Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, this makes perfect sense. Vote against the bonds (possibly jeopardizing the county's bond rating) and lose the opportunity for a sure way of funding capital improvements and hope that the politicians can figure out an alternate way to funds construction based on assurances from Kaye McGary, who is not on the County Commission and has no say in approving COPS or any other bonds.
Voting against the bonds will have absolutely no effect on classroom funding. Teachers salaries and other operating expenses come from other sources. Certainly classroom instruction is important, but capital improvements are a separate issue. The fact remains that Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools are bursting at the seams. This county is growing by leaps and bounds, and the kids need more classrooms.
Yes, this makes perfect sense. Vote against the bonds (possibly jeopardizing the county's bond rating) and lose the opportunity for a sure way of funding capital improvements and hope that the politicians can figure out an alternate way to funds construction based on assurances from Kaye McGary, who is not on the County Commission and has no say in approving COPS or any other bonds.
Voting against the bonds will have absolutely no effect on classroom funding. Teachers salaries and other operating expenses come from other sources. Certainly classroom instruction is important, but capital improvements are a separate issue. The fact remains that Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools are bursting at the seams. This county is growing by leaps and bounds, and the kids need more classrooms.
By that logic, we should have a vote to also pay the teachers what they truly deserve.
In North Carolina, teachers are state employees. Remember this next year when you're deciding how to vote for state legislators and governor. (Don't you live in South Carolina?)
I do not know about the candidates for the Board of Election which 3 should I vote for?
Bill Clayton,
Liz Downing,
Kaye McGarry,
Trent Merchant,
Mr Plotseneder,
Joe White,
Julian Wright,
Yes, this makes perfect sense. Vote against the bonds (possibly jeopardizing the county's bond rating) and lose the opportunity for a sure way of funding capital improvements and hope that the politicians can figure out an alternate way to funds construction based on assurances from Kaye McGary, who is not on the County Commission and has no say in approving COPS or any other bonds.
Actually, If you read my post I have not advocated either way. So you really don't know which way I voted in the past or will vote this time. Don't confuse thoughtful dialogue with stated position. I simply offered food for thought. The numbers show over and over more money does not solve the problem nor does rhetoric.
Nonetheless, the kids need new schools. Voting against the kids because you don't like certain people seems pretty silly to me. Why sabotage the kids' education just to make a point? If you don't like the school board, you can vote against them, but don't vote against the kids.
It has been proven that the facilities at which a student learns has little to no bearing on his/her success/failure rate. The success depends on the student him/herself. Research has been done using students from homes in wealthy areas that instill the importance of education and placing them in "run down" schools. On the other hand, students from poor sections of the inner city were placed in schools in exclusive areas with state of the art facilities. The results were that the first group did no worse and the second group did no better. The facilities had no real bearing on the performance of the student.
What I am saying is that if buildings need repairs, they should be repaired when they are getting to the state that climate controls are no longer operational or when safety is an issue they need to be fixed. But, don't use the "poor student" as the instrument to persuade others to support the funding issue. The kids really don't care and the grades are affected minimally.
Bottom line: Voting against a school bill has nothing to do with voting against kids. And yes, mismanagement of funds might be an issue that a voter could possibly want to see sorted out.
It has been proven that the facilities at which a student learns has little to no bearing on his/her success/failure rate. The success depends on the student him/herself. Research has been done using students from homes in wealthy areas that instill the importance of education and placing them in "run down" schools. On the other hand, students from poor sections of the inner city were placed in schools in exclusive areas with state of the art facilities. The results were that the first group did no worse and the second group did no better. The facilities had no real bearing on the performance of the student.
What I am saying is that if buildings need repairs, they should be repaired when they are getting to the state that climate controls are no longer operational or when safety is an issue they need to be fixed. But, don't use the "poor student" as the instrument to persuade others to support the funding issue. The kids really don't care and the grades are affected minimally.
Bottom line: Voting against a school bill has nothing to do with voting against kids. And yes, mismanagement of funds might be an issue that a voter could possibly want to see sorted out.
It has been proven that the facilities at which a student learns has little to no bearing on his/her success/failure rate. The success depends on the student him/herself. Research has been done using students from homes in wealthy areas that instill the importance of education and placing them in "run down" schools. On the other hand, students from poor sections of the inner city were placed in schools in exclusive areas with state of the art facilities. The results were that the first group did no worse and the second group did no better. The facilities had no real bearing on the performance of the student.
But the one thing this does not take into account is that the classes are very overcrowded. To say a student is not being hurt by a 32:1 student teacher ratio is not accurate... I have heard from teachers first hand that they spend so much time keeping the kids settled down that their lesson plans are frequently cut short.
I understand the arguement about CMS and how they have been fiscally irresponsible in the past... that is obvious after very little research. However, Gorman has done some good things and there are times you have to spend money to correct things. What do you expect him to do with no money?? He has done quite a bit in limited time.
Maybe I am biased because I have a child in a second grade class with a 30+:1 ratio. It's a mobile unit which I was ok with until they discovered today there may be a serious mold unit in the trailer. In the beginning of the school year they were having trouble getting the a/c units to work, now this and I can't wait to see how the heating system holds up. In addition to all of that, they are also moving some of the students to new classes as more kids enroll. This happened several times last year and it is difficult for kids to adjust to a new teacher 2-3 times a year. Heck, my wife as the room mom has to rip pages out of the class books every week and make copies because they don't have enough books for all of the kids. Not every class is lucky enough to have someone dedicated enough to do this.
My long winded point... top of the line facilities are not required but meeting the state requirements for students per class, having enough books etc is critical.
I'm afraid that the majority of this vote is going to boil down to the yes'ers as those who have kids that are impacted and the no'ers being those that do not. It's far easier to be principled when its not directly impacting you.
I agree. This sad thing is, as often happens, the money never makes it where it is most needed. If the money were going to hire more teachers, I don't there is anyone who would vote no. There are creative solutions but for whatever reason, building is the only option you ever hear. The powers that be here seem to be more interested in "new and shiny" than using resources that are already available.
I think you are right though, out of deseperation, parents will vote yes and history will show that the problem will persist. Not to mention the fact that even if money is appropriated today, it will not impact the children in CMS anytime in the near future.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
