Rep. Wilkerson,

Let me give you a newsflash.

If you are concerned about "LOCAL CONTROL" and you are concerned about keeping your MONEY (even though it is not in danger of being lost).... your focus is NOT on kids, and it certainly is not listening to the stakeholders that matter most - parents. You are not representing your full constituency, you are simply representing a bureaucracy that you know will wrap their broad arms around you and protect your place in office.

Our state's achievement is ABYSMAL in some areas and you very well know it. And in other areas that do well, we need to raise the bar and provide more challenging and diverse options WHEN PARENTS DEMAND THEM. Charters provide choice for parents and ensure every child in our state has a quality public school option.

For once, stop being a politician and be a public servant. Serve the children and not the status quo.

Rep. Wilkerson,

Either you are being purposely obtuse or you are uninformed.

You SHOULD know that HR 1162 does not even address the Commission - that is covered by HB 797, which can be altered by locally elected officials (like yourself).

You SHOULD now that the Commission, if established, has no "power" other than to approve/deny and oversee quality schools. The power, by LAW, is vested in the LEA, which for state charter schools, is the governing board constituted of parents, teachers, and community members. Isn't this what you and others continue to spout - the importance of "local control." Well, this IS local control, and it is not vested in a Commission.

To be continued...

You SHOULD know that there are 2 sides of any math equation, and that "adequate" revenue has to be considered in light of conservative spending. Have you checked out the spending in Cobb County and other districts? Can you honestly, honestly stand here and say that school districts across this state have been fiscally conservative and ensured maximum amounts of dollars make it to the classrooms? Cobb's central office spending is within the realm of reason, but how about APS with 22% going to central office and only 48% going to classrooms? Do revenue cuts even matter when you have priorities like this? How about districts in our state earning more than $10,000 per pupil (there are 34 of them, or nearly 20%). We have districts making (even with austerity cuts) $14,000 and $15,000 per pupil - and ALL of these districts are failing kids in masses. How much is enough, Rep. Wilkerson?

To be continued...

Where's the money going to come from? You SHOULD know that. The law states clearly (both HR 1162 and HB 797) that it CAN'T come from the K-12 education budget. The state will, as it does with other expenditures in its appropriation bills, prioritize the non K-12 budget and fund from there. And you SHOULD know that the "projected cost" (which is nonsense, but assuming Barge is right) would account for 1/20 of 1 percent of the non K-12 budget.

So which is it, Mr. Wilkerson? Are you being purposely obtuse and misleading the public and your own constituency in order to protect the status quo OR are you simply poorly informed?

Rep. Wilkerson,

Let's look at the poor logic behind Dr. Barge's estimate:

1. Districts swear up and down they Looooooovvvveeee charter schools and only deny ones that are not quality.
2. Dr. Barge estimates that 7 charters are year will be authorized by the state Commission. What he is admitting is that 7 times per year, districts will NOT fairly authorize, which only makes the case that an appeals process is needed.
3. He fails to tell the public that if the amendment fails and the state isn't challenged (which isn't true - lawsuit is pending...Sally Fitzgerald said so the other day in Johns Creek), then that SAME amount of money will be required for schools authorized by the State Board.
4. He only provides the COST to the state, and fails to balance the equation by recognizing the loss in EXPENSE for the districts. Districts claim the state doesn't fund them enough and they are kicking in more local funds. Ok, so if that is true, then the large COST of kids leaving will mean (since they keep their local funds) they will MAKE money off kids going to state charters. He fails to mention that the cost to educate state charter students (for the taxpayer) is 38% less than to educate kids in traditional schools.

I expect our leaders, like you, to have better reasoning skills. I think you patronize the public in thinking they will fall for the weak and fallible arguments the opposition claims. I think the public is smarter than that.

To be continued...

Odd, you and the opponents CLAIM we already have a state appeals process... so explain to me exactly why you are afraid to have the voters affirm this?

The ballot doesn't lie, and if what you and the opponents say is true (that we already have both state and local authority that is shared), then it is not even a "change" to the constitution. It simply comes out and says EXPLICITLY what you claim is implicitly implied. Why are you afraid for the public to affirm this?

Are you really asking me why the liberal media hasn't come out in favor? Really?

Oh, and the reason BOTH are in there is because the majority of people in this state barely know what a charter school is, much less who has (currently) the authority to approve it. It is more transparent to say exactly who will have it, which is both. And again, you are saying both have it anyway, so why wouldn't both be in there?

To put just the state might imply that they are the ONLY one who can....which is exactly what the opposition to this was hoping for.

Helloooooo..... Rep. Wilkerson? Where are you? Doing some homework?

MP, obviously you feel that you are smarter than everyone else out there. This is neither a conservative nor liberal issue. The Tea Party has also come out against this amendment. With that said, we should able to converse with respect for one another. Since you are unable to do that, I will leave my earlier comments to stand on their own.

No, David, Debbie Dooley has come out against this issue. The Tea Party where I live is behind it, as are many others.

You didn't respond... so I prodded. I will apologize for prodding - you are right, that was rude. Now, please answer the questions put before you. The comments you made prior do not stand on their own.

If you want your constituents to believe that you DO have their best interests at heart and that your reasons for opposing this amendment are valid, then please answer the questions and address my statements.

I will add the Debbie Dooley stood up beside Lowery who made those inflammatory statements this morning about all white people going to hell. Strange bedfellows indeed.

Dr. Danielle LeSure, Center for an Educated Georgia, highlights three innovative practices taking place in Public Charter Schools that other schools could use! http://www.educatedgeorgia.org/news/press-release-successful-innovations-fuel-state-charter-school-success/

These three schools exist because of the state charter commission (16 of nearly 60 approved over 3 years...not too crazy). I will vote yes so that we see more innovation in education. Innovation that can be replicated in traditional school systems.

@ Dana,

What is misleading about it?

You CLAIM the state can "already" authorize on appeals.

If this is true, then the ballot contains the local and state's role in this process AND the voter will simply be affirming this in an explicit manner that cannot be interpreted in any other way and cannot be legally challenged.

Why do you dispute the amendment language then?

Well, it's been several days, and it looks, for all intents and purposes, that neither Rep. Wilkerson and Dana Teegardin can answer the tough questions when pressed. Those considering how to vote, please consider those not willing to engage, not willing to adequately articulate responses to the tough questions, or not willing to answer them at all...do they really have a good argument?

MP,

Our lack is response is due to the name calling and tone of your comments. I appreciate your opinion and am willing to discuss this important issue with anyone. People can reach me at 770-891-9736 (cell) with questions.

I haven't called you any names, and my tone reflects impatience with a disingenuous opposition who does not publish truthful informAtion. I do find it interesting you won't put a response in writing...not for me, but for others following the article.