have to do one or the other, you know.




The BoE's MYR solution, whatever that was supposed to be, wasn't implemented because it was ILLEGAL.


We shall see. I think you'll have to retract that statement. And buy me a box of Rice-A-Roni, if I recall correctly. ;)



My youngest son has five years left in the school system, and I don't see any quick-fix ways to get the right 'answer' for him. This is about way more than money. I'd be willing to bet that if Rosa Gill ran at-large and you gave her $250K, she still wouldn't have a prayer against a candidate who demonstrated competency and a willingness to listen.


So if you think she's clearly incompetent and unwilling to listen why do you think she wins in her district? Are the voters in her district not capable of discerning that? Or do they just disagree with your characterization?

If, as you suggest, 'most' people think the current BoE electoral process is just fine, then this should be a non-issue come election time.[/QUOTE]

[rmaitra]

At-Large School Board seats in Wake County? Sure, why not. If it is good enough for Mecklenburg County, why not Wake County? Until this year, Mecklenburg-Charlotte School System was the largest in North Carolina. The "Voters Act" stuff was not an issue down there. But then again, when you have someone as powerful as Uncle Jim Black on your side, anything is possible. How come we have no "Uncle Jim's" in Wake County looking out for us?

http://www.cms.k12.nc.us/boardeducation/index.asp

The more you know........

We have Nelson Dollar and you know that the buck never stops.

[NewHillBilly]

A move to elect the western Wake school board at-large
(And a picture of Joe Ciulla!)
http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A209045

[StanN]

A middle ground would be to elect both the school board and the county commissioners from a combination of at large and district seats. Speaking as a candidate running at large over 864 sq. miles, there are enormous obstacles to understanding local problems when you have to cover the entire county. Running at large also places enormous obstacles to candidates who don't have access to special interest PAC money...as does Kenn Gardner my opponent.

If a combination of district and at-large seats works for the school board, then why not for county commissioners? Why don't you see if any one in the NCGA would support that.

StanN

[JoeCiulla]

A middle ground would be to elect both the school board and the county commissioners from a combination of at large and district seats. Speaking as a candidate running at large over 864 sq. miles, there are enormous obstacles to understanding local problems when you have to cover the entire county. Running at large also places enormous obstacles to candidates who don't have access to special interest PAC money...as does Kenn Gardner my opponent.

If a combination of district and at-large seats works for the school board, then why not for county commissioners? Why don't you see if any one in the NCGA would support that.

StanN

Stan,

I agree with you on this one. A combination of district and at-large positions would be fine, provided citizens VOTE FOR A MAJORITY. Perhaps if The NCGA Democratic reps would stop spending their time throwing up smokescreens about VRA and speculation about social armageddon, that kind of discussion could take place.

I am just a schmuck citizen. Somebody needs to step in and start building bridges. I'm not trying to be a smart@ss here, but are you that person?

[Icorpse]

Only 90 days in office and I have to wonder if our mayor is a fighter or a quitter?? The article in "The Independent" was a real eye-opener.

What happened to the beard Joe C? You kinda look like Michael Moore in the pic.

[StanN]

Joe said:

"Somebody needs to step in and start building bridges. I'm not trying to be a smart@ss here, but are you that person?"

Joe, the problem with the way you have defined the issue is that it can ONLY be solved within the General Assembly. Whether it's me or any other CC, all that can be done is to give advice. Having been intensely involved with the NCGA on the highly contentious issue of the Transfer Tax, I can tell you that building bridges there involves a lot more than a petition and a web site. Most of all, even if there is a compromise possible, it is very unlikely to look anything like what you asked for...that certainly was the case for the TT.

I've been traveling around the county including a meeting with the African American Community and an inside the belt Democratic Party group. I can absolutely tell you that the issue of voting for the BOE at large is HIGHLY divisive. Whether your idea, or the compromise I have proposed, has merit or not it will be very difficult for members of the Wake delegation to come to a near unanimous position. So even when I get on the BOC I will be relatively powerless. That's not to say I wouln't try.

If the problem was defined as MYRS, excessive re-assignments (beyond those required to accommodate growth), those problems could be eased by the county commissioners and especially with the CC's working with the muni government councils. Not an easy job at all - but possible. I promise you I will try - including building bridges.

StanN

[chaboard]

I notice this compromise solution in the article:



However, at least one candidate is willing to strike a compromise between the two voting methods. Jack Nichols, who is running for Janet Cowell's state senate seat, announced his plan this week to overhaul the way the Board of Education and the Board of Commissioners in Wake are elected. He proposes to combine district and at-large voting and align the districts of both boards to make them identical. He also proposes moving both elections to odd years, instead of staggering them odd and even.

Nichols, a former Wake commissioner, says running for that office the same year the president, U.S. Senate and governor are elected means local issues can be drowned out. "Voters will never hear the debate about education issues at the local level—there are just too many candidates out there asking for attention."

Keeping some district representation could address the Voting Rights Act concern, he says. "I do know one thing: If we did what Nelson [Dollar]'s proposing, we'd be putting ourselves right in the middle of a voting rights lawsuit."



Hey Joe, what do you think of Nichols' plan?

[JoeCiulla]

I notice this compromise solution in the article:



However, at least one candidate is willing to strike a compromise between the two voting methods. Jack Nichols, who is running for Janet Cowell's state senate seat, announced his plan this week to overhaul the way the Board of Education and the Board of Commissioners in Wake are elected. He proposes to combine district and at-large voting and align the districts of both boards to make them identical. He also proposes moving both elections to odd years, instead of staggering them odd and even.

Nichols, a former Wake commissioner, says running for that office the same year the president, U.S. Senate and governor are elected means local issues can be drowned out. "Voters will never hear the debate about education issues at the local level—there are just too many candidates out there asking for attention."

Keeping some district representation could address the Voting Rights Act concern, he says. "I do know one thing: If we did what Nelson [Dollar]'s proposing, we'd be putting ourselves right in the middle of a voting rights lawsuit."



Hey Joe, what do you think of Nichols' plan?

I think a combination of district and at-large is a reasonable compromise, provided citizens can vote for a majority -- 5 district, 4 at-large.

Defining the new districts under such a plan could turn into a real cu&sterf@ck which could drag this on a long time, but I guess they are going to have to redefine districts anyway (I think plan was 2010) because they are already well out of balance.

Not sure whether having same districts for BoE and CC's makes sense. Today, BoE districts are defined based on total population, not student population. Something I need to think about.

[dhyatt]

This would normally warrant a separate thread but since we already have one going here.... Joe also has a nice "Point of View" column in today's N&O. It can be read here:

http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/columns/story/1012109.html

[StanN]

Joe,

A well written POV. Three questions: 1. Do you really expect unanimity or close to unanimity from the Wake Delgation? 2. If you don't, the bills go down in flames. What do you do then? 3. Who will push for unanimity on your compromise in the GA?

Stam/Stevens/Dollar/Hunt owe you a great deal of thanks for promoting this wedge issue. Will they be your brokers?

StanN

[DarylB]

Joe,

A well written POV. Three questions: 1. Do you really expect unanimity or close to unanimity from the Wake Delgation? 2. If you don't, the bills go down in flames. What do you do then? 3. Who will push for unanimity on your compromise in the GA?

Stam/Stevens/Dollar/Hunt owe you a great deal of thanks for promoting this wedge issue. Will they be your brokers?

StanN

Stan,

You united with the "FOWC", and you continue to beat the drum for more money for the BoE. Yet, I (and MANY others) see the problem not as a revenue problem, but as an expenditure and a priorities problem. I'm reposting a recent exchange of views, for you to comment on this, and why you insist that more money is the answer to all of WCPSS's problems, without examining the alternative possibilities...and please explain to me how each of the possible alternatives to more spending through another bond offering was better served as an item for discussion by district representatives (with a clear majority from ITB), as opposed to At-Large representives....



Daryl,

How would you have proposed to pay for the schools (other than tearing down the entire system)...it was the least expensive way to fund the new construction.

I published...repeatedly.. 15 specific suggestions that would help to resolve the issues with the schools. I in fact stated these so often, I was asked to refrain from doing so further, as they were well known by then. I know you're aware of ALL of them, yet you only wish to seek more money, sort of a Johnny One-note for more taxes. I'm re-introducing about four of them here, since you've "forgotten". The others I'll also re-introduce, as time goes on.

I wrote at length about the amount of time spent in the existing buildings as being minimal, and provided evidence that they are only utilized less than 15% of the available time. I suggested such alternative as MYR for ALL students, later evening classes for those starting classes later in the day, and possibly using some weekends. There are a lot of ways to move that figure up from a dismal 15% utilization. Does it really make all that much sense to aggressively go about building more buildings, only to watch them also sit idle 85% of the time?

I stated that businesses would do that math a little differently. I pointed out there are many in our schools who take up seats that don't belong, and suggested we use that retainer to Tharrington Smith to reject Plylor V. Doe, and seat only legitimately enrolled students, and not all the thousands of illegal aliens presently illegally attending Wake county schools, at a savings of Millions of dollars.

I suggested partnering with private-public partnerships, especially for such things as science labs. I suggested using eLearning, utilizing laptops along with such programs as WebEx for those courses that don't require bus trips to get there, and similarly don't require seats in a building. Universities and businesses alike have used eLearning as a way to enhance attendance and cut costs very, very effectively. It never even got a discussion in the "FOWC" war for cash. Just for old times sake, how would you have handled the "Technology connections" boondoggle, in which millions of dollars in computer equipment were purchased, and teachers sent for training in using the programs that were purchased for it, only to find the equipment all disappeared, as did the teachers, who had no contractual obligations incurred for their training? Would you support leases of IT equipment, as does business, instead of the current purchases that result in outdated equipment on the books, with WCPSS having to provide its own IT support personnel to support it for upgrades, breakdowns, etc?

I pointed out that busing was a waste of money, and advocated buildings closer to home for students, and any new buildings be built without the adjacent land purchases for athletic fields. In fact, I also mentioned eliminating athletics programs and band. That got your immediate attention. All negative.

I've heard you advocate NO plans other than more money and more power to the BoE. I want more ideas and support for the uses of the Wake taxpayers dollar than you've been willing to offer. You say you want change, and offer Status Quo, along with the appeal to call yourself a fiscal conservative while calling for more money and higher taxes. You seem to be all out of fresh ideas, save the ability to come up with new reasons for shooting down newer, fresher ideas.

Does that about answer your question? Or should I just hand you my wallet, so you can again tell me when you're done with it?

I'm anxious to hear how you, as a self-professed "fiscal conservative", wish to reply to my concerns.

[chaboard]

This would normally warrant a separate thread but since we already have one going here.... Joe also has a nice "Point of View" column in today's N&O. It can be read here:

http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/columns/story/1012109.html

Sounds pretty much like what he's posted here...without additions or modifications to address questions posed to him here. For example, he STILL uses that "the opponents could get legal staff to make a study" line without acknowledging that Nelson Dollar could (and would) do the same if he were really interested in moving the bill. But he doesn't because he has no intention of this thing ever passing.

Personally I don't think a highly partisan column like this is gonna help create the groundswell of support that Joe assumed into existence out of whole cloth in the first paragraph. But what do I know, I could be wrong. ;P

[JoeCiulla]

Joe,

A well written POV. Three questions: 1. Do you really expect unanimity or close to unanimity from the Wake Delgation?

That is up to the Wake County delegation.



2. If you don't, the bills go down in flames. What do you do then?

I don't think they actually burn them. If they can't reach a compromise during short session, then our state representatives have plenty of time to reach one prior to elections. If they still can't come to and agreement between themselves, then the voters will decide for them.



3. Who will push for unanimity on your compromise in the GA?

Whoever gets elected in November



Stam/Stevens/Dollar/Hunt owe you a great deal of thanks for promoting this wedge issue. Will they be your brokers?

This comment is a genuine disappoint to me. You are running for County Commissioner. Are you going to accuse others who disagree with you and your party of being pimped by the competition? Is it your assumption that Wake County citizens are programmed to think only like the Republican or Democratic parties tell them to?

[JoeCiulla]

This would normally warrant a separate thread but since we already have one going here.... Joe also has a nice "Point of View" column in today's N&O. It can be read here:

http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/columns/story/1012109.html

Sounds pretty much like what he's posted here...without additions or modifications to address questions posed to him here. For example, he STILL uses that "the opponents could get legal staff to make a study" line without acknowledging that Nelson Dollar could (and would) do the same if he were really interested in moving the bill. But he doesn't because he has no intention of this thing ever passing.

Personally I don't think a highly partisan column like this is gonna help create the groundswell of support that Joe assumed into existence out of whole cloth in the first paragraph. But what do I know, I could be wrong. ;P

I think we will just agree to disagree on this one.

[Brent]

For example, he STILL uses that "the opponents could get legal staff to make a study" line without acknowledging that Nelson Dollar could (and would) do the same if he were really interested in moving the bill. But he doesn't because he has no intention of this thing ever passing.

I'm not aware that Nelson is questioning the legality of the bill he introduced. Deborah Ross, who is, could (and would) do the same if she were really interested in moving the bill. But she doesn't because she has no intention of this thing ever passing.


Personally I don't think a highly partisan column like this is gonna help create the groundswell of support that Joe assumed into existence out of whole cloth in the first paragraph. But what do I know, I could be wrong. ;P

I know Joe to be non-partisan. It's not a highly partisan column. He's pointing out facts. And a major fact is that our Wake County legislative delegation has chosen to make this a highly partisan issue. And that's a shame, because, as the column points out, that's not what we elected them to do, and they're disenfranchising Wake County voters.

Fie on them.

And fie on those who blame the messenger.

[chaboard]

For example, he STILL uses that "the opponents could get legal staff to make a study" line without acknowledging that Nelson Dollar could (and would) do the same if he were really interested in moving the bill. But he doesn't because he has no intention of this thing ever passing.

I'm not aware that Nelson is questioning the legality of the bill he introduced. Deborah Ross, who is, could (and would) do the same if she were really interested in moving the bill. But she doesn't because she has no intention of this thing ever passing.

Well - at the risk of stating the obvious - OF COURSE she has no intention of it passing....she OPPOSES it!!! Duh!

The onus is usually on those supporting a bill to convince those opposing it - not the other way . Unless we've fallen into bizarro world where everything must by definition be the fault of the Democrat.

The exact same work will get done by staff regardless of which side requests it. What the whole "who is willing to request it" business tells us is who is really interested in seeing it advance. And the answer is clearly, so far....NO ONE.

Which is a dog bites man story when applied to the bills nominal opponents, but actually has man bites dog significance when applied to it's supposed supporters. Such as the so-called Mr. Dollar.

[StanN]

Brent,

Are you disenfranchised when the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, from Gaston County, (who was strongly supported by the development lobby) can hold a choke hold from any bill containing an impact fee and could weaken the transfer tax bill so that it was harder to get through referendum?...of course you are. Many similar examples abound. The chairs of all the big committees have extraordinary powers to bottle up bills. So does the Speaker and the President Pro-tem of the Senate. Why not change that system too?

So is that cause to advocate for all members of the general assembly be voted for at large? The signers of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were not elected at large. They all represented their districts, i.e. their states. The President is elected at large (sort of). Are you happy with him? So why this big fuss?

Voting for all the BofE at large might make you feel better, but it ain't gonna solve the basic problem of MYRS and some cases of excessive busing, nor will it end reassignments as long as we are, thank heavens, still growing.

The courts will decide the MYRS issue. A morphed BOC can, in time, reduce the busing and even ease a bit of the reassignment problem.

It won't even get you the Cary or WW school system, I believe you have said you want...and where we will have to disagree.

I just don't get it.

[MattD]

For example, he STILL uses that "the opponents could get legal staff to make a study" line without acknowledging that Nelson Dollar could (and would) do the same if he were really interested in moving the bill. But he doesn't because he has no intention of this thing ever passing.

I'm not aware that Nelson is questioning the legality of the bill he introduced. Deborah Ross, who is, could (and would) do the same if she were really interested in moving the bill. But she doesn't because she has no intention of this thing ever passing.


Please do not take this to be a partisan question - The N&O's story on March 15th http://www.newsobserver.com/news/education/wake/story/1001151.html wrote the following:

"Gerry Cohen, bill drafting director for the General Assembly, told the Wake delegation that the bills would go against a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said at-large elections for state legislators in Wake violate the federal Voting Rights Act."

My non-partisan question is: So hasn't the question of the legality been addressed?

[StanN]

Joe,

A well written POV. Three questions: 1. Do you really expect unanimity or close to unanimity from the Wake Delgation?

That is up to the Wake County delegation.



2. If you don't, the bills go down in flames. What do you do then?

I don't think they actually burn them. If they can't reach a compromise during short session, then our state representatives have plenty of time to reach one prior to elections. If they still can't come to and agreement between themselves, then the voters will decide for them.



3. Who will push for unanimity on your compromise in the GA?

Whoever gets elected in November



Stam/Stevens/Dollar/Hunt owe you a great deal of thanks for promoting this wedge issue. Will they be your brokers?

This comment is a genuine disappoint to me. You are running for County Commissioner. Are you going to accuse others who disagree with you and your party of being pimped by the competition? Is it your assumption that Wake County citizens are programmed to think only like the Republican or Democratic parties tell them to?

Joe,

If I have accused you of anything, it is only of a lack of knowledge about how the NCGA works and you are part of an enormous group. As far as being "pimped by the competition" I doubt the legislators involved even knew you existed when they submitted their DOA bills. And don't I remember that you earlier said that they were manipulating the system...or words to that effect?

[StanN]

BTW, Rep. Ross, a "neat" person and part of the leadership of the NC House...she is one of the Whips (no stale jokes please), also lectures on law at Duke University.

[DarylB]

"Gerry Cohen, bill drafting director for the General Assembly, told the Wake delegation that the bills would go against a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said at-large elections for state legislators in Wake violate the federal Voting Rights Act."

My non-partisan question is: So hasn't the question of the legality been addressed?

I would like to think that some of the judicial activism and social engineering of that earlier time has been corrected to at least a small degree in the intervening years by the appointments that have survived the obstructionists, and that the present construction of the Supreme Court may be a little more in line with the average US citizen's view, approximately 70% of whom seriously question the legitimacy of the previous decisions. To go further, I think this also would be true for such absurd past rulings as Plylor V. Doe, in which that most fundamentally bizarre of court rulings not only could, but should be reviewed, challenged and rejected. Forcing schools to not only break the Federal immigration laws, but to have taken the position of running roughshod over taxpayers, who have been forced to spend taxpayer money on illegal aliens.....that has been a slap in the face of the typical law abiding American citizen, and the laws of the United States itself. Such absurdities can be righted. Challenges should be embraced, especially now, not feared.

[StanN]

To DarylB,

You said: "I'm anxious to hear how you, as a self-professed "fiscal conservative", wish to reply to my concerns."

Is that the same Daryl who diss'ed almost every post I have ever written here?

Is that the same Daryl who, when others wanted you off of this board, I came to your defense?

Is that the same Daryl who when he originally posted these points, I actually agreed with some? Remember about leasing computers?

The answer to your question is that right now I don't have the time or the staff to answer all your questions. But come to me, after I am elected, with a prioritized list including the pros' and the cons' and I promise we will talk to one another and try and separate the wheat from the chaff.

We all are going to have a tough two years to get through. CC's do have an oversight responsibility. And the hole that has been deepened by my opponent and his allies demands efficient spending of every tax dollar. And while you are at it please look at the non-school expenditures. I have direct responsibility for every penny of those.

Also remember that I am running for the CC job not the BOE. The BOE is independently elected and on some of your items the CC's have no control. But honey and carrots sometimes works, whereas beating someone with a stick in public rarely does. Wasn't it Teddy Roosevelt that said: "Speak softly and carry a big stick."?

StanN

[CarpenterV]

For example, he STILL uses that "the opponents could get legal staff to make a study" line without acknowledging that Nelson Dollar could (and would) do the same if he were really interested in moving the bill. But he doesn't because he has no intention of this thing ever passing.

I'm not aware that Nelson is questioning the legality of the bill he introduced. Deborah Ross, who is, could (and would) do the same if she were really interested in moving the bill. But she doesn't because she has no intention of this thing ever passing.


Please do not take this to be a partisan question - The N&O's story on March 15th http://www.newsobserver.com/news/education/wake/story/1001151.html wrote the following:

"Gerry Cohen, bill drafting director for the General Assembly, told the Wake delegation that the bills would go against a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said at-large elections for state legislators in Wake violate the federal Voting Rights Act."

My non-partisan question is: So hasn't the question of the legality been addressed?


Yup. If you think this is 1986. Or if you think Wake County looks just like it did 22 years ago.

[DarylB]

To DarylB,

You said: "I'm anxious to hear how you, as a self-professed "fiscal conservative", wish to reply to my concerns."

Is that the same Daryl who diss'ed almost every post I have ever written here?
If by "diss'ed", you mean "disagreed with", probably... we tend to be of opposing ideologies and viewpoints on many if not most occasions, which shouldn't come as a huge surprise to either of us.


Is that the same Daryl who, when others wanted you off of this board, I came to your defense?
Pardon me for having to ask this, but which time? I've had so many people wanting me banned for life, it's hard to keep up. Those who want all the power and control over others, all to themselves, are numerous in Cary. We just voted a few of them out of office. We had a certain plumber on the CTC who in fact had a lot of voters behind him with the same problem, so I guess I feel I'm in very good company. Yes, this is in fact the same Daryl. Is it expected that I espouse your political views because you came to my defense, and have therefore for some reason divested myself of my political soul in the bargain? Just a question.....


Is that the same Daryl who when he originally posted these points, I actually agreed with some? Remember about leasing computers?
So I can now safely assume that you'll mention your support of a few of my cost saving measures, to include using leases instead of purchases as a way of saving money, as one of many ways to fund schools adequately short of additional bonds and taxes?


The answer to your question is that right now I don't have the time or the staff to answer all your questions. But come to me, after I am elected, with a prioritized list including the pros' and the cons' and I promise we will talk to one another and try and separate the wheat from the chaff.
Did someone tatoo the word "Sucker" to my forehead while I was sleeping? Stan, I don't have a staff either, and I've never, ever seen you need a staff before to answer a few questions, nor to ask a few for tht matter. Further, these are questions best asked of a candidate (who should take every opportunity to make his positions known and who has a clear incentive to get elected), not of a seated commissioner (who then has no incentives whatsoever to provide answers). It's like trying to get a better rate plan on your cell phone after they've gotten your signature on a new contract...may happen..but pardon me for a moment while I chuckle to myself, as my minds eye drifts to that vision of that business card I just gave you post-election slowly fluttering into the circular file.


We all are going to have a tough two years to get through. CC's do have an oversight responsibility. And the hole that has been deepened by my opponent and his allies demands efficient spending of every tax dollar. And while you are at it please look at the non-school expenditures. I have direct responsibility for every penny of those.
Before you get too carried away with your "I have direct responsibility for every penny..." speech, you might want to count all the votes and find out if you get elected first. At this point in time, you are just a candidate promising, as politicians will do, to "have direct responsibility for every penny...", while trying to avert the fact that your history has been one of trying to raise a whole lot of pennys for an organization that has done an incredibly poor job of accounting for all those pennys. Have you displayed good judgement in doing so?


Also remember that I am running for the CC job not the BOE. The BOE is independently elected and on some of your items the CC's have no control. But honey and carrots sometimes works, whereas beating someone with a stick in public rarely does. Wasn't it Teddy Roosevelt that said: "Speak softly and carry a big stick."?
Personally, I prefer the adversarial roles of the two boards as they currently are, to the prospect of an even worse situation where we wake up one morning to find a CC who would essentially act as an ITB school board member filling a seat as a County Commissioner. You may not live "ITB" yourself, but it's definitely very, very well know that your "friends" do.

[chaboard]

"Gerry Cohen, bill drafting director for the General Assembly, told the Wake delegation that the bills would go against a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said at-large elections for state legislators in Wake violate the federal Voting Rights Act."

My non-partisan question is: So hasn't the question of the legality been addressed?


Yup. If you think this is 1986. Or if you think Wake County looks just like it did 22 years ago.

Perhaps you'd like to tell us what changes of relevance have occurred and how they impact the legal status? It sure seems like none of the other bill advocates are willing to address the legality issues at all.

[Brent]

Brent,

Are you disenfranchised when the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, from Gaston County, (who was strongly supported by the development lobby) can hold a choke hold from any bill containing an impact fee and could weaken the transfer tax bill so that it was harder to get through referendum?...of course you are. Many similar examples abound. The chairs of all the big committees have extraordinary powers to bottle up bills. So does the Speaker and the President Pro-tem of the Senate. Why not change that system too?

Yes, and just because multiple problems exist doesn't mean that people shouldn't focus on fixing one of the problems. Perhaps you could focus on the NCGA committee structure while others focus on the BoE.


So is that cause to advocate for all members of the general assembly be voted for at large? The signers of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were not elected at large. They all represented their districts, i.e. their states. The President is elected at large (sort of). Are you happy with him? So why this big fuss?

Why the invalid comparisons? Why shouldn't Wake County be like the majority of NC counties?


Voting for all the BofE at large might make you feel better, but it ain't gonna solve the basic problem of MYRS and some cases of excessive busing, nor will it end reassignments as long as we are, thank heavens, still growing.

The courts will decide the MYRS issue. A morphed BOC can, in time, reduce the busing and even ease a bit of the reassignment problem.

Wait...are you saying that a more accountable school board won't change busing and reassignment policies but county commissioners can ("BOC"? what's that?)? Perhaps if we had a more accountable school board, we might not be arguing MYRS in the courts.


It won't even get you the Cary or WW school system, I believe you have said you want...and where we will have to disagree.

Of course at-large BoE elections won't result in a separate Western Wake school system (is anyone claiming they would? How is this relevant?) (BTW, I support investigation of a separate school system as a lever to persuade the school board to be more accountable)


I just don't get it.

On this we agree.

[Brent]

"Gerry Cohen, bill drafting director for the General Assembly, told the Wake delegation that the bills would go against a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said at-large elections for state legislators in Wake violate the federal Voting Rights Act."

Board of Education members aren't state legislators.

Does Gerry Cohen have an opinion on at-large election of county commissioners in Wake County?

[chaboard]

Why shouldn't Wake County be like the majority of NC counties?


Because we *like* having better schools than they have?

It does always see to get lost in the noise that we have a **** fine school system and that that's no accident.

[MattD]

"Gerry Cohen, bill drafting director for the General Assembly, told the Wake delegation that the bills would go against a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said at-large elections for state legislators in Wake violate the federal Voting Rights Act."

Board of Education members aren't state legislators.

Does Gerry Cohen have an opinion on at-large election of county commissioners in Wake County?

Brent - the next paragraph in the article was this: "Supporters of the school board change point out that the county commissioners run at large. But Cohen said the difference is no one has challenged the way commissioners are elected."

I know the BOE are not members of the state legislator, but one of the questions going back-and-forth was why Reps. Dollar/Ross didn't investigate whether or not At-large BOE elections were legal. That's why I posed the question about Gerry Cohen's comment.

[JoeCiulla]

Why shouldn't Wake County be like the majority of NC counties?


Because we *like* having better schools than they have?

It does always see to get lost in the noise that we have a **** fine school system and that that's no accident.

On what basis do you make the claim to having a **** fine school system?
And specifically what negative effect do you think having at-large elections will have on the quality of our schools?

[DarylB]

Because we *like* having better schools than they have?
[snip]
....we have a **** fine school system...



On what basis do you make the claim to having a **** fine school system?

Joe, I think it's a claim based on mileage......

[StanN]

Brent,

MYRS, whatever excessive busing exists and some portion of reassignments can all be related to insufficient permanent seating capacity. IMO adding seating capacity should not and can not be achieved by the sole means of raising property taxes. I know for a fact that the MYR decision was taken because school board members did not see any hope that additional funds to add sufficient permanent capacity would not be given to them. All they could see was a growth in the number of trailers which suck money out of the classroom and lower the ability to educate kids. Bear in mind that they have already had to cut into programming by reducing the number of magnet schools.

I was more optimistic at the time than they were and felt they were not weighing sufficiently the resistance they would encounter. They pointed out to me that some mandatory YRS had existed for years without any big complaints. Also, they were strong defenders of diversity as key to fulfilling the mission of public education. Their perspective was that they were between a rock and a hard spot.

The CC majority, including my opponent, has not supported any initiative to get incoming residents to pay for the new infrastructure they need, i.e. impact fees or transfer taxes no less an APFO. There was, and still is, a long history of underfunding the school system, far below the national average. So the BoE took what they considered the lesser of two evils.

I'm not defending their decision. I thought it was wrong at the time and told key members how I felt. I was more optimistic than they were about new sources of revenue. Time has proven the BoE assessment correct. Now the decision is up to the courts. If the decision goes against the school board they will find themselves with even more unpalatable options. And if the decision is in favor of the BoE...we are back to square one.

Short of financing more capacity through alternatives to the property tax...or re-prioritizing non-school programs and/or dipping into reserves and/or major efficiencies in all budgets, we all are between a rock and a hard spot.

Getting elected is just chapter #1 in the difficult job that lies ahead. But I can tilt the balance on the BoC and will have more influence on the BoE than the current CC majority.

Instead of focusing on the root problem, many of the folks on this board are all heated up on what is, at best, a diversion. I'm disappointed that you are not putting more of your energy and intellect behind obtaining impact fees, transfer taxes and APFO's.

[DarylB]

Stan,

Your by-line ("Change is possible"), needs to be amended to read "Hard currency by the truckload is possible". Do you really expect us to believe it's only our "change" you're interested in? Bespeaks, loudly, what I was saying earlier about your not being interested in the real issue of the BoE, that being the underlying expenditure problem. It isn't a revenue problem, it's an EXPENDITURE problem.


...But I can tilt the balance on the BoC ....
...but the question then becomes, do we really need more ITB "friends" present among the County Commissioners to "tilt the balance", when that's a basic flaw that's already out of balance. Why would we want to expand that problem even further?

[chaboard]

On what basis do you make the claim to having a **** fine school system?

This is a joke, right? Tell you what...tell me which major metro school system in NC you'd rather be like and we'll start comparing.



And specifically what negative effect do you think having at-large elections will have on the quality of our schools?

No, no, no....YOU'RE the one proposing a change from the status quo. The logical burden of proof is on YOU to demonstrate that having at-large elections will improve the quality of our schools. A question I've asked before and you have not answered. Seriously, if I thought there were a solid chance it would improve our schools you'd have my support in a heartbeat. But NO ONE is arguing that case. All I'm hearing is "I don't like the way things are so I want change for the sake of change".

Besides, I did not claim there would be a negative effect. I was merely making the point that the "let's be like everybody else" argument cuts both ways....there are a lot of ways in which we clearly don't want to "be like everybody else". Change for the sake of change usually makes things worse.

[JoeCiulla]

This is a joke, right? Tell you what...tell me which major metro school system in NC you'd rather be like and we'll start comparing.

For starters, I don't base my assessment of Wake County Schools on a comparison to other NC/Metro school systems. Wake is one of the most affluent counties in the state, and has one of the highest concentrations of professionals. Where our results do surpass other counties, it has more to do with parental support than the effectiveness of the school system (my opinion here, but I don't think anyone would argue that children who grow up with well-educated parents tend to get more parental support and do better in school).

My opinion of WCPSS is based on how effectively I believe they serve the needs of the community in educating our children. Stan blames all problems with the schools on under-funding. While I do believe we should be investing more in our schools, I don't dismiss their failures as easily. Others blame school issues on growth. Again, I'd agree that growth has made managing our schools more difficult, but also believe that WCPSS hasn't done themselves any favors.

Some specific WCPSS issues which are not attributable to funding or growth:
- Poor use of resources. We have entire tracks in some MYR schools which are shut down, while other schools need class-size waivers.
- Poor planning. Their growth projection for this year was 30% overstated, for example. Many times, kids are redistricted out of their school, then redistricted right back to it a year later.
- Poor fiscal management. Bad land deals, bus scandals, etc.

The school system is built to move average students through the system and teach them how to pass EOG's. Kids spend the last month of school on EOG prep. I have two kids in the system, one who is AG and one who is special needs. Both have been poorly served by WCPSS.

The biggest problem with the school system is the board itself. Parents all over Wake County feel alienated. MYR is a good example. WCPSS's own survey data showed that parents supported VYR not MYR, but they converted 22 schools anyway. Turned out the enrollment figures were less than projected but what's done is done. They did not have to convert all these schools. When the lawsuit was filed, board members refused to have staff develop a 'Plan B.' Much churn was caused after the ruling because they were too arrogant to believe they would lose. Oh, and don't blame this on the parents who sued or the judge that ruled (unless you know more about the law than Judge Manning). The board is now betting on winning the appeal, and developing their assignment plans on that basis.

With all of the mass-protests over reassignment over the past few years, I don't see how anyone could possibly come to the conclusion that the board is representing the interests of the citizens. They have blown up the concept of neighborhood schools, and parental support will suffer. None of the board members have taken the time to understand the assignment model Chuck D uses, so even if they did not agree with the annual reassignment-a-thon, they wouldn't know where to begin arguing.

The board has not fairly 'spread the pain,' real or created, around Wake County. Zero MYR's inside the beltline, all of those are stuck in three of the nine districts.



No, no, no....YOU'RE the one proposing a change from the status quo. The logical burden of proof is on YOU to demonstrate that having at-large elections will improve the quality of our schools. A question I've asked before and you have not answered. Seriously, if I thought there were a solid chance it would improve our schools you'd have my support in a heartbeat. But NO ONE is arguing that case. All I'm hearing is "I don't like the way things are so I want change for the sake of change".

Besides, I did not claim there would be a negative effect. I was merely making the point that the "let's be like everybody else" argument cuts both ways....there are a lot of ways in which we clearly don't want to "be like everybody else". Change for the sake of change usually makes things worse.

There are two sides to every argument, and I've already presented mine so I won't repeat it here. I know nothing I say will convince you that at-large elections would be an improvement, I'm just trying to figure out what all the opponents are worried about.

[chaboard]

[accidental double posting deleted]

[Brent]

Instead of focusing on the root problem, many of the folks on this board are all heated up on what is, at best, a diversion.

I consider at-large BoE elections an important issue, not a diversion.



I'm disappointed that you are not putting more of your energy and intellect behind obtaining impact fees, transfer taxes and APFO's.

I continue my years-long quest to promote what I believe are fairer ways to pay for growth, which should include the ability to have the tools you mention in our "toolbox". However, the topic of this particular thread is BoE elections.