I believe
your comments towards and about the Colonel are "negative and bitter".
He's the one that has advocated competitive bidding and more uniformity in building schools.
But hey, we've dealt with your type before.
Why don't you stroll over to
http://chatham-county-nc.com/bulletinboard/index.php/topic,1647.0.html and take a look at the Chatham Coalition's Board of Education Questionnaire
Excerpts -
3. Chatham is faced with aging schools that need to be updated and renovated.
Additionally, new schools must be built to accommodate unprecedented growth in
Chatham. How will you determine funding priorities, given that the Board of
Commissioners has limited available funding?
Burke - We should make priorities on funding on a two-part formula: where is the greatest need
and how can we make sure every school has its needs met. Then we make our best informed
decision based on available funds and present needs. Sometimes we may need a Band-Aid; at
times we may have to decide what needs attention now and what can wait. We’ll always face the
twin challenges of having enough space now and building for the future. I do favor impact fees and
the concept of developments and subdivisions helping pay for the need they help create.
KHarris - At this time, Northwood and North Chatham are priorities. Both are grossly overcrowded.
The North Chatham Pod is way behind schedule and Northwood has students eating lunch
standing up. We have failed these two schools needs whilst buying millions in laptops and
cafeterias
McManus - It is the BOE’s responsibility to be familiar with the facilities at our schools but we must
also rely on the Superintendent and Central Office staff to make budget recommendations. They
base their recommendations on school requests and their personal knowledge of the school’s
needs and maintenance schedule. The BOE has to make responsible decisions with the first
priority being the safety and health of students and teachers. The BOE then must determine the
next most urgent need based on a variety of factors including space/crowding, educational needs,
functionality, maintenance costs, and aesthetics. Money needs to be distributed equitably, not
necessarily equally, so that all parts of the system receive ongoing maintenance and upgrading. I
think this is a fair, equitable process for determining our funding priorities. I am happy to listen to
parents and parent groups, PTSA’s, teachers, administrators and maintenance and janitorial staff
regarding a school’s needs but, as a parent, I know it is very difficult to remain impartial and to
know what the needs are at other schools that may have less vocal advocates. The BOE must be
responsible for allocating the limited funding as equitably as possible while address the most
pressing needs.
Russell - Fair distribution of less than adequate funds is a perpetual struggle in virtually
every level of government. Funding priorities should be determined by using an objective
set of criteria that takes into account the areas of greatest need throughout the system. The
critical element is to assure that the limited resources are put to use in the areas that will
serve the greatest need and generate maximum educational returns.
Totten - A. The first priority must be those schools which have health issues with unsanitary
restrooms, weight rooms, locker rooms, ventilation systems, asbestos and the like. Those must be
fixed first without question.
B. Three years ago, I – and several others – insisted we get an opinion from a professional
study to assist us in that very thing. We hired a laboratory from North Carolina State University to
identify optimum locations for new schools. In the past year, the original optimum location for a
new high school on highways 15/501, not Jack Bennet Road, has changed simply because of the
number of approved and planned developments. When that new optimum location is spotted by
the lab, I will support it and will work hard to get a bond passed to finance the construction.
C. I have already addressed maintenance and repairs to existing schools. Renovations are
more tricky. The first thing I think we need to do is redistrict and fill schools with students within
reasonable geographical areas. Next a number of schools have rooms that are being used for
storage of junk – books, lesson plans and programs, etc. - which were stored “because they might
be needed sometime”. Some of that stuff belonged to teachers who are no longer in the system.
The current plans of the school system show 20% of the available space is not available to
students for classroom purposes. We don’t know how many classrooms or student spaces we
actually have because of what they call capacity. Last year it was 15% indicating to me we have
5% more junk or available space but not occupied by students. Get rid of the stuff that is no longer
needed or used! Next we need have a professional go through each school in each redistricted
area to determine what each school needs. My priority for that chore would be the schools which
now are not at capacity, bring them up to standard, fill them with students then see what we need.
By footprint of the total schools, we have- according to state standards – space for well over
10,000 students. Our enrollment as of 6 September was 7,636. Until that disparity is resolved I
don’t think we can ask anyone to commit more building and renovating funds.
11. The Jack Bennett Road location for the new high school has been criticized as being in
the wrong location on a very dangerous road, and unsuitable for locating a high school.
What are your views on this location and this site?
Burke - My initial response to this question is the same as (11) – criticized by whom and why.
Two recent studies by a NCSU research team say the most ideal site for a new high school, based
on all sorts of demographics, is within two to three miles of the site the county owns. Have the
critics provided any facts to back up the complaint? To me, based on the NCSU data and findings
it would be fiscally irresponsible not to use the site, as well as creating another issue that would
delay the already overdue status of the school.
KHarris - I think it was yet another poor property purchase by our county along the lines of the
industrial park in Siler City. The infrastructure improvements needed at that site far outweigh the
benefits if there are any at all.
McManus - I have not seen evidence that convinces me that this site is unsuitable. We have the
infrastructure needs met, we have enough acres to situate a school and athletic fields, and we
have student growth in that area. This is the area where the OR/Ed study has recommended
placing a high school and I think it would be very hard to find another suitable site in the same area
with access to water and sewer. Land in north Chatham has become very expensive and I don’t
believe we can justify the expense when we have land available. We need to go ahead and do the
site study to evaluate how much of the land is useable and we should consider an independent
traffic study and begin conversations with DOT about the road.
If this is not the right place for a school, we need to approach developments about donating land
with infrastructure facilities available.
Russell I agree with these criticisms and have often wondered how this site was chosen.
Locations for new schools need to be chosen on some pre-selected, subjective criteria
which takes into account future needs and convenience of location.
Totten A. The District engineer for the Department of Transportation advised me of that fact
with the admonition “It is an accident waiting to happen.” This discussion took place some three
years ago when my original bond committee was examining options. What gave rise to that
discussion was the road net leading into that site and affluent young people driving on those
roads. This past year there have been two young people killed on the very roads leading to that
site which, to me, is one red flag about that location.
B. I do not support building a high school or any other school on that site for a number of
reasons in addition to the trafficability of access roads.
(1). That Jack Bennett Road site was never identified by our paid consultants
from NC State University in their reports of two years ago as an optimum high school
site. That land was bought without adequate study of the very reasons I oppose building and
school on it.
(2). The entrance to that site is a narrow strip similar to what the school system has
faced for Northwood High School and the Virginia Cross Elementary School in Siler City. Both
sites are now being criticized because of those narrow routes. The Town Board of Siler City nearly
refused to rezone that property out of concern for emergency access.
(3). The topography will require a two story building be built on the upper south side of that
property because the drainage and low points abound.
(4). The Corps of Engineers are adjoining landowners and have a duty to protect the
watershed into Jordan Lake. The topography of the site will encourage run off into that watershed,
something the Corps of Engineers refuses to allow and has so stated.
(5). Initially raw sewage was to be treated by the Governor’s Club Treatment Plant with the
effluent sprayed on the golf courses within the club itself. The Club’s sewage treatment plant has had
– and continues to have – problems handling its own raw sewage. The schools had a handshake
agreement with the Boothe Mountain development next door to the Jack Bennett Road property to
treat the school’s sewage and return it to the school for spraying on the school’s athletic fields. A
number of parents have told me that they did not want their children playing on effluent treated fields.
(7). When Boothe Mountain development obtained approval for their treatment plant; the added
sewage calculations for the high school were not included. Boothe Mountain was approved for a plant
based on the sewage solely for Boothe Mountain development. The added calculations still have not
been submitted or approved.
(Cool. New calculations by the paid consultants from NC State University show the approved and
proposed housing developments in the Northeast Chatham area to be about one third less than the
approved and proposed developments south of highway 64 and east of 15/501. That fact may change
the optimum site as originally planned two years ago in their original report. Until that optimum site is
identified based upon up to date information I am not in favor of building a high school in any area
short of optimum.
12. While we are faced with some schools that are overcrowded, other schools have not yet
reached capacity. Do you support re-drawing the school district lines so that school
facilities are better utilized? What should the Board of Education consider in redrawing
these school boundaries?
Burke - I would be supportive of considering redrawing school attendance zones. It will have to
be done when a new high school comes on line anyway. Completing that task now could put a
step ahead of a major effort when it comes. I don’t know that there are any “magic bullets” the
board of education should consider when it comes time to make that decision. It would be simple if
geographic features – rivers and creeks – and manmade factors, such as roads and highways –
could serve as boundaries but that isn’t necessary. One major consideration should be the
distance students would be required to travel. An hour or two one way isn’t a great idea.
KHarris - I am willing to look at all options for more efficient use of our facilities. I will not however
support any form of busing in its historical concept. If districts are redrawn we have to be ever
mindful of one of Chatham’s biggest problems…length of bus routes. Our land area is so large we
would have to keep districts along the most direct bus routing possible. It will be difficult when you
consider the impact on the child but I will explore it.
McManus - As of Wednesday, September 6, 2006, Chatham County only has two schools that
are more than 20% below their capacity: Horton is 42% below capacity, Moncure is 30% below
capacity. We have three schools that are more than 20% over capacity: Northwood is 39% over,
Siler City Elementary School is 37% over, and Silk Hope is 31% over. Jordan-Matthews and North
Chatham are both 17% over. The Virginia Cross Elementary School will relieve crowding at SCES
and Silk Hope and districts will be redrawn before it opens. When the new middle school opens in
the Briar’s Chapel development, districts will likely be redrawn and some student may be shifted to
Horton at that time. I support redistricting at those times. Redistricting is needed but since we will
have to redistrict when new schools open, we don’t really want to move children now, knowing we
will have to move them again in a couple of years. This happens almost every year in Wake but it
is very difficult for families and stressful for students.
When we redistrict, we need to consider projected growth patterns, racial and ethnic diversity, and
socio-economic diversity. Schools need balance in each of these areas. Diversity enriches the
educational experience by exposing students to different ways of thinking, different belief systems,
different cultural experiences, and different lifestyles. My children attended the Siler City feeder
schools and Jordan-Matthews High School. They didn’t know what a unique educational
opportunity they had enjoyed until they got to college and met students who didn’t really know
anyone of another race, kids who attended all white, mostly middle-class schools. My girls’ lives
were enriched and their borders expanded by the diversity in their schools. Both have selected
social groups that are racially and ethnically diverse at their universities.
Russell - Before endorsing the re-drawing of district lines I would want to take a long term
look at the projected growth. With the rapid growth that is about to occur in Chatham, I
don’t think it would necessarily be wise to re-draw lines to accommodate today’s needs if
those lines will be obsolete in a couple of years. So I would favor an approach that
considered all the factors necessary to properly accommodate the demographics of
Chatham in the future, not just a quick fix for today’s problems.
Totten
A. Albeit unpopular, redistricting is a required function of the Board of Education based upon
changing school capacities. I favor leadership in redistricting to balance school capacities with
the populations.
B. There are a number of factors to be considered. The most notable are: The ability of the
transferred students to assimilate the change and the ability of the losing school to maintain a
healthy student balance, transportation times of students involved, effect on the diversity of both
the transferring and receiving schools, potential effect on the state ABC rankings of each school
involved since teacher pay is directly involved, a healthy balance between the schools involved
of core capacity (school administrative staff and offices, lunchroom and media center space as
well as common play/athletic areas), costs involved in renovation requirements and finally the
balance of school districting.
