Temple High to apply for grant; as much as $6 million possible
5 months ago | 1045 views | 7 
| 9 
| 
| 
| 9 | |
Dr. Georgia Evans, a performance consultant with the Georgia Leadership Institute for School Improvement, leads a meeting of Carroll County school administrators and Temple High School faculty Tuesday to discuss goals required by the School Improvement Grant funding available through the Georgia Department of Education. (Photo by Thomas O'Connor/Times-Georgian.)
While it seems certain the school will get some money through the program, said Kathy Rogers, assistant superintendent for the system, it’s still unclear how much the school might receive.
“It’s pretty much a given that we’ll get the money, but it just depends on how much the grant is written for,” said Rogers, who specifically oversees curriculum, instruction and student achievement with Carroll County Schools.
Temple High is one of 36 schools statewide that qualify for the funding, which is based on either graduation rates or achievement scores. All schools included in consideration for the funding are among the lowest-achieving 5 percent of schools statewide.
About $123 million will be awarded following the April 15 application deadline.
While Temple’s graduation rate is more than 10 percent above the 60 percent cutoff for the program, the school falters in a number of other areas, including test scores and attendance rates. Over the last three years, which is how far back the DOE looked to assess who would qualify, Temple High has seen on average a quarter of its students absent for more than 15 days.
The school also continues to struggle in the math portion of the Georgia High School Graduation Test, showing a proficiency rate of 73.6 percent in 2009. Those factors qualify the school for the SIG funding, which, if awarded, would be paid over a three-year period. Participating schools would qualify for anywhere between $50,000 and $2 million in funds annually.
After each year, the Department of Education will review each school’s progress, and if it deems a school has failed to take the necessary steps to improve the achievement of its students, the funding will be cut off.
To qualify, schools are given the burden of devising a plan to transform their respective instructional environments, a plan that can fit four models outlined by the state. Carroll County Schools has decided Temple would best qualify for the “transformation” approach to fixing its achievement problem, which, unlike the other plans, would not require the school to layoff any teachers or administration.
This approach would require the school develop a projected budget for the next three years, establish achievement goals that will be met over that same period of time and hash out an overall plan to move the school forward.
With those objectives in mind, members of the system met with Temple High teachers and faculty on Tuesday, the first of a series of meetings that will address the specifics of the grant application. The next in-house meeting is scheduled for Friday, and a meeting for students and parents will be held in the coming weeks.
“This is an exciting opportunity for Carroll County Schools, Temple High School and the Temple community,” said school system public relations coordinator Elena Schulenburg in a written statement. “As the school and district work through the planning states, we encourage parents, students and the community to become involved in the planning by offering suggestions and support.”
Below is the reply i got back from a Temple council member after inquiring into the matter of Temple selling or leasing away OUR water rights to an out of state private water company? As you can see from the reply i got, there is validity to this! If the committee votes to send it to counsel this Monday, then the following Monday, counsel can vote away our water rights! Then no one in Temple will have a say about their water bill. They can charge us whatever they want. No matter how much money they offer city hall to purchase or lease our water rights, they will get every single cent back plus more because they are a for PROFIT company! I have contacted the Times Georgian about this and they will be there. Their is nothing on the cities web site about this and nothing has been in the paper? If we don't get the word out and show up to let our elected officials her our voice of NO PRIVATIZATION OF OUR WATER!! Then in less than two weeks. it could belong to an out of state private company:-( Citizens of Temple, UNITE and be heard this Monday night!!!!
Here is a link that has the story of another town and how they had to wage a six year battle to regain control after a private water company took over and tripled water rate!! http://www.feltonflow.org
From: "hmiller@templega.us" To: Steve Lamar Sent: Tue, March 23, 2010 6:21:49 AM
Subject: Re: OUR WATER RIGHTS, NO PRIVATIZATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you for your concern. I am the chair person for the Public Works committee and it will be my committee that will hear the proposal on March 29. The meetings begin at 5:00 pm. I would like to encourage you to come and voice your opinion on the matter. I agree city hall is not the city of Temple. I do appreciate and consider all feedback from all citizens. I think to make a informed decision we need to hear from the citizens and I promise I will not ignore any concerns.
Thank you also for including your information of other towns. I will ask that my committee time be moved to the last spot so if you are unable to make it at 5:00, then hopefully by 6:00. Thank you for your time and concern.
Hiley Miller
Temple City Council Ward 3
678-326-6298
> I have heard that city hall is contemplating selling or leasing OUR
> water rights away to an outside company in another state??...If this is
> true, what are you people thinking!!...This is not why you were
> elected!!..I voted for each and everyone of you reading this (and there
> are four votes in my house )....City Hall is NOT the city of Temple,
> that would be it's residents!!...There can be NO argument that can be
> made that makes this a good idea...I don't care if the private company
> comes in here and says their writing city hall a $10,000,000 check and
> give city hall a part of the profit every year, THEY will get back all
> the money PLUS at least a 10% profit or more and it will come off the
> backs of the residents that live here in way of HIGH water bills!!!...I
> would rather pay a higher water rate to city hall if need be, then if
> there was extra money left at the end of the year, spend it on
> sidewalks, parks and rec, or even knock down some of the unsightly
> buildings that will never be used again, NOT to line some out of state
> companies pockets as they gouge us residents for the next 50 years!!!
>
> If you all do this, then you all will go down as the people who sold
> Temples water rights away and the reason our water bills will be so high and you will a hard time defending that next election that comes up.
>
> Below are some articles of of other towns that have tried this and the
> pitfalls and mistakes they made. I have highlighted in bold the most
> relevant sentences.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Food & Water Watch advocates for economic and environmental
> sustainability through research, the media, public outreach and
> education, including lobbying for safe, wholesome food as well as
> public control of groundwater, oceans, lakes and rivers.
>
> In February 2009, it published a report titled, "Money Down the
> Drain: How Private Control of Water Wastes Public Resources." It
> covers
> corporate efforts to convince cash-starved communities to privatize
> their water and wastewater systems, saying it's how to
> raise vital
> revenue, be more efficient, and the best way to upgrade facilities at
> low cost. The facts prove otherwise:
>
> -- because of financing costs, taxes, high executive pay, expected
> profits, and numerous other factors, privatization is expensive and
> irresponsible;
>
> -- private utilities charge up to 80% more for water and 100% more
> for sewer service;
>
> -- costs are contained by downsizing workforces, destroying unions,
> relying on cheap labor, using shoddy construction materials, deferring
> maintenance, and backlogging service requests to focus all efforts on
> profits
> .
> Cities belatedly learn that public control delivers better, cheaper,
> faster, more reliable service and happier customers. Food & Water
> Watch concluded that:
> Privatization is not a sustainable model
> or a way to rejuvenate
> community water system.
>
> "From high costs and
> inefficiency to
> unaccountable and irresponsible operators, a deluge of problems has
> swamped communities that turned to the private sector. Corporations
> prioritize earnings over quality, and stockholders over consumers. They
> seek good returns by cutting corners, neglecting maintenance and hiking
> rates."
>
> Privatization is the problem, not
> the solution to protect our
> valuable water resources and distribute them equitably to everyone at a
> reasonable cost. "Public money for public utilities is the best
> way....to ensure clean, safe and affordable water for generations to
> come." It also preserves higher paying jobs and the right of workers to
> organize. Irresponsible profiteers operate otherwise.
> Archive for Monday, November 16, 2009
> Leasing water system could be a risky move for Chicago
> Mayor Richard Daley could learn from other cities? experiences
> By Michael Hawthorne
> November 16,
> 2009 Mayor Richard Daley says any part of city government is up for grabs if
> the price is right.
>
> But
> if he is tempted to dangle Chicago?s vast water system as his next
> lease deal, he might want to first consult Atlanta, which is still
> smarting from a botched experiment with privatizing a big-city water
> supply.
>
> Or the mayor could look someplace closer to home, like
> Bolingbrook, one of dozens of suburbs and downstate communities furious
> about steep rate increases imposed by a private water operator.
>
> Daley
> is searching for more jackpots as his administration draws heavily on
> the money it reaped from leasing parking meters and the Chicago Skyway to ease the city through the recession. The mayor recently told the Tribune editorial board that he has met with consultants who outlined
> new privatization deals, but he would not provide details.
>
> ?Everything is always on the table,? Daley said, though mayoral aides later
> insisted that nothing immediate is in the works.
>
> If Chicago tried to sell off its water department to a private company, it would be the
> largest U.S. city to do so. Such a deal also would run counter to movements in
> dozens of smaller towns across the suburbs and the rest of the nation,
> where local officials are having second thoughts about private control
> of public water.
>
> Mayors from Homer Glen to Urbana are
> threatening municipal takeovers of their local water systems, moved by
> complaints about skyrocketing rates and lackluster service from
> corporate operators. Fort Wayne, Ind., already wrested away part of its
> water system and is seeking to buy back the rest after accusing a
> private operator of putting shareholder interests before those of
> customers.
>
> Backers of privatizing government services suffered a
> bigger setback in Atlanta, where city leaders tried during the late
> 1990s to turn over management of the water system to a corporate
> operator. In 2003, less than four years into a 20-year deal, Atlanta
> regained public control in response to cost overruns, service problems
> and breakdowns.
>
> Similar concerns forced Milwaukee this year to
> scuttle a bid to lease its water system. Even the idea of studying a
> deal prompted such a fierce outcry that city leaders backed off, at
> least for now.
>
> ?Water is critical to a city?s future management
> and growth,? said Rob
> Hunter, Atlanta?s commissioner of watershed
> management. ?It?s not something you want to turn over to somebody
> else.?
>
>
>
>
> By Megan Tady
> Who should own the water: communities or
> corporations?
> Tags corporations water
> SHARE THIS ARTICLE |
> Bill
> Lokyo never expected to find himself embroiled in a six-year battle
> over water with a multinational corporation and city officials in
> Stockton, Calif.
> ?We all thought this would only be a one-year fight,? Lokyo says.
> But Lokyo and the group Concerned Citizens Coalition of Stockton
> (CCOS) felt compelled to challenge a rushed deal that turned the city?s
> publicly owned water system into a for-profit venture. This month,
> their perseverance paid off when the city finally sent privatization
> packing.
> ?We believed that we were right,? Lokyo says. ?And when you believe
> that, you just can?t stop.?
> In 2003, against the wishes of many Stockton residents, the city
> signed a 20-year contract with the company OMI-Thames to manage its
> wastewater, water and stormwater system. The CCOS, joined by the Sierra
> Club and the League of Women Voters of San Joaquin County, filed a
> lawsuit under the California Environmental Quality Act to halt the
> project until it allowed for public participation. Judges twice ruled
> in favor of the groups, and on July 17, city officials voted to rescind
> their appeal and dissolve what Food and Water Watch, a group that
> challenges corporate control of water resources, has called the ?most
> notorious water
> privatization deal in the United States.?
> As Loyko and fellow members of CCOS celebrate, water watchdogs mark
> another tally for citizens fighting to keep or regain local control of
> their water.
> ?It?s both symbolic for the anti-water privatization movement, and
> it?s a real victory for the citizens? groups of Stockton?it means that
> the ordeal of water
> privatization is over for the city of 270,000
> people,? says Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food and Water
> Watch.
> More than 80 percent of Americans fill their glasses with water
> owned and managed by public utilities?a market for growth that has CEOs
> rubbing their hands. Across the United States, multinational
> corporations are swooping into towns and cities with promises of a more
> efficient and economical water system if they would just turn over
> their taps.
> But for many municipalities, it is a raw deal. Privatization often
> results in exorbitant water rates, poor service, little accountability,
> a disregard for public safety and destruction of the environment. City
> officials in Atlanta,
> for instance, cancelled their contract with Suez
> four years into privatizing their water system after residents
> experienced routine boil orders, water shortages and rate hikes.
> ?People get at a very basic level that they don?t want a really
> important public service like water to be privatized,? Hauter says.
> ?They don?t want the customer call center to be 1,000 miles away. They
> don?t want their water rates going up. Privatizations are succeeded
> with environmental disasters, as [companies] try to cut corners and
> they don?t fix the leakages.?
That said, something obviously needs to be done. I think if the current principal sticks around, things might improve.
I am sure there are a few weak teachers there but they need to use this money to get this kids IN school and KEEP them there. If you have that many kids (25% of what, 500 kids) missing that many days, then no wonder their test scores are weak. Get to the root of the drop out problem, work within the community to increase the graduation rate and the value of an education.
I know MANY very successful people that graduated from THS and, surpise, they went to school and wanted an education.
No, I don't live in Temple or even work there. I just happen to know people from there, many which are very successful college students right now.