The headline article in the May 31 MDJ, "Osborne upset over turf schedule" speaks volumes about the workings of the Cobb School District that occur out of public view. There are so many egos involved that there is just not enough time to think about such mundane things as educating our kids.
Does anyone remember when the school board's public agenda ever contained an item to discuss the schedule for an expenditure of $16 million to install artificial turf on the football fields at 16 high schools in public? Were all of the ramifications of such a large project ever thoroughly discussed by all before it was approved? Was the final schedule really based on "most apparent need"?
Were the problems that have now become apparent ever considered when our highly educated board and highly paid administration moved the school calendar from the end to the beginning of August against the wishes of the taxpaying parents, in a year when it would undoubtedly conflict with the turf installation?
Doesn't it seem peculiar that the initial schedule for the turf installation at the first eight schools was "re-evaluated" for valid reasons and that the changed schedule just happened to contain one school in each board member's post, or that the school in Allison Bartlett's post just happened to wind up at the end of the line?
Does it seem plausible that Bartlett and her constituents are finally getting their come-uppance for her alleged violations of board etiquette at public meetings and for showing disrespect to the board chairman during the past tumultuous school year? Didn't he publicly proclaim that she should be censured?
In the beginning, it was loudly ballyhooed that the only reasons the turf was needed was because it was safer, easier to maintain and would provide a better surface for all school classes to use for many educational purposes.
Now, the failure to install turf at Osborne first "may lead to the ultimate demise of the Osborne football program." Does that sound like many other classes expected to use the "turf" for "educational purposes"?
Someone told me long ago that schools were invented as non-profit, non-business, tax-supported entities and the primary reason for a countywide school district was to enable the tax revenue to be spread equally across all schools in a county, so that none of the county's students would be shortchanged as a result of the location and concentration of taxpaying entities. Did that concept only apply in the "olden days" or is there something wrong with the picture now being presented?
James E. Stoll
Kennesaw
Follow us on Twitter!
Parents need to put their educational needs of their children BEFORE their family vacations. Until that is done you will have no influence on the school board.
Leave the calendar issue alone give it a chance!
If a week in May is $315K, then why is the last day of school May 25? The first week of June must be close to $315K as well. LOOK AT AUGUST - $393K per week!!! If you move a week from August to a week in May/June that is almost $80K per week in savings! You know, you guys are patting yourselves on the back for $62K and just wait until the August bills come in! You can bet the MDJ will have an open records request for those. But, a few of you and/or your cronies will be voted out by the time that hits the public eye.
Balanced Calendar
Weekly Rate
Week in August $393,643
- Week in September $(374,251)
- Week in February $(397,425)
Week in May $315,699
Cost Savings to the District $(62,333)
Mrs. Bartlett took a not-so-popular-stand when she tried to wrestle the ability to accrue vacation pay away from administrators--proposing to grandfather-in all monies that had already been earned, of course. In a system that seems to embrace business models, such as Ombudsman Educational Services that will take the place of Oakwood High School, I was stunned that the board and superintendent could not see the value in what Mrs. Bartlett advocated. I was even more stunned when Mr. Sanderson said he was surprised and honored to see so many administrators at the board meeting--this said after administrators received a memo telling them to be in attendance!
With the upcoming elections for school board, I believe Mrs. Bartlett will finally have people on the board who will treat her respectfully and listen to what she has to say. She has had a tough time fitting into the "good old boy" network, but she is honest and tenacious. Aren't those qualities what taxpayers look for in their representatives? She represents her constituents, makes a mistake now and then, but gets back to task and tries to do better. I don't see the other six board members doing that. In fact, it appears to me that the others represent Mr. Sanderson, not their constituents. They make mistakes, but they never admit to them. A few more board members like Mrs. Bartlett would be a nice change, don't you think?
If Cobb's lower salaries is what will push these unsuccessful "leaders" out the door, then I am all for it.
Those who like the new schedule generally are stay-at-home parents who don't need to worry about what their kids will be doing on all those extra weeks off. They don't have to deal with bosses who demand they be at work, regardless of what their kids need.
And, if the school board cares so much about teachers, which is the so-called reason for these weeks off, why the heck are they firing so many?
One more thing, just wait until the air conditioning bills start coming in for our hot August days. Maybe then the fog will lift from the board's eyes. then again, maybe not; their record of stupidity is a long one.
"...in a salary study of the states' 6 largest school districts, Cobb has the lowest paid superintendant and has the least number of employees earning $100,000 or more annually. I have a concern that there was too drastic a cut in support services in the Central Administration, which may begin to show this school year or next."
"Another concern is the salary of our Principals as compared to fourteen neighboring school districts. Gwinnett county has the highest salaries for these positions with Cobb county being on the bottom. Cobb county has a risk of losing many of its top leaders if corrective action is not taken soon."
Please tell me that he's not proposing raises. Wasn't the vacation perk designed to "retain talent".
"against the wishes of the taxpaying parents" just isn't true. You might be a taxpayer, but not a parent - so stop speaking for us!
Not sure how this ‘cheaper price’ statement is even remotely true since the money from the saved vacation time has to be put in a "lock boxed". Those monies can't be used by the board. Does Holly Cash or the Superintendent even know how to balance their own checkbooks when they make such claims? Where was the CFO’s voice to pointing out that this reasoning was grossly wrong?
Let’s replace the board with new members who are not appear to be disinterested insiders or long time employees who publically claim they don’t know how to judge their old boss, Fred Sanderson.
It is time for a change, despite the comedy which many on the board offers to the viewer.
It is apparent that our board priorities of how to spend leftover monies from splost II is well off when it comes to making decisions. There are so many schools in cobb that have a shower in its classrooms everytime it rains. I often wonder how many have the black mold growing beneath the carpeting that smells of mildew. Or the unsanitary and outdated bathrooms that remain as a last priority to be replaced through splost. Let's not forget the trailers that exist at almost every school in cobb. But they claim that artificial turf is being placed for safety and educational reasons for our children. I am blown away!
It is a crime how booster clubs have the right to pay for coach salaries rather then just support the atheletic teams so that no childs' parents have to pay for them to play the sports. Not to forget that some boosters had enough of money to put turf down already and CC feels they should now be reimbursed for their wasteful spending. AGain, I will never give a dime to a booster club in CC!
Good luck CC, my children are registered in private school for this fall. The costs may be more then my tax dollars, but at least I know they will have a A education and be prepared for college. I will share a school where all parents share values and morals that education, discipline come first. And a board cannot do a damn thing without the majority vote of the parents first.
The school board does not have a leg to stand on with the closing of Oakwood High School, but it keeps going forward with it. In NO way did they prepare for closing a school. Why? Because they didn't realize that that was what they were doing.
That aside, it makes you wonder. Maybe some of them did realize. Perhaps Sanderson, Constantino, Lynnda Crowder-Eagle and the rest who hate Bartlett, just made sure that it slid right past the board. I mean, did you see the information they received on the issue before the vote? Nowhere did it say Oakwood High School would be closing. Of course not, but guess who it makes look bad-Bartlett. It is in her Post.
Payback certainly, but at what cost?
That school could house 2000 students easy in a school year with the current staff. Why not keep it to absorb some of the increase in class sizes around the county?
What they want to replace it with, a 'digital academy' can't come close. It can only handle 180 students and 40 of those go to the non-traditional student, the rest are expelled or suspended students. Regardless, that number is a far cry from 2000.
Seems like there is a little vindictiveness at play here, indeed.