Penny by Penny

David Montané, a leader in the local Libertarian party regularly leaves comments on this blog that give me pause. I find his perspective often reminds me of early founders of American principles. In a recent post, David left this comment, "Everyone has been writing, both on this blog and all the local papers, about what will be done with the money if SPLOST is renewed. Will it be wasted, or will it benefit the children? Should we vote NO this time, then if they do what we want vote YES next time? This is the way those who have a special interest in the public schools look at the matter. This is so because the schools and buses and computers constructed with SPLOST money, in the words of Frederic Bastiat, are "seen" - they are visible to all. "This blinds all eyes" to the real effect of the tax on the public welfare. As an austro-libertarian, my interest is not in how the money will be spent, but in how it will NOT be spent - the "unseen". If we continue the SPLOST, $100 Million per year, from mid-2012 to mid-2017, will NOT be spent by individuals deciding on their own how that money should best be spent or saved or invested. Instead, that money will be forcibly removed from them at the cash register. In this sense, no matter how the money is used, it is stolen money and will obviously be misused. (Read "That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen")

He has a point. I am tired of being taxed in every nook and cranny of my life and would most likely spend my money more wisely if allowed to keep it. Although I don't mind paying taxes for basic societal needs, we are over-taxed in DeKalb and much of it is simply squandered. On top of that, the great state of Georgia has abused DeKalb for over a decade now. First, we all pay taxes to the state of Georgia and then the State, using a complicated funding formula called QBE (explained as well as possible by Joe Martin at the January, 2011 ELPC meeting) calculates what our school system is entitled to from state funds by adding up the numbers of our students, having multiplied each by a different weight proportionate to their individual needs called "FTE"*. Then, in something they call "Austerity Cuts", the state just hacks away at our entitlement total until it becomes a number the state feels comfortable sending to DeKalb. This has cost us hundreds of millions in lost funds over the last decade. It's frustrating and harmful. Have your ever noticed how hard CFO Marcus Turk has tried to alert us to this over the years? He mentions it every time he presents a budget. I've included a couple of his charts below.

FTE State Funding Summary
(click to view larger)

Worse, add to these "Austerity Cuts" the "Equalization" of school funds by the state, where they take what they call our "Local 5 mill share" and simply give it away to counties around the state that they decide are "poor" and "rural" and need our money more that we. Guess how much they take from us for "Equalization" every year? You are right! 100 Million Dollars! (Insert pinkie upside down at the corner of your mouth when you read that.) $100 Million (or more). Ironically, this is just about exactly the same amount we are now poised to tax ourselves and our guests (for the fourth time) to cover what we need to build and maintain our schools. How long until they start redistributing our SPLOST pennies? I wonder if our poor, rural neighbors appreciate that we are willing to double-tax ourselves so that they can build new schools too.

Actual funds received
vs entitlement
(click to view larger)

This is $100 million, penny by penny, taken from the good people of Dekalb - who already pay quite enough to fund a perfectly functional school system if those in charge would simply make it functional. We wouldn't need a SPLOST if those at the state would return the what they take from us year after year to give to "poor", "rural" counties who don't tax their property owners at nearly the same rate as we. We are fools to play into this game of income redistribution by the state. Vote "No" on SPLOST and instead, demand that your state legislators return our hard-earned money!

===

The Cobb County Budget available online includes this chart:

Property Taxes - Taxes levied on real and personal property, based on values assessed as of January 1 each year. FY2012 Property Tax revenue is based on a millage levy currently of 20.0 mills. The following are FY2011 Metro Atlanta comparisons of proposed millage rates, homestead exemptions and taxes on a $165,000 home:

===

*(For more in-depth but easy to understand information on FTE, click here to download a great Powerpoint called FTE for Dummies written by Paige Cooley of the Savannah-Chatham County Public School System.)

To SPLOST or not to SPLOST

The Get Schooled blog at the AJC has a conversation going about politician's views on SPLOST - the penny sales tax up for renewal for school construction. Former mayor Shirley Franklin stated,

"I have been surprised at the opposition toward the education SPLOST on the Nov. 8 ballot in Atlanta, Fulton, DeKalb, Decatur, Gwinnett, Buford, Cherokee and Henry."

Given the stark reduction in state funds for education and the depressed housing market, schools are in desperate straits, and there would seem to be no more critical time to renew the penny sales tax for construction and capital improvements than now.

Among those who have not signed on — Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed and the business community. In an interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution earlier this year, Reed said the penny — which has helped build or renovate 84 city schools or other buildings in the last 15 years— instead needs to go to a regional transportation plan expected to be put to voters next year.

Reed did not want the school system to seek to renew its SPLOST because Atlanta residents will be asked three times to raise their taxes between November and July. In March, Atlantans will vote on an extension of a 1-cent sales tax to upgrade the city’s water and sewer system, and later deal with another penny tax on the transportation bill. If both were to pass, Reed warned that the city would have the state’s highest sales tax at 9 percent and would be at a competitive disadvantage.

There is a standard mantra among SPLOST supporters that somehow this is "free" money - or at least money we collect a large portion of from our visitors, therefore, why not? I have some personal thoughts on why not:

1) We are in the middle of a $100 million lawsuit over SPLOST II construction that has cost us $15+ million and committed us to another $19+ million in legal fees - which comes from the General Operating budget - not the SPLOST budget — thus taking directly from the money earmarked for our children's education. We need to resolve these lawsuits, identify exactly how deep the corruption goes and put practices in place to prevent future mishaps.  Further, SPLOST money, projects and discussions take time, energy and attention away from the main task of the school board: Educating Students. Our test scores show the dismal job our board has done in this endeavor.

2) We have criminal charges looming and criminal trials yet to take place involving SPLOST and our former superintendent, our former COO and others. This is bad news and will require additional resources and attention as the trial moves forward. (BTW, these trials can now move forward, as the decision has been handed down that Lewis can keep his Alston & Bird attorney. Read about it and download the decision here.)  Compounding the taxpayers cost for defending our employees, is the fact that taxpayers are also funding the plaintiff in this story; the taxpayers themselves via the District Attorney's office. Finish the corruption cases and identify and release any and all other 'players' that emerge during the trial and then revisit restructuring the system. This includes restructuring the Auditing and Accounting offices. Any future SPLOST dollars should be monitored, reviewed and paid by an independent firm, with citizen oversight and transparency via the Online Check Register.

3) The current plan is not focused. There are projects promised in SPLOST IV that were listed as political favors for a chosen few who are very organized and very vocal. We will still have schools with great needs that will not get their needs addressed in full. Like our curriculum, the project list is vast, yet vague. A more focused, educationally-driven plan needs drawn. We need to give our new superintendent a year to develop that plan. As it stands now, she will be forced to redesign an educational system within the confines of the structures currently planned on the table. I would like to offer Dr. Atkinson the chance to first create a vision for educating our 100,000 children and then formulate a brick and mortar and technology plan to support it. SPLOST IV as it stands will tie her hands. What if she decides that a superb vocational/tech high school would feed a demand? She can't create it, as the SPLOST plan must be followed as written for the vote. What if she has other great ideas and would like to propose facilities to house those ideas? She won't have that option. She must work within the buildings as planned by SPLOST IV. By voting for SPLOST IV, we will be forcing our new superintendent to effectively work backwards with her hands tied and one eye closed.  Allow her the time and the freedom to formulate a vision and a plan to turn this ship around in every way, for every child.

GeorgiaSPLOST.org points out the drawback of SPLOST fundraising, which I believe is what has happened consistently in DeKalb. "In practice the SPLOSTs combine many projects into one referendum. Often many of the projects do not enjoy broad community support but are included in the list as a favor to certain special interests. The voters often have to vote for five or ten projects that they oppose in order to pass the two or three that they strongly support. Another problem with current practice is that SPLOST referendums are often held concurrent with elections with low expected voter turnout and the special interests promoting the SPLOST can have a greater effect on the referendum." This is why every SPLOST passes. There is always a very vocal group promised a project they have dreamed of for years. This group will promote the referendum with fervor, ensuring that it passes in order to have their own dreams realized, regardless of how inequitably the rest of the money is spent or (mis)managed.

As far as Shirley Franklin and others go, I find it interesting that some politicians get up in arms when voters question handing hundreds of millions of dollars over to a school board that has failed miserably in it's one and only true task: Educating our children. Why is it that people like the good mayor will advocate for new buildings, but not advocate for great reading and math scores? Why don't politicians feel compelled to make it Job #1 to provide a highly qualified, educated workforce to entice new business to incubate or locate in Georgia? Why are they not ripping their hair out in angst over being rated #49 in the US in education year after year? Glitzy buildings don't educate students – gifted teachers do. We need to make our universities train up the best teachers in the country and then we need to pay them well so that they will stay in Georgia and teach our own children.

The leadership in DeKalb has proven that when given bags of money, they will spend most of their energy finding ways to divert that money to their own and their friends' pockets and neighborhoods. Watch any board meeting in DeKalb; over half the time is spent discussing construction contracts. Improve test scores by hiring great teachers and principals and then supporting them in their task by paying them well, offering consistent, quality training, in-class support staff and smaller class sizes. When we have a functional educational system, then our construction needs will be easy to identify and voters will support those needs. 

Form follows function. We need to get our function – which is to educate – in order before we start planning the form (buildings). Maybe next time...

PTA President Admits Prior Knowledge of Cell Tower Proposal

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Lithonia, GA: Monday, Oct. 24, 2011:

Words were exchanged in anger, tempers flared and PTA President Evelyn Cunningham, wife of school board representative Jesse “Jay” Cunningham, admitted she had been aware of talks with the DeKalb County School System (DCSS) regarding the cell tower proposal for more than a year. She offered no explanation about why the subject was not announced to the parents or community until May, just a month before the school board was scheduled to vote.

Cunningham approached the group of approximately 12 - 14 people who had gathered outside the entrance to Martin Luther King, Jr. High School around 11 am. Monday, Oct 24, to inspect the location where they recently learned a T-mobile cell tower will reside for the next 30 years, thanks to the school board’s approval to lease its property, along with eight other school properties, in exchange for about $400 a month which will be deposited into the county’s general fund. The deal also includes a one-time payment of $25,000 that will also be deposited into the general fund, but those funds will be “directed” by the PTA or a School Booster Club that the school wishes to support.

While the group was assembled outside the school, a spokesperson for the local non-profit group “Get the Cell Out - Atlanta” was also being interviewed by a reporter from WXIA-TV for a story related to SPLOST IV. That story has not yet aired. As the group was disassembling and preparing to return to their vehicles or walk back to their nearby homes, Ms. Cunningham approached them and demanded to know their names and what had been reported to the news media. After several minutes, the group convinced the PTA officer to calm down and discuss her concerns rationally, which is when she admitted to having known about the cell towers for more than a year. When asked if she received the information from her husband, she replied that it was her understanding that lots of people in the PTA were aware of the proposal and it was not specific to anything her husband told her directly.

The DeKalb County Board of Education Administrative Rule O.C.G.A. 20-2-1160 requires: "… public forums from time to time, especially when dealing with controversial issues or matters of deep community concern, to receive input from citizens on policy issues, the educational program, and school administration."

The DCSS official position on the subject of public notification has been that public meetings were held at each of the schools once carrier T-mobile had been selected. Critics claim the flyer sent home with children was vague and did not convey the message that the meeting was to discuss the intent to place cell towers on the school property.

DeKalb County zoning laws specific to the permitting of cell towers has language that prohibit cell phone or cell tower companies from constructing towers, which emit low levels of RF radiation 24 hours a day, within close proximity of residential neighborhoods unless there are no other suitable alternatives. T-mobile representatives stated during the school meetings in May that the schools were selected because they were the “easiest” choice for them to pursue, not the last alternative as required by the county.

T-mobile also reported in the community meetings, according to one parent who attended the meeting at Brockett Elementary in Tucker, that they did not want to build their towers in neighborhoods where they are not wanted. The community members and neighborhood associations near Martin Luther King, Jr. High School have stated that they have been shut out of the process completely, only learning recently that a 150’ tower with a base size of 60’ x 60’ has been approved by the school board.”

At the July 11 board meeting, Jay Cunningham spoke out on the cell tower issue, stating that the community was in favor. In an interview with a reporter from the Crossroads newspaper in July, Cunningham said “Everybody has their view,” adding that he only had one call opposing the proposal. “Everybody had no problem with it. I didn’t hear anything negative from the community.” Read more: CrossRoadsNews - Cell Towers Going to Schools

“It is very disappointing and makes you wonder if you can trust anyone in this school system,” stated one of the people who witnessed the altercation between the PTA President and the community members who say they would like some answers.

“We have fought things like this before,” said one man from a neighborhood right next door to the school. “This is the first time something like this has happened where they plan to allow zoning for something and we do not hear about it until it is too late.”

Update: At a subsequent meeting held Oct. 25, Jay Cunningham admitted that the community surrounding MLK High School did not get adequate notice and agreed to take their concerns back to the other board members. After being well prepared and well armed with information and questions about the cell tower issue, the community was able to collectively prove their points and give Mr. Cunningham no choice but to back down from his earlier claims that the community was in favor of a tower. He said he would ask for a reconsideration of the vote in light of the new information. This meeting has gone the same route as the meeting between Paul Womack and Briarlake, and all involved are still hoping for a reconsideration. They must move quickly, however, as the 30 day period following the permit application has expired and they will now be working against the clock to stop any signs of construction. T-mobile should have the permits all in place no later than the end of January. And, their substandard towers can be built overnight and brought up to code later as a result of their claim to exemption from DeKalb County's zoning laws. This is one of the legal issues that might be contested.

To read our post on a similar meeting held at Briarlake ES, with board rep Paul Womack, click here.

SPLOST IV: Let’s Talk about Technology

““We are behind technologically in public school education; we’re behind the nation and the rest of the world,” (Cheryl) Atkinson says. “It is imperative that we make technology the norm, not the exception. Our students must be comfortable with technology, because otherwise we will lose our country’s competitive edge and students will not be able to survive. I’m very passionate about public school education being a great equalizer.”

Dr. Atkinson understands the value of putting technology into students’ hands. One of her landmark educational initiatives in Lorain City Schools was to ensure every student in 6th, 9th and 10th grades was equipped with a netbook to access textbooks online, put the Internet at their fingertips, and enable them to be members of the 21st Century Classroom. And this was only the beginning of an initiative that will span grades 4 through 12.

The current SPLOST IV proposal is troubling because it does not support Dr. Atkinson’s understanding that technology integration and abundant access is essential to students’ future success.

Look at the DCSS SPLOST IV Educational Technology goals:
“(17) (15) Upgrade classroom technology (including interactive boards, student response systems and projectors), upgrade and refresh to hardware (including desktops, laptops, and servers), software, wireless infrastructure in all schools, digital communication technology (including video conferencing, virtual and learning technologies), enterprise content management solution, upgrade and increase data storage systems, upgrades to telecommunications and implementing a mass notification system….”

Currently, classrooms of 30 to 35 students have an average of 2 to 3 computers per classroom. Most elementary schools have one computer lab to serve hundreds of students, and high schools have an even worse student to computer ratio. SPLOST III “upgraded and refreshed” the hardware which basically meant they replaced the existing computers. The current SPLOST IV proposes “upgrading and refreshing” which means student access to technology will remain stationary.

Technology for students has remained stagnant in DCSS as the opportunity for implementing the 21st Century classroom has been delayed. SPLOST I saw the lion’s share of technology money spent on software while the hardware to use the software was severely limited. SPLOST II saw most of the technology funds spent on the network as DCSS installed a private fiber optic cable network. SPLOST III saw the majority of technology dollars go to interactive boards for a relatively small percent of our teachers, replacing computers that were out of warranty (also called upgrade and refresh), and the purchase of eSis and Schoolnet. SPLOST IV now proposes interactive boards, student response systems, projectors, a wireless network, video conferencing, and replacing computers that are out of warranty. The SPLOST IV Educational Technology goals show a very teacher centered view of technology with little additional hardware for students.

Since student access will not reach a critical mass with SPLOST IV, benchmark testing with students “bubbling in” answers using paper and pencil while teachers take planning time to “scan” in 150 tests will be assured for the next five years. DCSS classrooms that do not look noticeably different from their parents’ classrooms will appear even more disconcerting in this fast paced world of global competition.

DCSS’s “Digital Divide” is increasing with children in affluent schools having much greater access to cutting edge technology than children in low income areas. Leveling the playing field should be a prime concern for a school system that has such disparity between schools in terms of student progress.

This is the problem with SPLOST IV passing “as is”. Technology access for students will stay “as is” while tens of millions are spent on non-student centered initiatives.

DCSS must involve the end users in the technology decisions. What do the teachers who are charged with increasing student achievement want in the way of Educational Technology in DCSS? What do the students want? What do the parents want? Who has made these plans for spending the tens of millions of dollars? Where is the Return on Investment in terms of student achievement projected and detailed? What is Dr. Atkinson’s vision of DCSS students as 21st Century learners? Where will the money come from to implement the one-to-one netbook initiative she has suggested for DCSS students once these SPLOST IV parameters are set? How will she get the real time data analyses she and the teachers need to make smart educational decisions?

These are questions that need to be asked and answered before moving forward with SPLOST IV. The 21st Century Classroom puts technology into the hands of students. DCSS is stuck in the bricks and mortar world of the past while our children must compete in a world without boundaries.

SPLOST IV: The Referendum Just About Covers it All

Care to read the exact text of the Referendum voters are asked to vote on in November? 


NOTICE OF ELECTION TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF DEKALB COUNTY TO CONSIDER A SPECIAL ONE PERCENT SALES AND USE TAX FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

NOTICE is hereby given that on November 8, 2011 an election will be held at the regular polling places in all the election districts of DeKalb County, Georgia, at which time there will be submitted to the qualified voters of DeKalb County for their determination the question of whether a special one percent sales and use tax for educational purposes shall be continued in DeKalb County for a period of time not to exceed twenty calendar quarters, beginning the first day of the calendar quarter (July 1, 2012) following the calendar quarter in which the sales and use tax for educational purposes currently in effect expires, to raise not more than $______645,000,000 and shall be used and applied for capital outlay projects for educational purposes of the DeKalb County School District, the City Schools of Decatur and Atlanta Independent School System, respectively, as specifically described below.

(a) For the educational purposes of the DeKalb County School District the following capital outlay projects (the “DeKalb County School District Projects”) at a total maximum cost of $607,384,422:

(1) Improvement projects to make reasonable accommodations for the Americans with Disabilities Act at various schools throughout the DeKalb County School District;

(2) Upgrades, including turf installation, at stadiums and renovations to Athletic Facilities and Stadiums including, but not limited to Adams Stadium, Arabia Mountain High School, Avondale Stadium, Cedar Grove High School, Chamblee High School, Clarkston High School, Cross Keys High School, Druid Hills High School, Dunwoody High School, Hallford Stadium, Lakeside High School, Lithonia High School, McNair High School, Miller Grove High School, Martin Luther King Jr. High School, North DeKalb Stadium, and Panthersville Stadium, Redan High School, SW Dekalb High School, Stephenson High School, Stone Mountain High School, Towers High School and Tucker High School.

(3) Capital Renewal Program to include renovations, modifications, and upgrades to existing buildings and facilities that will include, but not be limited to, roofing, plumbing, electrical, HVAC, kitchens and program-driven modifications as needed including, but not limited to Allgood Elementary School, Ashford Park Elementary School, Austin Elementary School, Avondale Elementary School, Avondale Middle School, Bob Mathis Elementary School, Bouie Elementary School, Briar Vista Elementary School, Briarlake Elementary School, Brockett Elementary School, Browns Mill Elementary School, Canby Lane Elementary School, Cary Reynolds Elementary School, Cedar Grove Elementary School, Cedar Grove Middle School, Cedar Grove High School, Chamblee Middle School, Champion Middle School, Chapel Hill Elementary School, Chesnut Elementary School, Clarkston High School, Clifton Elementary School, Columbia Elementary School, Columbia Middle School, Cross Keys High School, DeKalb Elementary School of the Arts, Dresden Elementary School, Drivers Ed N & S, Druid Hills High School, Dunaire Elementary School, Dunwoody High School, Eldridge Miller Elementary School, Evansdale Elementary School, Fairington Elementary School, Flat Rock Elementary School, Flat Shoals Elementary School, Freedom Middle School, Hambrick Elementary School, Hawthorne Elementary School, Henderson Mill Elementary School, Henderson Middle School, Hightower Elementary School, Huntley Hills Elementary School, Idlewood Elementary School, Indian Creek Elementary School, Intl Student Center, Jolly Elementary School, Kelley Lake Elementary School, Kingsley Elementary School, Kittredge Elementary School, Knollwood Elementary School, Laurel Ridge Elementary School, Lithonia Middle School, Livsey Elementary School, Marbut Elementary School, McLendon Elementary School, Meadowview ElementaryMcNair High School, MedlockMeadowview Elementary School, Midway Elementary School, Midvale Elementary School, Miller Grove Middle School, MLK Jr. High School, Montclair Elementary School, Montgomery Elementary School, Murphey Candler Elementary School,Narvie Harris Elementary School, Oakcliff Elementary School, Oak Grove Elementary School, Panola Way Elementary School, Pine Ridge Elementary School, Rainbow Elementary School, Redan Elementary School,Rowland Elementary School, Robert Shaw Elementary School, Rock Chapel Elementary School, Sagamore Hills Elementary School, Salem Middle School, Sam Moss Service Center, Shadow Rock Elementary School, SW DeKalb High School, Snapfinger Elementary School, Stephenson High School, Stephenson Middle School, Stone Mill Elementary School, Stone Mountain Elementary School, Stone Mountain High School, Stone Mountain Middle School, Stoneview Elementary School, Tech South High School, Toney Elementary School, Towers High School, Tucker Middle School, Vanderlyn Elementary School, Wadsworth Elementary School, Warren Technical School, Woodridge Elementary School and Woodward Elementary School.

(4) Modifications and upgrades to existing buildings and facilities to comply with health/safety and other building codes as required by DeKalb County or other local governments;

(5) Modifications, upgrades, and renovations to Coralwood Diagnostic Center;

(6) (5) Development of an Early Learning Center in the Wesley Chapel area to include design, acquisition, construction, renovation, and modification of an existing structure;

(7) (6) Modifications, upgrades, and additions to Avondale Middle School for an Arts School;

(8) Modifications, upgrades, and renovations to Southwest DeKalb High Schoaol and Stone Mountain High School;

(9) (7) Design, construction, renovation, modification, additions to and equipping of replacement elementary buildings and facilities atfor Austin, Fernbank, Gresham Park, Pleasantdale, Peachcrest, Rockbridge and Smoke Rise Elementary Schools, including the acquisition of land and the demolition of all or portions of existing structures, if necessary;

(10) (8) Design, construction, renovation, modification, additions to and equipping of buildings and facilities at Henderson Middle School, including the acquisition of land and the demolition of all or portions of existing structures, if necessary;

(11) (9) Design, construction, renovation, modification, additions to and equipping of buildings and facilities at Redan High School, including the acquisition of land and the demolition of all or portions of existing structures, if necessary;

(12) (10) Acquisition of replacement Chamblee High School pursuant to Qualified School Construction Bonds (QSCB) lease-purchase financing;

(13) (11) Design, construction, renovation, modification, additions to and equipping of replacement buildings and facilities atfor McNair Middle School, including the acquisition of land and the demolition of all or portions of existing structures, if necessary;

(14) (12) Local School Priority Requests, involving minor projects deemed necessary to meet interior and exterior facility needs at various local schools;

(15) (13) Repurpose and/or demolish surplus properties as needed;

(16) (14) Modifications and upgrades to security and life safety systems for existing buildings and facilities, including, but not limited to, camera installation, lighting, intrusion alarm systems, fire alarm systems, closed circuit television, and video recorder installation;

(17) (15) Upgrade classroom technology (including interactive boards, student response systems and projectors), upgrade and refresh to hardware (including desktops, laptops, and servers), software, wireless infrastructure in all schools, digital communication technology (including video conferencing, virtual and learning technologies), enterprise content management solution, upgrade and increase data storage systems, upgrades to telecommunications and implementing a mass notification system;

(18) (16) Acquisition of buses, upgrade bus radio communications to comply with FCC regulations, and GPS reporting equipment and construction of three bus parking locations to serve various schools throughout the DeKalb County School District;

(19) (17) Acquisition of support service vehicles; and

(20) (18) Facility improvement projects throughout the DeKalb County School District, including but not limited to building and site renovations, replacements and demolition; code required renovations and upgrades; HVAC renovations and replacements; roofing repairs and replacements; electrical and low voltage repairs, renovations, and upgrades; technology additions, renovations and upgrades; transportation improvements; environmental and air quality control; and site acquisitions for new facilities.

If imposition of the tax is approved by a majority of the voters within the DeKalb County School District, such vote shall also constitute approval of general obligation debt of the DeKalb County School District in the principal amount not to exceed $150,000,000200,000,000 for the purpose of funding a portion of the DeKalb County School District Projects, including capitalized interest and the costs of issuing such general obligation debt. Such general obligation debt shall bear interest at an interest rate or rates not to exceed ______4 percent per annum as determined by the DeKalb County Board of Education prior to the issuance of such general obligation debt, may be issued from time to time in whole or in part in one or more series and shall mature (serially or, at the option of the DeKalb County Board of Education, by mandatory sinking fund redemption) in the years and amounts as follows:

Maximum Principal Payable in Such Year

2014  $36,655,000 

2015  37,145,000 

2016  37,755,000 

2017  88,445,000

Click here to view the SPLOST IV referendum with mark-ups.
Click here to read the exact text of the referendum on the ballot.
Click here to view the SPLOST IV Capital Planning Powerpoint.
Click here to view the school system's SPLOST IV project list.

There's a Hole in My Bucket, Dear Liza

There's a hole in my bucket, dear Liza, dear Liza,

There's a hole in my bucket, dear Liza, a hole.

Then fix it, dear Henry, dear Henry, dear Henry,

Then fix it, dear Henry, dear Henry, fix it.

My, oh my! What a wonderfully wet week we've had children! Not only did we have four Board members running up the white flag on the superintendent search and the "leakiness" of their peers, we got a view of the fountain of youth that is the next SPLOST IV scope.

The drama of the reveal was breathtaking! What would the fourth down payment on our fantasy trip to a renewed capital plant look like? A lot like the last three is the answer. True, there are a few lucky communities with replacement, neighborhood-scale schools and there's the laundry list of other items that seemed to touch every school in the district.

Wow! Not ...

Besides Nancy Jester's brave 'no' vote, the only part of the entire proceeding that stuck in my head was a pesky image of a bucket full of holes like the one above. The "capital needs" were described as "$3 billion" and the SPLOST IV revenue target of $475 million. I thought, "Wow, that leaves $2.5 billion in unmet needs."

Then I remembered what we had been told by DCSS in past years whenever I asked where Cross Keys' auditorium was in plan: "Kim, we have over $2 billion in needs and only $500 million in SPLOST dollars - no one is getting everything they need and we are spreading it thin." Putting aside the fact that many are, in fact, getting "everything they need," I have been surprised that no one seems to be noticing the SPLOST death spiral we are in as taxpayers.

There are a lot of holes in our capital bucket and the money is running out those holes faster than we can fix them apparently. What are the holes? Too many schools and sites to maintain - way too many properties.

Let me over-simplify this so I can understand it ...

Five or six years ago we had $2 billion in needs. In the ensuing five years, we spent $500 million against this need. This should leave somewhere in the neighborhood of $1.5 billion in need, right? Not according to DCSS this week.

The current line is that we now have $3 billion in identified needs and $475 million to spend in SPLOST IV. What?! Our need more than doubled from $1.5 billion? What's going to happen in SPLOST V? We'll spend $500 million in SPLOST IV against the $3 billion in need leaving $2.5 billion which, if the next period is like the last period, will double to $5 billion in need??

Is our leadership blind or irresponsible or both? That this kind of dynamic can be allowed to persist without addressing the fundamental issue is a massive failure of fiduciary responsibility.

SPLOST has become for taxpayers like one of my favorite movies, "Ground Hog Day," where the protagonist is trapped in the same day over and over again. He says, "Well, what if there is no tomorrow? There wasn't one today." That is how I feel about the current "2020 Vision" and SPLOST IV - there is no tomorrow in these plans today.

When will the madness stop? Unlike for Bill Murray's character, I am afraid not soon for DeKalb taxpayers, not soon ...

Another community rallies for SPLOST project funding

As we move into the time period for promoting SPLOST IV, look for more neighborhood initiatives like the one below. This is as big an issue as redistricting, and many feel that promises have been made in the past that may be slipping away in SPLOST IV. In my experience, this is exactly how all SPLOST spending has gone.

Click here to read the actual proposed referendum. Every category reads "Includes, but not limited to"... Now that is vague and opens up the flood gates for additions and special projects (akin to the gorgeous Palace reno snuck in SPLOST III, which incidentally has another year to go).

Furthermore, as we have stated on the blog in the past, most of us do not plan to support another SPLOST tax unless and until we get highly qualified, trustworthy, ethical leadership in place. We think it is best to wait a year and make a much more structured plan – one that is educationally driven (form follows function, right?)  Make a sound education plan and then let that drive the numbers and types of buildings necessary to complete the task – educating children.


----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Coralwood School
Sent: Wed, June 1, 2011 8:45:37 PM
Subject: Urgent: Coralwood School Needs Your Help!

Dear Friends,

Coralwood School needs your help! For the last 5 years, members of the Board of Education and the Superintendent and the Superintendent's staff (both Lewis and Tyson) have pledged funding to Coralwood for a renovation and additional classrooms that will allow us to better serve the needs of our children. In fact, the County has already funded architectural drawings for this expansion at a cost of nearly $400,000. This project would provide dedicated music and art rooms, a sensory room, therapy space, 8 additional classrooms, renovated bathrooms, a dedicated computer lab and expanded library. Thousands of volunteer-hours have been dedicated to this plan and it is ready to go! Over the last year, members of the Board of Education, Ramona Tyson and Barbara Coleman have all given us their personal promise to see our project through. Now they are reneging on that promise.

This is what we need you to do. Please email the following TODAY and every day through Monday, June 6 (the day of the vote) to Board of Education members, the Interim Superintendent Ramona Tyson; Barbara Colman, Chief Operating Officer; and Dan Drake, Demographer responsible for data collection and reporting.

********************************

Subject: CORALWOOD SCHOOL


1. Coralwood School is an inclusion program that serves children from all over the county and EVERY Board of Education member has children of voting constituents at this school.

2. Our community has worked tirelessly these last 5 years to create an award-winning, model program and have self-funded initiatives to improve the program and facilities, but now we need DCSS to step up to improve our facilities, as promised, so that we can adequately meet the needs of our students.

3. DCSS has already spent, as part of its commitment to the Coralwood expansion, almost $400,000.00 in architectural drawings. Without following through with the complete project, this money spent is evidence of further waste and lack of accountability to tax payers. We demand wise decision-making and fiscal responsibility from DCSS and the BoE.

4. We dispute our utilization number. We are, in fact, at capacity based on the disabilities of children we serve. Our classroom sizes are mandated by law based on our inclusion model and the severity of the disabilities of children placed in the classroom.

5. We dispute the argument that Coralwood has a higher expense per pupil. Federal Special Education funds, not local dollars, cover those additional expenses as required under IDEA to meet the educational needs of disabled students.

6. DCSS is legally required to meet the IEP goals of our students. This is not and has not been the case in providing adequate therapies. Our children have received inadequate services in inadequate space for years in violation of IDEA.

7. You are rushing through this process and not giving the public adequate time to digest and respond to the information, much less considering prior commitments you have made to the children of Coralwood School.

8. Our community will not support SPLOST IV, and will actively campaign against it, unless the funds are made available for the Coralwood project as pledged.

Thank you for fulfilling your commitment to Coralwood School.

Sincerely,

(Your name)

*****************************************
Please make this a priority TODAY and every day through Monday, June 6 before it’s too late! The Board will be voting on SPLOST IV projects Monday, June 6. Ask your neighbors and family members to also email this message on behalf of Coralwood School.

School System Presents Proposed Master Facilities Plan

On Friday, May 27th, Interim Superintendent Ramona Tyson, Interim CIP Operations Officer Barbara Colman, and members of the consulting firm MGT America presented the proposed 2020 Vision Master Facility Plan and SPLOST IV list to the DeKalb Board of Education.

To view the presentation and see the Facility Needs Assessments for each school, click here. Scroll down to Updates and look under Friday, May 27th.

Stakeholders are invited to provide feedback on the SPLOST IV draft project list. The survey closes this Wednesday, June 1st at 11:59 p.m. To take the survey, click here.

The DeKalb Board of Education will continue the discussion about the 2020 Vision and SPLOST IV at a Committee of the Whole meeting this Wednesday, June 1st at 9:30 a.m. at the Administrative and Instructional Complex, 1701 Mountain Industrial Blvd., Stone Mountain, GA. The meeting is open to the public.

The DeKalb Board of Education will hold another Committee of the Whole meeting this Friday, June 3rd at 9:30 a.m. to continue the discussion about the 2020 Vision and SPLOST IV and to receive a copy of the final draft of the Facility Master Plan. It will also be held at the Administrative and Instructional Complex, 1701 Mountain Industrial Blvd., Stone Mountain, GA. The meeting is open to the public.

The Board of Education plans to vote on the SPLOST IV referendum and the Ten Year Facility Master Plan at their monthly Board meeting on Monday, June 6th at 6 p.m.

Please take time to familiarize yourself with the proposals and provide any feedback you have this week.

To view the plans as well as the video of Friday's meeting, click here.

To read an interesting blog post on the subject click here to visit Dunwoody Talk Blog.

Rut-row! Looks like there could be trouble for DCSS and SPLOST IV

Mayor, schools at odds over penny

By Nancy Badertscher and Kristina Torres

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

A potential showdown between Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed and Atlanta Public Schools over a penny in sales tax could jeopardize nearly $1.5 billion worth of school construction, maintenance and technology for the city and surrounding school systems, including Fulton and DeKalb counties.

In an interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Reed said the penny — which over nearly 15 years has helped build or renovate 84 city schools or other buildings, among other projects — instead needs to go to a regional transportation plan expected to be put to voters next year.

The penny is in play because it expires next year. Reed doesn’t want the city school system to seek to renew it as voters also consider the transportation tax. If both were to pass, the city would have the state’s highest sales tax at 9 percent and would be at a competitive disadvantage, the mayor said.

“Obviously, I’m very concerned about renewing the 1 percent sales tax in the city [for education] and then adding another penny,” Reed said.

The showdown looms as the city’s school board must decide whether to join with Fulton, DeKalb and the city of Decatur to ask voters to continue using the 1-cent-on-the-dollar sales tax to fund capital needs. The tax started in 1997 and has been renewed twice. The three other systems, which all want the sales tax to continue, cannot seek a referendum to do that without Atlanta schools’ participation.

Click here to read more.