Results 1 to 10 of 56

Thread: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    HB Forum Owner R0cketer's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 16th, 2002
    Posts
    7,632
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    Wise County leaders all proclaim their support for economic development "? a field in which I am quite familiar, and one in which I am involved professionally. Just two years ago, the county mounted an aggressive public campaign to convince state political leaders and those business groups pursuing the project to locate a state-wide data center in the county (specifically at the Lonesome Pine Business and Technology Park).

    Just at the very moment decisions were starting to crystallize, the previous school board went into a virtual melt-down over the very subject of school renovation vs. consolidation ("rationalization"?), culminating in the public sacrificing of Dr. Mike Basham, a man whose only sin was doing his job as directed.

    The school board meetings were ugly and downright personal, with angry "save our schools"? partisans calling for heads to roll. Dr. Basham and his family were bodily threatened. Of course, elected politicians seldom step up and take full responsibility, but instead sacrifice the closest professional administrator to placate an angry mob.

    Why is this relevant? This all took place at the very time the (ultimate) winning company "? Northrop Grumman "? visited Wise County. In fact, it was the headline in the daily newspaper that was slipped under their doors at the hotel that next morning. They came away with the impression that Wise County had a dysfunctional education system, with limited course offerings, no real commitment to public education, and sadly blighted and out-of-date high schools.

    Instead, they chose Russell County and Lebanon "? a county that impressed them with their commitment to education both in terms of academic offerings and physical plant (To be fair, there were other factors "? but this was a major self-inflicted wound for our county.). Wise County can thank those radicals who caused such a public ruckus back then for killing our chances to land the data center. So, until county leaders get a grip on this problem, economic diversity will be mighty slow in coming to Wise County.

    In all this discussion, there has been little debate over the abysmal state of curriculum and course offerings in the Wise County school system. Friend and local professional engineer Carl Curtis has bravely spoken to this problem many times before the school board, but has been hooted down by some of the same voices who robbed us of the data center through their actions.

    Many Wise County students are woefully deficient upon graduation "? a fact supported by the high percentages of entering college freshmen enrolled in remedial math and English courses. This is true not only at Virginia Tech or UVa "? but also MECC and UVa-Wise. The high numbers of Wise County students in dual-enrollment or advanced placement courses at MECC and UVa-Wise merely suggest the poor track record of the Wise County school system in placing proper attention to the only thing that's really important "? the act of teaching.

    Instead, at least some of the school board members are preoccupied by attempting to micromanage the system and debating innocuous details instead of the broad policy matters they're elected to develop. This is not meant to malign the teaching corps in Wise County "? a group of dedicated professionals who deserve to be fairly compensated and supported with ample budget resources to give our young people the very best. They need more "? not less "? and the school renovation debate robs them of the very resources they need.

    It should also be noted that SOL achievement is merely base-level adequacy. If the Wise County school system is standing tall, obviously it's in a room full of extremely short people. Rather than take my word for it, I suggest the school board engage the colleges I mentioned for some first-hand feedback and factual documentation. As a sitting member of the UVa-Wise board of directors, I can assure you this matter has been discussed around our table.

    So "? it's time to step back from "tradition,"? and the silly notion that life, as we know it, will return to 1950. It won't. We're in the here and now. We have a stagnant population, a "graying"? age stratification that means enrollments will not increase over time, and little chance of changing any of this, at least dramatically or soon. Like it or not, these are the cards this county has been dealt.

    With three NEW schools "? which I'll call Wise West, Wise Central and West East "? we could offer our children an exemplary educational experience, and thus position ourselves for a world-class economy. We could do this with little or no tax increase, if we were wise (no pun intended). I would allow the county's professional leadership to plan these schools based around the existing infrastructure, proximity to existing services, access routes, and the various issues that drive the placement of such facilities. It's not difficult "? it merely requires the leadership and the will to act. The elected officials should allow these professionals to bring such a plan forward for their consideration, and stop proclaiming that "we're here for the children."?

    Also "? please don't mention high school athletics (particularly football) as a significant consideration against "rationalization."? These schools are for education (hence the name "schools"?), and athletics are merely extracurricular activities that should not drive the debate.

    For those who maintain "small schools"? are superior, consider these points, because all things are relative. If Wise County had three high schools, they would all still be "small."? Dobyns-Bennett in Kingsport has 1,822 students, grades 9-12. That's clearly a "large"? high school. If you deleted those students who are not county residents, a single high school in the county would suffice (there are presently 2,126 high school students, although that figure includes some eighth graders). If you divided this total into three, for comparison purposes, you would have three schools with about 700 students each (and the total also includes the 250 "freeloaders"? who come from neighboring counties). These would be "small schools"? by anyone's standard.

    Sullivan County, Tenn., high schools, for comparison, range from a low of about 800 for Sullivan North to about 1,200 for Sullivan South. Even these schools are not "large"? by national standards. The program offerings and quality of education, arguably, are superior to Wise County's system now. The physical nature of the school plant, by comparison, is embarrassing for us. We're languishing in the "dark ages,"? and our neighbors in other counties and nearby states are laughing at us "? and whipping us in their own efforts to grow their local economies. Children adapt quickly to change, so the issue of "tradition"? is invoked by the adults only.

    Finally, I write these rather frank comments and suggestions in full support of the Wise County Board of Supervisors and the Wise County School Board. Without exception, these are sincere people who only want to do the very best for our county. While we might disagree at times, we do so without being disagreeable. And, as I learned from my parents many years ago, I will respect and support the decision of the majority. I'm willing to pay higher taxes to support public education, since the future of our county rests on it. That's called good citizenship.

    Political leadership is not about "doing what the people want,"? but doing "what's in the best interests of the people."? And please don't mention "referendum."? This is a complex issue that requires considerable thought and planning "? and it is thus beyond the ability to compress into a simple ballot initiative that could be absorbed by the voting public sufficient to cast an informed vote. That's merely a cop-out, and it's not why referendums are held (It's normally to authorize the full faith and credit of the taxpayers for certain large-scale capital projects "? not the particular nature of those projects.).

    I would challenge our elected leaders to step back from the normal popularity contest that characterizes any elected post, and instead display the courage and commitment to do the right thing for the future of Wise County. And again "? I'm willing to pay my share of that "right thing"? without a grumble or complaint. Ultimately, as citizens, we must ask what is really best for the future generations of children of our county in the future. It may not necessarily be what a few adults think is best today, but it shouldn't be about them.

    Flanary is executive director of the Lenowisco Planning District Commission.

    What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach, so you get what we had here last week which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it.

  2. #2
    Inactive Member plantsman's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 14th, 2006
    Posts
    2,592
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/getsmile.tmp007816300.gif[/img]

    Great article, expresses much of my own sentiment.

  3. #3
    Inactive Member imported_mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 6th, 2004
    Posts
    5,094
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    Propoganda I tell you, Propoganda. [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif[/img]


  4. #4
    Guest 's Avatar

    Re: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    [ QUOTE ]
    With three NEW schools — which I’ll call Wise West, Wise Central and West East — we could offer our children an exemplary educational experience, and thus position ourselves for a world-class economy. We could do this with little or no tax increase, if we were wise (no pun intended). I would allow the county’s professional leadership to plan these schools based around the existing infrastructure, proximity to existing services, access routes, and the various issues

    [/ QUOTE ] I think some of the opposition would like the idea of all new schools instead of just keeping 3 old ones(at 54 million). And the thing will still increase taxes, anyway you go about it. The next topic is how to increase the size of a couple of elementaty schools so they can handle the 8th grades, too. More space and more new buildings. Make it fair, and you won't see as much opposition. And isn't it about time we went to a formula that will let us keep all of our severance tax money. There are too many hands in that pot, for some tastes. And if we are gonna buy into this idea, why not just have 2 schools? Keep them close to the size of Lee High and you will at least have some neighbors of similar size.

  5. #5
    Inactive Member buck73's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 22nd, 2006
    Posts
    148
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    Mr Flanary keeps saying we can build 3 new schools with LITTLE OR NO TAX INCREASE. I honestly don't think he knows what he's talking about. Sure he has a lot of experience and credentials BUT how come nobody else thinks there will be little or no tax increase. I agree with mega... propaganda.
    Macho Man
    [img]http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/2007/11/01/2003988995.jpg[/img]

    2007 ACC Champions!

  6. #6
    HB Forum Owner R0cketer's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 16th, 2002
    Posts
    7,632
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    Call me crazy (ok I'm crazy) but I'll go with someone who does have a lot of experience and credentials over someone who does not. How it would be little or no tax increase, I don't know. That would a point I'd like to have addressed. Maybe he can explain that.

    I mean one obvious factor to me, if you're getting 36 million from the state and federal, and now you're splitting that between six (in this example, $6 million per school, if you go to 3 schools, you get 36 million, you get 12 million. Already you've cut the bill in half, and doubled your money. Now then, you also have to think that it should be cheaper to provide utilities, and again, not only cheaper, but to less schools. Heat 6 buildings with bad windows, poor insultation, cracks, etc etc compared to heating 3 with things proper. Simple office supplies, supplying 6 schools things such as letterhead, when you would supply only 3. You're not going to expenses in half, but there should be significant savings, and the money you're getting from the state and federal shouldn't be cut, since its based on enrollment.

    What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach, so you get what we had here last week which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it.

  7. #7
    Inactive Member plantsman's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 14th, 2006
    Posts
    2,592
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    If consolidation does occur, what would be the effects on the feeder schools? or would there be none?

    Also, I would think there would be some savings by eliminating some of the administrative positions.

  8. #8
    Guest 's Avatar

    Re: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    [ QUOTE ]

    I mean one obvious factor to me, if you're getting 36 million from the state and federal, and now you're splitting that between six (in this example, $6 million per school, if you go to 3 schools, you get 36 million, you get 12 million. Already you've cut the bill in half, and doubled your money. Now then, you also have to think that it should be cheaper to provide utilities, and again, not only cheaper

    [/ QUOTE ] You still have the same nunber of kids. None of the schools have A/C so anything you might save there, heating system being more efficent, it is out the window. You will have to increase transporation costs, the "second run" buses won't be available , the longer travel will make a bus harder to get the second trip out of. The ones that run some of the elementary schools won't be there as they will have to go earlier to get to the new schools. I'll have to see him pull a rabbit of his hat, before I'll buy the "no tax increase" line. I can't tell we get squat from his organization, what makes you believe he can buy new schools without money? And if he could explain it ,I'm thinking he is in the wrong job. He should be running the country.

  9. #9
    Inactive Member imported_Counts's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 17th, 2002
    Posts
    3,370
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 2nd Part of Ron Flanary Letter

    OMG we agree on something consoladation related!!!!!!

    I agree that Wise Co. taxes will be going up wheather the answer is fixing the 6 schools of building 3 new ones IMHO the County will go with whatever is the cheapist proposal

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •