VoteNoBonds.com

In response to “Citizen panel plans fail; Haithcock is candidate” (March 15):
For shame! Frances Haithcock should send a note of apology to each member of Gov. Martin’s committee — nothing they can do will get CMS bonds passed if she is appointed superintendent.
Does Haithcock have skills so rare that it’s worth trading the trust of the voting public to have her as superintendent? The last thing this district needs is the status quo.
Tricia Brodbeck

Charlotte

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlot…n/14140580.htm

On The Soap Bov

by Lewis Guignard

March 02, 2006
Last fall, voters soundly defeated the latest bond proposal for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools. In the wake of that defeat, the Board of County Commissioners, led by its self-avowed tax-and-spend chairman, Parks Helms, directed County Manager Harry Jones to form a committee whose main purpose was to convince 51 percent of residents to vote “yes” on a school bonds package this year.

As details of the organization of that committee became clear, I sent Jones an email explaining my concerns. After a few politically correct exchanges, including one from former Gov. Jim Martin, who chairs the so-called School Building Solutions Committee, Jones sent me the following on Dec. 28 in response to my decision not to serve on the committee, if asked:

“There is much we can learn from Mother Goose,” Jones’ letter read. “I am reminded of Humpty Dumpty who had a great fall and all the king’s horses and all the king’s men could not put Humpty together again. Rumor has it they failed because they could not reach consensus (the inability to reach general agreement). I believe Humpty can be put together again in this great community when we stop shouting at each other and start listening to one another. I hope that you can be one of those voices of reason.”

My response was that Humpty Dumpty was probably pushed by those who expressed concern about his plight. This is what is going on in Mecklenburg County today. The voters have been pushed by their leaders, elected and otherwise, to a point where they soundly reject a CMS bond package. This is a failure of leadership, yet those in positions to change this leadership continue to support the failed policies and leaders who have brought us to this point.

Examples abound. Eight years ago, for example, former County Commissioner Joel Carter proposed a capital pay-as-you-go plan to use a short-term tax increase to bring about a long-term reduction in taxes. If it had been adopted by the Board of Commissioners, which was controlled at the time by Helms, today our taxes could be lower, while having more operational money for programs than currently exist. Helms and other leaders ignored Carter’s plan because a political opponent had proposed it. Yet last year, Helms led the vote to increase taxes, beginning a version of the Carter Plan while avoiding any reference to Carter’s leadership. Unfortunately, in addition to trying to fix the capital side of the county’s funding problems, the Democrats’ tax increase also included millions of dollars for social programs designed to appease Democrat voters.

As a result, the county still faces a capital funding and revenue problem that requires voters to approve bonds that will lead to long-term tax increases.

About six years ago, I did a regression analysis of the relationship between school age, teacher longevity, teacher degrees, parental involvement, race, socio-economic status and math and reading results.

The analysis was based on CMS’s own numbers and the results were clear. There is a strong relationship between socio-economic status and test results, and a slightly weaker one between race and test results. I presented the findings to the Board of Commissioners. In turn, the findings were roundly ignored by the liberal leadership of the county, which continued, and continues to this day, the wasteful policies of school rebuilding and renovations that do nothing to improve educational results.

County Commissioner and former Board of Education member Jim Puckett, along with school board members Kaye McGarry and Larry Gauvreau, cite the need for building more schools in the suburbs, where there is tremendous growth and overcrowding. Those in control – specifically the Democrat majorities of the Board of Education and the Board of Commissioners – have steadfastly refused to listen.

Former Charlotte Mayor Harvey Gantt and Bank of America executive Cathy Bessant co-chaired a task force focused on changing the way CMS is organized and administered with the intention of gaining public support for a new and improved CMS. Their report, although wide ranging, could not cover everything, but focused on major items. There are many good ideas in their recommendations. The acceptance of those task force recommendations, however, has been weak among those who would be expected to implement its changes – in effect, the Democrats and liberals who control the Board of Education and want to stay in power for their benefits.

The majority of the school board is opposed to Charter Schools, which are public schools whose purpose is to offer parents an opportunity to educate their children outside of CMS. CMS is required by law to fund these schools at a per pupil level equivalent to its own funding. To the detriment of charter school students, the school board voted with the support of CMS staff to under-fund the charter schools. This is an attack on children just because they do not attend CMS.

Puckett has talked about finding ways to enable low-income families to have their children attend schools outside CMS, if they wished: a voucher system of sorts. It is a proposal that would give parents direct control over where their children could attend school and the education they would receive. Yet because such a policy would wrest control, not to mention funding, from CMS and the county, his proposals have fallen on deaf ears.

These are only a few examples of why Humpty Dumpty fell down and broke when voters overwhelming rejected the school bonds last November. Many of you have your own and similar stories – the arena, light rail, business subsidies – of how “leadership” has either ignored those of us who offer legitimate ways to make this a better county, or called us naysayers.

Then, when things fall apart or results aren’t exactly right, the complaints start. But by continuing to support those who follow the policies of the past, which have been shown not to work, by refusing to listen to new ideas and accepting the fact that parents have a legitimate and proprietary interest in the wellbeing of their children; by raising taxes just because they can; in general, by ignoring the interests of the average people of the county, our leaders, self-appointed and otherwise, have caused Humpty Dumpty to fall down.

It’s important to remember that those in positions of leadership continue to support the people and ideas that have brought us to this point. Downtown and its cheerleaders only interest is 51 percent of the vote on the next bond.

Then those in opposition are told we must learn to listen to each other, to build consensus. I say that I have listened; it is those who have brought us to this point who have refused. Show me, that I might believe you know how to lead us out of where we find ourselves; because I don’t believe you can. Look to yourself to see why Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.

It is not the fault of those who voted against a wrong-headed and excessive school bond; it is the result of those who convinced us, through their actions and policies, past and present, to vote “No.”

Are you proud of the results?

Lewis Guignard is president of Citizens For Effective Government

http://charlotte.rhinotimes.com/
Charlotte, North Carolina • Volume XV No. 9

Merchandise Mart eyes new location
Updated: 2/9/2006 7:34 AM
By: Adam Shub, News 14 Carolina

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — The Charlotte Merchandise Mart, which recently agreed to sell its facility on Independence Boulevard, wants to partner up with the public sector and build a new exhibition center off Wilkinson Boulevard.

All the revenue would go to the Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation Department, which owns the proposed site along the Catawba River. Private developers would turn their profit from a hotel, residential units and retail shops.

“You have a synergy, located on Wilkinson Boulevard, that wouldn’t be there otherwise,” said Edna Chirico, who represents the Merchandise Mart.

Most of the site would be green space, though.
…
Parks Helms, the chairman of the Mecklenburg County Board of Commissioners, likes the concept.

“I think it would be a major benefit to the citizens of this county if it’s done right and if we can do it at the right price,” he said Wednesday.

But Helms said any deal would have to clear several hurdles first. After all, taxpayers would have to sign a bond referendum to pay for the center’s construction.

Read the article here.

…
In 2002, the bonds passed 63-to-37 percent, a substantial change from the previous two margins. Yet again, those on the winning side expressed no concern for those on the losing side. They had won and that’s all they cared about. If they cared about consensus and those who had voted against the bonds they would have gone into Coulwood, Oakdale, Mint Hill, Berryhill and the other precincts where a majority of the voters had said “no” and asked about their concerns. They did not.

Which leads us to November of this year, when the “no” voters gained 20 percent in the polls and defeated the school bonds. This is extraordinary and cries out about the problems the voters have with CMS.

The bond supporters are stunned. Having never cared about those who expressed concern about issues personal to themselves, because all they wanted was 51 percent of the vote, they are surprised their arrogance has caused such wreckage.

Suddenly, bond supporters, on the losing side for a change, say they care about those opposing the bonds, who are on the winning side for a change. The supporters want consensus, compromise, yet the naysayers can leave the county if they don’t like the higher taxes. There is consensus only in their arrogance.

Let me assure you all. Board of Education Chairman Joe White does not care about consensus or resolving the issues, his is a mantra from coaching that has only to do with winning. His words upon learning of the failed bond vote indicate his position. White, and others of the same ilk, only care about winning. They are only interested in 51 percent; when they get it, talk of consensus and compromise disappear.

There is a similar attitude in the people who support the bonds and the losers on the arena vote, because they are the same people. They don’t really care what the voters say; they care only about taking the voters’ money.

My prediction is there will be much talk and nothing will change, which has been the history of CMS since 1970. In no uncertain terms, education is not the purpose of the CMS bureaucracy, as the culture of bureaucracy in control there is concerned only with self-preservation. As this culture is perpetuated through quiet approval by the Board of Education and the Board of County Commissioners, there is no reason to change.

A “no” vote is only a bump in the road to them – much as the arena vote was. Expect higher taxes and no real change in policy.

Rhino Times

Last week’s defeat of the $427 million Charlotte-Mecklenburg School bonds moves the district one step closer to a meltdown of epic proportions.

As a show of frustration with how the Board of Education handles spending, management and pupil assignment, voters overwhelmingly turned back the package, which would have built new schools that would relieve overcrowding while renovating inner city campuses that have fallen behind on maintenance. A strong push by conservatives helped fan the flames, but the school board’s ineptitude and a massive case of sticker shock were likely enough to sink the referendum. The fallout, however, could portend serious ramifications for the county, CMS and students alike.

For the county, Republican commissioners Bill James and Dan Bishop argue that Mecklenburg can alleviate overcrowding by issuing Certificates of Participation, or COPs, to build schools in the suburbs. The Republicans, who demanded CMS hold the line on spending when they were in the majority two years ago, should be applauded for their change of heart. But issuing COPs is riskier for the county financially and doesn’t address renovation issues in areas that sorely need them.
Democratic commissioners, on the other hand, pledged to help public schools find the money to ease overcrowding and maintain equity. Although the referendum went down in flames, they’ve been painted into a corner: issue COPs or face criticism for doing nothing. Democrats, most notably Dumont Clarke and Norman Mitchell, have publicly opposed COPs after a resounding public decision on the bonds, using Charlotte City Council’s reversal of the failed arts and entertainment referendum of 2001 as a cautionary tale of abiding by voters’ wishes. The Democrats won that skirmish Tuesday by defeating the COPs proposal.
So what will happen next? We suggest that public input be allowed to go forward with the new school board, which returns many of the same characters that put the district into this mess. They should hammer out a new proposal that takes into account Charlotte-Mecklenburg’s overall needs, which requires a centrist, mature study of issues facing the district. Then offer it to commissioners for a referendum.
One thing is sure: Suburban schools will continue to overflow without new construction. Older campuses will continue to deteriorate without renovation and upgrades. And communities will continue to balkanize based on geography, economics and politics. If Mecklenburg citizens are determined to send a message to the school district and elect representatives who share that view, it should be consistent. If it’s fiscal restraint, so be it. If it’s aggressive spending, we should be ready to live with it. Staying this confusing course only leaves everyone railing for top-flight education without the assets - or courage - to make anything of consequence happen.

Volume 31, No. 09

http://www.thecharlottepost.com/editorials.html

Nine Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools are still waiting for renovations voters approved over the past eight years.

…
This time, 57 percent of voters — and three out of four who voted at Northeast Middle — said no to CMS bonds.

Beverly Cannaday, a Northeast parent, says she wasn’t going to keep voting yes when her school’s renovations haven’t materialized, and when CMS failed to plan for inflation. Rising costs jacked up the price of projects higher on the priority list, so projects waiting in line have smaller budgets.

“If they’re not going to spend it wisely, why keep throwing money at it?” Cannaday said.

But David McAlexander, a parent leader at Long Creek Elementary, voted yes, even though no one can say when his school will get promised improvements. In 2002, voters approved money to design a replacement for the aging, crowded Huntersville school. This month they denied money to build it.

…
As it became clear that federal judges would demand a new assignment plan, the school board voted to spend millions to bring old schools up to modern standards. Some already had minor projects authorized in 1997 bonds. The board decided to fold them into more sweeping and costly renovations.

Norm Gundel, a Cornelius lawyer who chairs the citizens’ Bond Oversight Committee, says that approach made sense.

He and Chamberlain say that if CMS had gone ahead with the smaller projects, CMS would have wasted money if it had done the work, then torn it down a few years later as part of a sweeping rehab.

But the decision, they say, created a problem: People with a stake in those schools complain about waiting eight years for CMS to deliver.

“In hindsight,” says Chamberlain, “we probably should have just gotten on with the (1997) renovations.”

Cannaday, the Northeast parent, says it’s not just the timing that irks her. As construction costs soared, higher-priority projects have eaten into the money left for other schools.
…
School board member Kaye McGarry says the GOP plan to borrow a smaller amount would have brought quicker results.

But for schools waiting to see their blueprints turned into bricks, those results would have been mixed. Wings would have been added, but renovations would have been shelved.

And McGarry says in the long run, she thinks well-planned bond requests every four years — the way Central Piedmont Community College does it — make more sense than frequent votes.

Gundel, whose citizens’ advisory panel unanimously endorsed the 2005 bonds, says CMS has honored its promises. But big projects take time, especially when they involve work on an occupied school.

Helping voters understand that, Gundel says, is one of the many challenges ahead.

Article

Open Letter to the Community:

As you can imagine, I am very disappointed with tonight’s vote on the 2005 Bond Referendum. Everyone loses. But the kids lose most of all.

I’m deeply concerned about the message we are sending our children and our teachers who struggle each day in severely overcrowded schools and aging facilities.

It’s unfortunate that side issues have clouded something that should have been very clear. We have 20,000 children in mobile classrooms today, and that number is only going to increase next year.

We have to come together as a community and start focusing on what unites us, rather than what divides us. Our journey is just beginning. The destination is up to us.

Sincerely,

Dr. Frances Haithcock, Ed.D.
Superintendent, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

Folks, we have heard it all regarding Bonds over the years. The CMS cheerleaders tell us; “It’s for the children”, “It’s for better schools”, “It’s to remain competitive in education.” The list of reasons they give for bonds today are essentially the same as in years past.

Let’s slow down for one moment and look at this rationally. Are we getting what was promised in the past, promised by the same people who are pushing for more money now? If the answer is “No” then they are in breach of their fiduciary duty to use the public money prudently.

Let me give you some insight~ from 1994 to 1998 I worked for the Scottsdale School District and during that time, they mismanaged money given to them through bonds. It was such a scandal! I would hear things through the grape vine (all districts have one) that things were not “kosher”, but we could not get our hands on the “proof” because the District had a closed door. It took a clamor that finally reached the ears of the Attorney General.

The Office of the Attorney General requested that the Office of the Auditor General investigate certain allegations of financial improprieties on the part of administrators and employees of Scottsdale Unified School District.

The term used was Misfeasance by Officials: the performance of a lawful action in an illegal or improper manner.

“Certain” administrators and school employees personally profited and accepted favors from vendors, which violated Arizona Revised Statutes, school district procurement rules, and district policies. Instead of criminal charges against the people who took these actions, contracts were paid off, and people were allowed to retire with benefits, etc. The District and Tax payers took another hit on top of learning the truth. The District was hit with a lawsuit by the Attorney General’s office.

b Civil penalties of $150,000 for each of the six anti-trust violations were handed down, but that wasn’t all that was charged for these improprieties.

The following penalties cost the taxpayers again, in money that could have gone for the children’s benefit, which is the true crime.

b Penalties in the amount of the entire dollar value of each contract, plus 20%, totaling $ 14,070,510.00.

b Further the Court was requested to issue a ten year injunction restraining the District from the following:

1. Engaging in unlawful procurement conduct and conspiracies in restraint of trade.

2. Failing to maintain, refusing to produce, or tampering with documents. They too, did not have an open door policy, which enabled them to conspire, to tamper and to screw the tax payer.

A huge campaign was drummed up to “clean” up the mess. The beat still went on for more money, (the same tune that we hear today.)

This is the reason we need to stop and say “Where is this money going?” and demand accountability. Money went into affluent schools that did not need more items, while other schools languished in squalor and over crowding.

When people began to inquire where the money was going and began asking for records; (because the School District and Board regularly asked for bonds), the District turned around and stonewalled the public. Sound Familiar? It should, because it is the same type of attitude.

In Scottsdale, District top management established a business climate which encouraged a disregard for responsibilities associated with administering public monies. It is the same climate here; and I pose the question are we heading down the same path?

The Report of Misfeasance:

http://www.auditorgen.state.az.us/Reports/School_Districts/Districts/Scottsdale%20USD/SIU/IR10-98.pdf

Think carefully and vote.

Regards,

Shanna Palmer

If only CMS responded to the current educational crisis like it it responding to the upcoming bond referendum. Like a well-oiled machine, our dollars are being used to try and insure a “YES” vote for school bonds. Radio spots, mailings and other propoganda found in the heart of a marketing machine.

If only…

• Educating our kids was the #1 priority.
• CMS responded to parents and the community at large with as much skill and haste.
• Common sense prevailed on the school board.
• Schools were built where the kids are.
• The bond package wasn’t stuffed with pork.
• The bonds were going to build new suburban schools SOON. 2008 is not soon enough.
• Someone would reprioritize the almost 200 million of approved, yet unissued bonds from previous referendums.

I can only hope, but as long as the CMS marketing machine continues to manufacture F.U.D. (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), there is little chance for all of the above. The facts are out there people, the current administration would prefer to continue putting lipstick on the pig. They are spending our money to do it, and need to be held accountable. Help send a strong message on the 8th by voting NO on the bonds. Essentials can be funded with COP’s and will likely be done sooner than the bonds could provide for. Our children deserve better than this. CMS needs an infusion of business mentality, accountability and above all, common sense.

When you make decisions about your child’s education, do you think about what is best for your child or about what is best for society in general?

I know that Mrs. Capitalist and I think about what is best for our children in the context of what we can afford. That is the responsibility of every parent.
…
The underlying premise is that the focus of public schools should be on the neediest. The purpose of your taxes and bond repayments is to provide for better schooling for needy kids who, in their view, should get the abundance of resources, and to bus needy kids out to the suburbs forcing overcrowding at those schools. The suburban overcrowding now, they say, requires a $500 million bond issue.

It is time for parents to push back and in pure self-interest say, “What about my kid?” and “My kid first!”

A “My kid first!” perspective would of course lead to a totally private school system. That is not going to happen tomorrow. The thing to do today is to vote against the bond offering. Looks like some parents are going that way according to the article.

Charlotte Capitalist Oct. 10, 2005