Ross speedily confirmed as President of UNC System, ACORN ties and all

Published on: 30th August, 2010 |

This is the first of a three part series examining the new president of the University of North Carolina Thomas Ross.

At a hastily convened meeting on August 26th, The UNC Board of Governors voted to appoint Thomas Ross as the next President of the more than 200,000 students and more than 30,000 staff of the university system. While relatively unknown by most state residents, Ross is well known by the politically connected, especially those on the left.

A friend to many far-left organizations and a relative novice to higher education, Thomas Ross makes for an unfortunately predictable choice to be the next President of the University of North Carolina System. From a career in law to his seven years as Executive Director of the far-left funding mechanism – Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation – and President of Davidson College for three years, Ross is set to succeed current UNC President Erskine Bowles in January 2011. What is really alarming about the North Carolina Board of Governor’s choice of Ross as the heir apparent is his long history of steering hundreds of thousands in contributions to dubious organizations like ACORN.

During his almost seven years as Executive Director of the left-wing, Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation, Ross oversaw massive contributions to an enormous array of far-left liberal activist organizations. He took what was already a politically active foundation, founded by one of North Carolina’s most prominent families, and turned it into an active organizer and funder of the lefts political agenda in North Carolina. All manner of socially left organizations were on the foundation’s dole under Ross’s administration, including the radical and nefarious ACORN organization.

ACORN is an organization of community organizers with a tarnished history of fraud, embezzlement, and conflict of interest. ACORN employees have been tried and convicted of systematic voter registration fraud according to Factcheck.org. There have been reported cases of this kind of fraud in Missouri, Washington, Colorado, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and in 2007, ACORN’s Las Vegas office was even raided by state criminal investigators. In addition to fraud, co-founder Dale Rathke was found to have embezzled nearly $1 million from the so-called "charitable" funds of his organization. ACORN had strong ties to President Obama, and was actively engaged, in conjunction with other groups of identifying and turning out Obama voters in NC and across the nation for the 2008 election.

This infamous organization was heavily funded during Ross’s tenure as Executive Director of Z. Smith Reynolds. From 2004-2006, Ross pumped over $100,000 into ACORN. In 2007 alone, Ross’s last year as executive director, he contributed an additional $150,000 to the ACORN organization, "for general operating support to support and expand its North Carolina ACORN chapters." These gifts were given with the explicit caveat that the money was to be used to foster local branches of this sort of community organizing planting roots in counties across North Carolina including Wake and Mecklenburg. Ross funneled this money via the American Institute for Social Justice, a sister organization that contributed $5.6 million to ACORN’s coffers in 2008. This 2007 contribution helped to develop the infrastructure for a massive get out the vote effort to support Democratic Party efforts in 2008.

ACORN is only one example of the social leftist organizations that Ross heavily funded. Z. Smith Reynolds shelled out anywhere in the neighborhood of $16 million per annum during Ross’s tenure to groups like pro-abortion activists Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America, the American Civil Liberties Union, and homosexual advocacy groups like the Rainbow Youth Coalition (RYC) and the Equality NC Foundation.

Another interesting tidbit was the vocational switcheroo that took place upon Ross’s departure from Z. Smith Reynolds. The woman who succeeded him, Leslie J. Winner, was at the time the Vice-President of the UNC System. Three years later Ross is coincidentally elected as President of the UNC System; an interesting turn of events indeed.

After scrutinizing Ross’s record, it seems clear that the UNC System is positioned to take a decidedly left turn, and the new President’s credentials leaves much to be desired. One can only hope that the implications of his leftist background and being a neophyte to the realm of higher education won’t be passed on to the hundreds of thousands of North Carolinian students he will oversee.

Here is the original post:
Ross speedily confirmed as President of UNC System, ACORN ties and all

Money Misplaced Again

Published on: 21st August, 2010 |

The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG) was granted, during the 2010 legislative session, the authority to use $17 million in capital funds to purchase land and construct a railroad underpass leading to nowhere. The system-wide University of North Carolina budget in total for 2010-11 will be $170 million less than two years ago.

Currently, the campus of UNCG is bounded to the south by railroad tracks. The university hopes to expand its reach across those railroad tracks into the Glenwood neighborhood. The new southern boundary for the expanded campus would be West Lee St., which is one block south of the railroad tracks.

The university does own a few small parcels of land south of the railroad tracks in the Glenwood area where it plans to expand, yet none of the property has been developed for university use. Glenwood can currently be accessed from the university using two railroad crossings that are one-half mile apart.

While the expansion of the university may be assumed necessary, the railroad underpass ought to wait for a couple of reasons. First, the dreadful fiscal situation in which the state finds itself suggests that such unnecessary expenditures as a railroad underpass – where two others exist less than one-half mile apart – should be delayed. An item like the railroad underpass might be nice to have, but the costs of purchasing the property and construction do not outweigh the benefits of redirecting the funds to more important budget items such as university faculty retention and limiting tuition increases.

Furthermore, the university does not have the full approval of all Glenwood residents, meaning the issue of eminent domain could arise and a fight for property rights could ensue. Certainly the railroad underpass can wait until UNCG owns the property south of the railroad tracks. As it stands, the railroad underpass would allow students easier access to a neighborhood where there are no dormitories, laboratories or classrooms.

Without owning all of the properties necessary for expansion, how can the university ensure that all of the property owners in the area are willing to sell? According to Mike Byers, assistant vice chancellor for Auxiliary Services, the university and the Glenwood neighborhood have only reached a tentative agreement regarding the expansion. The absence of a formal agreement suggests that the university is nowhere near being assured the expansion will occur. It is a hasty decision to move forward with the $17 million underpass without assurance that expansion will happen. It very well may turn out that the $17 million is a waste.

Of course, wasting money would be nothing new for the General Assembly. This very same legislative body has spent your tax dollars on digging up old pirate ships, building teapot museums and funding cooking schools at private universities. Given the fiscal situation our state is in, the railroad underpass at UNCG should wait until campus expansion is a sure thing. As it stands, the university has $17 million to build an underpass to nowhere.

Dollars appropriated for the purpose of university expansion should have been diverted to a more appropriate use, such as holding down tuition increases, considering the budget gap that the General Assembly faced this year, which led to rather sizeable cuts to the UNC System as a whole.

See more here:
Money Misplaced Again

North Carolina’s FY 2010-11 State Budget: UNC System

Published on: 1st July, 2010 |

The 2010 Budget
Introduction
General Government
Public Education
UNC System
Community Colleges
Justice and Public Safety
Health and Human Services
Transportation
Natural and Economic Resources

The final 2010-11 state budget provides for a $10.4 million increase in budget appropriations compared to the amount of spending recommended for the UNC system in last year’s two-year budget plan.  The dollar amount of the UNC System budget turned out very close to the Senate’s proposal of a $10 million appropriations increase, rather than the House’s proposal for a steep $98 million reduction for FY 2010-11.

The budget’s $70 million management flexibility reduction represents the most striking compromise between the House and Senates’ budget recommendations. While the Senate originally proposed a comparatively mild $50 million flexibility reduction, the House’s original proposal was a much more severe reduction of $150 million. Last year’s two-year budget plan already lowered the baseline expenditures for UNC operations for 2010-11 with a $100 million flexibility reduction. In sum, UNC’s operating budget will be $170 million lower then it was two years ago.

The House did receive its share of victories, as it was successful in its proposal to repeal the reimbursement of UNC campuses granting  out-of-state athletes on full scholarship in-state tuition rates. Subsidizing the difference costs taxpayers nearly $10 million annually.

Major expansions and reductions include:

Expansions:

• Tuition Repeal: $34.8 million. Repeals the tuition rate increase enacted in the 2009 legislative session. The state therefore is replacing the lost revenue from the lower tuition rates by increasing the appropriation to the UNC system.
• Need-Based Financial Aid: $8.2 million. This provision increases funding for Need-Based Financial Aid to adjust for inflation and to fund an additional 4,600 students that qualify for assistance. General Fund appropriations in addition to 10 percent of lottery proceeds constitute the funding for Need-Based Financial Aid.
• Building Reserves Restored: $25 million. This will restore most of the building reserves cut in the 2009 session. The funds will pay for housekeeping, maintenance, and security requirements of the 40 new or renovated buildings completed in FY 2009-11. 286 new employees will be added pursuant to meeting the operation needs of these buildings.
• ECU Dental School Operations: $6 million. This funding will continue to meet the faculty and operating needs of the new School of Dentistry at East Carolina University, which is scheduled to open in the fall of 2011.
• Distinguished Professor Endowment Fund: $3.5 million. Increases the Distinguished Professor Endowment Fund from its base budget appropriation of $8 million to reduce the backlog of 66 professorships awaiting State matching funds. This fund matches state money to private contributions at a one-to-one basis to create endowed chairs for distinguished professors.
• Aid to Private College Students: $4.5 million. This provision will increase funding to the Legislative Tuition Grant and the State Contractual Scholarship Fund in expectation of a 2.9 percent growth in enrollment in private North Carolina colleges for FY 2010-11.

Reductions:

•  Management Flexibility Reduction: $70 million. This management flexibility reduction for the UNC operating budget with a priority on non-teaching related reductions. This reduction is in addition to the $100 million flexibility reduction already embedded courtesy of last year’s two-year spending plan.
• Repeal of Nonresident Athletic Full Scholarship Tuition Waiver: $9.4 million. This repeals the reimbursement of the UNC system for loss of revenue due to providing in-state tuition to out-of-state student athletes on full scholarships.
• UNC Advertising Reduced: $2.5 million. This reduces the UNC advertising budget by 24 percent. Campuses in the UNC System spent $10.6 million in advertising in FY 2008-09.
• Aid to UNC Hospitals Reduced: $8 million. Reduces the UNC Hospitals aid by $8 million in nonrecurring appropriations. This reduction will be offset by the UNC Hospitals’ $501 million in unrestricted reserves.

Go here to read the rest:
North Carolina’s FY 2010-11 State Budget: UNC System

North Carolina’s FY 2010-11 State Budget: Public Education

Published on: 1st July, 2010 |

The 2010 Budget
Introduction
General Government
Public Education
UNC System
Community Colleges
Justice and Public Safety
Health and Human Services
Transportation
Natural and Economic Resources

The North Carolina House and Senate reconciled a number of appropriations disagreements in their budget proposals for the coming fiscal year. The final figures include a reduction of $275 million to Public Education compared to the amount of spending slated in the two-year spending plan approved last year.

The adjustments bring the total Public Education budget for FY 2010-11 to $7.08 billion. This number does not, however, accurately reflect the total spending amount for the coming fiscal year, as the state expects to receive an additional $373 million from the federal stimulus “Education Stabilization Fund.”

The final budget shows evidence of considerable moderation and compromise between the House and Senate’s budget proposals. Notable Senate proposals that did not make it to the budget include a $4.5 million cut in funding for Assistant Principals, and a discontinuation of Dropout Prevention Grants. Similarly, the House sacrificed some of their proposals including scaling back their recommendation to do away with numerous End of Grade Tests. The final budget only included the elimination of the End of Grade Test on Geometry.

Also notable in the FY 2010-11 Certified Budget is the nonrecurring redirection of lottery proceeds from their standard distribution to prevent teachers from being laid off.

Major expansions and reductions include:

Expansions:

• Student Diagnostic and Intervention Initiative: $10 million. $10 million in recurring funding will be appropriated to extend this program an additional year in the 40 schools across the state where it already exists. Funding will also be used to expand the pilot program to new school sites and train teachers to properly implement the program. This is well short of the $39 million requested by Gov. Perdue. Neither House nor Senate budget proposals, however, included any funding for this program – making its inclusion in the final budget a violation of the General Assembly’s own procedural rules that prohibit the insertion into the final budget spending items not included in either chamber’s budget proposal.
• Education Value Added Assessment System (EVAAS): $1 million. This funding will provide $250,000 for EVAAS licenses that had been funded from reversions and $750,000 to purchase EVAAS Teacher Analysis.

Reductions:

• Education Lottery Receipts: $121 million. This will be a nonrecurring departure from the standard direction of lottery proceeds from More at Four, classroom size reductions, public school construction, and financial aid for college students to preventing teacher layoffs.
• More at Four: $30.6 million. This reduction of $30 million will be offset on a one-time basis with federal Temporary Assistance for Need Families (TANF) Emergency Contingency Funds.
• Instructional Supplies: $3.3 million. This reduction will siphon off 3.5 percent of the total allotment for school supplies detailed in the previous year’s budget, leaving $90.9 million remaining for this purpose.
• Mentoring: $9.2 million. Eliminates the state funding for all Local Education Authority mentoring programs on a one-time basis for FY 2010-2011.
• Central Office Administration: $2.4 million. Reduces funding to LEAs for salaries and benefits of central office staff by 2.2 percent, leaving $107.5 million remaining for this purpose. Central office staff is composed of superintendents and assistant superintendents, finance officers, athletic trainers, transportation directors, etc.
• Limited English Proficiency (LEP): $4 million. This reduction represents 5 percent of the funding allotted for this program, leaving $76.5 million remaining for this purpose. LEP programs provide additional assistance to students identified as being limited in their English proficiency to help them further their educational experience and develop English proficiency.
• Transportation: $10 million. This reduction represents 2.4 percent of the annual funding for transportation, which is used for the salaries of transportation personnel as well as the maintenance of yellow buses. $403 million will remain for this purpose.
• School Bus Replacement: $11.9 million. This will impose a one-year moratorium on school bus replacement for FY 2010-11. Funding will remain to support the financing payments for previously purchased school buses. Additionally, $1 million will be set aside for emergency bus replacement purposes.
• Department of Public Instruction (DPI) Operating Reduction: $2 million. This reduction composes 15 percent of the agency’s operating funds.

See more here:
North Carolina’s FY 2010-11 State Budget: Public Education

SB 704: A Trojan Horse for Charter Schools

Published on: 9th June, 2010 |

SB 704, approved by the House on May 21, asks the General Assembly to convert as many as 135 low-performing schools to charter schools – as long as the charter schools are controlled by school boards. The bill is a last-ditch effort by state public school leaders to improve the state’s application for federal Race-to-the-Top (RttT) funds.

While it is true this bill significantly expands the number of charter schools across North Carolina, don’t be fooled. The bill does not help charter schools or work to improve public education.

• SB 704 puts school boards in charge of charter schools. Charter schools are designed to foster flexibility and innovation by allowing schools to operate outside the traditional administrative structures of public education. Charter schools are accountable not to school boards, but boards of directors. By giving school boards control over charter schools, such schools — by definition — would cease to be charter schools.
• Why should NC tie its fate to RttT funds? RttT ties North Carolina’s fate to the federal government’s education goals. RttT would also commit North Carolina to adopting unproven, costly national curriculum standards and tests. Worse yet, RttT would place our children’s future in the hands of education bureaucrats in Washington and lessen parental influence over the education of their children.
• North Carolina’s values about public education aren’t the same as those embodied in RttT. RttT centralizes control of public education within the federal government and works to eliminate local control and regional differences. Interestingly, the federal government believes competition will help to produce the best proposals among the states and spur reform efforts. Yet the federal government will oppose policies like school choice which works to instill among schools the benefits of competition.
• Does North Carolina need a turnaround plan for schools? A new plan for Failing Schools? The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction already has detailed plans designed to help turnaround low performing or failing schools. Unfortunately, those plans have not generated much success. Before adopting another plan however, shouldn’t public school leaders let us know why our current efforts to turnaround schools failed and why federal efforts are any more likely to succeed where North Carolina’s have failed?
• Is RttT really concerned about improving public education? If the federal government was really concerned about education, it would make assistance available to states with no strings attached and realize that states choose to address problems in different ways.

North Carolina could have raised its RttT score if the state would have merely lifted the charter school cap. That a majority of legislators will only sign on to legislation that raises the cap but also shifts control of charter schools, tells us that the issue is really about something else. Would any friend of charter schools put in charge of such schools individuals who have frequently expressed strong opposition to the very existence of charters?

Summary: SB 704 allows those legislators who opposed lifting the charter school cap to please charter school proponents by voting for this bill and also to please charter school opponents by strengthening public control over charter schools. In truth, SB 704 greases the skids for what most states desperately want: RttT monies. The funding is the means by which the federal government will gain greater government control over public education. Those who believe in the value of charter schools, strong local control and expanding student and parental choice in education have plenty of compelling reasons to oppose SB 704.

See the original post:
SB 704: A Trojan Horse for Charter Schools

Next Page »