Final School District Representative Map Approved

Since it’s the Friday before Spring Break, we will leave this map up all week as the front post.  Enjoy your holiday and check over the maps when you get time.  Now is the time to think about running for one of the open board seats (the even districts: 2, 4, 6 and possibly super-districe 8).  We are fairly certain the election will be held in July, so you need to get cracking if you want to run! Please consider it — we need dedicated public servants to monitor the progress of DeKalb County Schools!

Image

Click on our FILES page to view or download this map as a pdf and to view or download the consensus map previously discussed.

Advertisements

About dekalbschoolwatch

Hosting a dialogue among parents, educators and community members focused on improving our schools and providing a quality, equitable education for each of our nearly 100,000 students. ~ "ipsa scientia potestas est" ~ "Knowledge itself is power"
Gallery | This entry was posted in GA Legislature / Laws / O.C.G.A., Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Final School District Representative Map Approved

  1. Watching... says:

    Do we have a map for districts 8 and 9? Do we know if anyone will be able to run for district 8?

    I live in Tom Bowman (6th) and Pam Speaks (8) districts—so I didn’t get to vote at all last round. I had actually been considering running when my district came open. But now it appears that I have been moved into Donna’s district–so I can’t run for 6. If they aren’t planning on giving a 2 year term to a district 8 or have shifted me out of that district also, any possibility of me running (or getting to vote for anyone) won’t be happening next round either.

    The sarcastic part of me says that that is what always happens to the “middle” in Dekalb. Shifted and ignored again.

    Marney Mayo

  2. Ned says:

    Right there with you Marney–couldn’t vote last time because we were an even, can’t vote this time because we’re an odd.
    Taxation without representation

  3. dekalbschoolwatch says:

    We don’t know about districts 8 and 9. They weren’t on the map. We wonder if the plan is to roll those off to satisfy the legislative requirement to reduce the board to 7 (or fewer) members. Truthfully, we only have this map because Nancy Jester sent it out in her recent email newsletter.

    On another note, she shared the news about hiring a new CFO. She included the link to the press release:
    http://www.dekalb.k12.ga.us/newsroom/press/pdf/2012-03-29.2012-04-12.DeKalb_Schools_Appoints_New_Chief_Financial%20_Officer.pdf

    DeKalb County School District Appoints New Chief Financial Officer
    March 29, 2012 – The DeKalb County Board of Education voted unanimously on Thursday, March 29, to approve the appointment of Michael Perrone as Chief Financial Officer for the DeKalb County School District. The appointment is based on the recommendation of Superintendent Dr. Cheryl Atkinson after a national search for a Chief Financial Officer for the School District.
    Mr. Perrone was most recently Chief Financial Officer for the Duval County Public Schools in Jacksonville, Fla. He was previously Executive Director of Budget Services for the Duval County Public Schools, as well as Director of Finance for the Barnstable Public Schools in Barnstable, Mass., and Business Manager/Assistant Treasurer for the Silver Lake Regional School District in Kingston, Mass.
    He holds a master’s degree in public administration from the University of Hartford in West Hartford, Conn., and a bachelor’s degree in economics from Boston College.
    As Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Perrone will be in charge of all School District finances and budgeting.
    “I’d like to thank the members of the Board of Education for their support as we assemble the best possible team to take our School District to the next level,” Dr. Atkinson said. “Mr. Perrone is an experienced financial professional who will help the School District implement better budgeting processes to make us more efficient and focus our resources on the classroom, where we can make the greatest impact on student success.”

  4. dekalbschoolwatch says:

    We also do not have the numbers of voters in each district. When you compare this map to the ‘consensus’ map presented most recently, it’s hard to think that these new districts are evenly populated. Esp. District 7. The ‘consensus’ map had the data attached. This new one does not. So, we can’t really compare. The law says they have to be evenly divided within a 1% margin.

    District 4 changed the most. This is the Lakeside district (Paul Womack’s). It looks quite a bit larger than the last few maps, now eating into District 2 considerably, pushing District 2 to the south while giving Jolly, Idlewood and others to Districts 6 and 7. Districts 1, 2 and 4 have seen growth, while the others have decreased in population for the most part. Therefore we’d really like to see the numbers associated with this map. If anyone has them, please forward to the blog at dekalbschoolwatch@gmail.com

  5. concernforthekids says:

    Look at the map and find the nine red dots.
    This is where the current board resides. Why does the blue District #1 come down in to the Lakeside District #4? (I’ll give you a hint, look for a red dot)
    This is where Nancy Jester lived when she was elected to the board 2 years ago.
    She has since moved and lives outside of 285 near the far Northwest corner of the map.
    It would have been nice if Nancy had notified them while she was advocating for her map.
    You would think someone at the Capital would have checked her residency.

    I also wonder what happened to the “Super Districts”.

  6. dekalbdoyenne says:

    @ CFTK

    I am assuming that you are being facetious in your reference to Nancy Jester. Nancy Jester is well within her district. It was up to the geniuses in the DeKalb Delegation to the Georgia General Assembly obtain Nancy Jester’s current, correct address and put her in the correct place on the map. Maybe they were too busy scuttling after that lowlife, Howard Mosby, doing his bidding. What say you Fran Millar, Mike Jacobs, Mary Margaret Oliver, et al?

    The four (4) BIG QUESTIONS are:
    1. Why was District 002 bumped up into Nancy Jester’s district? Looks like it was done just to accommodate the current BOE member, self-effacing apologist Don McChesney.
    2. Why was Ashford Park Elementary, which is part of the Chamblee Charter High School Cluster, left in District 002 instead of being moved into District 001?
    3. What are the 2010 U. S. Census population numbers for the “new” districts?
    4. And the big, BIG QUESTION: What happened to the Super Districts and their elected representatives? Wasn’t getting rid of the Super Districts and their elected BOE members the big problem with meeting the legislative mandate to reduce the size of the DCSS BOE to no larger than 7 members?

  7. Super districts still exist says:

    I wonder if citizens who didn’t get to vote in 2010 and now won’t get to vote in 2012 have a valid complaint to file with the D O J?

  8. dekalbschoolwatch says:

    Very important and interesting question super districts. Would you mind writing up a description of exactly who has been disenfranchised and how and posting it here on this blog? It would be nice to have it written down and published for the public to see.

    Also, Nancy Jester did not advocate for this map as she says in her email newsletter where she shares the link. (Subscribe to her emails at http://www.nancyjester.com) The map she advocated for had 7 votes from the BOE and is called the “Consensus Map”. There are no dots on that map, however, in past versions, Nancy’s “dot” has been at her current (correct) residence in Dunwoody. This one is wrong and shows her old residence (maybe they still own that house?). We’re not sure how that suddenly happened other than to say that yes, whomever drew these maps thought that Nancy lived in her old house and scooped it up into District 1. But it wasn’t Nancy. Obviously, she knows where she lives as did everyone who drew all previous maps.

    We have saved several maps in our “FILES” tab at the top under “Facts & Sources”. Feel free to download them and compare.

  9. The Other Anon says:

    The “Consensus Map” was voted on by the board? When did this happen? Who voted for it and who voted against it?

  10. As far as we know, the consensus was not the result of a formal action of the board. Dr. Walker simply provided the map to all BOE members and asked if they would email him back indicating their support for the map. Seven members supported the map. Two opposed – Donna and Paul.

  11. Leo says:

    Can anyone tell me the voting procedure? I know that there were some efforts proposed to alter how the reduction bill would work and when we would vote. I’ve been traveling much of this month and missed where our elected officials landed on how to implement the change.

  12. Last we heard, Fran Millar introduced legislation to postpone the whole thing until 2013 or later. Anyone know?

  13. Ned says:

    BTW Marney–if you ever do run, you’ve got my vote!

  14. GTCO-ATL says:

    disenfranchised: transitive verb : to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially: to deprive of the right to vote.

    Well, if I were a Democrat and the President is not going to have a need for a primary in order to put him on the ballot, and I cannot vote in a Republican primary due to my being registered as a Democrat, and therefore I am given the false belief that there is no real reason for me to vote in July. So, the summer comes and goes and school starts up again and I find out… WHAT? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? WHY DIDN’T SOMEONE TELL ME? I WOULD HAVE VOTED IF I KNEW THEY WERE GOING TO DO THAT!

    If you found out about a cell tower decision that took place at a July school board vote last year, then you know this terrible feeling. Well, guess what? They are going to stick it to us all again… not only is there serious talk about the school board open seats going on the July ballot rather than the more heavily attended by everyone who cares to vote November Presidential ballot, the DeKalb delegation has somehow passed a “non-binding referendum” that will ask a mutli-part, confusing, misleading question about “should DeKalb County Schools Place and/or Operate telecommunications towers at any public, independent or charter school for elementay, middle or high school?” (something along that lines… mutiple questions buried in a question without any contex being provided and without mention of the words “cellular” or “wireless” or “cell tower.” Just like the memo to parents last year said “various locations in DeKalb County” instead of saying, “right here on school grounds.”

    The same press leaks and misinformation that the board promised the D.A. they would handle and prevent are working in full force. The state also passed a bill that will make picketing (including signs in your own yard if done in “mass” style in neighborhoods where an executive lives (like Womack). So, one of our only means for warning others of a cell tower that might be headed their way, will now make any concerned resident who tries to place a sign in their own yard subject to at $1,000 / day fine. It seems the executives who are doing bad things and making lots and lots of people angry do not want their upset neigbhors to interfere with their quiet enjoyment of their private residences or their sense of security and safety.

    Gee, guys, maybe you should have thought about the consequences of doing bad things to people who don’t deserve it and aren’t expecting it. Did you stop to think about OUR rights to quiet enjoyment of OUR homes? Did you stop to think about the fact that YOUR actions are directly affecting OUR ability to feel safe and secure in OUR own homes? Except the difference is a lot of signs will not, by themselves, kill you or give you or your child cancer. And you can make the signs go away by making better decisions that don’t harm people. The cell towers, on the other hand, will emit RF radiation at unknown levels (the levels submitted upon application are not what the levels will be when you add co-locators or have multiple towers in a small area – like Flat Rock which just got a tower at the church across the street, yet they still want to put ANOTHER one at the school a few hundred feet away.). And RF radiation at higher levels can and will kill you, at lower levels for many hours on end, for many years – the results may not be scientically proven, but early warnings are issued that they can result in a wide variety of cancers, and children and the elderly are the most vulnerable.

    Where are they putting the towers? Mainly next to elementary schools and at schools with a higher population of retired citizens, likely in hopes they can drive them out faster since they do not have to pay the education portion of their property taxes after age 70. So, the board wants to clear out those homes so they can move in some new people who will give more money to the friends and family network. Isn’t that nice?

  15. GTCO-ATL says:

    Super Districts are a thing of the past, so why does Walker get drawn in and Speaks gets nothing?

  16. The Other Anon says:

    But Womack went on record saying he never saw the map. You say Gene Walker “provided” the map to the other board members – how do you know this? How do you know who supported it and who did not? This map should have been presented for a formal vote at a public meeting if it is being touted as the “consensus” map. I suspect there is a lot more going on here.

  17. Steve Smith says:

    The choice to hold non-partisan elections during the general primary in July as opposed to the general election in November was made by state legislators. This is not something unique to DeKalb County. In fact, elections for non-partisan positions such as school board members and judges used to be held in the general primary until 2006. Before that year Democrats controlled both chambers of the legislature and the governor’s office and were content to leave non-partisan races on the ballot for the general primary. After Republicans took control they made the change and I believe the reason given at that time was that more people vote in November so moving these races would increase involvement and participation. Apparently now the reason for shifting it back is that it is wasteful to hold runoffs after the general election for these non-partisan races. I guess the thinking is that there are more runoffs for partisan races after the general primary so we might as well include the non-partisan races at that time. Honestly, I think Democrats kept the non-partisan races on the general primary ballot because it favored their candidates, and now that Republicans are dominant in Georgia they are doing the same thing.

    Your example about voting in July is incorrect for two reasons. One is that you are conflating the presidential primary (which already occurred in March) with the general primary. Secondly, no one in Georgia registers as a Republican or Democrat. All primaries are open, which means all you have to do is pick which party’s ballot you want to vote on.

    As I understand it, the non-binding referendum about cell towers on school property is not meant to be complex or misleading. Rep. Karla Drenner’s intent was to show the school board what county residents thought about the matter. Even if the language in the bill is potentially confusing, the wording on the ballot can be simplified.

    The state legislature DID NOT pass the bill (SB469) to make picketing in certain places illegal.

  18. justwatch says:

    I am not sure how there are usually runoffs in general elections in November. Generally, there are only two candidates, one Repub and one Dem for most races. There are frequently runoffs in non-partisan elections, because they have no primary system. Some non-partisan races are already held in November.

    The reality is that is has to do with turnout, though that analysis in Georgia is even questionable.

    DCSS board elections were in November until very recently (within the last 8 years I think). The idea of changing was them was local I believe with the idea that perhaps only people paying attention would show up and vote, bettering the chances for an improved board. That obviously didn’t happen.

    November elections are very beneficial to the incumbents. There will be thousands upon thousands of voters across the state who show up to vote for President who have done no research on the local elections they will find on their ballot and will simply vote for the person who has the I (incumbent) by their name.

Comments are closed.