John Tedesco, Wake school board member, just issued a statement about his possible candidacy for state Schools Superintendent, Republican nomination division. The statement: JT will announce next Thursday — Jan. 26 — whether he's announcing his candidacy. Happy as always to help with his publicity:

JohnTedescoMediaRelease.pdf

• photo by Bob Geary
• The new Wake school board takes office

It's January 17 and the new student assignment plan — Superintendent Tony Tata's version of controlled-choice — starts today still missing a strong diversity component. In fact, the plan is unchanged from what it was in October, when it was adopted by the old Republican school board majority, which passed it after lopping off the diversity element that Tata floated but didn't actually propose.

Nor is this a new problem. From the get-go two years ago, it's been understood that a controlled-choice plan won't work unless the four "pillars" of stability, proximity, choice and diversity (as measured by achievement) are equally strong. If any of the pillars are weak, controlled-choice guru Michael Alves told us, the plan won't be fair to low-income neighborhoods and kids.

In the plan going forward, the diversity pillar is weak to the point of collapse.

You'll recall that Kevin Hill and Keith Sutton, then in the minority, voted against the Tata plan in October because it lacked a sufficient diversity standard.

Now, after toppling the Republicans in the fall elections, Hill and Sutton are the board chair and vice chair, respectively, installed by a 5-4 pro-diversity majority.

And yet, the new majority — Hill, Sutton, and the three newly elected members, Susan Evans, Christine Kushner and Jim Martin — has taken no action to strengthen the plan since assuming office seven weeks ago.

Strange.

Looking over my notes from the two work sessions held by the school board on Jan. 3 and Jan. 10, I'm struck by the lack of cohesion among the five pro-diversity members. They're clearly not on the same page. But that's not the problem so much as it is the fact that they don't seem to be making much of an effort to get on the same page — i.e., to reach a consensus among themselves about how to move diversity forward.

The five majority members appear to be split between two different diversity approaches. (More on this below.)

OK, but if they all continue to insist that they get their way, nothing will happen — because there's only five of them, and the four Republicans won't give them a vote for anything.

So, to repeat, the majority must come together.

Complicating things is the Open Meetings Law, which bars the five of them from meeting privately to thrash out a common position. To meet together, the five — because they are a majority — must hold a public session. Or else, one of them must be the leader and engage in shuttle diplomacy with the others.

At their public sessions on Jan. 3 and Jan. 10, the five demonstrated little ability to control their own agenda, allowing the Republican members, especially Debra Goldman, to filibuster them to distraction with all manner of issues other than diversity.

Which is not to blame Ms. Goldman.

Now, the majority is under the gun. The first round of the assignment plan goes from Jan. 17 to Feb. 24. Pro-diversity changes must be made before Feb. 24, or they'll come too late to matter, at least for the 2012-13 school year.

The board has a work session scheduled next Tuesday — time TBA — and two in February on Feb. 7 and Feb. 21. But the Feb. 7 regular meeting is the only official session on tap between now and the end of round-one assignment choices on Feb. 24. That's not to say the board couldn't schedule additional meetings. It is to say that the majority needs to get itself in gear.

The issue the new majority has thus far not resolved is what to do about the "structurally displaced" kids (Tata's term) from low-income neighborhoods in Southeast Raleigh. They're displaced by the fact that half or more of the seats in SE Raleigh's magnet schools are reserved for magnet students coming from other, more affluent places. To maintain diverse student bodies in the magnets, therefore, about half of SE Raleigh's kids go to school elsewhere in the county — and by doing so, they may augment diversity in their "elsewhere" schools.

Which begs the question, where exactly is "elsewhere" for the displaced students?

If they end up in the same handful of so-called rim schools, the schools closest to Southeast Raleigh that aren't magnets, the result will be a disproportionate number of low-income students in those schools; then, if the history of other school systems with "good" and "bad" schools is any guide, the rim schools will be deemed "bad" (i.e., high-poverty) schools — and the downward spiral of abandonment via controlled-choice will be underway.

The issue centers on 750-800 Southeast Raleigh kindergarten students who must be displaced. That's because:

1) Under the Tata plan, all other students are "grandfathered" in their current schools or in designated feeder-pattern schools unless they want to change; kindergarteners, though, don't have a current school;

2) Under the plan, kindergarten is the nearest thing to destiny. Once in kindergarten, a student is assured of never being reassigned to a different elementary school and also assured that, from their elementary school, they'll go to a designated middle school and high school unless they apply — via controlled-choice — to go somewhere else. (Or, at least, that's the promise of the Tata plan. Whether it will hold together over the years is a very good question.)

To avoid having all 800 Southeast Raleigh kindergarteners land in the same handful of rim schools, two different approaches have been offered:

1) The straightforward one is to establish set-aside seats in other, so-called Regional Choice schools that aren't close to Southeast Raleigh and do have high achievement levels. This is Tata's plan, and it seems to be the approach Hill and Sutton favor.

2) The less direct method is to change the priority ranking system under the choice plan so the displaced Southeast Raleigh students have a better chance of being accepted into a Regional Choice or other desirable school when they apply. Kushner, Evans and possibly Martin seem to be headed this way.

About the latter option:

Under the choice plan as it stands — the Republican plan, in other words — if a school has more applicants than seats available, first preference goes to grandfathered students, second to siblings of current students, and third to students who live closest to the school. Displaced Southeast Raleigh kids are at the bottom of the barrel.

In public comment at the Jan. 10 meeting, Sanderson High School parent Anne Sherron, a diversity proponent, suggested thinking of displaced students the same way you'd want an airline to think about you, the displaced passenger. If you were bumped off one flight because it was overbooked, Sherron said, you'd certainly expect to be given top priority on the next flight — not put at the bottom of the list and bumped again.

It's only fair, Sherron said, that the displaced ("bumped") students go to the top of the list of applicants for scarce seats in good schools.

Tata, though, recommended the set-aside approach, mainly because — as his assignment task force chief James Overman said — designating a specific number of seats (say, up to 15 percent of available seats) in each of several schools would preclude the possibility that a lot of displaced kids would apply and get into the same one or two schools. With preference and with no controls, Overman said, low-income students could overwhelm a school.

it seemed to me the two approaches could be married — with displaced students getting top priority up to a 15 percent limit. The combination wouldn't differ much from a 15 percent set-aside approach, but it could read differently to a potential applicant to be given priority in an assignment system ... rather than handed a set-aside seat.

Whatever the actual difference, Republican board member John Tedesco is taking every opportunity to call any set-aside approach a "quota system," a racially loaded term well-known in the South. Interestingly, majority member Jim Martin says he agrees with Tedesco that set-asides are too "quota-like." But what Martin would do instead is unclear. (And to adopt anything else would require that the majority tangle with Tata, a formidable task unless they're united.)

On Jan. 10, the board scheduled four hours for its work session, with most of it supposed to be devoted to the assignment plan. But a good half of the four-hour window was eaten up instead by Debra Goldman, who belabored the subject of a private meeting the three new members (and Hill) had with consultant Alves as part of their orientation; questioned whether the majority should be in touch with each by email; objected to having the chair and vice chair meet in "leadership meetings" with the chair and vice chair of the Wake County Board of Commissioners; and just generally went on about tangential issues. If she was trying to gum them up, she succeeded beautifully.

Finally, when the student assignment plan did come around on the agenda, much of the remaining time went by in a fruitless discussion of whether the Jan. 17 start date could or should be pushed back. Result: It wasn't.

The clock was ticking toward zero before diversity — which unbelievably came last on the list of student assignment topics for discussion — was even addressed. Which meant, of course, that the topic was rushed and disjointed.

Kushner had suggested the previous week that displaced kids be moved ahead of proximate kids in the choice priority system. This prompted objections from Goldman and Tedesco about kids not getting into their nearby neighborhood school. So Evans, as a compromise, proposed putting the displaced students and the proximate students on an equal footing, with a lottery to decide if there weren't enough seats for both.

Evans also lamented that this issue wasn't taken up with some urgency as soon as the board majority was seated in December. Check-mark for that.

Martin started spitballing ideas about giving extra resources to schools for successfully recruiting displaced students, which he said could be a "win-win" approach but which won no response at all from anybody.

Hill and Sutton, at the head of the table, listened passively, offering nothing.

And then they were all out of time, with the 5:30 regular meeting due to begin in a few minutesl leaving Hill to announce the obvious: The Tata plan would go ahead unchanged, and the board would "monitor and evaluate" its progress beginning Jan. 17.

Before the Jan. 10 meeting, I wrote that the majority should allow the assignment plan to go ahead as scheduled. Great Schools in Wake, a progressive coalition, was calling for delay, but I disagreed, saying it made no sense for the new board to pick a fight with Tata as their first order of business.

I wrote this, however, assuming that the new majority would act that day to adopt one or the other of the two competing pro-diversity approaches, or a blend of the two. It simply didn't occur to me that they would instead kick the diversity can down the road. But watch out when you assume, because it makes ... well, you know.

After the Jan. 10 work session ended and as the regular meeting began, Kushner told some of us informally, and then repeated for the record when the meeting started, that diversity can be addressed as the plan goes forward and parents start to make choices for their kids.

That's the case up to Feb. 24, certainly. Parents' choices begin today, but no seats will be assigned until the end of round one. And, yes, it may help the board majority to see, as the process unfolds, which schools are in high demand and which are not ... and which parents are eagerly engaged in this process, and which are not ... and whether Southeast Raleigh are engaged or not.

There's a fear that many low-income parents won't be engage at all, and that unless there are set-aside seats for their kids in desirable schools, the end result of the choice process will be that affluent, tech-savvy parents get their top choices for their kids ... while poor parents don't actually make a choice, leaving their kids with whatever's left over.

Leftover schools = high-poverty schools = a result the whole election was intended to avoid.

• photo by Bob Geary
• The Wake school board in a work session last week; Kevin Hill, the new chair, is at the head of the table with his back to the camera

Well, fellow Wake County citizens, we're down to it on Tony Tata's student assignment plan, a controlled-choice plan with no base assignments for students:

Is it a go, or a no-go, for the 2012-13 school year?

The new school board, when it meets today, can:

1) retain the plan as is;

2) retain it, but with one or two fundamental and easily executed changes that would improve it greatly while still allowing it to go ahead for 2012-13;

3) delay it, either for a year or indefinitely, so that confusion would reign as to whether it would still be used next year or any year;

4) scrap it and muddle through for 2012-13 while searching for a different solution for 2013-14 et. seq.

5) delay a decision — but remember, the plan was adopted in October by the old (i.e., the Republican-majority) school board, and it remains in place unless some other action is taken.

Under the plan as it exists, parents have already applied for magnet school seats. The choice process for all other schools (Round 1 of two scheduled rounds) begins January 17.

After the new school board's work session on the plan last week, I concluded that the likely outcome was No. 2. Since then, the Great Schools in Wake group has come out for delay, ripping the plan as incomplete and a ploy to obscure the important issues of school assignment in a fog of marketing double talk. GSIW's members are dedicated and smart. One, Susan Evans, is now on the board. Evans was elected in October with Jim Martin and Christine Kushner, who are attentive to GSIW if not officially aligned with it. In short, GSIW's critique will be taken very seriously.

The GSIW position paper is here. The press release is here.

Raleigh attorney Neil Reimann issued a brief rebuttal on his authoritative Wake Reassignment blog. It's definitely worth a read. (I should note, Reimann is a neighbor of mine in Cameron Park, and I'd love to take credit for his work on this subject over the last two years, but he's always way ahead of me.)

Delaying the plan would be a mistake, Reimann says:

While I agree with some critics that there are unanswered questions, I don't think many of these remaining questions can be answered before the plan is implemented. It is a risk of a choice plan that choice implies some uncertainty.

I also agree with the critics that the plan is incomplete — left that way intentionally by the old Republican majority. But we now have a new pro-schools majority. (I am not going to give in to the fiction that this group of non-politicians, elected in a non-partisan election, should be called "Democratic" just because they are registered Democrats ... and four of the five people they defeated were, indeed, Republican politicians.)

The new board majority has the power to complete the plan with one or the other (or both) of two simple amendments designed to assure diverse schools and avoid the creation of high-poverty schools.

One amendment would promote achievement — the diversity factor — above proximity in the process for allocating seats in schools where the demand exceeds the supply. The other amendment would set aside seats in high-achieving schools so that kids from low-income areas who apply to that school are assured of acceptance.

Both changes would improve the plan in terms of its outcomes for kids from low-income neighborhoods who, because there isn't room for all of them in nearby magnet schools — they are "structurally displaced," as Tata puts it, by the fact that about half the seats in their schools are reserved for magnet applicants — must attend some other school.

The idea behind having set-asides and of promoting achievement in the allocation process is the same: Kids who are structurally displaced should be favored in the choice process, not given the leftovers — that is, the seats in schools that nobody else wanted.

With the amendments, the plan would still be imperfect. What plan isn't? The only perfect plan, as board member Chris Malone said last week, is the one that gives every parent a choice, "that choice being what they wanted all along."

With limited capacity and funds, no such perfection is in reach.

If the amendments are adopted, will the plan be successful over time?

I don't know the answer to that question. Tell me whether the voters will pass a critically needed, very big school bond issue in the next two years ... and whether the Wake Commissioners will increase funding for the schools (and, indeed, whether the General Assembly will also) ... and I'd be willing to take a shot at it.

The Tata plan — or any controlled-choice plan — depends for its success on having some slack capacity in the school system; if too many schools are full, where's the choice?

Success also depends on having sufficient funds to intervene quickly when schools are under-selected or, freighted with too many under-achieving students, get labeled as "failing" schools. A failed school won't be selected by anyone with a (real) choice who's paying attention. Schools cannot be allowed to fail.

That said, I think the Tata plan will hold for a year or two at the least. There isn't much slack capacity in the school system now — without 1,000 pre-fab classroom trailers, there wouldn't be any — but the pell-mell pace of growth in Wake County has slowed since the recession, and the $970 million bond issue from 2006 has helped immensely. So there's a window of time to give the plan a tryout.

The alternative, to junk it or put it off pending months of further wrangling and confusion, strikes me as wrong substantively and a terrible decision for this new school board to make politically.

I know Kevin Hill hates it when anyone (I include myself) suggests that he view things in political terms. But I'm using that word today, after the election, not to foretell what will get anyone re-elected (or elected). Rather, I mean political in the sense of what's good for the body politic — the public.

The public's been through hell on this issue for two years. A consensus has formed around a compromise approach that may or may not be the long-term answer, but it is the only answer on the table as we speak. Sensible people say it's an approach worth trying. Tata has staked his reputation on it, so unless the new board wants him gone — and contrary to Republican assertions, that's not the case — a meeting of the minds is in order.

To approve the plan now, with changes, is not to preclude further changes for 2013-14 and beyond — changes to feeder patterns, to priorities in the choice process, to the establishment or dis-establishment of new STEM schools, or leadership academies, or single-sex academies or even (dare I say it?) charter schools operated under the school board's aegis.

The plan has undoubted impact on magnet schools. At the work session last week, it was agreed the magnet schools must be protected and the plan, if adopted, should be analyzed to assure that it works in harmony with the magnet schools, not at cross-purposes with them.

Tata's plan may not be what the new school board would've come with on its own given a two-year head start. it may not be what it will come up with over the next four years. But throwing it out with little or no time left to fashion an alternative for the 2012-13 school year would be justifiable only if disaster was impending. And it isn't.

[Update, 8:45 p.m.: Back from the meeting. Guess what? Despite the low, low (free) price of my good advice, the new majority tossed Tedesco out as vice chair. Kevin Hill is the new chair, Keith Sutton is vice chair. Both by 5-4 or 5-3-1 votes. (A convoluted process; the vote for Hill as chair happened ... and then it happened again ... the reason doesn't matter.} Jim Martin, new member, made the good point that organization meetings, as a rule, should occur after elections — in December — not in June, as they do now. Martin wants the dates changed, which requires action by the General Assembly. Another example of the idiotic mother-may-I system of legislative control over local issues.

[Still, the bottom line is that Tedesco, a Republican, was ousted in mid-term on a party-line vote. Another body blow to the old nonpartisanship that Hill, as chair, said is his prime directive. Is JT planning to run for the DPI post? He didn't confirm or deny — but he had that look in his eye.]

Below is what I wrote this morning:

So here's a question for y'all who've spent the last two years in open or quiet despair over the antics of the Wake County Board of Education's Republican majority. With the recent elections, the Republicans' hold is broken. Non-Republicans, a.k.a. registered Democrats, will be in the majority by 5-4 as of today's swearing-in meeting. The Republican board chair, "Papa Ron" Margiotta, was defeated for re-election, so he must be replaced mid-way through his one-year term as chair.

Kevin Hill, I'm told, will be elected the new school board chair. A non-Republican.

But now the question is —

What of the vice chair, Mr. Grandiloquence himself, John Tedesco? Not just any Republican, but a firebrand Republican of the Tea Party variety and a likely candidate for state Superintendent of Public Instruction in the 2012 GOP primary.

Should Tedesco be allowed to serve the remaining six months of his term as vice chair? Or should he be ousted in favor of, say, Democrat Keith Sutton?

You will recall that, when the Republicans took power in December, 2009, Hill was the sitting board chair with six months left in his term. Margiotta & Co. knocked him immediately, notwithstanding the long, long board tradition of nonpartisanship and, actually, bipartisanship, under which Republican members and Democratic members served side-by-side and so cooperatively that most people had no idea which was which.

The ouster of Hill in mid-term blew that tradition off without care, signaling the Republicans' intention from the jump to run the school board as partisans.

But the old tradition was a good one — one the new board would do well to restore.

Leaving Tedesco as vice chair for another six months would send the message that this new school board majority, albeit all registered Democrats, intends to serve in the nonpartisan way their predecessor boards served — with the unfortunate 2009-11 period the exception proving why the rule is needed.

On the other hand, can you really leave Tedesco in office, even if it is a largely meaningless office with no authority, knowing he'll be calling himself the Wake school board vice chair if and when he runs for state DPI leader?

This morning, with the sun shining and the holidays approaching, I'll say yes.

I don't know that I'd say yes every morning.

We don't usually call him Sen. Dan Blue Jr., but we may need to start now that his son, Dan Blue III is beginning to make a mark in Wake County. Dan Blue III is a lawyer in his dad's firm, an officer in the Wake County Democratic Party and a new member of the Downtown Housing Improvement Corporation's board, among other things. He's also a front-runner to succeed Mack Paul as chair of the Wake Democrats when Paul steps down at the end of the year.

An email circulated yesterday by an unhappy Democrat objected to Paul's "endorsement" of Dan III to succeed him. I checked with Paul. He said he did write party activists to say that he, Paul "didn't want to leave without knowing that someone who can do the job" was willing to take it from him. Dan Blue III, Paul said, is well-qualified, is ready to put in the time and wants the job. Other well-qualified candidates may emerge as well, Paul said. "It's an open process."

Paul added that former Wake Commissioner Lindy Brown, who is first vice chair, did not want to step into the chair's role because she's considering running for elective office herself in 2012. (For a seat in the state House of Representatives. Update: To clarify, Brown is looking at District 38. Remember, the Republican map puts incumbent Democrats Grier Martin and Deborah Ross in the same district — District 34 — leaving 38 without an incumbent. District 38 is 4-to-1 Democrat and 53 percent African-American voters.)

Paul's successor will be chosen at a meeting of the party's executive committee (precinct leaders and elected officials) on Jan. 19. Wake Dems are also recruiting for a new executive director to replace the departing Tammy Brunner, who's moving to a position with the state party organization/Obama campaign.

Details of the meeting and applying for Brunner's job are on the Wake Dems website.

He's going out on top: Mack Paul, who led the Wake County Democratic Party in 2011, announced his resignation today, effective Dec. 31. The Democrat-backed slate went 5-for-5 in the Wake school board elections this fall, ousting the Republican majority. Democrat Harold Weinbrecht was re-elected mayor of Cary, and Nancy McFarlane, an independent with Democratic backing, beat a pair of Republican opponents to be the mayor-elect of Raleigh. Five Democrats will sit on the new Raleigh Council along with McFarlane's hand-picked successor, Randy Stagner, an independent who won her District A seat, and District E Councilor Bonner Gaylord, also an independent. The only Republican who won is District B member John Odom.

Here's what Paul had to say:

Dear Friend,

2011 marked a turning point for the Democratic Party locally and nationally. With continued hard work and a focused message, we can look forward to even greater successes in 2012.

As the end of year approaches, I have been working through several transitions to put us on solid footing for next year. Tammy Brunner, our talented and very patient executive director, will be moving into a new role with the State Party and OFA. She has done a tremendous job for the Wake County Democratic Party, but we are proud to see her in a new role that will allow her to have an even broader, positive impact on the Party.

I also am moving into some new roles, and consequently, am stepping down from my position as Wake County chair effective December 31. As you know, I filled Jack Nichols' unexpired term as chair late last year. My primary reason for doing so related to the situation facing the Wake County School Board. My wife was forgiving enough to let me serve as chair through the 2011 election cycle so that I could focus the Party's efforts on the school board races and coordinated campaign. The energy and passion unleashed by hundreds of volunteers and community leaders made this experience one of the highlights of my life.

Despite claims by some Republicans, Democrats prevailed in Wake County this year due to the hard work of many, many local volunteers, a seasoned and professional field organization and other groups vested in the success of our public school system. My hope is that we return to the days when no one knew or cared about the party affiliation of Wake County School Board members. However, if extreme ideologues attempt to upend the our school system in the future, I am confident Democrats will fiercely defend the traditions that have made this region an economic success story.

Now, with the campaign behind us, I need to refocus on family and work. I will remain involved in the Wake County Party, particularly on the fundraising front. I also plan to have a more targeted role in the 2012 Democratic races, to help make sure President Obama and Governor Perdue prevail in North Carolina as well as our Democratic candidates in the House and Senate.

We have a transition plan well underway to ensure the Party does not lose a beat. Tammy's position will be filled by year end so that she can work alongside her replacement. Our new chair will be installed at the January County Executive Committee meeting. Very capable leaders are stepping up as roles shift on the executive board, and you will be hearing more about that.

As someone who has worked on behalf of Democrats all of my adult life, I look forward to working with you on many more campaigns. Your encouragement and engagement in the critical challenges facing Wake County gives us hope. The cause never ceases.

Thank you for the opportunity to serve,

Mack

• photo by Jeremy M. Lange
• John Tedesco strikes an upward gaze.

I see that Under the Dome (N&0) is reporting that June Atkinson, the state Superintendent of Public Instruction and a Democrat, may not run for a third term in 2012. (Or she may.) The other night, some of the Democrats who packed into Kevin Hill's victory party were saying that state Rep. Rick Glazier, a leading progressive from Fayetteville, is laying plans to run if Atkinson doesn't. Then there was the story of how John Tedesco, whose hopes of being the next Wake school board chair were dashed by Hill's victory, is telling people he plans to run for the Republican nomination for DPI Super.

Glazier versus Tedesco? Articulate supporter of public schools versus voluble tea-party critic of same? Save me a seat for that one.

[Update, 11/17: WRAL checks in with JT. He's mulling ... and now comes the N&O with same.]

I saw Tedesco the other day at the Wake schools magnet fair in Raleigh. He didn't mention a DPI candidacy. (He has been speaking to conservative audiences all over NC.)

He did, however, say that he's getting married soon, to a woman with a son, and was at the magnet fair not simply in his capacity as a school board member but in his prospective parental capacity also. John took some heat for using family-style pictures in his '09 campaign, including one with a child on his shoulder, even though he was single. Now he'll be a family man, he said. He was beaming.

Combined with the four wins by Democrats in October, Hill's victory makes the 5-4 Republican school board majority go away as of the first week in December. The new board will have the five Democrats elected this year and the four Republicans, including Tedesco, who were elected in '09.

Another of the Republican members, Chris Malone, has already announced his candidacy for a state House of Representatives seat in the 2012 elections.

I would think Malone will be under some pressure to resign from the board once he becomes an active candidate for the legislature. Ditto Tedesco if he launches a statewide run. They wouldn't be required to step down, but the time demands of campaigning would seem to favor it. They would be required to do so if they won.

Should they leave the board, their replacements would be picked by the remaining board members, i.e., by a board dominated by Democrats. Thus, a 5-4 Democratic majority could soon become 6-3 or 7-2 ... but in any event, the Republicans will be in the minority through 2015 at least.

Malone's replacement in District 1 might well be Rita Rakestraw, a Knightdale Democrat who ran for the seat against him. In District 2, Tedesco ousted Horace Tart, a Republican who ran with Democratic backing. Not sure Tart would be picked — he might be — but the Democrats might well want to name a moderate Republican like Tart as a gesture to the good ol' days of bipartisan, or nonpartisan, school boards.

• photo by Bob Geary
• Kevin Hill arrives at Milton's in North Raleigh

In the runoff for the District 3 (North Raleigh) school board seat, Hill, a career educator (teacher, principal, university professor) and registered Democrat, defeated Republican challenger Heather Losurdo by about 900 votes. He won with 52.3 percent to Losurdo's 47.7 percent of the votes After a hotly contested campaign, the 20,400 votes cast for both candidates were about 4,000 more than in the first round of voting, Oct. 11.

In that election, Hill fell just 51 votes short of an outright majority with 49.7 percent to Losurdo's 39 percent in a four-way contest.

Hill credited "the 500, 600, 700 volunteers" who worked the phones and went door-to-door in support of his candidacy over the last month. "This isn't about me," he said Tuesday night. "It's about the children and the schools in Wake County."

When the votes are counted in the Wake County Board of Education District 3 runoff tonight, the winner will be celebrating at Milton's Pizza & Pasta in —

Well, that's the rub. There are two Milton's Pizza & Pastas in District 3. One is in what we might call old North Raleigh; the other is so far out in the new North Raleigh that Milton's itself lists its location variously as being in Wake Forest or "Wakefield."

Kevin Hill, the incumbent, plans to be at the first Milton's, the one located at 8853 Six Forks Rd. (corner of Strickland Rd.), according to Perry Woods, his campaign advisor.

Heather Losurdo, the challenger, will be at the second one, according to her campaign tweets, at the Milton's located 14520 New Falls of Neuse Road.

Finally, something these two candidates can agree on.

Pizza.

Until it comes time to order the toppings.

Here's a helpful map from Google. A marks the spot for Hill's Milton's. The B is for Losurdo's.

• Heather Losurdo

1) The charge was made in a way that suggested I never worked at a bank at all. But I did too.

(I don't think anyone ever suggested that she made the whole bank thing up. Classic rebuttal of something that's beside the point.)

2) She found her supervisor from back then, and he confirmed that she was, quote unquote, "an account manager or whatever you want to call it to service the loan portfolio for North and South Carolina."

(Whatever you want to call it?)

3) Her supervisor said that if you added up all the lines of credit that businesses in NC and SC had with the bank — used and unused — it would've been $2 billion or more."

(I have a line of credit at my bank. I've never used it, and i wouldn't count it as part of the bank's "portfolio" unless I did.)

In other words, Losurdo was a loan servicer, just as I said before her press conference. (See below.) It was not a job one should cite when claiming "vast managerial experience," which is the way Losurdo's tried to portray it.

Being an "account manager or whatever" was, rather, a job in which folks "interacted with the customers, they had technical knowledge, had an ability to communicate with people, be tactful in some adversarial type of role."

So said Donald Senior, Losurdo's former boss, in an interview with NBC-17 today. Losurdo provided a partial transcript to the press this evening as proof of, well, whatever.

Oddly, Losurdo also handed out Senior's resume, but not one of her own.

The rest of her press conference was taken up, I gather, with attacking Progress NC Action for "mudslinging."
I say I gather because I arrived 10 minutes late (Spring Forest Road — don't count on finding anything easily,) and by then it was over.

Losurdo's duties at First Union National Bank years ago have little or nothing to do with whether she's qualified to be on the school board. They're relevant only to the extent that they're all she can cite when she claims to have "vast managerial experience" in other areas besides education.

The fact is, she has no experience, managerial, civic or otherwise, to support her candidacy other than being, as she said tonight, a parent.

That, and a Republican politician of the Tea Party variety.

Kevin Hill does have vast educational experience as a teacher, principal and now a faculty member teaching future teachers at N.C. State.

The runoff election is Tuesday. Early voting ends Saturday at noon. The Indy has endorsed Hill.

This is what I wrote before the press conference:

A week ago when I tried to get a detailed resume from Heather Losurdo, the Republican candidate for Wake County school board in District 3, I was accused by her campaign manager of trying to "Palinize" her.

That would be as in Sarah Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president in '08, whose lack of qualifications for national office were indeed comparable to Losurdo's lack of credentials to hold the Wake Board of Education seat.

Palin-ize is a good word for it, I guess.

Anyway, the answer was that she did not have a resume, or at least not one she was willing to share.

But that was a week ago.

In the week since then, Losurdo's credentials — or lack of same — turned into a major issue thanks to the muckraking efforts of Progress NC Action, an "independent" political organization in the same way that Civitas Action is. (Civitas Action is working hard to elect Losurdo. Progress NC Action is working hard to defeat her.)

Thanks to Progress NC Action, it's now on the public record that Losurdo, a high school graduate from California, lived in New Orleans for a time, worked in a strip club there — but only briefly, she says, and as a cocktail waitress, not a stripper — and declared bankruptcy because of unpaid credit-card debts. She then enlisted in the Air Force.

According to Losurdo's sketchy campaign accounts, she somehow went from being in the Air Force to, three or four years later (that lack of a resume makes it hard to give precise dates), working as an account manager for the old First Union National Bank in Charlotte.

Here's where it gets a bit dicey. Losurdo's claim is that she was "an Account Manager for First Union National Bank, overseeing all small business loans in the states of North Carolina and South Carolina equaling a portfolio of over $2 Billion."

Account manager? Overseeing?

When I first read her statement awhile back, I took it to mean that she worked for a bank with lots of loans and her job was to process the payments and chase after the non-payments. What else could it mean, given that she had neither a college degree nor any prior professional experience?

Banks, after all, have a way of inflating titles. The typical bank has four or seven levels of vice president (senior, regional, associate, assistant, you know) in between its "managers" and anyone with an actual executive job. I understood Losurdo to be saying, I wasn't a clerk. She didn't claim to be a loan officer.

Still, when you have almost no work experience to tout, and you exaggerate what little you've got, you open yourself up to the charge that you've misrepresented yourself. That's what Losurdo seems to have done, suggesting to audiences that she was somehow in charge of a $2 billion loan portfolio as a part of her "vast" managerial experience. Not surprisingly, Progress NC Action called her on it.

So after first trying to stonewall the subject, Losurdo is now attempting to use it to her advantage. She was too an account manager, she insists. What's more, Progress NC Action is a left-wing attack organization which is attacking her viciously in an effort to derail her candidacy.

Earlier today, Losurdo taped a TV debate at WRAL with her opponent, incumbent District 3 member Kevin Hill. (The program, "On the Record," will be aired at [time corrected] 7:30 p.m. Saturday.) I hear that David Crabtree, the moderator, grilled Losurdo on the subject of her banking credentials to the point that she was forced to say that she'd back up her claim with evidence — today.

Thus, Losurdo has called a press conference for 6 p.m. this afternoon. I plan to be there.

In the meantime, here's some background material to consister.

First, here's the email I sent a week ago to Dennis Berwyn, Losurdo's campaign manager:

Dennis — I'm hearing a lot of questions about Heather's work experience, including her statement on the Indy questionnaire about "vast experience in management and leadership roles."

I'd forgotten that she made that statement. My sense was, rather, that she'd never claimed to be a leader in anything until the Northern Wake GOP.

Someone sent me this reconstruction of her background (I've copied it below). Would you check and tell me if it's accurate or, if not, what's inaccurate about it?

(Does she has a detailed resume or equivalent that I could see?)

From what I see in her history, she worked for a bank for a few years in what must've been a low-level administrative role (or else they gave an upper-level job to someone with no college degree).

She worked in direct sales for awhile.

Am I missing something that would constitute "vast experience in management and leadership"?

Thanks,
Bob

Here was Berwyn's reply:

Hey Bob,

Thanks for the email. I appreciate you reaching out to us. I really
don't see an opportunity to respond to your query. I think that what
seems to be an effort by our opponents to 'Palinize,' Heather
shouldn't be encouraged.

Thanks again for the email,
Best
Dennis

Here's the outline of Losurdo's history that I attached to my email. I got it from a source who is not in her camp politically; before I passed it on, I did my own background check using Accurint, which confirmed all of what's listed. (Amazing what's online about where you've lived, where you've owned property, where you've gone bankrupt):

1989 - Graduated Encinal High School, Alameda CA
01/89 - 02/93 Alameda CA
10/92 - 02/93 New Orleans LA
06/93 - Joined Air Force, Sheppard AFB TX
12/93 - Bankruptcy filed CO (with AFB TX address, about $20K debt, mostly credit cards, car loan)
05/94 - Bankruptcy complete CO (with AFB TX address)
1994 - Married Craig Losurdo? (Claimed on Facebook married 17 years)
95/96 - Charlotte? Left USAF? (Claimed in IndyWeek lived in Charlotte 5 years)
04/97 - Charlotte purchased 1st house
07/98 - Charlotte 1st child
1998 - Charlotte possibly went on maternity leave & did not return? (Based on MySpace statement)
04/99 - Charlotte purchased 2nd house
10/99 - Charlotte 2nd child
08/00 - Charlotte sold house
2000 - Moved to NY, Saratoga Springs, via Oswego
2004 - Got started in Arbonne International direct sales
2005 - Moved to TN, Arlington/Barnett
2008 - Moved to NC, Raleigh

What's not in the outline above is any employment dates for Losurdo's First Union gig. For that, we have to extrapolate from Losurdo's MySpace entry, apparently written in 2007. It indicates — in the part under "About Me" — that she left First Union in 1998 during her first pregnancy. That would mean she worked there for about four years.

Previously, we learned that Craig Losurdo, Heather's husband, ran into legal trouble in connection with his job in New York State as assistant manager of a plant that routinely employed undocumented (i.e., illegal) immigrants. Losurdo took a plea bargain, admitting to a misdemeanor and cooperating with a federal investigation. The Losurdos thereafter moved to Tennessee, and three years ago they came to Raleigh.

Finally, here's what Gerrick Brenner, executive director of Progress NC Action, had to say this morning about her refusal thus far to provide a detailed resume:

Despite evidence of an embellished resume, Wake School Board candidate Heather Losurdo continues to refuse to hand over professional references or HR documentation of her time at First Union. The News & Observer has been waiting since Thursday, Oct. 27.

“This is the definition of padding your resume,” said Gerrick Brenner, Executive Director of Progress NC ACTION. “Not only is this behavior the wrong message to send Wake County students, but it is totally unacceptable for someone asking voters to trust them with their votes. Ms. Losurdo should either provide documents to back up her claims or she should withdraw from the race.”

On Tuesday, Thad Woodard, President of the NC Bankers Association questioned Wake School Board candidate Heather Losurdo’s claim that she oversaw a $2 billion small business loan portfolio.

According to the News & Observer, Woodard said, “If the resume is correct and she has no formal education beyond what is listed, it would be hard to fathom that any bank would hire someone with a personal bankruptcy and without a much higher level of formal education to handle that kind of function.”

Throughout her campaign, Ms. Losurdo has referenced her bank experience as a qualification for public office:

On her official campaign website, Ms. Losurdo claims "she was an Account Manager for First Union National Bank, overseeing all small business loans in the states of North Carolina and South Carolina equaling a portfolio of over $2 Billion."

She repeats the same claim in the 2011 North Carolina Voter Guide.

In a campaign mailer Losurdo claims, “After the Air Force, Heather began a career in small business banking where she was an Account Manager, overseeing a portfolio of small business loans of over $2 billion."

During her closing statement of the District 3 candidate forum in September she said, “I have a professional background in the small business banking industry where I was in charge of a loan portfolio of over $2 billion.”

In her WRAL candidate statement she claims “I was in charge of a small business loan portfolio of over $2 billion.” Clearly, Ms. Losurdo has used her bank job as major qualification for public office.
In her WRAL candidate questionnaire she lists “small-business banking, accounts portfolio manager” as experience.

In the Independent Weekly questionnaire she claims, “vast experience in management and leadership roles, in the U.S. Air Force, Small Business Banking, and many volunteer positions in PTAs, schools and as a mother of two girls…"

In a Chamber of Commerce questionnaire, Ms. Losurdo claims, “My background in the military, small business banking and community volunteerism brings a plethora of leadership experience along with an “out-of-the-box”, solution-oriented mindset.”

Yet, Ms. Losurdo shows no record of a college degree and filed a personal bankruptcy in 1993 loaded with credit card debt. The 1993 Chapter 7 bankruptcy, filed in federal bankruptcy court in Colorado and signed by Ms. Losurdo, lists only two former employers - the United States Air Force and the Crescent City Cabaret, a strip club in New Orleans.

"How does one go from the Crescent City Cabaret in New Orleans, to a personal bankruptcy, to no college degree, and then to a banking position just a few years later in which one is 'overseeing' ALL small business loans in two states and a $2 Billion loan portfolio?" asks Brenner. “The claim just doesn’t add up.”

"Losurdo had no staff and had no authority over the loans. At best it's an embellishment. At worst, it is an outright attempt to mislead the voters. We expect school board members to be role models for our children. Candidates should hold themselves to a higher standard.”