Sex, Lies And Educrats
MIDLANDS SCHOOL DISTRICT CAN’T SEEM TO COME CLEAN
FITSNews - July 5, 2008 - It’s been a sweltering summer of discontent for one Midlands-area South Carolina school district, and the heat doesn’t seem likely to subside anytime soon.
Beset by declining academic marks, embarrassed by negative national press over the status of a gay-inclusive club and caught artificially inflating their supposed “overcrowding” problem, the district is now facing the loss of yet another leader due to personal issues - all of this while attempting to sell voters on the need for a $250 million bond referendum.
After dismissing its previous superintendent three years ago for allegedly having an affair with a teacher, a high-profile sex scandal is once again plaguing Lexington-Richland School District Five - and this one couldn’t come at a worse time for the beleaguered administration.
The current scandal involves district superintendent Scott Andersen - who just last month had to fend off rumors that he was stepping down from his post - and elementary school principal Melissa Cole. According to numerous sources within the district, the pair’s romantic involvement has already cost Andersen his job - but school board members are hoping to “sweep the affair under the rug” until after the November referendum when they can dismiss Andersen at their leisure.
Andersen’s wife, Bernice, and the couple’s seven children have already left South Carolina and returned to Utah. Also, the Superintendent’s home in the lakeside community of Chapin, S.C., is up for sale.
News of the scandal began circulating like wildfire within the district last month, when school board members met privately with Andersen to discuss the situation but decided to keep him on the job until after the referendum, telling newspaper reporters they wished to “respect his privacy” regarding what Andersen’s own spokesman termed “rumors circulating in the community.”
Publicly, however, Andersen is at the heart of a much bigger and much more expensive alleged manipulation - an apparent attempt to deliberately overstate the projected growth of the district’s student population and make it appear that his schools are more overcrowded than they actually are.
According to figures obtained from district officials, Andersen and his school board allies appear to be intentionally inflating these figures to convince a skeptical public of the need for a referendum that has twice been rejected at the polls over the last three years.
Literally within months, astronomically-high numbers seem to be appearing out of nowhere, with no connection to anything other than the district’s desire for more money.
For example, according to Lexington-Richland Five’s official estimates, the population of Irmo High School is supposed to expand from 2,012 students this year to 4,041 students over the next decade - a dramatic projected increase that is considerably higher than what the district itself estimated as recently as three months ago.
But there’s no historical data to back up such an estimate. In fact, over the past fifteen years - which have seen tremendous growth in the Midlands suburb which is served by Irmo - the school’s population has only increased by 85 students.
Asked to explain their 2000-student increase, the district could not provide an answer, and said that the justification for their growth figures was “a rhetorical question that no one can answer.”
Of course, the district itself projected much more conservative growth rates as recently as April of this year, when Andersen sent an e-mail to his staff pegging Irmo’s projected growth at 650 students over the next five years.
And previously, in November of 2007, Andersen had said the school’s population would grow by only 400 students over the next decade.
Amazingly, not even the low-end of Andersen’s figures appear to be on the mark, as the five elementary schools which feed into Irmo High have all shown declining enrollment figures over the past five years.
In fact, the total enrollment for these five schools declined by 250 students last year alone.
But the deception doesn’t stop with estimates for future growth, it extends to how the district is managing its current student population - shoving more and more of them into portables despite glaring discrepancies between the actual student population and the core capacity the district’s schools are designed to manage.
Architecturally, the current core capacity for Lexington-Richland Five’s schools is 21,200 students - which is well above the district’s current student population of 16,505. Additionally, the student population this year is actually less than it was last year - by about 70 students.
Yet for some reason, the district spent $1.3 million this year on 22 portable classrooms - 17 of which went to the Irmo cluster of schools, which actually lost about 300 students from last year’s enrollment. These portables, of course, are displayed prominently right out in the front of the school as a way to showcase the “pressing need” for additional facilities.
Students we spoke with at Irmo High School do still say they feel “squeezed” in the current facility, as do students at Dutch Fork High School.
In fact, there was visible congestion in the Dutch Fork hallways on both of our visits to that campus.
So what gives? How can a district’s facilities be bursting at the seams despite a contracting student population?
Several teachers we spoke with told us that the overcrowding problem has been exacerbated by district policies designed to reduce available teaching space.
Specifically, the addition of state-supported 4K programs, creative student-teacher ratio adjustments and the allocation of ninety minutes per day for each classroom to be used exclusively for “teacher planning” have combined to cut the percentage of available classroom space - necessitating the “need” for portable classrooms.
“That leaves about 25% of classrooms vacant and creates the need for more classrooms, hence more portables and the perception of an overcrowded school,” says Kim Murphy, a local parent who has repeatedly challenged the district to come clean with its numbers.
Speaking of numbers, after posting “excellent” absolute ratings from 2003-2006 on its state-issued report cards, last year saw Lexington-Richland Five slip to “good.” Additionally, the district’s improvement rating dropped to “unsatisfactory” last year.
Not surprisingly, the district blames those losses on inadequate facilities for a growing student population - despite the fact that the numbers do not support those claims.
So what is the driving force behind the $250 million referendum being sought by Lexington-Richland Five?
Well, pushing the spending plan again this year are powerful local developers who have a direct stake in placing new schools next to their planned subdivisions. These interests - led by the Mungo Company - have bankrolled the last two pro-referendum campaigns, which have invariably outspent their opposition by considerable margins.
District administration leaders also serve as the referendum’s cheerleaders, devoting a whole section of their taxpayer-funded website to a “Fact or Fiction” page designed to drum up support for the referendum.
Fortunately, voters aren’t buying the spin.
Last year’s $256 million referendum was defeated 56-44%, and a $230 million referendum two years earlier was defeated with over two-thirds of the vote.
Will they be successful this year?
With Andersen ethically-compromised and his numbers failing to compute, signs point to “No.” But count on them to keep putting the referendum on the ballot year after year, anyway.
Comments
By That's spelled... on July 5th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
AndersEn.
Nothing wrong with the keyboard.
By UnderHouseArrrest-Lexington on July 5th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
You can bet your a55 Donnie Myers and Legal Tediums, Inc., are involved in this — tighten the noose around his neck!!!
……..
At any rate, we knew you wouldn’t let us down Sic Willie! We Heart You and Mrs. Sic!
[What a woman she must be -- to live amicably with you!!!]
By UnderHouseArrest-Lexington on July 5th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Grammar Patrol
By Confused on July 5th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
I just don’t get it - manipulation of the true situation like this would never fly in the real world. I mean, if I’m running a business and need investors to chip in more to expand the operation, I would need definitive numbers for justification of my request. And, if I inflated my numbers to get what I wanted, I would be in a whole lot of trouble if caught - possible job termination or legal problems that could lead to jail. Why do public officials so often do things like this and avoid consequences like we face in the private sector?
By UnderHouseArrest-Lexington on July 5th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Legal Patrol, pls delete 1st comment
By Calhoun Fawls on July 5th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
This is bullshit. If you want to oppose the ballot, fine. I would probably be with you on that. But, the personal stuff, what’s that about. Are you really that pathetic or just not gettin’ enough so you have to think about how everybody else is gettin’ what you ain’t.
Ah, the clean tactics of the Sanford people.
By Silence Dogood on July 6th, 2008 at 1:52 am
Great story! Now if we can just get some attribution on the quotes, sources for the numbers, and documentation for the claims it looks like the bond request is going down the tubes.
I am not saying there isn’t a story here, but attribute quotes, numbers, claims and other information to a source.
By Tom on July 6th, 2008 at 5:49 am
Great post.
This is classic “old government” at work. Not just school admin, but “old” government.
These people can not separate themselves from their appointed mission, and therefore they become one, and the whole thing becomes a mess.
Good work married guy Will. The State will publish the same article in 2011…so until then I am thankful for your efforts.
By Deidre on July 6th, 2008 at 5:55 am
AnderSIN
By tax-pay-poor on July 6th, 2008 at 6:20 am
“Following an evaluation of Superintendent Scott Andersen in an executive session at last week’s meeting, the District 5 School Board agreed to increase his salary by 3.85%, bringing his annual pay to $166, 296.” (NIN)
Is that pay increase for his GIGANTIC alimony and child support payments he will be making???
By H.Melville on July 6th, 2008 at 6:32 am
TRUTH IS IN THINGS, AND NOT IN WORDS
D5 Staff -
We are in the home stretch of this school year. Only 16 days left!!!
I am letting you know that we have updated information about enrollment, facilities and a potential future bond referendum on our facilities website: http://www.lex5.k12.sc.us/about.cfm?subpage=38. If you click on “PRESENTATION”, you will see the updated material. Here is a direct link to the presentation: http://www.lex5.k12.sc.us//files/filesystem/Enrollment, Projection and Other Ref Info 2008.pdf.
The update includes information about the financial of a potential referendum this fall. One of the option shows a referendum total of $243 million. Depending upon the length of the payback for the bond, the cost per $100K home would be either ONLY $14 per year for a 20 year pay back or $0 for a 25-year pay back.
I hope you find the information helpful. Please don’t hesitate to let me know if you have questions or comments.
Have a terrific day!
Scott
By Observer on July 6th, 2008 at 6:34 am
The older I grow the more I distrust the familiar doctrine that age brings wisdom.
H. L. Mencken
By HoraceMann on July 6th, 2008 at 6:44 am
Evil and good are God’s right hand and left.
By porti on July 6th, 2008 at 6:49 am
“Mormons have nothing whatsoever to do with this polygamous sect in Texas. The fact is that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints officially discontinued the practice of polygamy in 1890: 118 years ago. It’s a significant part of our distant past, not of our present”
Has AnderSIN read this?
By seeker of truth on July 6th, 2008 at 6:52 am
New motto for District 5
“Scientific truth is marvelous, but moral truth is divine and whoever breathes its air and walks by its light has found the lost paradise.”
By seeker of truth on July 6th, 2008 at 6:53 am
Unfaithfulness in the keeping of an appointment is an act of clear dishonesty. You may as well borrow a person’s money as his time.
By The TOMESTER on July 6th, 2008 at 6:56 am
As one who “singlehandedly defeated” Hampton One’s bond referendum last fall (not my words), I see the same thing in all these school districts. The District offices can (and with our tax money, will) say anything that makes the situation look dire.
In Hampton One we have an aging school that truly needs to be replaced. But the district, seeing an opportunity brought on by the school funding shift, swung for the fences, and turned a $15M school into a $30M referendum. And tried to sell doom and gloom the the 10,000 or so folks who would have to pay for it. And because we are rural, and are economically depressed , a much smaller number of property owners would actually be paying for this boondoggle.
Fortunately, despite a miserable turnout, the referendum was handily defeated. So soundly, in fact, the Superintendent found it was a good time to move on.
It’s not over, though: there’s a new, local-grown superintendent with legislative experience. Wish us luck.
By seeker of truth on July 6th, 2008 at 7:13 am
#17- The rural schools in our state definitely need an overhauling. Ultimately it is the children that are being affected the most. Your need is valid. Lex. 5 are also in valid need of change too. Change in ADMINISTRATION. The best way to fix the problem in our district is to fix the existing schools that are in desperate need of restructuring. The Board should have gone with the two-question ballot.
By DistrictWon'tBackDown on July 6th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Oxymoron:
Referendum: Referendumb
T.Petty: S.AndersEn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isKvVN8MXC8
Is this Petty? ………………. getting too deep
By Hillacrat & Shameless!!! on July 6th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Hey You — District 5:
Hillary Clinton has the rights to this
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isKvVN8MXC8]
song — including all power, rebel-yell-in-your-face angst, and associated glory until after the DNC in Denver in August. Got it?
You Have Been Herein Thusly Warned.
By teacherfriend on July 7th, 2008 at 10:08 am
I agree with #18 — two question ballot. One question on whether to build new schools in the most rural part of our district (next to land Mungo owns) and one question on whether to renovate and add on designed classrooms to existing schools. Don’t count on the board budging. It’s all about getting the 3 new schools and getting 50% of the voters plus 1.
By windowofopportunity on July 7th, 2008 at 10:14 am
For a computer wiz, Andersen can’t even get the link right on his own mass email. Thanks for posting it, #11. Incidentally, that email was sent to all of D5 staff on May 14 and the link should be: http://www.lex5.k12.sc.us//files/filesystem/Enrollment,%20Projection%20and%20Other%20Ref%20Info%202008.pdf page 6 to see Irmo High projection as 650 in 5 years.
“Honest, open and transparent” are Andersen’s words describing himself at his very first board meeting in D5 and then again in other venues. Ha! Did you catch his “not-so-honest” statement in his email seen in post #11? “Depending upon the length of the payback for the bond, the cost per $100K home would be either ONLY $14 per year for a 20 year pay back or $0 for a 25-year pay back.” Try again Andersen.
The Board approved the first option, but it’s not as Andersen states. The truth… if you voters approve this Bond Referendum, your debt service will be $14 MORE than the $196 per $100K home for 20 years you are already paying now - not “ONLY $14″ as he says so matter-of-factly. But wait a minute… He also fails to tell you the most important fact… most of that $196 that you’re paying now will go away because… in March of next year ALL YOUR DEBT WILL BE PAID OFF. Tricky, tricky.
Do you think he’s not telling you how much the Bond Referendum will really cost you because he’s afraid you might not vote for it? (He, Robert Gantt, Ed White and their buddy Mungo really want these new schools.)
And when is he going to tell you how much your taxes will go up to pay to operate them?
By windowofopportunity on July 7th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
And then this appeared 15 days later. Now Irmo High will have 2,000 MORE kids in the next ten years???http://www.lex5.k12.sc.us//files/filesystem/Enrollment%20and%20Capacity%20Slides.pdf page 5
By Believe It Not (a.k.a. Sic Willie's Stalker) on July 9th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
sic(k) willie, you’re low-ness in attacking children knows not bounds. It seems silly to go down this road. You’ve admitted taking money from those in that school district who attack children’s future.
Shame, sic(k) willie. How much are they paying you to attack kids?
By Believe BIN Not on July 10th, 2008 at 5:52 am
BIN -
How you think raising the questionable morals of an individual leader is “an attack on kids” amazes me.
By rick on July 10th, 2008 at 6:16 am
Lets see, The voters say no, the school district comes back, the voters say no….yep you’re right sic willie you devil, its all about the kids. and the contractors and the teachers and the union and the damn this could get boring.
By constituent on July 11th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
Still waiting for the district to come clean- it is the right thing to do- we trust you
By Another teacher friend on July 13th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Fits - For the sake of the children - thanks. Our so-called “leaders” need to be exposed when it gets to this point. Bogus presentations meant to mislead - inappropriate relationships… We teach “character education” in this district. Quoted from Board Policy IDBC -
“The district believes that the home is the primary source of moral, ethical and religious instruction and that the role of the school is to support and reinforce the importance of the character traits inherent in these teachings. To be effective, character development needs to be evident in the entire school district at every level. …these traits should be demonstrated, modeled and supported by the words, actions and deeds of all employees and official representatives of the district including the members of the board.”
By Jack Spratt on July 14th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Ohhh yall are just being too hard on Andersen and Coles. Look, it is simple, as a supervisor how do you give an inexperienced, young female teacher the principal role at the largest and newest elementary school in the district and make the situation good?
Of course you take a hands on approach. You get on top of the situation and you push and push and push until your satisfied. But I guess only Melissa knows if it was micro management….or if in the end his involvement left a bad taste in her mouth. What is odd is her husbands promotion YEEEOUCH…. :0 I don’t even want to know about that arraignment LOL
By abc on July 14th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Is this AndersEn’s solution to meeting the growth projections he reported? Got to give him credit for innovative thinking. Too bad his wife took like 7 kids out of the district. He better get busy if he wants to hit his target number.
By D5 Supporter on July 14th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
This is a travesty. District 5 continues to excel in EDUCATION. District 5 continues to educate our children and strives to REMAIN one of the best in the nation. These outrageous lies are vindictive. The persons responsible for initiating and perpetuating these myths should look at THEMSELVES. There are those out there that don’t care who they hurt - children, an administrator, a family/families in crisis… wholly for their own gains. How dare anyone make these accusations and let them bring forth the burden of FACT. They cannot, because this is a horrible display of people in a feeding frenzy of lies organized by political sharks.
By D5 Supporter II on July 14th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
D5 Supporter,
Take off your rose-colored glasses and look at the facts. The only way to better this district is face them and clean it up. Family/families in crisis IS sad. And if the accusations of inpropriety are true, it’s too bad the adults in leadership positions made such poor choices or even went as far as putting themselves in positions that are the least bit improper.
By spring hill resident on July 15th, 2008 at 7:37 am
Seems odd Andersen would be parked in a wooded area in a panel van during work hours. Get out of the van in a pair of shorts and t-shirt, look around cautiously and then proceed to walk a mile back to his house. Worse yet a Chapin student and Mom saw it and thought what’s going on here…. I think Jimmy Buffet has a song titled like that “You call it jogging, I call it runnin’ around”
By laying-down-on-the-job on July 15th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Maybe Jack Spratt is right above…. Maybe the real issue is with Coles? If DS Supporter is right AndersEn is doing a great job and Coles just got picked out…. Now why is that? Why if it is false would someone target Melissa Coles? Has she acted in a manner in the past that would have made her a target? I would love to hear why she was picked out if the story isn’t true.
By just say yes on July 16th, 2008 at 7:38 am
All this controversy really puts a new meaning behind saying yes to AnderSIN and the board. IF Melissa said yes to Scott and that is what she got think what would happen if we say yes to the board.
Where is the rest of the school board on this topic? Hiding behind some personal reasons for the sell of his house. A simple, “this is not true” statement from the board would be nice to hear. They like the fact fiction thing at the school so here lets see if they can fill this in
Fact: Andersen’s house is for sell
Fact: Andersen was seen by a Chapin student getting out of a van in wooded area around 4 oclock on a Thursday. Saw him walk 8 tenths of a mile to his house and then saw the wife show up later. Behavior was odd enough that she told her parents.
Fact: Andersen’s wife has left with 7 children
Fact: Cole’s husband left Melissa
Fact: Cole’s husband was promoted to assistant principal
An official response from the board would clear this all up. BTW if the allegations are true and the board is covering for little Scotty then they are as culpable of the impropriety as he is.
By s.carolina.gal on July 18th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Shame on the Builders? Really?
You say shame on builders like Mungo who are trying to do something to help our children get a better education, but considering that the United States is ranked 19th in the World for children’s education, it seems that we should be applauding those that are making a difference for our kids rather than always complaining about their efforts to assist.
I say thank you to them and builders like them that help provide my child with a better place to learn!
By rick on July 18th, 2008 at 11:47 am
Yep, me too! Since their not turning a profit it only stands to reason its for the kids….rose colored glasses and pass the cool-aid.
By Unpopular Patty on July 18th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
If the numbers the district is giving are wrong and there have really only been an increase of 90 students at Irmo High in the last 15 years then it sounds like we need to REZONE. Yes, I said it. REZONE. Chapin is very overcrowded so we need to move the the line and move some students from the Chapin feeder area to the Dutch Fork area. Then take students from the Dutch Fork area and put them i the Irmo area. We will still need to build, but not quite as many schools so quickly. No one wants their neighborhood rezoned and this will not keep us from needing new schools, but it is a start.
By concerned parent on July 18th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Oh my God. I am APPALLED at what I have seen on this site. I am so sorry I took the time to look into what a friend said she saw in the Irmo news (which was a reference to this site). As a parent of River Springs Elementary Students, I can tell you that Melissa Cole is a wonderful person and an excellent leader of our school. Anyone who KNOWS her personally couldn’t possibly be writing these hateful, destructive messages. It makes me sick. What I am seeing here is evidence of the hideous, hurtful, ugly rumor mill that destroys kids in school. I can not believe that parents are talking like this. I can only imagine what the kids are learning from these conversations since I doubt it ends online and does not continue at the kitchen table and in the front yards. I am scared that my children may be attending middle or high school with the children of some of the people behind these messages. I am seeing despicable things written about two people based on RUMORS. And they are then telling these two people (that they don’t even know) how THEY should behave….what is moral and ethical….you are kidding me, right…???? Look back at what you have written and take that to your family, friends, and your God, and tell me if you think what you have done is right. I don’t know my scripture as well as most do, but I know the spirit of it and it goes something like this…” why do you see the speck in his eye, but not the plank in yours”
By Concerned DF Supporter on July 19th, 2008 at 7:36 am
I, too, know the parties involved. This hate campaign is backed by a gorup of persons that want to skew reality. There is NO proof to these claims. Do not stoop to the level of even questioning this FICTION.
Here is the proof: District 5 is a respected educational leader. Schools like Dutch Fork High have been recognized as one of the best places to educate our children. Newsweek magazine named DFHS as one of the top 100 schools in America. This district has done an excetpional job of hiring the brightest and the best teachers that have worked tirelessly to provide the safest, most nurturing, and academic environment for CHILDREN.
Please get off your political agendas. You are defacing an icon - District 5. You are using malicious lies to further your hate campaign. And what is your underlying campaign? Basically, you don’t want your property values to go up. You don’t want the schools to be less crowded. You don’t want our schools to continue to excel. Why? You are too worried that your taxes will increase each time a child succeeds. You are too worried that your pocket book will suffer to help children succeed.
Bottom line - this smear campaign is based on vicious political group that DOES NOT WANT to see District 5 succeed, because it will hurt them financially. Childen are the last thing behind this horrible attack.
These attacks should be seen for what they are… They are another way that can detract the mainstream public away from the facts that District 5 is DEFINITELY overcrowded, and that technology and space are woefully needed to help our children continue to strive towards excellence.
You see guys, these are not the times that WE grew up in… Our kids are more technologically savvy than we ever had to be. Keep in mind that it will be our CHILDREN that take care of us when we are seniors. We need to give OUR CHILDREN the opportunities that are available to us TODAY. Things are NOT like they were 30 years ago. And if you think so… think about this. Do you still want to use the old lawn mower that was not run on gas? No, you are moving with technology. You are SMARTER than that.
Do not let these insane lies, get in the way of the real issues. This is just a ploy to keep JOE PUBLIC misinformed and not focused on the real problems that face our growing district.
Why would anyone listen to these malicious lies?
You talk about ROSE COLORED GLASSES… The glasses you want the mainstream public to wear are lined with lies, deception, a blatant manipulation of fact… all to make YOUR cause seem plausible. And these same villans SAY that they CARE about our children.
No, they care only about the almighty dollar bill. CHILDREN are the last things on the minds of this political group piloted by a few and fueled by many that don’t care to look any further than the surface for truth.
By You have got to be kidding on July 19th, 2008 at 7:52 am
Look back to post #37
The “facts” this person suggests have nothing to do with these horrible allegations based on myth. The “facts” are stupid and do not suggest any truth to these allegations.
He/She wrote: “Fact: Andersen’s house is for sell”
Hello, WHERE did this guy go to school? How can you listen to someone that cannot even write using correct english?
Sounds like he/she needs a good school to go to! Good news! District 5 is still the BEST in SC. Sign him up today!
By get real on July 19th, 2008 at 9:55 am
WOW!!! I can’t believe adults are actually acting like this. It reminds me of the HS games people play. Take a ounce of truth and add a gallon of lies. This article is BS.
By In The Know... on July 19th, 2008 at 9:59 am
BS, Concerned DF Supporter. Facts are facts.
By Tami on July 19th, 2008 at 10:09 am
“s.carolina.gal - July 18, 2008
Shame on the Builders? Really?
You say shame on builders like Mungo who are trying to do something to help our children get a better education, but considering that the United States is ranked 19th in the World for children’s education, it seems that we should be applauding those that are making a difference for our kids rather than always complaining about their efforts to assist.
I say thank you to them and builders like them that help provide my child with a better place to learn!”
To you Gal…
I think you’re right. I think we should build Mungo another school!
By Just Vote No on July 19th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Well #41, you think Melissa Cole is a wonderful person? Fine. Did you think her predecessor was also? Wonder why Lynn Robertson left River Springs Elementary? She was having an affair with one of her employees. She didn’t retire voluntarily and surprisingly she isn’t retired now. She went to Richland One and is now a principal there. See what happens when a School District does not reprimand unethical behavior. She may be wonderful, but she learned from a pro. I will NEVER vote for a bond referendum in a district that cannot handle their “house”. How can they handle that much money.
By Lake Murray Dad on July 19th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
To Unpopular Patty-
I am so glad that someone had the nerve to finally mention REZONING. I used to live in one of the neighborhoods that SHOULD be rezoned out of the Chapin feeder. My family moved because we felt that rezoning was imminent and really SHOULD take place to make the best use of the facilities available . Nobody wants to mention rezoning as a solution, because it would certainly be hard to get reelected to a school board if the Board has to do the right thing and rezone. I have always been supportive of Bond Referendums to fund building projects in this district. However, I’m afraid that with all that MAY be going on with the Superintendent (and lack of action OR explanation by the Board) and with the declining state of the economy, it may be time to face reality and do what no one really wants to do. REZONE!!
By the way, Board and Dr. Andersen, the portables in front of Chapin High School are lovely. Hope it accomplishes what you have set out to do!!
Another thing that the Board needs to stop allowing is School of Choice (even retroactively) for the schools that have capacity issues. Another parent told me that there are students attending the Chapin feeder schools, Chapin Middle, and Chapin High School that are attending out of their attendance area, even when the schools are so overcrowded. I told her that there was no way that the District would allow this, but yet, when I checked into it, she was correct. Why would you allow this? Seems rather short-sighted, in my opinion, especially when you are trying to drum up much-needed support for a Bond Referendum.
By Here are the FACTS on July 20th, 2008 at 5:55 am
Don’t let this smear campaign detract from the true issues. Here are the FACTS. This agenda to smear the good names of hardworking individuals like Melissa Cole is meant only to keep the referendum down. But JOE PUBLIC is getting smarter and is refusing to listen to inaccuracies.
FICTION: The passage of the referendum will increase the property taxes of a homeowner by $1,300.
FACT: Not true. The owner of a $100,000 home will see taxes increase by $14 annually. Studies to determine the cost-effectiveness of building on to existing structures have been done and where feasible those renovations have been made a part of the plan. Those spaces will not come anywhere near meeting our need for classroom space…for now or in the future.
FICTION: The school district is saying not to allow “nay-sayers” to spoil the election.
FACT: Not true. The school district is urging community members not to rely on misinformation but to seek accurate, verifiable information, make an informed decision, and vote.
FICTION: The 135-Day count is 62 students fewer than last year.
FACT: True. For the same reason we show fewer students in our 45-Day count this year. This data ignores the results of our residency verification process conducted last summer where we know there were more than 400 students who were no longer enrolled in our schools in 2007-08, who were there in 2006-07 thanks to our Affidavit and Verification of Address process.
FICTION: The cost of the referendum is actually more than the district is saying since an additional $8.8 million is being funded with 8% money.
FACT: Not true. The cost of the referendum is just what the school board approved, $243,664,692. The design work being funded with 8% money is within the funding limits set by law and will NOT result in any additional increase in millage.
FICTION: The entrance to the proposed new high school demonstrates the district is constructing a Taj Mahal.
FACT: Not true. First of all, the entrance to the school and the overall design has not been determined nor has it even been discussed. The artwork being shown by a group of citizens is from a PREVIOUS project of one of our architects. Secondly, and most importantly, the estimated cost per square foot for all of the referendum projects is $111.33. The state average cost is $152. There are no plans for extravagant and and/or luxurious buildings. They will be cost-effective and cost-efficient spaces to create a learning environment to support quality teaching and learning.
FICTION: One in every five students in the district will be rezoned if the referendum passes.
FACT: Not true. There is absolutely no way to know the impact on attendance lines at this point. When new schools are opened there will be attendance line adjustments to populate those schools. Those lines will be drawn with community input and every effort will be made to minimize the movement of students and maintain community schools.
FICTION: The district will have no funds to operate the three new schools and refuse to discuss the issue.
FACT: Not true. The schools will be operated with funds from the General Fund Budget. Most of the cost of operating the new schools will be staffing costs already being budgeted and paid to staff housed in overcrowded schools. These costs will be moved to the new school. Additional operating costs will be redirected within our budgeting means…part of which will come from the money currently being used to operate and support hundreds of portables which will no longer be needed.
FICTION: The district overtaxes residents and creates an excessive “slush fund”.
FACT: Not true. There is no “slush fund”. Every school district in the state maintains a fund balance. This fund balance is created by carefully managing costs during the year. Financial analysts carefully observe fund balances since they are an indication of a district’s financial health. As a result, school districts that have strong fund balances do not have to issue Tax Anticipation Notes and benefit from lower interest loans…all of which save taxpayers millions of dollars in interest expense.
FICTION: Chapin Elementary has grown by 49 students yet the district refuses to add the needed capacity of 195 students to the school.
FACT: Not true. Renovations and additions to Chapin Elementary include increasing the in-building capacity from 655 students to 750, plus adding space to the media center, cafeteria and other spaces to support the increased number.
FICTION: District Five is not listening to the public.
FACT: Not true. Throughout the process of developing the current facilities plan, community members were involved. Parents, non-parents, senior citizens, educators, business people and county leaders all helped to develop the plan. This was done with two separate committees. In addition, the school board held several hearings to receive input on the plan.
FICTION: Using a combination of 8% money and bond money is a unethical and a “flimflam.”
FACT: Not true. There is nothing unethical about funding building renovations and improvements using this method. School Boards are authorized by law to use 8% money to address building needs, including renovations and maintenance. When those funds are not enough to meet building needs, school boards are authorized by law to conduct bond referendums.
FICTION: It will be many years, if ever, before all of the requested sewer taps in the Chapin area will be used so this is not an indication of growth in the school district.
FACT: Chapin Mayor Stan Shealy’s information about the number of sewer taps is that nearly all of them will have been used within 10 years.
FICTION: Renovations proposed at existing schools are being designed to deliberately reduce capacity.
FACT: The only adjustments to capacity have been programmatic adjustments over the years along with smaller class sizes. Schools are not being designed, nor built for smaller student capacity. In fact, most renovation plans bring students from portables into the building.
FICTION: The district is ignoring the fact that the community voted no on the referendum and is using other means to move forward, such as using 8% money.
FACT: Growth continues in School District Five and the board is using every resource available to address growth…including 8% money to pay for designs for new construction and renovations. These designs will allow us to move ahead as quickly as possible when a successful referendum is passed and the funds are available to do the work.
FICTION: The district is ignoring the general maintenance of schools in order to fund renovation projects.
FACT: Money has been allocated within the 8% limits to maintain our schools. An aggressive repayment schedule allows us to free funds to be used for the renovation projects and design work.
FICTION: It would be more cost-effective and practical to build on to existing schools as opposed to constructing new ones.
FACT: Studies to determine the cost-effectiveness of building on to existing structures have been done and where feasible those renovations have been made a part of the plan. Those spaces will not come anywhere near meeting our need for classroom space…for now or in the future.
By Irritated in Irmo on July 21st, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Hmmm. Let’s see. Sic Willie, Gov. Sanford, “Putting All Students First”, Kim Murphy, Don Carlson and this blog. What do all these have in common? They HATE district five schools.
By Disgusted on July 21st, 2008 at 5:18 pm
This post and this site are disgusting.
By Political Motivation on July 22nd, 2008 at 9:26 am
Hmmm…
ROD SHEALY, JR. BEATS HIS DAD IN LOCAL REFERENDUM RACE
FITSNews - November 8, 2007 - He doesn’t have his father’s scraggly beard, infamous reputation or penchant for Magnum P.I.-style Hawaiian shirts, but Rod Shealy, Jr. does have bragging rights over his dad after a Midlands-area bond referendum was defeated 56%-44% earlier this week. Shealy, Jr. advised the “Vote No” campaign, putting him up against his famous father, who was a vocal proponent of the referendum.
The $256.5 million building plan for Lexington-Richland School District 5 was the second bite at the apple for the less-than-forthcoming school district in as many years. In 2005, voters rejected a $230 million referendum by a 67%-33% margin, the only school bond referendum in the state to be defeated that year. In the interest of full disclosure, the “Vote No” campaign in 2005 was advised on a pro bono basis by our very own Sic Willie.
Shealy, Jr., whose resemblance to Shealy, Sr. in appearance and mannerisms is downright disarming, downplayed the victory over his prodigious papa, who in 2006 re-established himself as one of the top political consultants in the state with wins in three intensely-competitive statewide races.
“(Rod Sr.) wasn’t helping the other side,” Shealy, Jr. told FITSNews. “He just strongly supported it, and endorsed it in his newspaper.”
Maybe so, but Shealy Sr.’s individual pull in the area is legendary, and his network of newspapers wields tremendous influence on local politics.
Shealy Sr. told FITSNews that he was merely a “supporter,” not a paid advisor to the pro-referendum forces.
By Facts (?) Not Fancy - Just LIES and Tremendous Ego on July 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 am
PUTTING ALL STUDENTS FIRST VICTORY MISSION STATEMENT
While recognizing the excellent academic achievement of Lexington/Richland District 5, two additional areas of excellence must be incorporated into the overall District operational system. They are Vocational Education and sound, responsible financial management. Given the totally dysfunctional management provided by the past board officers and the monumental problems that they have created, our new board needs our patience, encouragement and complete support as they work to correct years of inept direction. The Putting All Students First Committee will be in the forefront of this gigantic challenge by keeping you informed and offering sound suggestions to our new board.
So why you might ask, do I spend so much time examining the financial and management practices of District 5? Because after 32 years of demanded performance and its attendant evaluation, it becomes obvious that with the District’s excellent reputation for college bound students, there was basically nothing being offered for the non-college bound. In addition, the financial and business management systems are dysfunctional at best. It’s my objective to give facts not fancy to the public so the necessary changes will be made.
By The WORD on July 22nd, 2008 at 10:42 am
Eph. 4: 31 - Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:
By Iwrestlewithzen on July 22nd, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Lake Murray Dad - I kinda agree with you on the rezoning, but I see it a little bit different. I am afraid of federal intervention. Irmo is something like 40%+ minority. Dutch Fork is more than 35%. Chapin is less than 9%. Richland county has a much higher percentage minorities than Lexington around Chapin. If we (AND I EMPHASIS WE PEOPLE) in our community are not careful with our rezoning and new schools, we will face with the same issue that Georgetown County faced. If we rezone without consideration to these matters, the federal government can come in here and they could define what schools go where…. THAT scares me more than all this dribble of “sex,lies and Educrats” (I am not discounting the seriousness of this article because it is a problem - true or not)
Let’s face it, we are growing (maybe not as much as the school board’s projections / maybe more than the other groups). What about a new Chapin school? Argue for it in town, out of town I don’t care (there is a lot to say about a one town school). Maybe a zoning plan that recognizes Chapin as 4A…. (yes I said it 4A). Expand Chapin, rezone to include more kids from “out of the area” too. Ease the crowding in Irmo and DF, be cognizant of an equitable distribution plan and at the same time keep the school count (operation cost) to a minimum. Keep just the three High Schools all of them 4A.
No argument from me - This is a good educational district. It is the kids that make it that way: because we as adults sure are not doing anything to help. Lake Murray Dad - I hate to say it: No, You are wrong, the trailers look bad. Putting kids in that environment to prove a point….come on. You don’t believe that. I can tell by what you wrote. Don’t cut off your son/daughters nose to spite his face. Yes, stop the dribble and finish this issue about “sex” scandals. This rumor/truth needs finality. Someone needs to have the guts to make a statement. Andersen, Cole, Board, a witness…. Someone. Bad news is like old meat. It stinks worse with time. I am certainly not sticking up for Murphy et al but at least that lady states what she believes. Ms Murphy you are not always right, but you are always Kim Murphy. It may be wrong sometimes but I am thinking they are not lies. I respect that.
We really have no idea what property values and taxes will do. We don’t know that the operation costs won’t go up. We think we know but we really don’t. If you do know, help me out on some of my stock picks PLEASE. SOMEONE please show some leadership and provide acceptable alternatives, don’t hit me with facts. Stop pointing fingers and get to work or it will be “no” in the vote. Not because of people don’t want the renovations but because people can not think past their nose.
Don’t run Andersen out of town on a scandal. If anything, run him out for failing to lead and foster community on this issue of schools.
Dear School Board, the vote was roughly 60 - 40 No last time. Give us other options. If you cut the board again, it will still be too short.
By The Putting All Students First Committee - HA! on July 23rd, 2008 at 12:47 am
This is the same Committee that was using my Uncle’s good name to endorse their political agenda. My Uncle had Alzheimer’s and could not remember where the bathroom was much less being an active supporter of this group! They had a petition letter going around a few years back and had his name as an endorser of their campaign. I personally called Don Carlsen (Member of this Committee) on the phone and asked him WHY they would falsely use his name. Don Carlsen said that he would look into the matter… When talking to other senior citizens on the list, it was also found out by my Mother (Senior citizen in Chapin) that other names had been used as well without their consent. This letter continued to circulate throughout the Irmo/Dutch Fork Area for MONTHS after Mr. Carlsen promised to “look into” the matter.
Any group that would stoop to this level is NOT a group that should be respected or TRUSTED. They are very adept at taking an ounce of truth and twisting the true meaning.
BEWARE of this group - The ONLY agenda they have is spread rumors and lies. Unfortunately, my Uncle was unable to speak up for himself.
So, I say “Putting all Students First” - HA!
This is not hearsay, speculation, or pure fiction. I am stating a FACT.
By Putting Students First - NOT on July 23rd, 2008 at 9:37 am
Their real name should be Putting Our Egos and Wallets First. They will do anything to pass their “agenda”, which includes vouchers, charter schools, and anything else that erodes public education. They are politically motivated and highly funded and they use professional political consultants to write their material and forward their campaign. It is truly sad.
By curious on July 23rd, 2008 at 12:05 pm
#56 and #57 - Are you doubting the information in the Fitsnews article? Do believe there is no truth to what is being said about the supt’s relationship with the principal? And do you think 2,000 more kids in the next ten years in Irmo High is a realistic growth projection? Fitsnews has a pretty good reputation of being right on the money, so as a reader - I’d love to hear if you think they’re wrong.
By Iwrestlewithzen on July 23rd, 2008 at 1:24 pm
WOW I am amazed. I have to say I am relatively new to the district just a couple of years so maybe I don’t understand all the issues… There seems to be more hatred and infighting than there is progress. Like ya’ll I have seen Don’s letters to the Editor - WOW - unbelievable detail. Like yall I see these attacks on the elected leadership. What I don’t see is people pulling together to move forward. So you got Kim and Don out there saying what they believe. The only thing I am certain of is they don’t know everything, but they are trying. I see the school district trying to find a solution but the only thing they will consider is put it up for vote again… again… again… And if they don’t like the outcome they just find another way to buy the land and put up trailers for public displays…
People People, somehow I doubt I am the only person on this blog that is willing to say WOW good point Don operation costs may very well change and we need to control them. WOW interesting information Kim you might be right that the speculation on growth is non-determinant from the compiled information. AND wow Board there is a lot on your plate but you guys are holding the schools together so far.
By Response 58 on July 23rd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
58 - From what I understand about the 2,000 figure is that it is ONE of the projections from the district’s computer system. The basic enrollment projection presented last year was that the district would grow by a minimum of 300 students each year. Certainly one could conclude that the other figure is above the minimum. The 2,000 number is a distraction and smoke screen. The district needs schools now regardless of how much more they grow. The question is how many more schools are they going to need. Kim and Don mislead you with one small, and sometimes insignificant fact, to divert attention away from the real issue - the needs of the children.
By Darla on July 23rd, 2008 at 4:25 pm
The “rumors” are TRUE!! The School Board met in executive session for SIX hours to discuss the “problem”. I am NOT a member of any vigilante group that IS alive and well in Chapin; however, covering this up is WRONG! I voted for the referendum the last time …but…unless the board has the gumption to expose (no pun intended!) the two parties, I will vote “NO” this time. This is a bad situation that has only been made worse by he school board trying to keep this quiet.
By Valerie Crites on July 23rd, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Melissa Cole is totally devoted to the best interests of students at River Springs. She fights for this constantly in spite of other employees demanding she conform to sub-standard procedures. She is a wonderful person and leader of schools.
By discouraged on July 24th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
“43-58. Disciplinary Action on Educator Certificates.
(Statutory Authority: S.C. Code Ann. Sections 59-1-445 (2004), 59-5-60 (2004), 59-5-65 (2004), 59-25-110, et seq. (2004), 59-25-530 (2004), 59-26-40 (2004), and 20-7-840, et seq. (Supp. 2004))
The State Board of Education has the legal authority to deny, revoke, or suspend a certificate, or issue a public reprimand for the following causes…
…8. immorality,
9. any conduct involving moral turpitude,…
…The intentional failure of a district board of trustees to instruct the district superintendent to report the termination of school employees as required by this regulation shall be considered by the State Department as an accreditation deficiency pursuant to R43-130 and, upon approval of the State Board of Education, all district schools will be placed on an accreditation status of probation.”
I am thinking with these potential outcomes on the plate this problem won’t go away any time soon. We may have to have a bond referendum to deal with the lawsuits before it is over.
By embarrassed on July 24th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
There appears to be no evidence of “immorality or any conduct involving moral turpitude,” but only speculation, rumor, and gossip. And how exactly would we define those behaviors? Shall we revoke the certificates of any school employee who has a child out of wedlock, visits a topless beach, drinks too much, fudges on their taxes, dirty-dances at a bar? At least those might be behaviors with some form of evidence, none of which has been offered in this case.
Oh, let’s see. Evidence. There is a man and his wife who have separated and she has moved out of state with their children…scandal, indeed! And their house is for sale!!! Shocker! Unheard of! And don’t forget this salacious tidbit: a teenager saw a man park a van in the woods and walk around and then meet his wife. Perhaps Jimmy Hoffa was in the van. Too bad the kid didn’t check; that might have made a story. This is not a story, it’s a non-story.
People’s fascination with this non-story might be amusing were it not for the fact that there are lives, careers, and families at stake, not to mention reputations and a school district’s honor.
By advice on July 24th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Debating the financial and other legitimate issues of the district is fine but the discussion of a personal relationship (based solely on rumor) is juvenile and only makes the legitimate arguments sound petty. Separate the two issues and drop the personal relationship thing.
By Taylor on July 24th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Thank you #65. Monday night’s board meeting will probably put the personal (personnel) issue to rest. We anticipate a resignation. But don’t expect to see the board drop the referendum even after losing their number one sales person.
By advice on July 25th, 2008 at 7:30 am
As #66 says, the superintendent is the sales person for the school board. A superintendent may have his/her own initiatives, but the main job, especially on major issues, is to serve at the pleasure and direction of the board, selling their ideas to employees and constituents. With elected board members, we can expect a board to be as politically split as the community they represent, which often means a lot of division and little progress. (True leadership would mean one person steering an organization, hired with confidence to do so and doing so even in opposition…although accountability to someone — stockholders, voters, customers — still exists.)
So it begs the question if whether attacking a superintendent is like shooting the messenger. And, if dismissing a superintendent (driving them off?) isn’t like offering up the sacrificial lamp, only to leave the fox in the hen-house (a mix of metaphors, I know.)
By Just Do It on July 25th, 2008 at 7:56 am
The personal issue should NOT be dropped. This coverup has happened before maybe many times in this district. (See #47). As an employee of SD5, I believe if I were having an affair with my principal, I would be fired. I would expect that. Married or not, it is unethical. Why shouldn’t Superintendent AndersEn be held accountable? Wouldn’t he hold his employees to that standard? We have a great school district, great students and awesome employees. Let’s not let two people ruin our reputation. School Board, do the right thing.
By A Bird By Another Name on July 25th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Just Do It is clearly has a personal issue and since she was dumb enough to let the fact be known that she is an employee, it exposes her. The board should do the right thing and not act on rumors that people like Just Do It fabricate and pass on throughout the community. Grow up and truly think about the children.
By Right On Embarrassed on July 25th, 2008 at 8:32 am
EMBARRASSED is right. Let’s start looking at all of the behaviors of the board, administrators, teachers etc., throughout the district. This is so disappointing.
By Darla on July 25th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
This is NOT some made-up rumor. Melissa Cole’s husband has left her also. If you talk to teachers in the district, they are all aware of the situation. Morale is down because if this incident….and…the fact that it is being “hush-hushed”.
By Darla on July 25th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
I understand why some people are defending Melissa Cole and the job she has done at River Springs. Melissa was a tennis player (Melissa Odom then) at Irmo HS. The fact that she was a good tennis player; the fact that she is being touted as a good principal have no bearing on what she has done after school hours….which is committing adultery.
By get real on July 25th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Why is this anyone’s business? (the relationship). If you start getting into every teacher, principal, board member and staff member’s personal “affairs” half the school district could be targeted for this sort of public treatment. Could we stick to the financial and/or other public interest problems?
By Joy Bridges on July 25th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Darla, we know who you are. Ryan Cole and Melissa Cole’s marriage break-up has nothing to do with any of this. Thanks.
By J.C. on July 25th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Darla, I think you must have a hidden agenda here. What does being a tennis player have to do with commiting adultery, which no one has any basis to prove. I guess now you will show up with a different name.This web-site is pure trash.
By A.C. on July 25th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
A teacher at River Springs. Went into her office and told her I don’t care whether it is true or not, she is the BEST principal I have ever worked for.
By Dear Darla on July 25th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Darla is sure is easy to throw anonymous claims on a blog. Your personal vendetta is very transparent and ridiculous. Get a life.
By Ashley on July 25th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Morale isn’t a problem at River Springs. We are looking forward to another good year.
By Children First on July 25th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
To #61 Darla. You should vote based on the needs of the children in this district and not on two personal rumored incidents.
By High on Morale on July 25th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Morale isn’t a problem for me and the people I work with either. We love our jobs, we love our administrators and we love the direction we are heading as a school and a district. Stop trying to make things up. You are pathetic.
By Life is Good at RSES on July 25th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
At RSES we will continue to do what we have been doing…working everyday to ensure that the highest quality of teaching and learning occurs for each child. I have no doubt that Mrs. Cole will continue to stay focused on this goal and lead the rest of us to continue to do so also. We will not be deterred or distracted by rumor…to do so would be letting down our students and families, as well as each other and our principal. The rest of the district may be caught up in a frenzy of rumor but we will simply ignore it and do our jobs.
Want to work at a happy school? Join us at RSES!
By To Darla on July 25th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Darla: two people who work together have each separated from their spouses. So what? This can be said of many people in our district. Are you going to start connecting imaginary dots between them all? That’ll keep you busy.
IF there is a morale problem it’s because of this kind of gossip-mongering. Those of us who aren’t promoting this gossip are quite content in our jobs, thank you very much.
By Hypocrisy 101 on July 25th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
This mess is such a major distraction to the true focus of educating our children. Knowing some of the “players” in this mess, and the likelihood that some of these indiscretions are true, one is left with one big question: Why should we trust this superintendent, and this inept school board, with the stewardship of even MORE money (can you say fall bond referendum?) when they can’t even take care of basic moral issues, the same that we all learned in kindergarten? I for one will never vote for a bond referendum until two things happen: First, we clean house; second, we get honest impartial information. I think those Chapin folks who were so vilified last year for scuttling the last bond referendum are the real truthtellers here.
By Iwrestlewithzen on July 26th, 2008 at 12:45 am
This is amazing. I keep coming back here hoping to learn something about the options for advancement in the schools and all I see is this stuff. The article sites like 2 paragraphs to the alleged “turpitude” and like 20 paragraphs to the issue of the referendum and growth or the lack there of. Yet the blog is almost all about the alleged “turpitude”.
What I want to know is how we can continue to allow our children to excel. OK, so we get a resignation; we don’t; Melissa is buddy buddy with her teacher friends huddling together. Who cares!
What alternatives are out there? Clearly after two years of defeat, “loss of a salesman”, gross disparity in numbers, failing economy, slump in housing and on and on, I am wondering what options we have.
Why can’t we just expand the existing schools? Can someone answer that? (BTW - Please don’t respond with the same FACT/FICTION crap that clearly failed to advance us the last two times. Give me logic)
Let me ask a question and please don’t beat me up I am new here. The Student First Group says there is no growth. The District says it is huge. I am guessing it is between the two. Why can’t we use the money that everyone claims is held in reserve, and being used to buy land and portables to begin expansions on the schools.
Build a strategic plan that will take several years to complete. If we did it that way we could accommodate the issues of growth (if they occur) and placate the naysayers at the same time. Build it a piece at a time. Stop buying portables and expand the existing structures. Why can’t we grow slowly into a solution instead of a HUGE referendum that apparently is leading to terrible infighting and according to this blog is ruining people’s lives. Is the referendum really the only way? I will be quite disappointed if the sole purpose of the next board meeting is to accept “resignation” (#66).
#67 you may be right. The school board made up their mind about how they want to create new schools and they will sacrifice even their hand selected leader to accomplish their goal. Perhaps all the anger I read in this blog should be directed at the Board and not Cole and Andersen. I am more confused on the real issues now than I have ever been.
By mission accomplished... on July 26th, 2008 at 7:03 am
Misguided focus and confusion…welcome to another bond referendum season in SD #5! Paid political consultants or small-town watchdogs…either way, someone sure knows what they are doing.
By Just Do It on July 26th, 2008 at 9:07 am
Well, number 69, my manliness is now insulted. Not that it matters. I think everyone has lost track of what this blog is about.
By no contest on July 26th, 2008 at 10:26 am
I fear you are right, mission accomplished. Unfortunately, dedicated educators who have devoted their professional lives to serving the best interests of children are no match for this anti- machine. It really is a terrible shame.
By Just Do It on July 26th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Sorry #86, whether you are male or female is not the point. You have no manliness by throwing unfounded claims on some ridiculous and disgusting blog. I agree, you have lost track.
By Sanitation Engineer on July 26th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
More unfounded trash from FITS and the anti-public education machine. What sources?
By disappointed on July 26th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Andersen has done a lot of good for the district. It is a shame people have taken the gossip approach to a good man.
By Darla on July 26th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
I seriously doubt that anyone knows my name. If you do, that’s fine with me. I have not uttered (written) one untruth. I have merely been trying to say that these are not unfounded rumors…but…actual facts. I love district 5…and I would NEVER say anything in a malicious hurtful way….BUT…I DO have a problem when morals are “thrown out the window”…. and nothing is done by the board. We are all entitled to our personal opinions. I DO, however, have a problem when people in authority transgress/aka/”cross the line”.
By Darla on July 26th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Response to #79. You are EXACTLY right. The children/students are the major concern. I do, however, question the referendum IF the numbers are PROVEN to have been inflated. I have no faith whatsoever that this board is student-focused. Sad…but…my opinion. Response to #82. I am in NO way a “gossip monger”. I have not discussed this with anyone who did not INFORM me of the “problem”. I learned of the situation 3 weeks ago from someone at the district office.