• Announcements

    • Neo

      WARNING!   07/26/16

      By reading or participating in the Coffee House forum, you are acknowledging that some topics may be highly controversial in nature. While we make every attempt to ensure that no one and no groups are offended as a result of discussions contained within, we unfortunately can make no guarantees. Participate in threads contained within this forum at your own risk.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

monsoon

Upcoming Bond Vote

Will you vote for the Bonds in the Nov Election  

28 members have voted

  1. 1. CMS Bonds to build more schools - $427M

    • No
      12
    • Yes
      13
    • I don't plan to vote
      3
  2. 2. Public Land acquisition - $66M

    • No
      10
    • Yes
      18
    • I don't plan to vote
      0
  3. 3. Facilities for Law Enforcement - $14.5M

    • No
      7
    • Yes
      21
    • I don't plan to vote
      0
  4. 4. CPCC - $46.5M

    • No
      6
    • Yes
      21
    • I don't plan to vote
      1


Recommended Posts

Before you answer these questions, it might be useful to review the details here. Bonds have to be paid back by the taxpayers of the county. Note that each bond issuance ends with with ....and a tax to be levied for the payment thereof, be approved? Like all bonds you are voting to allow additional taxes for these items should the county see fit to levy them.

It's amazing that CMS is asking for bonds this year that equal the cost of the South LRT. I am also surprised the Arts did not manage to get something on the ballot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The last 3 choices yes.....I haven't decided yet on Public Schools......it's hard for me to vote against them, especially with a child in the system, but I'm not sure that there is enough efficiency yet that I can feel the money will be well managed/spent. There may be some fresh school board faces, so I would like to see the bonds delayed one-year and see if any policy/governance changes are made before bonds are approved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No No Yes Yes.

400+ mil is just too much to hand over to the school board. Let's see better cooperation on the board and less bickering.

The other bond packages aren't too onerous. I'll go along with the CPCC improvements. Local high schoolers get a chance to improve themselves after they escape CMS and can make their own choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes yes yes yes.

cpcc probably has the most bang for the buck. they are extremely efficient, and cpcc training often has a direct impact on jobs.

land acquisition is important for giving the local government the chance to use land as an investment, a recruiting tool (such as johnson and wales), and to purchase sites for public projects before all the funding for those projects come through (usually the price of the land reflects the fact the project is approved... so it ends up inflating the cost of public projects).

14.5m isn't that much for law enforcement stuff, and it is terrible when the reason criminals are on the street is lack of space to contain them.

hmmm... cms. ... that money is so important in funding space needs... but if you look at the list of enhancements, schools that grossly overcrowded get just token additions like auditorium changes or library changes. so really, we'll spend half a bbbbbbbillion dollars, and will not even come close to solving the space needs... let alone any of the education or organizational problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

saying no to bonds, which lets the government mortgage their long term needs, means that they must meet their needs with money up front, and thus more taxation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

saying no to bonds, which lets the government mortgage their long term needs, means that they must meet their needs with money up front, and thus more taxation.

I agree, which means accountability for the county comms. They can choose to raise taxes, and we can choose whether we like the individual's view on taxation. Bonds are a back door taxation policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that we all got hit with a 10% tax hike this year. So next year, all of you with mortgages that include the tax payments are going to see at least a 10% increase in the escrow part of your payment. Part of that tax hike is payment on past bonds issued. If you go back over the years, you will see that CMS has been granted several multi-billions in bond money, some of which is unspent, but that we are still paying for never the less. And now they are at the trough asking for even more.

Everytime a bond is issued, the County has to immediatly start making payments to the lender and that money comes right out of the general fund. i.e. the property tax.

The only one of these bonds that I am for is the land acquisition one because it will be used in part to preserve land for the public, and take it out of the hands of the developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but these votes only authorize the bonds. the county does not actually obtain the bonds and start paying on them until they are ready to spend the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but these votes only authorize the bonds. the county does not actually obtain the bonds and start paying on them until they are ready to spend the money.

Which they do as evidenced by the rather substantial tax increase that we got hit with this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The headline story in today's Observer indicateds the Bond vote may most likely be decided by the voters in North Mecklenburg. Ironically not because of the bonds, but instead due to a battle between who will represent school board district 1, the incumbant Larry Gauvrear, or former FUME leader Rhonda Lennon. As a result voter turnout is expected to be fairly high compared to much lower voter turnout in the rest of the county.

Amazingly District 1 has 21,500 new voters in just the past 3 years and is now the county's largest district.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what the prevailing attitude is. I think considering their main problem with CMS is the overcrowding, it would be a mistake to vote down this bond referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my guess is the prevailing attitude is they don't want Charlotte students bused into the North Mecklenburg area which is what is causing the over crowding, not the lack of schools. As I was typing that last message I got a flyer in my mailbox in support of Larry Gauvreau. It gave the following reasons for NOT voting for his opponent that he only referred to as Rhonda.

  • She was endorsed by the Black Political Caucus and The Charlotte Observer

  • Prefers to follow the CMS plan

  • Follows the status quo

Given those comments, you know what this really means though nobody will come out and say it though the flyer added that one of the reasons to vot for Larry Gauvreau was that he would "Expel Thugs and Criminals and vote for Smaller Neighborhood Schools. Larry was one of the set of parents that successfully sued the CMS school system in a decision that went to the Supreme Ct. It eliminated court ordered busing in Mecklenburg county.

Wonder how many more flyers I will get before this election is over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new rule to disallow selection of an overcrowded school for the Choice program should help significantly, then, in North Meck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In typical reporting from the Observer, it misses the fact that CMS has built numerous schools during this period that are under capacity. If they would shift students to these schools, the problem is solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In typical reporting from the Observer, it misses the fact that CMS has built numerous schools during this period that are under capacity. If they would shift students to these schools, the problem is solved.

That is exactly what they are now planning to do.

They use a choice-based system in this county. Originally, they presumed that parents would not choose schools that were over capacity, and that would help solve the problems in part. However, as parents would still rather send their kids to a crowded school because of reputation or whatever other reasons, beginning next year, CMS will not allow new students to select a school that is over capacity.

In some ways, over-crowding isn't that big of a problem. Some schools in CMS are very poorly managed (by central and school administration). In some cases, it is better for students to be in a mobile classroom at a well managed school, than in a poorly managed school under capacity. That has clearly been the choice of many parents. However, it has resulted in some serious overcrowding, so to fix that problem, they will now cap enrollment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how voting "no" is going to solve anything. What does it prove? How will the school system keep up with future growth? Companies are not going to choose to move to a city with terrible, over-crowded schools. Some schools are 200% over capacity, and a lot of schools need some serious renovations and expansion. Everyone knows that this bond is not going to solve all of our problems, but it will help absorb the growth that is expected in the future - without it the entire school system will end up years behind on a bunch of projects, and over the years they will pile up, and a new, huge bond referendum is going to come up that will end up being twice the amount that it is now. If you want to see Charlotte thrive as a city, then I would recommend voting "yes".

This country has its prorieties messed up - everyone wants lower taxes and better roads, but they don't want to pay for toll roads. They want better education for their children but lower expenditures on schools. It just doesn't work that way - nothing "good" is free or cheap. I agree that CMS needs to be more responsible with their money, but by voting "no", it will not prove or solve that problem - it will just make matters worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voting No on the school bonds is the right choice for now. The plan needs to be seriously reorganized.

The parts of the bonds that affect the schools in the poorer areas of town call for athletic fields, no real improvements to the school buildings themselves. Athletics under the guise of Education should not be paid for by taxpayers in ANY instance.

I say, cut the Athletic programs and busing all over the city, make students go to their local schools. Parents that really feel that athletics are necessary should pay for them themselves.

CMS should also try to regain the respect it has lost from the people that send their kids there. No nonsense should be the word of the day. Enact a system wide dress code.

As for the other bonds, YES for Police and YES for CPCC. I am not sure on the second choice, I don't completely understand what it entails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. It is different all together if it is under the Parks and Recreation budget of the city, because that is what athletic facilities are for, recreation. An athletic facility has no educational value. When 40% of a school is on grade level and they spend a great deal on sports, the priorities are certainly out of whack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NC constitution requires public access to sound education, and I suspect that athletics would be bourne out in a court battle as being part of a sound education.

Whether EVERY school needs large athletic fields is another matter. Schools could be designed so that they're close enough to share some facilities.

Back to the bonds, I have some doubts about how effective CMS is in their construction contracting. When Guilford County proposed demolishing Dudley and rebuilding, the local community was aghast that a historic building was about to be demolished. So they got together and put together a removation bid, that was cheaper than new construction.

Could that happen here? I doubt it. The community is too factionalized and CMS management too distant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what i propose is that everyone who plans to vote, check out your district canidates for CMS. vote for the one you think will do a good job. this is truly the best way to show your displeasure @ cms. if you aren't comfortable with any of your choices and vote no on school bonds... i understand. my first instinct was to show CMS my frustration by voting no on their bonds (i have always voted yes)... but i do agree with what nyxmike has to say as well. i mean what is voting no really going to solve. we need new, effective leadership @ cms. if not, i don't think the people will put up with much more... and will break up cms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.