Maureen Downey has done a good job of publishing on her Get Schooled blog the two sides of the “Vote Yes” or “Vote No” on the E-SPLOST project list.
Six reasons DeKalb school board should approve new E-SPLOST project list Monday
By Allyson Gevertz
On Monday, the DeKalb Board of Education will be asked to approve the Education-Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax V (E-SPLOST V) project list, determining how $500 million in tax dollars will be spent. In May, DeKalb County residents voted overwhelmingly (71 percent voted ‘yes’) to continue paying a special purpose one-cent sales tax dedicated to school improvements.
1) Superintendent Green has earned our trust. DeKalb voters overwhelmingly approved the sales tax without a detailed project list in advance …
2) The list addresses needs, not wants. Under the old model of determining E-SPLOST funding priorities, school board members looked at their own districts and advocated for projects based on geography …
3) The project list is based on superior data and unprecedented community input. Development of an objective project list began long before the E-SPLOST V referendum. As early as summer 2015 …
4) The project list is not set in stone. The proposed list can be modified. This gives Superintendent Green and his team greater problem-solving flexibility …
5) This is not redistricting. Any redistricting will be a separate process, involving public hearings, beginning at least one year before new schools/additions open …
6) Citizens can influence the 2022 projections and funding needs. If DeKalb citizens demand county and city leaders work with the district to help schools keep pace with growth, it could have a major impact on E-SPLOST V spending plans …
Continue Reading Here >>
1) Superintendent Green has earned our trust. DeKalb voters overwhelmingly approved the sales tax without a detailed project list in advance …
2) The list addresses needs, not wants. Under the old model of determining E-SPLOST funding priorities, school board members looked at their own districts and advocated for projects based on geography …
3) The project list is based on superior data and unprecedented community input. Development of an objective project list began long before the E-SPLOST V referendum. As early as summer 2015 …
4) The project list is not set in stone. The proposed list can be modified. This gives Superintendent Green and his team greater problem-solving flexibility …
5) This is not redistricting. Any redistricting will be a separate process, involving public hearings, beginning at least one year before new schools/additions open …
6) Citizens can influence the 2022 projections and funding needs. If DeKalb citizens demand county and city leaders work with the district to help schools keep pace with growth, it could have a major impact on E-SPLOST V spending plans …
Continue Reading Here >>
.
.
Five reasons DeKalb board should vote ‘no’ on sales tax construction list
By Andrew Flake
In considering a hasty sign-off on the current staff-recommended E-SPLOST V project list, the DeKalb Board of Education is poised to make a big mistake.
Specifically, the Category 2 project list — which contains recommendations for massive capacity additions to certain high schools — runs counter to what most of the county wants. It is based on bad and flawed data and predicated on planned student moves that would violate board policy and legal requirements.
Among the reasons to reject the proposed plan, and at a minimum to defer vote on the capital building construction portion, are:
1. The proposed plan undermines community-based schools. DCSD noted that the standard high school size was 1,600, with “ideal capacity” utilization of 85 percent to 100 percent. In other words, 1,360 to 1,600 student enrollment is an ideal range. Suddenly, however, as of Sept. 7, staff are proposing construction of mega-schools of 2,100 students …
2. The development process for the proposed plan/Option B provided no fair analysis of alternative options. As a notable example, one logical potential answer to the supposed overcrowding the district is projecting would be building a new high school in the City of Doraville …
3. We have insufficient data. It is far from the case that the project list – and certainly the secondary school construction portion – is based on “superior data.” The district admits it completely failed to formally engage with the county and to coordinate in any fashion on traffic or other impact studies …
4. The public input process has been severely flawed and non-transparent. So poorly was the information shared with the wider community, that scores of attendees at the post-Sept. 27 community input sessions (including Columbia High School and Chamblee High School) were forced to raise their hands by the dozens and note they did not have sufficient information to offer further opinions even at that late stage …
5. The district is proposing unlawful redistricting that would contravene its own policies. The proposed plan contains hundreds of “assumed student moves” that, expressed in plainer English, mean redistricting. The proposal would pull 250 students out of Lakeside High School and, in violation of the district’s Policy AD …
Continue Reading Here >>
Specifically, the Category 2 project list — which contains recommendations for massive capacity additions to certain high schools — runs counter to what most of the county wants. It is based on bad and flawed data and predicated on planned student moves that would violate board policy and legal requirements.
Among the reasons to reject the proposed plan, and at a minimum to defer vote on the capital building construction portion, are:
1. The proposed plan undermines community-based schools. DCSD noted that the standard high school size was 1,600, with “ideal capacity” utilization of 85 percent to 100 percent. In other words, 1,360 to 1,600 student enrollment is an ideal range. Suddenly, however, as of Sept. 7, staff are proposing construction of mega-schools of 2,100 students …
2. The development process for the proposed plan/Option B provided no fair analysis of alternative options. As a notable example, one logical potential answer to the supposed overcrowding the district is projecting would be building a new high school in the City of Doraville …
3. We have insufficient data. It is far from the case that the project list – and certainly the secondary school construction portion – is based on “superior data.” The district admits it completely failed to formally engage with the county and to coordinate in any fashion on traffic or other impact studies …
4. The public input process has been severely flawed and non-transparent. So poorly was the information shared with the wider community, that scores of attendees at the post-Sept. 27 community input sessions (including Columbia High School and Chamblee High School) were forced to raise their hands by the dozens and note they did not have sufficient information to offer further opinions even at that late stage …
5. The district is proposing unlawful redistricting that would contravene its own policies. The proposed plan contains hundreds of “assumed student moves” that, expressed in plainer English, mean redistricting. The proposal would pull 250 students out of Lakeside High School and, in violation of the district’s Policy AD …
Continue Reading Here >>
“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.”