Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Wake school board: the usual 5-4 for "community assignment zones"
(Update: State NAACP's statement: Intentional resegregation is still illegal -- and we will sue. Letter from the Rev. William Barber to Board Chair Ron Margiotta is below the fold.)
You know, there's a good way to make public policy, and then there's just ram it through and the hell with anybody who doesn't like it. That the new school board majority just voted, by the usual 5-4 split, to establish "community assignment zones," before a student assignment committee has even been named, let alone met, just takes the damned cake, doesn't it?
Just sayin' -- the Tea Party is in session in Raleigh.
Developing, as they say.
One more thought: I didn't understand Debra Goldman's statement that this "directive" for community assignment zones was necessary before her policy committee could move on a new student assignment policy. She said community schools and diversity "can work in tandem ... in a holistic policy." Absolutely right, they can. But not if you draw hard lines, a.k.a, assignment zones.
What puzzles me, listening to Tedesco and Goldman in particular, is what they really envision for the schools and whether, at the end of the day, they have any intention whatsoever of avoiding the resegregation effects of zones. Since they continue to make policy on the fly, without full discussion (let alone thoughtful consideration of what the board minority might think), it's impossible to tell whether they actually care about diversity but can't articulate how it might be preserved in a community-schools plan ... or whether they're willing to let it slip away and can't quite bring themselves to admit it.
If they really want to balance community schools and diversity, they need to get busy with the kind of countywide stakeholders process that Tedesco talked about during and after the election campaign, but which he somehow hasn't managed to get started in the four months since.
Dear Chairperson Margiotta:
We received your letter that said the Board delegated to you and Ms. Goldman the power to respond to the NAACP's request to make a comprehensive presentation to it before it acted to dismantle the heroic efforts of thousands of Black and White parents, teachers and children since the 1970's to create diverse constitutional education. The NAACP has worked for 101 years to mend our society, rent asunder by slavery and Jim Crow. Our work in the past few decades has become more complex, because our communities are made up of deeply segregated neighborhoods—direct results of Jim Crow housing, lending and zoning policies backed by the government—that still make us strangers.
Your proposed resolution relies on the same euphemism used in the recent campaign – “neighborhoods.” Everyone knows this is a code word for race and class. A vote for this shall establish [white] “neighborhood schools” for the elites and, at the other end of the scale, shall establish [Black and Brown] “neighborhood schools,” that will reinforce low expectations, the flight of good teachers, and multiply the problems of concentrated poverty.
This is to put the Board on notice that we have informed the NAACP National Board and staff of your partisan political promises to re-segregate Wake Schools. We were advised that political promises are a dime a dozen. But should you make a policy decision and direct your staff to establish segregated schools by race, no matter what euphemisms and stratagems you use to try to disguise your intentions, the evidence is overwhelming that you know what you are doing and you are doing it intentionally. At that point, all legal options are on the table.
I still believe it would be useful for the Board and its many constituencies to hear the NAACP's wisdom on these critical human rights issues, and request the full Board vote on our previous requests.
Sincerely,
/s/
Rev. Dr. William J. Barber, II
President
Comments (6)
Showing 1-6 of 6
like
dislike
It doesn't matter what you call it, Chuck, the end result is segregation. That's what matters. It's a much more segregated system than we have now. Admit that. You're right, it sucks, so don't create schools that you wouldn't send your own kids to.
It's not an "unintended" effect. This is by design. Concentrations of poor students result in bad classrooms. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. It's not a matter of "black people can't learn" High teacher turnover, discipline issues, lack of high peer standards sink these places. Kids shouldn't be on a bus more than 30 minutes one way, but Raleigh isn't so large that equal-quality schools can't remain in place. The system should be tweaked, not abandoned. Racism isn't history.
Bull Mr. Barber. Segregated schools is where a school board passes a resolution saying "Only black children can attend this school, only white children can attend that one." That's not what's being done here. They're saying that schools will be assigned based on where you live. Now, whatever the secondary effects of that happen to be, they just happen to be. If it so happens that black kids go to school in black neighborhoods, which just happen to be poor, well that sucks - but it is an unintended secondary effect. These arent the '60's. "We shall overcome" - please.
It's a good question. I expected them to move faster, frankly. But after the debacle of their first meeting in December, with the eight surprise resolutions and tremendously negative public reaction, I think they were at pains to look, at least, like they were being careful, deliberative ... But actually being careful and deliberative takes time. I think they realized that if they were going to get this "zones" scheme in place by the 2011-12 school year (and before the 2011 election, at which point they may lose their majority), they needed to just punch it through and the h--- with any sort of authentic stakeholders' process.
Latest in Citizen
-
Perdue: I'll be in charge on fracking, thank you
- May 21, 2012
-
Too scary? Efforts to curb N.C. voting in 2012 recall state's 1898 coup
The means are different but the object is the same: Leave the rich in control by preventing the masses from voting their interests.
- May 21, 2012
-
Frank Eaton, Mary-Ann Baldwin, Don Vaughan: Next N.C. Dems chair?
- May 10, 2012
- More »
More by Author
-
Latest from PPP: Amendment 1 is (uh-oh) holding its lead
Amendment 1, as of polling done April 27-29, is still ahead by 14 points. But there are silver linings...
- May 1, 2012
-
What does the anti-gay amendment mean? There's a commission for that.
- Feb 27, 2012
- More »
