Community questions DeKalb charter system petition

From the DeKalb Neighbor newspaper >>

by LaTria Garnigan

The DeKalb County School District is actively seeking to petition the state board of education to become a full charter system and has held several meetings around the county to engage in citizen input.

Last week, a handful of community members met at Dunwoody High School to air their concerns and ask questions about what this charter petition will entail.

Trenton Arnold, regional superintendent for District 3 and chair of the district’s petition efforts, said the district is moving forward with its plans and gave a timeline of necessary upcoming events. On Monday, there will be a board update during the work session and the first required public hearing.

Sept. 10: there will be a flexibility advisory committee meeting
Oct. 6: another board update during the work session and the second required public hearing
Oct. 6: resolution by the DeKalb school board and proposed adoption of the charter petition.

Arnold said the Oct. 6 date for adoption was something that could change to a later date if the school board feels they need more time to discuss or would like more public input.

Read more: Neighbor Newspapers – Community questions DeKalb charter system petition

+++

After you read this report, let us know in the comments if anything presented by DCSS appears clear to you. It’s clear as mud to us.

+++

Further, at a meeting at Dunwoody High School regarding the Common Core, Dunwoody City Council member Lynn Deutsch had this to say about the charter system proposal >>

The potential formation of independent school systems and charter schools throughout the county was also a topic of discussion for many parents and residents. Dunwoody parent and City Councilwoman Lynn Deutsch said while she supports small school systems, she did not think the state board should approve a charter system application from the county.

“I support formation of small school systems and I think if we drill down in the data, we see that children in large urban school systems do far worse than children in small rural systems with far fewer resources than systems like the one DeKalb County has,” she said.

“We need decentralized management, however, I implore you not to approve the charter system application from the county that will come before you in the next year or so because the county school system has no ability to give true autonomy to its local schools.”

Read more: Neighbor Newspapers – Common Core defended at public hearing in Dunwoody

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"
This entry was posted in Board of Education Meetings, Charter School, GA Legislature / Laws / O.C.G.A., Michael Thurmond and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Community questions DeKalb charter system petition

  1. DunwoodyOwl says:

    From the last sentence of the article…..”Arnold said the notion of autonomy and roles of everyone including central office staff, parents, teachers and administrators will possibly need to change.”

    The notion of autonomy….will possibly need to change? I guess the new charter will grant autonomy to the schools, but autonomy doesn’t actually mean what you think it means.

  2. Our thoughts exactly. Why is this so vague? How can they propose anything that doesn’t address the issue of autonomy in great detail? Where is the written proposal? Did anyone get their questions answered? It looks to us like DCS is sending Trenton Arnold out to do a distracting song and [buck-&-wing] dance for the public. We always say — When DeKalb County Schools administration tells you to look right — look left!

  3. The “notion of autonomy”? Notion? Seriously? So typical of those who are currently in charge of DeKalb County Schools — and doing a fine job of running it into the ground. Autonomy is NOT a notion. Autonomy in charter schools will work to improve our schools, but it will not work in a “charter system.” Autonomy works only where there is a committed group of educated, selfless stakeholders and true local leaders — parents, teachers and community — who are driving the autonomous charter school.

  4. DSW2Contributor says:

    I think ya’ll should immediately start a letter-writing campaign to the Georgia Department of Education (DOE), telling the DOE to deny Dekalb’s petition.

    In a comment dated August 21, 2014 at 9:18 AM, DekalbSchoolWatch correctly pointed out that DCSD missed the deadlines for status quo and EI2, so the only choice left is for DCSD to become a charter system. The only benefit of becoming a charter system is that it lets the Palace put off its day of reckoning for a little longer.

    DekalbSchoolWatch pointed out that DCSD missed the deadlines to consider other options– accordingly, DOE should not give charter status to people who cannot make deadlines.

    The flyer for the “Charter System Petition Community Engagement Sessions” begins with the line “The DeKalb County School District is seeking to become the LARGEST charter system in the state of Georgia.”

    DOE should not allow the LARGEST charter system in the state of Georgia to be a school district that is currently on “Warned” status with its accrediting agency and only recently got off probation.

    The LARGEST charter system in the state of Georgia should not be one run by an UNelected Board appointed by the governor.

    The LARGEST charter system in the state of Georgia should not be a district whose former Superintendent plead guilty to corruption charges on October 16, 2013 — that’s not even two years ago.

    So start writing letters to the DOE now, telling them to DENY Dekalb’s petition for charter status!

  5. howdy1942 says:

    This is not the first time that the Dekalb County School System has missed critical deadlines. Remember that time when Dekalb County missed millions in State funding despite the fact that people at the State level provided extensive support to filling out the required funds? And the top level people who could not complete those funds are still employed by the DCSS. Eliminating two of the County’s options by failing to meet deadlines does not mean that the third alternative is the best one.

    Trent Arnold was respectful, patient, and positive in his response to questions at the meeting I attended. However, he was not prepared nor did he have the latitude to address many of the questions. So many of his answers amounted to “that will be the decision of the school board”. It was very apparent to me that either this whole charter petition was “half-baked” or that the DCSS was attempting to “put one over on the public” and minimize the public’s objections while pointing out that “public hearings had been held and little opposition encountered”. After hearing so many questions that could not be answered, I commented that the school board needs to step back and start with a clean sheet of paper and genuinely listen to the community at the outset. The proposal as it now stands does not make sense and just seems to be an endless bureaucratic nightmare built for a huge bureaucracy that we have in Dekalb County.

    As it stands right now, I expect the Dekalb County School Board to approve this petition on October 6, 2014. It just strikes me that it makes little or no difference how many of these public meetings are held or how opposed the community may be, the DCSS has made up its mind what it wants to do. It is beyond me to even begin to understand why the school board would want to go down this path when at least 40% of Dekalb residents oppose this move. Why can’t each member of this school board conduct meetings in his/her district to listen to the concerns of the public, explore possible alternatives, and meet with other members of the board to share these ideas and build on common ground? This should be an iterative process with community support and not one that is driven top-down.

    My perspective is that these charters ought to be based on the model proposed by Druid Hills. Contrary to that proposed by the DCSS, the Druid Hills Petition seems to be well thought-out, included extensive community input, and was supported by that community. As yet, none of us has been provided with any specific reasons by the school board for rejecting the Druid Hills Petition. There is simply no reason why charters could not be designed for the specific geography and needs of all areas of Dekalb County and would include the autonomy proposed by Druid Hills. If one charter could not meet the goals outlined, then the school board could address that specific charter while leaving successful charters alone. But autonomy and independence from an overpowering, controlling administration is at the core of what the community sees as wrong with the DCSS and the DCSS will make little headway in gaining any substantial support from the community until it satisfactorily addresses that issue.

    As I said in an earlier post, this whole proposal by the DCSS seems to be “of the administration, by the administration, and for the administration. Without substantial change, it should be opposed and rejected.

  6. teacher says:

    I don’t know enough of what this charter designation would allow, and I would think the board members don’t either. As someone who has worked for this school district long enough to see that the students serve mostly as numbers for administrative and non-teaching jobs, I am afraid. The DOE, SACS, the Dekalb DA, and PSC already allow Dekalb to provide its own oversight. How many more non-teaching positions would this charter system allow for? How much bigger could classes get? How much more ineptitude, corruption, and mismanagement would such a charter invite?

  7. Interesting points, Howdy. These dog and pony community meetings are only being held because they are required. There is NO requirement to listen to the public’s input – just a requirement to hold the meetings. So they throw Trent out there and then check the box. Done. They will present it to the board as Thurmond’s great plan – and since the board will never say no to Thurmond, it will be approved. This is how it works. It always has. Having Thurmond at the helm doesn’t matter – the same high level administrators still run the show in reality.

  8. FWIW, the state DOE website has quite a lot of information on the subject of charter systems, IE2 or traditional – the choices systems must select from going forward.

    CLICK HERE for the Charter System Annual Report for 2012-13.

    CLICK HERE for a list of charter systems and charter system applications.

    CLICK HERE to look at a powerpoint presentation.

    The text of one slide says,

    “Charter system contracts also include:
    o A list of innovations that the School District will implement to enable it to meet its higher academic targets”

    The Charter System designation also allows the “flexibility to innovate” and, “Waivers from state laws, rules, guidelines”

    We are not confident at all that these kinds of waivers should be granted to DeKalb.

    +++

    Here is a link to an interview with Michael Thurmond on the subject along with some AJC reported details >>

    Michael Thurmond talks DeKalb Charter School System

  9. This January, 2013 Marietta Daily Journal article was a bit helpful in clarifying some of the choices given to districts:

    Legislation may prompt charter for Cobb district

    Cobb’s school board is eyeing a state bill that would require school districts to apply for charter system status or be deemed one of two performance-based systems.

    Superintendent Michael Hinojosa spent about 30 minutes of last week’s work session talking about what the state will call the “Statewide Tiered Accountability and Flexibility System.”

    The plan stems from former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and the General Assembly’s push in 2007 for districts to choose a school model.

    Georgia’s 180 school districts can currently choose between being a charter, IE2 or a “Status Quo” system. Cobb is a status quo system currently because officials had not chosen a specific model before 2013.

    Hinojosa said a new bill, being drafted by Rep. Mike Dudgeon (R-Johns Creek) in preparation of passage by the end of March, would replace the current choices.

    A district would have to apply to become a charter school system or be named by the Georgia Department of Education as a “High Performing” or “Strategic” system by 2015.

    … The bill would allow districts to receive supplemental funding and flexibility from all Title 20 requirements, which cover system expenditures, class sizes, seat time and salary schedules.

    School districts would be graded for the high performing or strategic systems categories based on their score after the recently introduced College and Career Ready Performance Index.

    Read more: The Marietta Daily Journal – Legislation may prompt charter for Cobb district

  10. Continuing…

    “There are a lot of nuances or unintended consequences that are going to fall out, depending how many apply, who applies and what happens,” said Hinojosa in agreement.

    Board Chair Randy Scamihorn said he is a little worried about it.

    “Anytime that I see the federal or state government start throwing terms around like ‘flexibility,’ I don’t believe it,” he said. “I understand the snowball is headed down the mountain and it’s probably too big to stop, but I’m concerned because what I believe this will do, is the principals will lose more autonomy, not gain more.”

    Read more: The Marietta Daily Journal – Legislation may prompt charter for Cobb district

  11. For information on legal class size limits and waivers granted, click here >>

    http://www.gadoe.org/External-Affairs-and-Policy/Policy/Documents/Class%20Size%20Information.pdf

    However, now that the “Great Recession” has mostly recovered and tax revenues have returned to their previous levels (or more, since the school board did not reduce the millage rate when they increased property values after having raised the millage rate to compensate for lower values in 2012)…we think the class size waivers should no longer be granted. We cannot stand by and witness small class sizes in some schools with unmanageable sizes in others. This inequity must be addressed. Small boutique schools like DSA (not rated on the utilization chart), Wadsworth (32% utilization score — see pg 12 here) and others should be merged or housed in with larger schools in order to balance resources.

    For example, according to the study done in 2011 for the “2020 Vision” — in the same part of the county, Arabia HS is rated at 89% utilization, while MLK HS is rated at 146% utilization and SW DeKalb is 130% utilized. Ironically, originally the need to build Arabia was publicly stated as to provide relief for overcrowding at MLK and other area schools. However, Dr. Lewis claimed Arabia as one of his pet ‘magnet’ projects with a private school-like application process, uniforms and the whole bit. But while Arabia enjoys room to breathe and low class sizes, MLK and others have to use the class size waivers and remain overcrowded — sometimes dangerously so.

  12. momfromhe11 says:

    I agree that the public information meetings are a “check off the box” exercise, but if DCSS states that the majority of the public approves of the charter district simply on the basis that people attended the meetings, I have a real issue with that. I attended two of the meetings, and I did not hear one remark from the attendees that was favorable.

  13. To OPPOSE “charter system” status for DeKalb County [GA] School District, write to:

    Louis Erste
    Associate Superintendent – Charter Schools and Charter Systems
    Georgia Department of Education
    2070 Twin Towers East
    205 Jesse Hill Jr. Drive, SE
    Atlanta, GA 30334
    Email: lerste@doe.k12.ga.us

    AND

    Your State Board of Education member

    If you live in DeKalb County, GA, you are represented by one of the following State Board of Education (SBOE) members (see below). Not sure which SBOE member represents you? Go here to find your U. S. Congressional District.

    Lisa Kinnemore
    4th Congressional District
    E-mail: lkinnemore@doe.k12.ga.us

    Kenneth Mason
    5th Congressional District
    E-mail: kmason@doe.k12.ga.us

    Barbara Hampton, CPA
    6th Congressional District
    E-mail: bahampton@doe.k12.ga.us

    AND to the Chair of the State Board of Education:

    Helen Odom Rice
    Chair – Georgia State Board of Education
    3rd Congressional District
    E-mail: hrice@doe.k12.ga.us

    Send a copy of all e-mails to:
    Debbie Caputo
    Administrative Assistant to the State Board of Education
    Email:dcaputo@doe.k12.ga.us

    After sending your email(s) electronically, print a copy of each email sent, put each one in a separate stamped envelope and mail to the person named on the e-mail:
    [Name of Person on Email]
    [Title – i.e., SBOE Chair or SBOE Member, __ District, or SBOE Administrative Assistant]
    Georgia Department of Education
    State Board of Education
    2070 Twin Towers East
    205 Jesse Hill Jr. Drive, SE
    Atlanta, GA 30334

  14. momfromhe11 says:

    As an alternative to the DCSS Charter System concept, nebulous as it is, this comes from today’s Wall Street Journal (I usually do not agree with WSJ editorial content, but this caught my eye):

    http://online.wsj.com/articles/al-hubbard-liberating-indianapolis-schools-from-district-control-1410562744

    I don’t know if it will be viewable to all, so I am also putting the full piece here:
    Liberating Indianapolis Schools From District Control
    AL HUBBARD
    Sept. 12, 2014 6:59 p.m. ET
    Indianapolis
    One of the biggest challenges facing America today is the lackluster state of the K-12 education system. More than half of American workers are not prepared for today’s jobs and therefore are condemned to declining wages, with dire implications for the economy and for individuals’ ability to thrive in a 21st century workforce.
    The wages of male high-school dropouts, for example, adjusted for inflation, have contracted an alarming 33% between 1980 and 2013, according to data from the Digest of Education Statistics. Those with only a high-school diploma saw their wages drop 26%, and those with some college but no degree saw a decline of 17%. This is especially worrying because noncollege graduates make up the majority of the population—64%.
    Without dramatic action to reform K-12 education, this is unlikely to change soon. The good news is that change is possible. We’re seeing it first-hand here in Indianapolis, because of bold action by the state legislature this spring, and at schools like H.L. Harshman Magnet Middle School. In 2009, thanks in large part to Robert Guffin, Harshman’s principal at the time, the school was granted autonomy from the school district’s central office and given the power to make changes, including staffing changes. The results have been impressive. Harshman has increased the percentage of its students passing math to 93% in 2013 from 39% in 2009. This occurred even as the percentage of students in poverty at Harshman grew to 92% from 72%.
    But such improvements can be found across the country, if you know where to look. Schools are proving that students—regardless of economic or other life circumstances—can excel. Take Uncommon Schools, a Boston-based network of public charter schools, where three-fourths of students are considered economically disadvantaged, yet more than 80% are English proficient and 85% are math proficient.
    What these effective schools have in common is not extra funding, dazzling curricular models or other factors that one might assume lead to success. They simply have the conditions that attract excellent teachers and maximize their transformative power.
    Specifically, these schools have autonomy from the centralized bureaucracy of school districts, which gives them more control over curricula and hiring. Because principals control budgets at autonomous schools, they’re able to pay great teachers more and reward high performers.
    Why is a teacher-centric approach so vital? Ample research shows that excellent teachers are the most critical factor in student success. A 2011 analysis by Stanford University’s Erik Hanushek showed that by replacing the bottom 10% of teachers with average teachers, the U.S. could reach the education achievement levels of top-performing countries such as Finland and Canada.
    Paying teachers more is an important part of the solution. Many believe this must be done through increased spending, but the answer often lies in more effective allocation of existing resources.
    In Indiana the growth rate for non-teaching staff and teaching assistants from 1987 to 2012 was 70.3%, nearly 10 times the 7.7% growth rate among students, according to a 2013 analysis by Ben Scafidi, director of the Education Economics Center at Kennesaw State University. Had growth among non-teaching staff and teaching assistants merely kept pace with that of students, Mr. Scafidi estimated that every Indiana teacher could have seen a nearly $26,000 salary increase on the $51,000 base that average midcareer Indiana teachers receive today.
    Such facts underscore the need for shifting dollars and decision-making to the school level, which would enable principals to reward excellent teachers by compensating them well. Creating such a system is not easy, in part because there is significant resistance.
    Some of that resistance is driven by self-preservation. The jobs of thousands of administrators in top-heavy district offices depend on keeping centralized control. Unions want to protect jobs and seniority-based hiring and compensation. They fight giving school administrators the authority to assemble teams of quality teachers, regardless of experience, and the power to terminate underperforming teachers.
    Yet with strong local leadership and enough political will, educators and families can defeat the forces against change. New Orleans is a prime example. Since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the city has restructured its top-down model into a system of autonomous public charter schools. The percentage of proficient 3rd through 8th grade students has grown to 63% from 35%, according to a 2013 analysis of state data by the nonprofit New Schools for New Orleans. That growth puts New Orleans on track to become the nation’s only high-poverty urban district to surpass its state’s proficiency rate.
    Here in Indiana, the state legislature passed an innovative law in March allowing Indianapolis’s largest school district to create public schools that have contractually guaranteed autonomy from the district’s central office, while being exempt from the district’s collective-bargaining agreement. Such exemptions give school leaders more power to recruit high-quality teachers and pay them based on merit and market value.
    Indianapolis Public Schools Superintendent Lewis Ferebee championed the new law, and the district is working with The Mind Trust, a local nonprofit, to recruit and train talented administrators and teachers to launch and run the autonomous schools. This could lead to more success stories like Harshman Magnet Middle School throughout the city, establishing a national model.
    We all know that changing K-12 education is difficult. Achieving it begins with allowing more autonomy for schools and teachers, and less control from unions and administrators. The future of the American economy—and of today’s students—depends on it.
    Mr. Hubbard, a former director of the National Economic Council during the George W. Bush administration, is chairman of Indianapolis-based E&A Companies.
    Indianapolis
    One of the biggest challenges facing America today is the lackluster state of the K-12 education system. More than half of American workers are not prepared for today’s jobs and therefore are condemned to declining wages, with dire implications for the economy and for individuals’ ability to thrive in a 21st century workforce.
    The wages of male high-school dropouts, for example, adjusted for inflation, have contracted an alarming 33% between 1980 and 2013, according to data from the Digest of Education Statistics. Those with only a high-school diploma saw their wages drop 26%, and those with some college but no degree saw a decline of 17%. This is especially worrying because noncollege graduates make up the majority of the population—64%.
    Without dramatic action to reform K-12 education, this is unlikely to change soon. The good news is that change is possible. We’re seeing it first-hand here in Indianapolis, because of bold action by the state legislature this spring, and at schools like H.L. Harshman Magnet Middle School. In 2009, thanks in large part to Robert Guffin, Harshman’s principal at the time, the school was granted autonomy from the school district’s central office and given the power to make changes, including staffing changes. The results have been impressive. Harshman has increased the percentage of its students passing math to 93% in 2013 from 39% in 2009. This occurred even as the percentage of students in poverty at Harshman grew to 92% from 72%.
    But such improvements can be found across the country, if you know where to look. Schools are proving that students—regardless of economic or other life circumstances—can excel. Take Uncommon Schools, a Boston-based network of public charter schools, where three-fourths of students are considered economically disadvantaged, yet more than 80% are English proficient and 85% are math proficient.
    What these effective schools have in common is not extra funding, dazzling curricular models or other factors that one might assume lead to success. They simply have the conditions that attract excellent teachers and maximize their transformative power.
    Specifically, these schools have autonomy from the centralized bureaucracy of school districts, which gives them more control over curricula and hiring. Because principals control budgets at autonomous schools, they’re able to pay great teachers more and reward high performers.
    Why is a teacher-centric approach so vital? Ample research shows that excellent teachers are the most critical factor in student success. A 2011 analysis by Stanford University’s Erik Hanushek showed that by replacing the bottom 10% of teachers with average teachers, the U.S. could reach the education achievement levels of top-performing countries such as Finland and Canada.
    Paying teachers more is an important part of the solution. Many believe this must be done through increased spending, but the answer often lies in more effective allocation of existing resources.
    In Indiana the growth rate for non-teaching staff and teaching assistants from 1987 to 2012 was 70.3%, nearly 10 times the 7.7% growth rate among students, according to a 2013 analysis by Ben Scafidi, director of the Education Economics Center at Kennesaw State University. Had growth among non-teaching staff and teaching assistants merely kept pace with that of students, Mr. Scafidi estimated that every Indiana teacher could have seen a nearly $26,000 salary increase on the $51,000 base that average midcareer Indiana teachers receive today.
    Such facts underscore the need for shifting dollars and decision-making to the school level, which would enable principals to reward excellent teachers by compensating them well. Creating such a system is not easy, in part because there is significant resistance.
    Some of that resistance is driven by self-preservation. The jobs of thousands of administrators in top-heavy district offices depend on keeping centralized control. Unions want to protect jobs and seniority-based hiring and compensation. They fight giving school administrators the authority to assemble teams of quality teachers, regardless of experience, and the power to terminate underperforming teachers.
    Yet with strong local leadership and enough political will, educators and families can defeat the forces against change. New Orleans is a prime example. Since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the city has restructured its top-down model into a system of autonomous public charter schools. The percentage of proficient 3rd through 8th grade students has grown to 63% from 35%, according to a 2013 analysis of state data by the nonprofit New Schools for New Orleans. That growth puts New Orleans on track to become the nation’s only high-poverty urban district to surpass its state’s proficiency rate.
    Here in Indiana, the state legislature passed an innovative law in March allowing Indianapolis’s largest school district to create public schools that have contractually guaranteed autonomy from the district’s central office, while being exempt from the district’s collective-bargaining agreement. Such exemptions give school leaders more power to recruit high-quality teachers and pay them based on merit and market value.
    Indianapolis Public Schools Superintendent Lewis Ferebee championed the new law, and the district is working with The Mind Trust, a local nonprofit, to recruit and train talented administrators and teachers to launch and run the autonomous schools. This could lead to more success stories like Harshman Magnet Middle School throughout the city, establishing a national model.
    We all know that changing K-12 education is difficult. Achieving it begins with allowing more autonomy for schools and teachers, and less control from unions and administrators. The future of the American economy—and of today’s students—depends on it.

    Mr. Hubbard, a former director of the National Economic Council during the George W. Bush administration, is chairman of Indianapolis-based E&A Companies.

  15. concerned citizen says:

    DSW2 – ALL the schools you mentioned are dangerously overcrowded, and Arabia is far from a model school. The climate is horrible and counterproductive to students’ learning. Please check it out with the teachers. They’re the ones who know!

  16. Frustrated Dekalb Parent says:

    Just out of curiosity, I skimmed the Charter System Application on the GA DOE website. It was very interesting and would reveal quite a bit about the district’s specific intentions. There is also an assurances section that will require the county to certify that it will follow a list of items if awarded a charter system . One requires the district to make payments to TRS on behalf of employees. I wonder if this application will be available to the public.

  17. Just to clarify, Frustrated, (and you probably already know this, but many readers may not) — DCSS does make the required contributions to the state’s TRS. That is required by state law and there is no way — so far — that DCS can weasel out of it.

    It’s the promised additional contribution to a retirement annuity (Tax-Sheltered Annuity, referred to as TSA) that DCS quit paying. This contribution was made in lieu of participating in Social Security – which the school system would HAVE to pay 6.5% of the 13% paid into Social Security for teachers and staff. As a result, teachers now are not qualified to receive Social Security based on their DCS employment, nor do they get contributions to a retirement annuity. They only get the state Teacher’s Retirement System (TRS) pension.

    Even DCS teachers and other DCS employees qualified to receive Social Security based on a previous job or on a spouse’s employment will find their Social Security cut by about 1/3 because they are retiring with a pension from an employer who did not pay into Social Security. DCS teachers and other DCS employees who plan to collect Social Security based on a spouse’s employment need to remember that they are eligible to receive only 50% of the spouse’s Social Security benefit — and then that still will be cut by about 1/3.

    Read more on how this will affect teacher’s retirement income >>

    https://dekalbschoolwatch.com/2013/10/12/breaking-news-will-dcsss-default-on-the-tsa-affect-your-retirement/

Comments are closed.