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.
I have to disagree with this comment. We have staff that are expert educators... that does not make them experts at spatial analysis or demography. McKibben himself has said that his report should not be used to support redistricting. In fact when he found out about the redistricting size and scope he thought it was unwarranted.
I thought, they have this responsibility and availability to data and input that none of us might have. So my assumption was based on that. But you might be right about their expertise on analysis and interpretation economic growth and demographic forecast. And yes, i would agree with the size and scope of the redistricting, specially some of the neighborhood with longer commute, they went beyond what is required for short term.
I thought, they have this responsibility and availability to data and input that none of us might have. So my assumption was based on that. But you might be right about their expertise on analysis and interpretation economic growth and demographic forecast. And yes, i would agree with the size and scope of the redistricting, specially some of the neighborhood with longer commute, they went beyond what is required for short term.
But I thought that was what was said at some point they wanted this to be longer term than it has been in the past. That is why so many kids were being moved this time.
But I thought that was what was said at some point they wanted this to be longer term than it has been in the past. That is why so many kids were being moved this time.
I thought the same. We can have constant redistricting with smaller moves, or a more long term solution with a big move. People demanded a long term solution, and this is it.
I thought the same. We can have constant redistricting with smaller moves, or a more long term solution with a big move. People demanded a long term solution, and this is it.
Exactly what I thought as well. If you believe the bubble, this is a 5-7 fix and then all is sunshine and lollipops. If you don't believe the bubble, start a fb page.
There are no current plans, and no funding for, building facilities. If no buildings in the near future you are going to HAVE to move a lot of people to house the inevitable.
I have to disagree with this comment. We have staff that are expert educators... that does not make them experts at spatial analysis or demography. McKibben himself has said that his report should not be used to support redistricting. In fact when he found out about the redistricting size and scope he thought it was unwarranted.
WaxhawMike,
The comment about what McKibben said is interesting and I have read comments stating something similar before. I thought one of the purposes his enrollment forecasting provided support FOR was future capacity planning aka redistricting.
Do you have any information about who he said this to?
I have to disagree with this comment. We have staff that are expert educators... that does not make them experts at spatial analysis or demography. McKibben himself has said that his report should not be used to support redistricting. In fact when he found out about the redistricting size and scope he thought it was unwarranted.
I agree with that, Mike. While I believe redistricting is necessary to relief the overcrowding, I do think that they are taking way to many liberties with McKibbens numbers. Education and demographics are two separate issues. I'm not comfortable with a doctorate in education making assumptions on population growth. I've always thought 5800 is too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mewith3
But I thought that was what was said at some point they wanted this to be longer term than it has been in the past. That is why so many kids were being moved this time.
Right, if we all accepted that redistricting is a possibility every three years, we wouldn't have such a drastic move.
For the past 2 months, a very vocal group of people have been trying to tie Kevin Stewart and his company to the redistricting results. They went deep into many inquiries, filed complaints up to the state level, and still continue to look into any company holding he's had in the past. I have yet to see any tangible evidence of this. In addition to Mr Stewart, they have done the same with every other BOE member. They have been very vocal about "following the money" and insinuating that there must be personal gain for some of these members. Two months later, nothing tangible has surfaced. Yet the cries continue in blogs, emails and FaceBook.
Yesterday, it became known that Frank Aikmus has his personal house for sale in Alma Village currently listed for $224,900. His neighborhood will be moved from the Cuthbertson cluster to Parkwood if the current redistricting goes through. According to the same anti-redistricting groups, this move will lower home values 10-20%. In this case Mr. Aikmus' house will gain or lose $22,500 - $45,000 as a direct result of moving the boundaries. Mr Aikmus has been one of the most vocal BOCC members fighting to prevent redistricting and has offered up $3,000,000 taxpayer dollars with "no strings attached" to the BOE.
To be clear: Mr Aikmus will have a personal impact of $22,500-$45,000 on the sale of his home pending the decision of this process and he is voting to allocate $3,000,000 in county money to sway the outcome. Tangible evidence.
Last night someone posted this news on the "Union County Residents (United) for Protection of Our Schools" FaceBook and was immediately attacked by the same people trying to implicate the BOE. They saw no reason to bring this up, desperately tried to brush it off, made comments like "nothing to see here," and continually pushed the original poster. A few minutes later the entire post and thread was deleted off the site. Their hypocrisy is beyond comprehension. They will cling to the smallest of fallacies that support their mindset, yet ignore and suppress crystal clear facts that could hurt their cause.
Mr Aikmus should recuse himself from any further discussions and votes on this topic going forward.
Wow! Just wow. How about revealing THAT conflict of interest!! Documented, verified, and confirmed.
Listed days after the facilities meeting, I believe. No wonder he is willing to spend 3 million on trailers to prevent redistricting but not on fixing roofs.
Regardless of Mr. Aikmus' reason for selling the house (the reason does NOT matter), it is clearly questionable timing with putting the house on the market and there's clearly a potential conflict of interest when allocating county funds that could very well directly impact the value of the home and/or the timeframe required to sell it.
I don't see how you cry transparency and beat on the BOE when there's clearly some transparency issues with the BOCC.
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.
