VoteNoBonds.com

By BRIAN GOTT - STAFF WRITER

After receiving a backlash of public criticism last week for using taxpayer-funded resources to market an aggressive school bonds promotional campaign, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools officials appear to have taken some preliminary steps to rein in its message.

Those steps, however, might not go far enough to prevent CMS from landing in hot water. A group of concerned citizens, including Mecklenburg Commissioner Dan Bishop, said this week they are considering legal action to prevent CMS from continuing any promotional efforts that would encourage people to vote for the bonds.

In particular, CMS has been using taxpayer-funded resources like the district’s CMS TV cable station, CMS email, signs, flyers, school personnel and staff time to highlight what district officials and bond proponents claim are the benefits the massive $427 million school bonds would provide.
…
Bishop was referring to case law that prohibits governmental entities from taking a position and urging voters to vote one way or another on particular election issues. In a 2002 North Carolina Court of Appeals decision, a judge ruled in favor of a plaintiff who was suing the Town of Cary for conducting a “Growth Management and Education Outreach Campaign.” As a part of the campaign, town leaders conducted direct mail campaigns and media buys to “better inform the citizens about growth and management.”

In that case, the judge ruled that governmental entities were allowed to conduct educational campaigns. However, “Where the advertising is designed to influence an election, it is impermissible,” the judge wrote.

The judge also ruled that some taxpayer-funded communications could cross the line even if they don’t specifically say “vote yes” or “vote no.”

Read more …
RhinoTimes Article

Dear Editor,
If you support a sound basic education for all children, you must vote “no” for the school bonds. N.C. Rep. Beverly Earl and other local and state elected officials based their support for the school bonds on rapid growth in suburban areas and the need for life cycle replacement of things such as roofs, HVAC, etc. I have no doubt that the student population of CMS will increase by 53,000 students in the next 10 years, and that we will have to build schools to accommodate these students. My problem isn’t the need; it is CMS’ response to the need.

At least 45 percent of the 53,000 expected new students will be poor and minority. That translates to 23, 580 new poor and minority students that will be attending schools in CMS over the next 10 years. Most, if not all, of these poor and minority students will be located in Districts 2, 3 and 4. CMS plans to build 10 schools with the bond money. Only one of those 10 schools will be built in District 2; there will be no schools built in Districts 3 or 4. The standard for poverty in CMS is whether a child receives free and reduced lunch (FRL). If a school has high concentrations of FRL students it is labeled a “Focus School” (formerly called Equity Plus schools). There are 53 “Focus Schools” (schools with high concentrations of poverty) in CMS; 48 of them are located in Districts 2, 3 and 4. While approximately 48 percent of the students that attend CMS receive FRL, the current neighborhood choice plan has concentrated the poverty so that the poverty levels in our elementary schools is 84.3 percent; in middle schools it is 69.34 percent; and in high schools it is 62.12 percent. Most educational experts believe it is extremely difficult to educate children in high poverty schools.

In an effort to make Focus Schools work, CMS promised to: Reduce student-teacher ratios (one teacher per 16 students); provide additional instructional supplies and materials; and add incentives for teachers to attract them to Focus Schools. The two most important steps that must be taken, in order for children in Focus Schools to have at least a chance for a sound basic education, is to provide quality teachers and small class sizes. The June 6, 2005 Charlotte Observer published an article entitled “CMS teacher incentives.” The article proclaimed that the No. 1 priority for this year for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School Board is to have effective, high quality teachers in all classrooms. Just three months later, September 2005, the Charlotte Observer published an article entitled “Teachers won’t be laid off by budget.” The Board of Education, by a vote of 7-to-2, voted for a budget eliminating signing bonuses and other perks designed to attract staff to needy schools. CMS, with this unconscionable vote, must know how extremely difficult it will be for children in Focus Schools to receive any kind of decent education without experienced, quality teachers.

The bonds, if passed in November, will authorize CMS to build only one school in District 2, no schools in District 3 and no schools in District 4. The only way Districts 2, 3 and 4 can accommodate 23,850 new poor and minority students in the existing schools, plus one new school, is to do away with the promise of small class sizes for the Focus Schools. Without experienced, qualified teachers and small class sizes, you haven’t got a snow ball’s chance of giving children in Districts 2, 3 and 4 that attend high poverty schools a sound basic education. It may be that Commissioner Valerie Woodard was the only elected black official that voted against the bonds because she is one of the few black elected officials that regularly attends black forums such as The Tuesday Morning Breakfast, NAACP meetings and Charlotte Black Political Caucus meetings. It is fair to mention that the Charlotte Black Political Caucus held a Town Hall open to discussion on the pros and cons of the bonds. At the conclusion of the discussion, which featured representatives from the Chamber and CMS, a survey of the participants indicated that they are not in favor of voting for the bonds by a margin of 2-to-1.

Richard A. McElrath, Sr.
Founder, People United For Education;
Chairman, Education Committee,
Charlotte Black Political Caucus

Please don’t turn the fight at North Meck into a reason to vote for school bonds. The proposed package includes no relief for crowding at North Meck.

CMS should have built two high schools to accommodate the north’s true growth, instead of simultaneously building Hopewell in the north and Waddell in the south under the apparent belief that “if we put one here, then we have to put one there.”

Today Waddell has been turned into a partial magnet for foreign languages because in its four years of existence it has failed to fill its seat capacity.

Throwing more money at CMS will not fix its mismanagement of money.

Amy Hallman
Huntersville

Observer Article

‘Naysayers’ needed to battle boondoggles

The Observer for years has called those who disagree with its position on spending or taxes “naysayers.” But more naysayers are needed to say no to giveaways of arenas to billionaire owners, to massive bond issues that plunge the county into more debt, to light rail boondoggles, to ill-conceived art programs, to mismanaged school spending, to feel-good programs that don’t produce results and to foolish business grants.

Elton Shoemaker
Charlotte

Newcomers have money we can make use of

If Charlotte-Mecklenburg leaders want rampant growth, then they should manage it. The only solution is charging these “equity rich” newcomers who purchase McMansions here.Stop letting special interests make critical decisions for this community, and listen to the taxpayer you always ask to bail you out.

Rick Marshall
Charlotte

Why impact fees over bonds? Simple! Bond payments are added to the property tax rolls and are regressive — they tax the poor, the unemployed, the sick and people living on Social Security.

People have to eat, but they don’t have to buy a new home.

Romaine Horn
Charlotte

In response to “Bonds aim to put seats where they’d be filled” (Oct. 9):My reason for voting against the school bonds: the reluctance of county and city officials to require developers to pay for more of the costs of growth.

Progressive communities require impact fees, the dedication of land for parks or schools or a financial equivalent.

This will be my first no vote on a school bond issue. The message is for city and county officials: Move from the influence of real estate interests to the welfare of us all.

Russ Brown
Charlotte

Letters to Editor

Greetings to All!

Can I have just about two minutes of your time in regards to a decision that WILL effect you as a Mecklenburg County resident?

From 1999-2004 Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) student enrollment grew from 96,000 to 120,000 or an increase of a little more than 20%.

However, money spent on CMS students, gathered from all sources, has risen 60% in the same period (1999-2004), from $625 million to almost $1 billion. This includes money from the federal, state, and local government, and yes, including your property taxes.

So, in other words, the rate of spending has grown 3 times faster than the number of students has grown. But the Democratically controlled County Board and CMS say they need even more $$$ for education.

… Intrigued? Read on… Just one more minute…

In July of 2005, it was reported that less than half of CMS schools passed the No Child Left Behind testing standards. By comparison, 69% of Gaston and Lincoln county’s middle and elementary schools passed.
(http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/12175662.htm)

Of all 100 NC counties, NC had the highest spending per student, but middle of the road results. i.e. Where are your tax dollars going??

Your County Board, majority dominated by 6 Democrats insists, in part, that “its for education” to raise your property taxes nearly 11% in one year(2005), after a 2003 property reassessment that came just 5 years after a 1998 reassessment. The 1998 reassessment came two years earlier than the normal 7 year reassessment cycle.

Why? To increase your property tax values to gain more revenue. A double whammy - a reassessment and 11% one year spike in the county tax rate!

The Democrats don’t want to tell you the real truth for property tax increases: to pay for unneeded, if not wasteful services, cover mismanagement of resources, and to cover debt service because of waste and mismanagement.

And yet, in what the board claims is a tight budget year of 2005, they increased their own travel allowance almost 30% to do what with it? — Travel to Hawaii on your tax dollars (Democrat County Board Member Norm Mitchell) - Yes, that’s right!

Mr. Mitchell took the trip to a conference in Hawaii in the summer of 2005, that many local governments from many states such as Alabama and Georgia did not send representatives because they deemed it wasteful spending of public funds.

By the way, I thought traveling to an exotic place such as Hawaii is something we do on personal time and money, not on someone else’s dime?

Do you want to make a change?

Two things….

On Tuesday, November 8th…

VOTE NO for the School Bond Referendum…. A no vote demands smarter spending, which we have had little from Mecklenburg County officials. A “NO” vote stays off open season on taxpayers… Of course, most supporters of the bond, and probably the Charlotte Observer itself, will taint “NO” voters as anti-education, in reality the reverse will be true. Smarter spending will for one, keep our own local government accountable and fiscally healthier.

Ask yourself this question: Is a problem solved or improved, just by throwing dollar bills at it?? Money must be spent wisely.

Re-consider: Mecklenburg County has by far and away the highest spending per pupil in the state of all 100 counties in North Carolina, but only mediocre student performance. And now, Mecklenburg County wants even more money.

The next election for county board: vote conservative, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for education - a priority that will be placed truly first, not behind a wall of mismanagement and waste.

Let us all join together to hold our politicians accountable for FIRST, spending money wisely, before we give them MORE money.

For more information on a better plan with lower cost alternatives than the bond, click http://www.johnlocke.org/ , “Charlotte-Mecklenburg’s Costly Bonds.” The John Locke Foundation is North Carolina’s leading think-tank.

former Charlotte Hornet
NC State Class of ‘96
Charlotte native

P.S. Forward this to all of your friends who live in Mecklenburg County!

On Nov. 8, the voters of Mecklenburg County will be casting their votes for not only Mayor, City Council and School Board but also for one of the largest bond packages in our County’s history. The League of Women Voters will be sponsoring a debate on this bond package on Thursday, Oct. 13 at 7 p.m. at the Government Center. The panelists will include representatives from the Citizens for Effective Government, The Vote Yes Committee, and the John Locke Foundation. There will be a moderated question and answer session followed by questions from the audience. If you have any questions, feel
free to contact Gray Newman with the League of Women Voters at 704-609-3160.”

Dear Editor,
Please consider this an open letter to the school board: I am so not into politics. I am just a regular mom who wanted to make a difference, not only for my kids; for all the kids. And, believe it or not, it’s the truth. The bonds on the November ballot are a key issue. I asked myself many times why I would want to subject myself to this hardship and sacrifice for my family to help and be a part of this board just for the interim position for District 6. The answer is: It was the opportunity to make a difference.

Thank you to (school board members) Kaye (McGarry) and Larry (Gauvreau) for casting votes for me. Let me remind the board of the article from the Aug. 11 Charlotte Observer, which said that it was unlikely the board would choose any of the three candidates running in November to keep the seat. Board Chairman Joe White said it would be unfair to give one the edge of incumbency. The public needs to trust that the board will do what it says it’s going to do, whether it is appointing an interim board member or spending bond money.

The residents of Charlotte-Mecklenburg are clearly frustrated, based on the last nine months of activities that have gone on. Catchy slogans alone won’t pass the bonds. With more than $400 million to be spent, who will take on the task of understanding where, how and when this November bond money is going to be used, and then let the public understand the importance of it? The facts need to be presented without any spin and the people will decide.

For me to vote for the bonds, I need to know the following information for each and every one of the CMS schools: year of construction, total cost of the school at construction time, square feet of the building, number of students capacity (using the same formula for every school), the number of students for the 2005-06 school year, which district the school is in, renovations completed, year of renovations, cost of the renovations, and, most importantly, where the money came from for the initial construction and the renovation work that was done (bond year or certificates of participation). The schools that would be receiving money from the November bonds should be highlighted. That would be a good start.

Ask the public what they need to know to make their decision based on the facts. Make the information public in a timely manner so the voters have all the facts before Election Day rolls around. Certainly, the voters deserve these facts that you should have been working with to determine how much bond money to ask for. Every taxpayer deserves information to make an educated decision. I would be happy to endorse the bonds when CMS can show me the facts that support it.

A concerned taxpayer and parent,
Teresa Hermanson

Rhino Times Letters Sept.