I have been a Democrat since I registered to vote many years ago. Today, I question why I remain in the party. After all, most people today are registering as an Independent or Unaffiliated. Doing so sends the message that neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party is meeting the needs of the people.
In my party I've seen corruption that sickens me. Meg Scott Phipps in prison because of a political payoff. Jim Black in jail for having his vote and assistance bought. And, this week we learned Governor Mike Easley's closest aide, Ruffin Poole is facing a 51-count indictment on a variety of federal charges involving political payoff. Poole is presumed innocent of the charges. I predict that others will be indicted before this investigation is complete.
In Washington, DC my party is trying to ramrod a health care bill toward passage by buying the votes of other state senators and the union with taxpayers money. They are trying to pass a bill that the majority of Americans do not want. They are attempting to approve a bill that few have read because it is a bill so complex no one really knows what it will do.
When I look at the Republican Party, I don't find a much better alternative. Why? Because many Republicans have done little to bring forth compromise and have been as guilty as Democrats in caring more about their seats and padding their own pockets than they have been serving the citizenry.
I predict some real upsets in 2010 because of all the unrest in the Country. I predict that upsets will filter down to what have been Democratic-safe state houses. Elected officials once thought shoo-ins for their offices may very well learn a different story from an electorate that's mad about taxes and the lack of jobs, not to mention health care.
Those who believe taxes can be raised and jobs will follow have never taken an economics course. And, those who do believe that's possible don't need to represent us in Congress or in the State House.
So, today, I am pondering my party affiliation. I am questioning it, for not only the reasons above, but also because those elected to represent me do not represent my feelings and are hard to communicate with.
What will I do? Will I stay and argue for change within my party. Will I jump to the Republican Party? Will I become an Independent?
As a newspaper friend of mine once wrote in an editorial, "My party has left me." That's the way I feel today, and have for some time now.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Monday, August 17, 2009
Growing High Schools
The Pitt County Board of Education plans to "grow" three high schools, leaving three other high schools at the same capacity, according to their 2009 Facility Plan.
In the first phase of this plan, the school administration will add classrooms at Farmville Central High School. In the second phase of their construction plan, additional classrooms are planned for Ayden-Grifton High School and North Pitt High School.
While it seems great to add classrooms at these facilities, it won't be great when the school system begins bussing students to Ayden-Grifton High School, to Farmville Central, and to North Pitt. This will occur in order to fill up the classrooms while other schools will remain at their relative levels.
Certainly one reason for this is to keep from building another high school. However, there has been plenty of talk indicating that sports is also impacting the administration's decision because of the travel that Rose High School must endure. So what happens is the five county high schools will be "close" to the same enrollment enabling them to be in the same sports conference.
From a southern Pitt County perspective, Ayden-Grifton High School is a small high school that has been performing well of late. In my opinion, it needs to be allowed to grow normally, not grow at the hands of consultants who will move students in order to fill the classroom seats.
The Town of Ayden has a plan of growth and that plan should be allowed to take hold when the economy turns around. Large schools bring bigger problems. Anyone who believes that it is easier to run a large school over a smaller school is simply not enlightened.
Besides, Ayden-Grifton High School is a community school and we deserve to keep our students who are in our community.
it is obvious that the present administration has little concern for community schools and ours in particular. After all, this is the same administration that wanted to tear down successful K-8 schools in Grifton and Chicod before the people of each community stood up and resoundingly said "no". To-date, there's been no word on what will happen at Grifton School or for that matter, what the plans are with K-8 schools north of the river.
The time has come, we believe, for the community to take a look at the administration's attempt to artificially "grow" three high schools, and Ayden-Grifton High School in particular. I don't believe our residents in Ayden and Grifton want to be the place that tries to solve redistricting issues in and around Greenville.
In the first phase of this plan, the school administration will add classrooms at Farmville Central High School. In the second phase of their construction plan, additional classrooms are planned for Ayden-Grifton High School and North Pitt High School.
While it seems great to add classrooms at these facilities, it won't be great when the school system begins bussing students to Ayden-Grifton High School, to Farmville Central, and to North Pitt. This will occur in order to fill up the classrooms while other schools will remain at their relative levels.
Certainly one reason for this is to keep from building another high school. However, there has been plenty of talk indicating that sports is also impacting the administration's decision because of the travel that Rose High School must endure. So what happens is the five county high schools will be "close" to the same enrollment enabling them to be in the same sports conference.
From a southern Pitt County perspective, Ayden-Grifton High School is a small high school that has been performing well of late. In my opinion, it needs to be allowed to grow normally, not grow at the hands of consultants who will move students in order to fill the classroom seats.
The Town of Ayden has a plan of growth and that plan should be allowed to take hold when the economy turns around. Large schools bring bigger problems. Anyone who believes that it is easier to run a large school over a smaller school is simply not enlightened.
Besides, Ayden-Grifton High School is a community school and we deserve to keep our students who are in our community.
it is obvious that the present administration has little concern for community schools and ours in particular. After all, this is the same administration that wanted to tear down successful K-8 schools in Grifton and Chicod before the people of each community stood up and resoundingly said "no". To-date, there's been no word on what will happen at Grifton School or for that matter, what the plans are with K-8 schools north of the river.
The time has come, we believe, for the community to take a look at the administration's attempt to artificially "grow" three high schools, and Ayden-Grifton High School in particular. I don't believe our residents in Ayden and Grifton want to be the place that tries to solve redistricting issues in and around Greenville.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Ronald Reagan has health care opinion?
This is from a 1961 speech from former President Ronald Reagan, and is a speech he made long before his election:
Ronald Reagan's 1961 speech ..............
"As if we’re not already overextended enough financially, the issue of National Health Care is now on the table once more vote. Here’s some perspective you might find interesting.
Now back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.
One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.
Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it. We had an example of this. Under the Truman administration it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States, and, of course, the American people unhesitatingly rejected this.
Let’s take a look at social security itself. Again, very few of us disagree with the original premise that there should be some form of savings that would keep destitution from following unemployment by reason of death, disability or old age. And to this end, social security was adopted, but it was never intended to supplant private savings, private insurance, pension programs of unions and industries.
Now in our country under our free enterprise system we have seen medicine reach the greatest heights that it has in any country in the world. Today, the relationship between patient and doctor in this country is something to be envied any place. The privacy, the care that is given to a person, the right to chose a doctor, the right to go from one doctor to the other.
But let’s also look from the other side, at the freedom the doctor loses. A doctor would be reluctant to say this. Well, like you, I am only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf. The doctor begins to lose freedoms; it’s like telling a lie, and one leads to another. First you decide that the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government. But then the doctors aren’t equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him you can’t live in that town, they already have enough doctors. You have to go someplace else. And from here it is only a short step to dictating where he will go.
This is a freedom that I wonder whether any of us have the right to take from any human being. All of us can see what happens once you establish the precedent that the government can determine a man’s working place and his working methods, determine his employment. From here it is a short step to all the rest of socialism, to determining his pay and pretty soon your children won’t decide when they’re in school where they will go or what they will do for a living. They will wait for the government to tell them where they will go to work and what they will do
What can we do about this? Well, you and I can do a great deal. We can write to our congressmen and our senators. We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms. And at the moment, the key issue is, we do not want socialized medicine.
Former Representative Halleck of Indiana has said, “When the American people want something from Congress, regardless of its political complexion, if they make their wants known, Congress does what the people want.”
So write, and if your representative writes back to you and tells you that he or she too is for free enterprise, that we have these great services and so forth, that must be performed by government, don’t let them get away with it. Show that you have not been convinced. Write a letter right back and tell them that you believe in government economy and fiscal responsibility; that you know governments don’t tax to get the money the need; governments will always find a need for the money they get and that you demand the continuation of our free enterprise system. You and I can do this. The only way we can do it is by writing to our congressmen even we believe that he is on our side to begin with. Write to strengthen his hand. Give him the ability to stand before his colleagues in Congress and say “I have heard from my constituents and this is what they want.”
Write those letters now; call your friends and them to write them. If you don’t, this program I promise you will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country. Until, one day, as Normal Thomas said we will awake to find that we have socialism. And if you don’t do this and if I don’t do it, one of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free."
Ronald Reagan's 1961 speech ..............
"As if we’re not already overextended enough financially, the issue of National Health Care is now on the table once more vote. Here’s some perspective you might find interesting.
Now back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.
One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.
Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it. We had an example of this. Under the Truman administration it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States, and, of course, the American people unhesitatingly rejected this.
Let’s take a look at social security itself. Again, very few of us disagree with the original premise that there should be some form of savings that would keep destitution from following unemployment by reason of death, disability or old age. And to this end, social security was adopted, but it was never intended to supplant private savings, private insurance, pension programs of unions and industries.
Now in our country under our free enterprise system we have seen medicine reach the greatest heights that it has in any country in the world. Today, the relationship between patient and doctor in this country is something to be envied any place. The privacy, the care that is given to a person, the right to chose a doctor, the right to go from one doctor to the other.
But let’s also look from the other side, at the freedom the doctor loses. A doctor would be reluctant to say this. Well, like you, I am only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf. The doctor begins to lose freedoms; it’s like telling a lie, and one leads to another. First you decide that the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government. But then the doctors aren’t equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him you can’t live in that town, they already have enough doctors. You have to go someplace else. And from here it is only a short step to dictating where he will go.
This is a freedom that I wonder whether any of us have the right to take from any human being. All of us can see what happens once you establish the precedent that the government can determine a man’s working place and his working methods, determine his employment. From here it is a short step to all the rest of socialism, to determining his pay and pretty soon your children won’t decide when they’re in school where they will go or what they will do for a living. They will wait for the government to tell them where they will go to work and what they will do
What can we do about this? Well, you and I can do a great deal. We can write to our congressmen and our senators. We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms. And at the moment, the key issue is, we do not want socialized medicine.
Former Representative Halleck of Indiana has said, “When the American people want something from Congress, regardless of its political complexion, if they make their wants known, Congress does what the people want.”
So write, and if your representative writes back to you and tells you that he or she too is for free enterprise, that we have these great services and so forth, that must be performed by government, don’t let them get away with it. Show that you have not been convinced. Write a letter right back and tell them that you believe in government economy and fiscal responsibility; that you know governments don’t tax to get the money the need; governments will always find a need for the money they get and that you demand the continuation of our free enterprise system. You and I can do this. The only way we can do it is by writing to our congressmen even we believe that he is on our side to begin with. Write to strengthen his hand. Give him the ability to stand before his colleagues in Congress and say “I have heard from my constituents and this is what they want.”
Write those letters now; call your friends and them to write them. If you don’t, this program I promise you will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country. Until, one day, as Normal Thomas said we will awake to find that we have socialism. And if you don’t do this and if I don’t do it, one of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free."
Health Care Debate
The most important debate among us right now is the Heath Care Reform Debate.
It is more important than the economy because it could very well have an extremely negative impact on every American, and those of us who reside in Pitt County.
Let me state some of my concerns:
•The bill is more than 1,000 pages long
•Congressmen were being asked to approve this bill before reading it.
•It is full of legalese and I challenge everyone to read it.
•It is, in my opinion, more than health care reform. it is government controlled completely, no matter what the proponents are saying.
•It sets up a health commissioner and the bill allows for guidelines to be developed. No one knows what those guidelines will be nor how much they will cost.
Those are just a few of my concerns without really getting into the substance of the bill.
Why are they concerns?
Obviously one thousand pages for one bill is going to have some impact on our lives. To expect Congressmen to approve this bill in short order shows the arrogance of government. To expect it to be approved with its legalese (to the point it is hard to understand) is the height of government at its worse. But, quite frankly, in my opinion, the preparers of this bill did not want the average person to understand it. That's why there are so-called myths. It is left wide open for all sorts of interpretations, and I understand why people are thinking the worse about this bill. Obviously, if you open a door for government it walks right in more every day.
In my opinion this bill allows radically too much government involvement.
What is the answer?
To tweak the free market system we have is my answer.
Get representatives of doctors, drug manufacturers and other facets of the health care industry together and work toward cost reduction, full insurance for the indigent, and preventative care for those who don't have it.
I keep hearing that 18,000 people are dying each year from lack of health insurance. I wish not a single person would die for any reason, yet 42,000 die in auto accidents each year. Are we going to stop driving or radically change the vehicles we drive or the roads we drive upon? No we are not.
About 1,500 people per day, or 541,00 annually, die for all forms of cancer. It seems to me, if there should be government incentives, it would be to find a cure for cancer through research.
i respect those on both side of this debate.
But, we do not need government-run health care.
It is more important than the economy because it could very well have an extremely negative impact on every American, and those of us who reside in Pitt County.
Let me state some of my concerns:
•The bill is more than 1,000 pages long
•Congressmen were being asked to approve this bill before reading it.
•It is full of legalese and I challenge everyone to read it.
•It is, in my opinion, more than health care reform. it is government controlled completely, no matter what the proponents are saying.
•It sets up a health commissioner and the bill allows for guidelines to be developed. No one knows what those guidelines will be nor how much they will cost.
Those are just a few of my concerns without really getting into the substance of the bill.
Why are they concerns?
Obviously one thousand pages for one bill is going to have some impact on our lives. To expect Congressmen to approve this bill in short order shows the arrogance of government. To expect it to be approved with its legalese (to the point it is hard to understand) is the height of government at its worse. But, quite frankly, in my opinion, the preparers of this bill did not want the average person to understand it. That's why there are so-called myths. It is left wide open for all sorts of interpretations, and I understand why people are thinking the worse about this bill. Obviously, if you open a door for government it walks right in more every day.
In my opinion this bill allows radically too much government involvement.
What is the answer?
To tweak the free market system we have is my answer.
Get representatives of doctors, drug manufacturers and other facets of the health care industry together and work toward cost reduction, full insurance for the indigent, and preventative care for those who don't have it.
I keep hearing that 18,000 people are dying each year from lack of health insurance. I wish not a single person would die for any reason, yet 42,000 die in auto accidents each year. Are we going to stop driving or radically change the vehicles we drive or the roads we drive upon? No we are not.
About 1,500 people per day, or 541,00 annually, die for all forms of cancer. It seems to me, if there should be government incentives, it would be to find a cure for cancer through research.
i respect those on both side of this debate.
But, we do not need government-run health care.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Memorial Day Tribute
My Dad seldom talked about his experience in the U.S. Army during World War II.
Ask him a question and he'd respond, "I was in the Army 3 years, 3 months, 3 weeks, and 3 days." I didn't understand why he chose to frame his service experience that way, but today, maybe I do.
He enlisted. And, I think that from that very moment he wanted to serve his Country in time of war and hurry up home. Maybe that's why he framed his service time the way he did ... that every minute of it he timed. I'm not sure he did but that was about the most you could get from him.
I questioned him on several occasions and got little from him. I know he was in the Normandy Invasion, but not in the early waves. He was in Artillery. I know he stayed in the European Theatre. I have pictures of him serving behind a piece of Artillery and in some cold, snowy countries.
I do recall one conversation with Dad that with stood out. Just before President Truman ordered the dropping of the bombs on Japan that effectively concluded the War, he said it was rumored that he and others would be taken to a small island off the coast of Japan. Dad had been moved from Artillery to Infantry by then. He said the rumor was they would get orders to storm the beaches of Japan as the U.S. did at Normandy.
Thanks to President Truman, his decision to use the bombs probably saved my Dad's life and countless other Americans.
It is a case in point about how decisions of a President affect the life and death of our citizens and the safety of our great Nation.
I think of my Dad a lot since his death in October 2001. But, today I thought this Memorial Day to be a really special day because of his Service to Country.
God bless my Dad and the thousands of Americans who have made living in America a cherished freedom.
Ask him a question and he'd respond, "I was in the Army 3 years, 3 months, 3 weeks, and 3 days." I didn't understand why he chose to frame his service experience that way, but today, maybe I do.
He enlisted. And, I think that from that very moment he wanted to serve his Country in time of war and hurry up home. Maybe that's why he framed his service time the way he did ... that every minute of it he timed. I'm not sure he did but that was about the most you could get from him.
I questioned him on several occasions and got little from him. I know he was in the Normandy Invasion, but not in the early waves. He was in Artillery. I know he stayed in the European Theatre. I have pictures of him serving behind a piece of Artillery and in some cold, snowy countries.
I do recall one conversation with Dad that with stood out. Just before President Truman ordered the dropping of the bombs on Japan that effectively concluded the War, he said it was rumored that he and others would be taken to a small island off the coast of Japan. Dad had been moved from Artillery to Infantry by then. He said the rumor was they would get orders to storm the beaches of Japan as the U.S. did at Normandy.
Thanks to President Truman, his decision to use the bombs probably saved my Dad's life and countless other Americans.
It is a case in point about how decisions of a President affect the life and death of our citizens and the safety of our great Nation.
I think of my Dad a lot since his death in October 2001. But, today I thought this Memorial Day to be a really special day because of his Service to Country.
God bless my Dad and the thousands of Americans who have made living in America a cherished freedom.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Time To Reduce Board Size
The Pitt County Board of Education has a 12-member board.
What follows is the members of each district and the seat they serve:
District 1: Seat A Michael Dixon and Seat B Ralph Love.
District 2: Seat A Billy Peaden and Seat B Mary Williams.
District 3: Seat A Marcy Romary and Seat B Jill Camnitz.
District 4: Seat A Roy Peaden and Seat B Barbara Owens.
District 5: Seat A Richard Tolmie and Seat B Jennifer Little.
District 6: Seat A Mary Grace Bright and Seat B Benjie Forrest.
The 12-member board is too large. The six-year terms are too long. This board should be reconstructed to mirror the Pitt County Commission in both geographic district terms and term of office.
The board is of its present size because of the merger of the Pitt County and Greenville City Schools systems. That merger occurred many years ago, and now is the time to effectuate positive change in this board. It is too large and cumbersome and deserves a reorganization that will make it leaner and more able to adjust to the current times.
Obviously the majority of those on this board are not making an effort to reorganize it. Thus, I would hope that when the 2010 elections get here it will become a serious topic of discussion for those who, not only choose to seek re-election but to those who will challenge incumbents.
What follows is the members of each district and the seat they serve:
District 1: Seat A Michael Dixon and Seat B Ralph Love.
District 2: Seat A Billy Peaden and Seat B Mary Williams.
District 3: Seat A Marcy Romary and Seat B Jill Camnitz.
District 4: Seat A Roy Peaden and Seat B Barbara Owens.
District 5: Seat A Richard Tolmie and Seat B Jennifer Little.
District 6: Seat A Mary Grace Bright and Seat B Benjie Forrest.
The 12-member board is too large. The six-year terms are too long. This board should be reconstructed to mirror the Pitt County Commission in both geographic district terms and term of office.
The board is of its present size because of the merger of the Pitt County and Greenville City Schools systems. That merger occurred many years ago, and now is the time to effectuate positive change in this board. It is too large and cumbersome and deserves a reorganization that will make it leaner and more able to adjust to the current times.
Obviously the majority of those on this board are not making an effort to reorganize it. Thus, I would hope that when the 2010 elections get here it will become a serious topic of discussion for those who, not only choose to seek re-election but to those who will challenge incumbents.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Lawyer Fees
Let me make myself clear here.
I have dutifully made a public information request to get a breakdown of the actual dollars Pitt County Schools (PCS) has spent for lawyers defending their failed 2005 Student Reassignment Plan.
I have been sent information that tells me and you how much money PCS has spent on legal fees, with the NOTATION that the amounts provided include all attorney fees and not just those associated with the 2005 Student Reassignment Plan lawsuit.
Before I report the numbers I would be remiss if I did not say that I cannot understand why PCS leadership would not want to keep the lawsuit costs separate from the rest of the District's legal bills. One would think management would want to know the cost of the lawsuit. One would assume leadership would think the public, at some point, might want to know. Let's take it one step further, too. One would think that having these amounts separated in the PCS accounting system would have been a very good business practice — maybe not one that is required by law — but certainly a practice management would have wanted to see separated for detail purposes.
Apparently, that did not happen. For me to get that information, I have to put some poor staffers to the task of pulling and copying those documents for me so I can pull it out. I don't mind doing the work that should have already been done but I hate to pile more work on those who are not responsible. So, I plan to report the figures that have been made available to me and let the readers decipher from that what they wish. That will give me time to think about whether I believe there is something in those documents that is more worthwhile to see.
These are the numbers from PCS. They are not my own. So here goes:
In FY 2006, $40,443.30 was paid to the Dixon and Allen, PLLC law firm.
In FY 2007, $85,403.63 was paid to the Dixon and Allen, PLLC law firm and $11,154.99 to Adrian A. Garcia, P.A., for a total of $96,618.62.
In FY 2008, $54,142.34 was paid to the Dixon and Allen, PLLC law firm, $40,382.70 to the Tharrington and Smith law firm, $690 to Carol Moore, and $1,753.75 to the Brocker Law Firm for a total of $103,841.20.
In FY 2009, through February, $3,573.82 was paid to Dixon and Allen, PLLC law firm, $35,095.56 to Tharrington and Smith law firm, $345 to Carol Moore, $3,922.50 to the Brocker Law Firm and $7,925.00 to the Everett, Gaskins and Handcock law firm, for a total of $50,861.88.
Over the period noted, the total cost for legal fees have been $291,176.50. I can't tell you how much is for the 2005 Student Reassignment Plan lawsuit. Maybe PCS management will finally decide legal feels spent on the lawsuit is important enough to research and freely provide to the board members and the public.
What I do know is that the law firm of Tharrington and Smith has predominantly worked on the lawsuit. Their fees total $75,478.26. I would guess the legal fees for the 2005 case will exceed $100,000.
Before I forget, all this does not include the annual salary of the school board's on-staff attorney who earns $80,000 annually, not including benefits.
I have dutifully made a public information request to get a breakdown of the actual dollars Pitt County Schools (PCS) has spent for lawyers defending their failed 2005 Student Reassignment Plan.
I have been sent information that tells me and you how much money PCS has spent on legal fees, with the NOTATION that the amounts provided include all attorney fees and not just those associated with the 2005 Student Reassignment Plan lawsuit.
Before I report the numbers I would be remiss if I did not say that I cannot understand why PCS leadership would not want to keep the lawsuit costs separate from the rest of the District's legal bills. One would think management would want to know the cost of the lawsuit. One would assume leadership would think the public, at some point, might want to know. Let's take it one step further, too. One would think that having these amounts separated in the PCS accounting system would have been a very good business practice — maybe not one that is required by law — but certainly a practice management would have wanted to see separated for detail purposes.
Apparently, that did not happen. For me to get that information, I have to put some poor staffers to the task of pulling and copying those documents for me so I can pull it out. I don't mind doing the work that should have already been done but I hate to pile more work on those who are not responsible. So, I plan to report the figures that have been made available to me and let the readers decipher from that what they wish. That will give me time to think about whether I believe there is something in those documents that is more worthwhile to see.
These are the numbers from PCS. They are not my own. So here goes:
In FY 2006, $40,443.30 was paid to the Dixon and Allen, PLLC law firm.
In FY 2007, $85,403.63 was paid to the Dixon and Allen, PLLC law firm and $11,154.99 to Adrian A. Garcia, P.A., for a total of $96,618.62.
In FY 2008, $54,142.34 was paid to the Dixon and Allen, PLLC law firm, $40,382.70 to the Tharrington and Smith law firm, $690 to Carol Moore, and $1,753.75 to the Brocker Law Firm for a total of $103,841.20.
In FY 2009, through February, $3,573.82 was paid to Dixon and Allen, PLLC law firm, $35,095.56 to Tharrington and Smith law firm, $345 to Carol Moore, $3,922.50 to the Brocker Law Firm and $7,925.00 to the Everett, Gaskins and Handcock law firm, for a total of $50,861.88.
Over the period noted, the total cost for legal fees have been $291,176.50. I can't tell you how much is for the 2005 Student Reassignment Plan lawsuit. Maybe PCS management will finally decide legal feels spent on the lawsuit is important enough to research and freely provide to the board members and the public.
What I do know is that the law firm of Tharrington and Smith has predominantly worked on the lawsuit. Their fees total $75,478.26. I would guess the legal fees for the 2005 case will exceed $100,000.
Before I forget, all this does not include the annual salary of the school board's on-staff attorney who earns $80,000 annually, not including benefits.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
