Category Archives: SPLOST

Chamblee Magnet Program

Posted on July 13, 2016 by | 43 comments

Any truth to the rumor of moving the magnet program from Chamblee Middle and Chamblee High?

Steering Committee Meetings
In June, the Secondary School Facility Planning and Feasibility Study did its final round of public input sessions with a series of five Regional Steering Committee meetings. These committees consisted of two representatives from each of the forty middle and high schools included in the study.
Contact your school or governance council to find out who from your school attended and how the meetings went.
These meetings gave the regional steering committee members an opportunity to discuss possible options to address the middle and high school capacity concerns. Feedback from these meetings will be used to generate a single option that will be presented at the final public input meeting on August 23 & August 25, 2016.
Steering Committee Meeting Presentation
The steering committees discussed the purpose of the Secondary School Facility Planning & Feasibility Study along with the problems they are trying to solve. An update was given on where they are in the process and the E-SPLOST V funds available.
They studied and discussed the pros and cons of the following four potential options to address current and pending capacity needs. From these four options, over the next few weeks, the steering committee members will put together and recommend one (unchanged or modified) option to take to the public at the 3rd and final round of public input on Aug 23 and Aug 25 .
Options Developed To Address Capacity Needs

Option 1 New Cluster Approach
• Builds new high school & new middle school
• Adds classroom additions at Lakeside HS & Clarkston HS
• Adjusts attendance zones as needed
Option 2-A Expanding Existing Capacity
• No new schools
• Adds classroom additions to numerous overcrowded schools
• Adjusts attendance zones as needed
Option 2-B Expanding Existing Capacity & Relocate Chamblee Magnet Program
• No new schools
• Adds classroom additions to numerous ocercrowded schools
• Relocates Chamblee MS/HS Magnet Programs to Southwest DeKalb cluster
• Adjusts attendance zones as needed
Option 3 Utilize Existing Capacity
• Builds new middle school
• Converts Henderson MS to high school
• Converts Towers HS to middle school
• Adds classroom addition to Clarkston HS
• Re-opens Avondale MS
• Extensive attendance zone changes

Round 3 Public Input Meetings:

  • Tues, Aug 23 @ 6:30pm in the auditorium at Clarkston HS
  • Thurs, Aug 25 @ 6:30pm in the gymnasium at Cross Keys HS

Secondary School Facility Planning and Feasibility Study
The study will identify the challenges and opportunities facing each middle school and high school, determine options to address the needs identified, and prepare regional master plans to implement the options. The regional master plans will be presented to the Board of Education for approval as input for the development of the 2017-2022 E-SPLOST program.
The study will review feeder patterns, re-clustering attendance areas, additions to schools and new/replacement schools.
Input From Stakeholder Meetings & Online Survey
• Build middle and high school in Region 1 – “Doraville cluster”
• Add capacity to Dunwoody HS and Peachtree MS
• Rezone Clarkston HS to relieve overcrowding, or create 9th Grade Center, and improve transportation for those closer to Redan HS
• Utilize former Briarcliff site. High School? 9th Grade Center? Middle School?
Magnet program?
• Relocate magnet/curricular programs from Regions 1 & 2 to 4 & 5
• Use Druid Hills MS and Avondale MS/HS as cluster to relieve Lakeside/Clarkston
• Merge DSA & DESA into one facility, and/or relocate to Region 4 or 5
• Create STEM middle & high for Stone Mountain area?
• Standardize grade levels for choice programs to provide clear K-12 path.
Emerging Facility Considerations From Stakeholder Feedback

Pros & Cons
Planning and Feasibility Study Options
July 25, 2016 – Committees consisting of steering committee members and two representatives from each of the forty middle and high schools studied and discussed these pros and cons of the four potential options to address current and pending capacity needs.

Cost Estimates
Planning and Feasibility Study Options
July 20, 2016 – Based on 2022 enrollment projections, the Steering Committee discussed these Cost Estimates for the four potential options to address current and pending capacity needs.

DeKalb Secondary School Facility Planning and Feasibility Study
July 18, 2016 – The study will identify the challenges and opportunities facing each middle school and high school, determine options to address the needs identified, and prepare regional master plans to implement the options. Here are the problems, the funds and the options.

Chamblee Magnet Program – Is it moving?
July 13, 2016 – Any truth to the rumor of moving the magnet program from Chamblee Middle and Chamblee High? Steering committees discussed the pros and cons of the following four potential options to address current and pending capacity needs.

43 Comments

Posted in SPLOST

County SPLOST Proposal – Unacceptable

Posted on July 7, 2016 by | 1 comment

Stan Jester
DeKalb County
Board Of Education

The DeKalb County Board of Commissioners will soon decide whether or not to bring another 1% sales tax referendum to the voters for a DeKalb County SPLOST. This money is supposed to be used to fund capital improvement projects across the county.

However, the chair of the Citizen Advisory Committee, David Sjoquist, said,“If the facility was located near a municipality, we took it off the list. We weren’t interested or willing to spend unincorporated area money, which is what the SPLOST is, on services in municipalities.”
So, Fire Stations located within the city limits of any city have been removed from the Final SPLOST Project List no matter their current state of disrepair even though the sales tax is county wide and everybody in DeKalb County pays 2.75 mills for fire services.
At this rate, I hope the county doesn’t decide to stop picking up the trash in cities too. Here are Commissioner Nancy Jester’s thoughts on the County SPLOST project list.

Commissioner Nancy Jester

County SPLOST Proposal – Unacceptable
By: Nancy Jester, DeKalb County Commissioner

I have been asked to share my thoughts on the proposed SPLOST list. In its current form, the proposed SPLOST list is unacceptable to me. To sum up why:

  • The county’s current proposed SPLOST project list is filled with “wants” while shortchanging “needs”.
  • Less than 50% of the SPLOST list is focused on the original intent of the legislation – funding road paving and infrastructure repairs.
  • The current SPLOST list proposes to use almost 10% of all SPLOST collections to fund a new, large government center complex.

Here’s how your sales tax in DeKalb is currently assessed:
DeKalb Sales Tax is 7%. Here’s the breakdown:
4% is a State of Georgia sales tax
1% is an Education SPLOST that goes to the DeKalb school district
1% is a tax that goes to MARTA
1% is a HOST (80% goes to property tax relief / 20% goes to infrastructure funding)
7% Sales Tax in DeKalb
So – why is there a proposal to add another penny?
The 2014 DeKalb County Operations Task Force recommended that our DeKalb County Legislative Delegation pass a bill allowing for the county to call a referendum to correct a growing inequity in the distribution of the HOST tax proceeds. Increasingly, due to the way the funding formula works, the majority of that 20% for infrastructure was going to cities. The county struggled with the loss of these funds and road maintenance suffered. The motivation behind the legislation (HB 215) that allows for the SPLOST referendum was:

  1. To give even more property tax relief to homeowners (convert the HOST property tax penny to 100% property tax relief) and,
  2. To create more infrastructure funding by adding another penny sales tax – all subject to the approval of voters in a countywide referendum.

Why I oppose the current SPLOST proposal:
In theory I favor replacing property tax with sales tax. I am also sympathetic to the unfortunate skew in HOST fund distribution. I am strongly in agreement with the motivation of legislators to help fund a robust road paving program. Sadly, as the county prepares the referendum question for the ballot, the proposed list of SPLOST projects has grown to include pet projects and monuments to government bureaucracy. This includes new parks, libraries, and an exceedingly large new government center – a Taj Mahal monument to ineffective government.
In addition to mission creep in the SPLOST list, important and defensible public safety improvements receive less funding than needed. Our police and fire departments both need new training facilities, yet SPLOST only proposes to fund 40% of this need. Fire Stations located within the city limits of any city have been removed no matter their current state of disrepair. Keep in mind, most fire stations within city limits serve areas that include multiple jurisdictions including multiple cities and unincorporated DeKalb. You should also note that you pay fire service tax to the county to protect life and property even as the county refuses to build or rebuild stations that are necessary to protect you.
I hope that elected officials in the county, the cities, and our legislature won’t be distracted by or focused on “wants” but rather “needs” as they evaluate the SPLOST proposal. I hope that our partners in city government won’t support a county referendum that provides them a new source of tax dollars for their city while burdening DeKalb’s taxpayers in all of the county, including cities, with a project as wasteful as a new government center. I hope that all elected officials will understand the county must focus on repairing the broken infrastructure that everyone must endure instead of adding more capital (Government Centers, parks, libraries, etc.) to an inventory of assets that are already poorly maintained.
We can consider a SPLOST that is serious about paving roads and addressing public safety. We must adhere to the original rationale for this proposal – paving and repairing roads and infrastructure. I will not support a SPLOST, raising your taxes, to fund pork barrel spending of any sort.

 

Related Links

1 Comment

Posted in Nancy Jester, SPLOST