Articles & Press

"The new racial divide in Charlotte", N.C, Toronto Star, February 10, 2008.

"Why uniformity is a step backward" Stirred by Toronto Star feature on resegregation, an alumnus of the high school at the heart of the story reflects on what has been lost

"Speak out for school bonds", Charlotte Observer, June 29, 2007 - Mecklenburg ACTS calls for broad-based effort to address real needs for CMS facilities.

"Wake echoes CMS in test score declines", Charlotte Observer, June 29, 2007 - Fannie Flono discusses test scores.

"Set up by policy to fail", Charlotte Observer, June 28, 2007 - John Young chronicles the plight of a good teacher in a challenging school.

"Gorman moves to decrease class sizes" Charlotte Observer, March 24, 2007

"Big classes at high poverty schools" Charlotte Observer, March 24, 2007 -- Lists high poverty schools with class sizes over 20 students.

"CMS Budget presents big puzzle of needs", Fannie Flono's comments on proposed CMS budget, includes information cost of small class sizes at high-needs schools. Charlotte Observer, March 23, 2007.

Statement to Board of Education delivered by Pamela Grundy on behalf of Mecklenburg ACTS, Public Hearing on proposed CMS Budget, March 27, 2007.

"Equity, not adequacy, needed", Charlotte Observer, March 2, 2007. Pamela Grundy and Carol Sawyer critique the CMS "Report on Adequate Resources and Facililties (Equity)"

"Eyebrows up over CMS's pulled poverty report", Action by Mecklenburg ACTS members cause report to be withdrawn. Charlotte Observer, February 16, 2007

"Outrage Should Lead to Action", Louise Woods on behalf of Mecklenburg ACTS Steering Committee. Charlotte Observer - November 12, 2006

Read our response to the County Commission's failure to pass a plan for renovation and construction of schools here.

Charlotte Observer - July12, 2006 - Meckenburg ACTS response to School Building Solutions Committee

Statement to the County Commission on CMS budget- May 18, 2006

Charlotte Observer, Wed, July 12, 2006

Building for our children
Real CMS needs, construction costs require more public engagement

From Patsy Burkins, Carol Sawyer, Pamela Grundy and Louise Woods of Mecklenburg Area Coming Together for Schools, a group working to build support for equity and excellence in all schools:

We applaud the School Buildings Solutions Committee for affirming our school system's need for both renovation and new construction. Committee members have worked long and hard, and deserve our thanks. But their proposal is only a beginning. The combination of COPs and bonds they propose falls well short of the needs of this rapidly growing and changing school system.

Many projects left off the list are fully as urgent as those which were included. Our community needs a forceful, detailed consensus on the full amount of work to be done and how it can be paid for. We need to start building it now.

When asked which projects were most urgent, CMS facilities planner Mike Raible replied that the question asked him to "split the baby." Do we really want to be in the position of deciding whether it's more important to eliminate overcrowding at some schools or provide adequate science labs at others, or determining which of two severely crowded schools will get relief?

This community must find a way to pay for these other projects in the near future, or risk falling further and further behind. That discussion should begin with a thorough accounting of school costs.

One of the major obstacles school advocates face is the public perception that CMS wastes money. These perceptions are compounded by those who urge the system to build schools cheaper and faster without offering a fact-based analysis of how this might be done.

For example, advocates of cheaper schools frequently toss out the suggestion of recycling empty buildings. But there is little evidence that using such buildings will provide the same level of service while also saving money. In addition, Mecklenburg County's empty buildings are rarely located in the fast-growing suburban communities that need new schools. Even if converting empty big-box stores to schools would save money, would it be enough to offset the cost of transporting students long distances to attend them?

The Martin committee offers some criteria for analyzing efforts to reduce construction costs. These should not sink into oblivion. We believe three questions are especially important:
1. How would a different set of standards affect educational opportunities? Are we willing to sacrifice the idea that all children deserve adequate science labs, auditoriums and athletic fields?
2. Would long-term costs trump short-term savings? Would a less expensive air-handler cost more to maintain?
3. Will we take full advantage of the opportunity to save money by the proven method of purchasing and using land together with libraries and parks and recreation facilities?

Even if the school system reached the 10 percent cost savings that the committee suggested, those savings would still not meet the system's needs. Community leaders are understandably concerned about the effect school building projects have on property tax rates. We must actively investigate alternate sources of funding, such as impact fees. Politics should not get in the way of the real needs of children.

We believe our facility issues can and must be a unifier. We must work for all children to attend school in the best possible conditions. This community must analyze the real needs and the real costs of school renovation and construction.

Our new superintendent has called for community members to do the very real work of helping push our school system towards its goals. This is one place to start.

For The Record offers commentaries from various sources. The views are the writer's, and not necessarily those of the Observer editorial board. For informaton about Mecklenburg ACTS, go to www.mecklenburgacts.org.

>> top