News-Record.com

Lora,

Since Ragsdale was on the last bond, but had funds diverted, why would you think that the school board, who has demonstrated a clear inability to be responsible with public funds. Until we elect board members who can live up to their commitments and exhibit a strong sence of fiduciary responsibility, giving them more money would be like giving an alcoholic the keys to the bar.

JUST SAY NO TO SCHOOL BONDS

At the risk of sounding repetitive, I now repeat myself. Buildings are not equal to education. A building is just a container. I'm all for buildings if they are more than just warehouses where the government stores children until age 18.

I want to know why the school board won't take care of things that DON'T cost money--like giving thugs the boot and using instructional time for teaching instead of continual testing.

I also wonder how much space we would gain if the federal government actually enforced immigration laws.

I will not vote for school bonds until either a) the funds from the previous bonds are used where intended and as described on the ballot; or b) any school board member that helped to divert funds is removed from office and prosecuted.

I do agree that enforcement of immigration laws should be required, but do not see how it relates to this discussion. Children do not immigrate voluntarily and are not given a choice. Many so-called immigrant children were born here and are therefore US Citizens, like it or not. Yes, enforce the laws; no, do not relate immigration to school funding for children. Further, these children will grow up to speak English, learn about our history and assimilate into our society just lake generations of previous immigrants did. Of course, some people do not like the fact that when another ingredient is added to the melting pot the flavor changes accordingly. Nevertheless I do not support the politicization of children regardless of their parents choices.

Illegal, adult immigrants are another matter altogether on which I have already stated my opinion.

My concern here is fiscal and governmental. I will NOT vote for these bonds. My tax bill has increase 34% in 4 years while inflation was running at 3% and that should be enough for a while.

verlese,

Children of illegal immigrants have everything to do with overcrowding in schools, and thus, GCS' push for bonds for more schools. With the growth in the illegal immigrant population in this state and county, there can be little doubt that this is a major contributor to the annual increase in student enrollment. In Arizona, the state passed tougher laws of employers enforcing requirements that they not hire illegals, and many of them left the state and went home. As a result of that, overcrowding in the schools disappeared overnight.

Well, the same thing would happen here as well. If we had the demographics of the annual increases in student enrollment in the county schools, we might find that the majority of it is in children of illegal immigrants. Enforcing immigration laws could have the effect of reducing overcrowding in the schools.

Finally, I agree with the first poster, I have already voted for bonds to build schools in Jamestown once. I'm not being fooled once again and voting for the same bonds again five years later.

I assume that if illegals were deported, they would take their children with them--most parents would. I understand our immigration law has a loophole that allows a pregnant woman to cross the border illegally and then give birth to an American Citizen. If we controlled the border this would not be a problem, since illegal crossings would be minimized.

Incidentally, another beef I have is that ASL interpreters for deaf children of legal citizens are so poorly paid while the county makes sure there are Spanish interpreters everywhere--don't want any illegals to miss out on anything!

I have no fear of adding to the mix of cultures in this nation. My ancestors came from France/Germany/Scotland/England and were Brethren/Huguenot/Methodist/Calvinist and spoke French/German/Pennsylvania Dutch/English. Their descendants are all fluent in English and have studied Spanish,Latin, German, French, ASL and Latin. They have also performed humanitarian work or educational work on several continents. No xenophobia here. Just an observation that space for legal citizens comes first.

Oops! I didn't mean to list Latin twice--although it is twice as hard as the other languages I listed, imo.

Oak Ridge Runner,

Your statements on illegal immigration are irrefutable; this problem does contribute to school overcrowding. We both agree that our immigration problems should be addressed.
I am saying that I do not want to couple our school policy with our immigration policy. Should a [another?] law be enacted making the hiring of illegal immigrants a criminal offense and that law, being enforced [at last?] result in a reduction in school overcrowding, that is fine. However, I do not agree that these problems should be coupled. Getting a solution for either is more difficult if we have to find an acceptable solution for both at the same time. That is just a fact of politics. In addition, the argument that the children have no choice in this matter is irrefutable. If their parents take them home then so be it.
As for whether an illegal should be able to deliver a child that is automatically a citizen, that is another matter, again best left decoupled from our school issues.
I did not intend to suggest nor did I imply that a person is xenophobic just because they want to address immigration. If that were the case I would stand accused as well. Again, if we want to solve these problems, lets do so separately.

per ORR: "Finally, I agree with the first poster, I have already voted for bonds to build schools in Jamestown once. I'm not being fooled once again and voting for the same bonds again five years later." I am with you all the way on this one.

I believe the citizens are more than aware of our school needs. However, I do not believe our elected school board or county commissioners are aware of how to properly spend our tax dollars. I will ask again why Eastern High was so grossly under insured? Why do they waste our tax dollars on "green schools"? And before I am attacked for that last statement let me say I am all for using rain water in the toilets, for using sun lite instead of electricity, things that make a difference. But to waste money on a lumber certification so you can say its a "green school" is idiotic. Most counties around us build schools for millions less , why? Our elected officials have seen the population increases and ignored our schools. I will vote no on the bonds and will support all new candidates for commisioner and school board.

Regarding the illegal immigration issue:

Bill Graham is running for governor of North Carolina.

He supports laws much like those used in Arizona with amazing results.

Graham’s proposals include the following measures:

1. No driver’s licenses for illegal aliens
2. Require Voter Identification Cards
3. No access to public benefit programs for illegal aliens
4. Employer Sanctions
5. Make English the official language of the State of North Carolina
6. End bilingual education in public schools in favor of English transition and immersion
7. Enhance the ability of local law enforcement to apprehend illegal aliens and enforce immigration laws
8. Outlaw Sanctuary City Status: Charlotte, Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Durham, Raleigh, and Winston-Salem

I don't know much about Bill Graham or the other candidates at this point. I'll be interested to find out their viewpoints on this crucial issue.

Joker, et. al, I look forward to your support next month.

I have asked this question until I am blue in the face, but I'll ask it again:

How many trailers will this bond remove?

I fear that the answer is 0.

Have you guys thought farther than "theyse is illegal and needs ter go" and actually considered the implications of forcing immigrants out of the state?

1. The schools will be slightly less crowded of course, but NC still has the two of the fastest growing cities in America. It won't do much in the long term.

2. The immigrants that leave were productive and had jobs. If you suddenly pull out the rug from under 10% (an estimate) of the workforce, the economy will crash. It has been documented that this happens in other sundown towns that passed measures such as what you wish.

On the original topic:

Vote for the bonds during this election and then vote out the school board when they come up. I lived through Ragsdale and JMS and hated the places. I wouldn't force those places on anybody. Its all we can do.

Gee Slaan, when you put it that way. Overcrowding in the schools will be minimized, and we'll wind up with a labor shortage, so that employers will need skilled workers, many of whom are citizens and currently out of work. I don't think you're helping your case any.

I admire immigrants and hope we as a country can get more. It says a lot about us. But, in addition to freeing up school resources, wouldn't illegal aliens leaving an area allow the job market to ripen for unskilled American laborers, yo?

Roger

I will again not vote for school bonds. As a retired educator, I saw up close and personal how money was wasted...staff development is a sore spot with me...trips to foreign countries to study their system, umpteen "coordinators" at the county level; curriculum coordinators at all schools, paper pushers at the county office who cause teachers extra work with no visible benefit, and on and on and on.

As to trailers, they are cheaper and are movable. They make adequate classrooms. The teacher, not the building, create an educational environment...if they are allowed to do their job.

Also, how much are we paying a search firm to find a new superintendent? What is wrong with taking applications?

Sorry you hated Ragsdale and JMS, Slaan. I love both schools.

Couldn't agree more, Carol. I see no sense in beautification schools, and think there should be two (three tops) basic box-shaped and easily expandable school designs to choose from, with only minor architectural and engineering modifications incorporated when soil and/or terrain concerns come into play (the counties and State staff architects and engineers, right?). I'm open to reasoned arguments against the idea. It's cost effective and accommodating. And has worse than a snowball's chance because it would take administrative decisions and legacies away.

We're all slowly learning where our educational system priorities truly lie. And a great deal of us will vote a responsible "no" when the time again comes.

Roger