News-Record.com

If we were to look back through the records, we'd likely find that the board members, when the critical decisions were being made, were under pressure not to "throw money at the problem" of providing quality education. They "did what the law required," in the way of safety measures and displayed the best "values" their constituencies would allow. Their choices seem awfully shortsighted now, and we've surely seen aplenty of faulty designing and slipshod construction of late, but the blame needs to go to the root, and the root of these problems begins with a voting public that likes to do things on the cheap.

The common sense god gave an ant was to run away from a fire. So, Mr. Best, if your house burned down today, should we call you an idiot because you should've outfitted your house with a sprinkler system?
All the kids got out safe because someone took the time to come up with a fire escape plan and make the kids practice it atleast once a month. All the books are burned but atleast the kids will still get some schooling.

Why not buy the kids some school supplies instead of shaking a finger at the school board? Why not use the common sense that god gave you to help a fellow man when he's down instead of kicking him and spouting should've, could've and would've.

"it all could have been prevented with a few thousand dollars and the common sense God gave an ant."

Including a Fire Ant?
(rim shot!)

Does anyone know if the new Northern High is being built with sprinklers?

While I have been very critical of some of the board's decisions, especially the "High Point Schools" plans, I certainly don't blame them for the fire at Eastern. 6 and Chris said it well.

Michael,

Stop tip-toeing around and tell us how you really feel. :) I agree that chemistry labs should be fitted with more protection from fires. I still don't understand why this building burnt to the ground when the response was fairly fast. What kind of inspections did this building pass?

Lots of interesting stories in the News and Record today including High Point giving incentives to Polo to bring in jobs, How to get away with killing your baby, Lawyers ripping off Hispanics and more.

If you'd like to comment on them individually, visit my half illegitimate step sister once removed blog: http://nitpicked.blogspot.com/

The school was code compliant when it was built. Estimates in the news media say it would have taken nearly $1 million to update Eastern with sprinklers.
Would you have us tear down and rebuild every school in our county every year when new codes came out?
How about just pumping $1 million per year into every school building when the codes change? You feel like just signing over your paycheck to the School Board every payday just to keep up with that?

I hate to agree with Ackbar, but he illustrates the point well.

If it's a million per school to sprinkle, and $30 million per school to buld new (that's what it is in Forsyth), unless you burn down a school more frequently than every 30 years, sprinklers are a bad investment.

If you add the value of money in there .. 3% interest compounded monthly, means you put asside less than 8 million today, and your set.

So do you sprinkle only 8 schools - guessing which one will burn down - or simply plan for a replacement in 30 years ?

Before you jump on me -- that's a 3% annual rate, compounded monthy

Recently, our area suffered a minor earthquake. Had that been a major earthquake and had it occurred during school hours, our schoolchildren would have been crushed in their seats. Crushed!And what does the school board do about it? Nothing. Nothing! We should be retrofitting all of our schools now to prevent earthquake damage. Plus, with global warming causing a rise in sea levels, what is the school board doing about catastrophic flooding? They're just sitting there, that's what. We should be lifting our schools on pilings. Ever think of that?
And don't get me started on plague or locusts. I shudder to think.
Back when I was a kid, we were taught to duck and cover, an effective means of protecting ourselves from a nuclear bomb hitting our school. Where is that thinking today? Not on our school board, that's for dang sure.

James,

After my knee jerk reaction of last week, I've come around to the thinking that it probably isn't the best use of money to retrofit all schools with sprinklers.

However, this letter makes a good point about certain danger areas like chemistry labs at schools. Is there a lower cost way to add protection to these areas? Maybe there is enough protection there already. Bring in the asbestos again! :)

Ithey are going to have classes in trailers at schools across the county, maybe they can move the chemistry lab into a trailer off-site. That way, if they decide to burn down the chemistry lab, it won't take out the whole school.

I think that the school board needs to bear this one. It has a history of doing what it wants anyway. Even if, as an earlier writer wrote, the public wanted to save money, the school board should have been in our face to point out the folly of not putting in sprinklers. I don't care how old a building is; if we are going to put students in it, then put in the sprinklers.

I'm interested in all the fundraising being done for students and teachers. I'm wondering how those donated materials and money will be divvied out. Will everyone receive free erasers, paper, notebooks, calculators, bookbags, etc. Or will it just be the kids who are deemed to be unable to afford them?

What's really sad is the list for teacher supplies. What is pathetic is that teachers are expected to come up with those supplies themselves. Those should be purchased out of the school system's budget, not by teachers. If they'd spend their money wisely, and not on every fly-by-night program that comes along, they could afford these supplies.

I have to disagree with the assertion that it would cost $1 milion per school to provide sprinkler protection. Reasonable estimates are that every school in the district would cost about $32 million, and that would be to install it fully in every school, which may not be needed. What may be appropriate is to have a risk assessment done by fire professionals with a recommendation as to where such protection would be valuable. It is not likely that every portion of every school needs sprinkler protection, but rather needed in high risk areas. Such a reasonable approach would work, and I believe that properly presented to the parents and taxpayers, they would support a bond referendum dedicated to ensuring the safety of children while in school. I disagree with JDR's assertion that ensuring the safety and lives of school children is a bad investment. Since when do we consider the lives of our children in terms of an investment? I have a hard time agreeing that we gamble on the lives of children that it won't be their school that burns. You can replace schools, JDR, but you can't replace people. The students of Eastern were fortunate that no one was injured or killed. Who of you are wiling to gamble that it won't be your child's school that burns?

Having said that, I disagree with the letter writer that it is the fault of the school board. I don't recall the issue of school sprinklers being brought to their attention as a concern to be addressed. If it had, and they declined or ignored it, they could be faulted, but it wasn't. No, the fault lies in the school administration. They know that schools have little to no sprinkler protection, but they have never surfaced it as a concern to the board. If the law requires new schools to be protected by sprinklers, and insurance provides a discount for such, then it would seem that spinkler protection is desirable and needed. The fact that the law doesn't "require" it be done in older schools, is no excuse. Other than providing an education to children, the district's basic responsibility is to ensure the safety of children while at school.

I have the same question as nitpicker...why did this school burn to the ground? Some say sprinklers wouldn't have made a difference, but it is critical that fire inspectors pursue the cause of this fire to determine why the school burned and what could have prevented it, or at least minimized its damage. Finally, if a school such as this can burn to the ground and not be saved, then is anyone comfortable that making an investment in the safety of your children is a bad investment?

I disagree with Tews that the voting public likes doing things on the cheap. In fact, that is a cheap shot. What the voting public doesn't like is all of the wasted tax dollars spent upon programs that don't work or construction problems, such as correcting unsafe designs or paying excessive amounts for buildings that require millions of repair. That doesn't qualify as liking things done on the cheap, it's not liking things done incompetently.

nitpicker,

My thoughts exactly. Why isn't the central office providing the necessary school supplies for the school? They are making this a charity case. We all know that central office always has the money to do the things that they want to do. Heck, Terry Grier has enough money in his personal office account to fund it. It's a sad statement that the community has to come up with the replacement supplies, and Terry Grier is sitting on his duff (and his money). Interestingly, Terry Grier was seen having dinner at an expensive restaurant the night following the fire. A review of his office expenses show that he always eats at the best restaurants, and it is always a "business" expense.

Hugh, code requires sprinklers in new school construction.

This lte writer apparently has nothing better to do with his time than complain too late. The school is gone. Sprinklers were not in Eastern because when it was built, code did not require them. Adding the is not as easy as the lte writer seems to think! Generally (according to friends in the construction business) it's very costly to add systems to existing buildings. Perhaps the school board and Terry Grier need to take out some of the pet projects Grier dreams up and channel this money into building upgrades.

ORR:

You are free to disagree with my assertion that "ensuring the safety and lives of school children is a bad investment" - but when did I assert that?

In another LTE I stated schools had mostly taken into account the issue, for example: one story elementary schools with individual doors.

Now colleges do have their share of fires .. but we're talking primary and secondary schools.

Anyone remember any kids getting hurt?

anyone remember me saying it was ok for kids to get hurt?

JDR,

Did I misunderstand your comment when you said "sprinklers are a bad investment"? You made the point that sprinklers were a bad investment. Apparently, fire professionals think that sprinklers save lives, or they wouldn't require them in new construction. So, I suppose if you think that sprinklers are a bad investment then you think that taking prudent safety precautions for school children is a bad investment.

As I said, is anyone comfortable with the proposition that making an investment in the safety of your children is a bad investment? I believe that a reasonable approach of providing sprinkler protection in schools in high risk areas is affordable and doable. I also think that it is something that parents and taxpayers will support. Whether anyone has been injured or died in a school fire is not the issue, it's whether there is a risk there that needs to be managed. We've experienced several 100-year storms in recent years, which have been quite destructive. We hadn't experienced them before, but it would have been prudent to prepare for them. You may feel that providing sprinkler protection in schools is a bad investment, but who wants to make that decision and be proven wrong?

And for the record .. I am licensed by the State of North Carolina (and other states) to assure prudent safety precautions are taken for babies, school children, grown-ups, and every one in between.

I said retrofitting "sprinklers are a bad investment" - I left out "unless the law requires it", which it doesn't as these things are typically grandfathered as not cost effective. Retrofiting is required only when there is a clear and ongoing threat.

The Building Code is re-reitten every few years by a whole bunch of professionals, including engineers, contractors, building inspectors, and insurance companies.

Code Changes are made for variety of reasons. Most importantly because someone was hurt "the old way". Other reasons include improving life-cycle costs, force-feeding energy reductions, and employing more people.

"By Statute the Commissioner of Insurance has general supervision of the administration and enforcement of the North Carolina Building Code and teh Engineering Division serves as the stadd for the Building Code Council." That's right from the book sitting on my desk.

I heard the fire started when a teacher dumped an ashtray in a trashcan. I'm not sure what they were smoking. I'm making that up by the way but nobody has yet to prove otherwise.

It's interesting that just a few weeks ago someone was talking about getting rid of the chemistry labs in schools because of the dangerous chemicals that are kept there. This would definitely help strengthen that argument.

Personally, I don't have much of an opinion either way.

...yea, let's get rid of the Chemistry labs .. then the books 'cause someone might throw one, and what they gonna do anyway, learn something useful? what a dumb idea.

Nitpicker--

You asked a little bit earlier about fundraising and classroom supplies. I spoke with Cecelia Adams, who is part of the central administration and is helping to coordinate these efforts. We had an interesting conversation.

First, the parents that I have been speaking to in the last few days have been most concerned with replacing their children's calculators. These are the Ti-83 graphing calculators. They cost about $80 but are frequently on sale. (My daughter's was $50). That's still a lot of money. The Eastern HS principal, Lisa Cooke is making this a priority--she wants to replace them for all of the students. They are asking for cash donations because this way they could by them in bulk with their corporate account and get the best price. Will they belong to the school or the student? I don't know.

There is another effort being made that sounds like a good way to go. Deborah Barham, who is a school support officer at the Franklin Ave office is coordinating an 'Adopt-A-Teacher' effort. By adopting a teacher, the donor may feel that their donation is actually going right to a classroom.

We talked about the trust issue. A cash donation would probably be the easiest and because of bulk purchases, it would be an effective way to support the effort. Unfortuneately many people just don't trust the administration to use that money appropriately. Valid or not, there is a credibility issue.

For anyone interested, there will be a fundraiser tonight at the Alumni Foundation Center at A&T State University from 7 to 9 p.m. I am sure that many, many more opportunities will follow.

Like the Not Pick, I have no idea what caused this fire .. but I gotta wonder about the modern school teacher, and I say that having sub'd a few times and because of the following:

A few day's ago I was playin in this blog, using the book 1984 as a "resource". I went to Amazon to get the "purchase link" to post herein, and one of the reviews caught my eye ... here it is:

http://www.amazon.com/1984-Centennial-George-Orwell/dp/0452284236/sr=8-5/qid=1162844410/ref=pd_bbs_sr_5/104-5083683-9495965?ie=UTF8&s=books

Now go about halfway down:

High school English teacher, May 10, 2006
Reviewer: D. Dahlbeck "Tappah" (South Boston, MA United States) - See all my reviews

I am a second year high school English teacher and I just read this book for the first time because I loved Animal Farm and I am now trying to figure out a way to talk my district into including it in the curriculum.
I am not a very political person (I don't even vote), but this is a very interesting read about a society that never existed, but is coming very close to emerging: a society in which someone is ALWAYS watching (think reality TV mixed with Bush's phone taps).
If you have never read this book, do yourself a favor and pick it up.

==

Click on the cooment and you'll find this:

James D. Rockefeller Initial post I find it hard to believe - ok maybe just tragic - that the reviewer is a second year High School ENGLISH Teacher and is JUST reading this book. What are they teaching in College these days?

... sorry - I'm still in shock that a Second Year High School Teacher .. which should mean several years studying literatature .. has NOT YET READ 1984?

Maybe they should get rid of the Chem Labs ... if that's representative of the quality of some teachers.

that said, I know they are not all terrible. There are some GREAT ones out there .. and both my parents were school teachers so don't come down too hard .. but we might wanna look into the quality issue.

I think asking the teachers to resupply their own rooms is a sin - hell they don't pay 'em to begin with - tha's the starting salary - $30k? that's $15 / hour folks. See other LTE abous living wages ..

... that said, having already read 1984 should be a pretty low minimum for a HS english teacher.

That's part of what troubles me about NCLB. As I understand it, it requries credentials above actually knowing what the heck you are taliking about.

I read animal farm in hs. It was part of the standard curriculum. No one should be able to get out of high school without having read it.

ANNOUNCEMENT: Report cards came out today and my ds made A-B honor roll. Way to go, Patrick!

JDR,

I'm not all that shocked that a 2nd grade teacher has not read 1984. That may be your criteria for a good teacher, but it isn't mine. There are a million books out there and just because 1984 is a personal favorite of yours, I don't agree that having not read it makes you a bad teacher as you implied above.

I can't see 1984 or Animal Farm coming up during a standard 2nd grade class discussion. And they shouldn't.

SECOND YEAR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER, i.e., one who has taught at the High School level for one complete year, and is continuing into a second year teaching at the High School level.