Our Not-Quite School Bond
Perhaps I am somewhat biased. After all, I decided to run for the school board because I was concerned that Stony Rushing’s values did not give pride of place to education. Nevertheless, I find the current fiasco over the referendum being played out (or, rather, not played out) by the Union County Board of Commissioners a shocking embarrassment.
How is it that our elected representatives can be so short sighted as to play politics with the future of the children of Union County? More than most, our schoolchildren need our elected officials to act as public servants. Because they are too young to vote, they have no choice but to trust the adults to act like adults and put the public’s business before their own.
Instead, our County Commissioners – and Stony Rushing in particular – have intentionally missed meetings in order to block the bond from moving forward. This has put the future of our schools at risk and, assuming that this cannot be resolved quickly, has increased the costs Union County will have to pay to have the ballots ready in November.
As far as I can tell, we, the citizens of Union County, have no immediate recourse to deal with this turn of events. We have no choice right now but to worry about whether we will face increased costs to build the new schools we so desperately need and waste money because we cannot tell printers what to print.
We will in November – if we remember what has happened now.
If we want responsible government, we need responsible elected officials. We must not vote for those who have authored this farce – even if we must write in the names of other candidates.
Labels: Education, Local Government
posted by Matt DeForrest @ 7:39 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
It would be funny, a true comedy, if the consequences were not so real. A school bond referendum WILL be held-and these commissioners all know that-but that referendum will now be a special election. This special election will cost in the neighborhood of $50,000 (taxpayer dollars!). Not only have these five commissioners abdicated their responsibility to our children's education, they found a way to waste our money in the process! I guess we can put to bed the notion of the Republican Party as the party of fiscal restraint and responsibility...
Hopefully, the bond issue is finally resolved, and county voters will have the opportunity sooner rather than later to decide on the bond by referendum. I am one who seeks to view the glass as “half-full” rather than “half-empty,” but the large amounts of debt accumulated to build new schools can be a “half-empty” experience. However, there is one aspect of new school construction that excites me. In a bygone era here in Union County, schools were community schools. When larger high schools were built, county school districts became “regional” in nature and the “sense of community” suffered just a bit. Yet, with the construction of new schools, the “regions” break down and a sense of community is returning in the life of local schools. Phillip Schlechty, former assistant superintendent of Char-Meck Schools and former Ed. Prof. at UNC/Chapel Hill, says that a “sense of community” is a needed ingredient that needs to return to public education. May new school construction not only be seen as a necessity to accommodate growth, but with each new school, may we endeavor to create a real sense of community around those new schools.
I cannot think of a more divisive politician than Stony Rushing. He seems to be at his happiest when running down the efforts of others, looking for wedge issues and never having a solution that has any footing in reality.
He has no core values, he twists his Christian faith into a pretzel for in his mind, the ends justifies the means.
The "ends" in Stony's case is always about "him".
We all need to pray for Stony and Union County if he is ever elected again.
I hear a lot of shots at the other side, but no substance of how Matt would do better than Stony. Also, what are some specific occurrences in which Stony's ends for were for his own benefit over that of the people.
I'm still trying to decide who to vote for, but have little information available on the candidates. I see nothing here that points me in the direction to vote for Matt.
Dear Anonymous,
You ask a very fair question: Why should you (or anyone else, for that matter) vote for me? I promise to answer you. Before I do, however, I’d like to say a few words about Stony Rushing, since his name came up in your question.
I disagree with the approach Stony Rushing takes towards education in Union County. He has consistently undervalued educational expenditures and voted for underfunding our schools. I also believe that he takes a much too short-term approach to dealing with education.
When considering your vote for the Unexpired At-Large Seat, I would ask you to weigh three items: our experience, our positions on the issues, and our character.
In terms of experience, I have been in the business of education for about ten years now. I won’t bore you with the biographical material, as you can find it all via the link provided by uncdp-1. I will limit myself to the observation that, as a college professor, I see the products of a large number of school districts every day. I understand what happens when people make good policy decisions and bad policy decisions. For example, many students have begun to arrive at colleges and universities without ever having been asked to write a research paper. The ability to do research is a necessary skill for all students -- not just those who go on for four more years after getting their high school diploma. Citizens need to know how to conduct research in order to participate in their government and understand what candidates stand for and what ballot issues will mean to them. They need to know how to determine if they are paying too much for a house or a car.
This experience will help me deal with some of the issues that are beginning to grow in our community. Union County Public Schools must wrestle with what the best approach to dealing with the End of Grade tests (We do well on them but the tests do not ask our students to perform at the same level most other states require.) and how to guarantee that we continue to meet state and federal standards. I also believe that my background will be a good resource for the Board as we try to decide how to make our schools academically better.
Personally, I would like us to begin by moving to accelerating our own standards -- ideally to the point that our students may end up being a year ahead of where they should be on the tests.
If you have particular issues you would like me to address, I would be happy to do so. You can, however, find a number of my positions outlined on the site offered by uncdp-1.
As to the issue of personal character, I would like to believe that you will find all three of the candidates worthy of your consideration. The primary reason Sharon Gallagher was appointed to be a member of the School Board was her unwavering commitment to and interest in quality education in Union County. That shows good character. Despite our disagreements, there is one position that Stony Rushing has consistently taken that I have the utmost respect for: He is willing to be a part of the process of government and to risk the “slings and arrows” associated with such an endeavor. While I do not agree with most of the other decisions he has made, I praise him for the decision to become actively involved. Such involvement shows character.
In the end, you are making an important decision -- one that should be based on the candidates record and positions. I hope that you find mine to be worthy of your consideration and, perhaps, your vote.
Post a Comment
<< Home