http://www.memphisflyer.com/JacksonBaker/archives/2013/02/11/suburban-spokesperson-to-county-commission-drop-anti-msd-lawsuit Comments On: Suburban Group to County Commission: 'Drop Anti-MSD Lawsuit' by Jackson Baker en-us Copyright 2013 Memphis Flyer. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Memphis Flyer readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Memphis Flyer. wil@desert.net (Memphis Flyer Webmaster) Sun, 19 May 2013 00:00:01 -0500 Sun, 19 May 2013 11:45:00 -0500 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
I saw that, thanks.

I took no offense, having the same issue from time to time when I am negligent about my yearly eye exam.

Actually, I am thinking of changing my moniker anyway.

I figured if I asked for suggestions, I could get at least two from board denizens. More than one poster whould probably suggest ArlingtonSOB.
Posted by ArlingtonPop]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:51:57 -0600 Memphis Flyer
1. I believe the figure for MOE from Memphis was $68 million, or at least somewhere in that range.

2.
Posted by GroveReb84]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:01:21 -0600 Memphis Flyer 1.
Posted by Drift Boat]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:13:10 -0600 Memphis Flyer Posted by Jackson Baker]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 00:29:45 -0600 Memphis Flyer
Thank you for the suggestion. I still have a few books here left to read at home.
Posted by clarion]]> Wed, 13 Feb 2013 00:22:26 -0600 Memphis Flyer Posted by Jackson Baker]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:44:58 -0600 Memphis Flyer
Yeah, I can understand that, too.

I vex myself sometimes.

Sorry if you have already posted, but what about that hour BTH this week? Who can make that decision?
Posted by ArlingtonPop]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:50:12 -0600 Memphis Flyer Posted by Jackson Baker]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:24:05 -0600 Memphis Flyer Posted by Jackson Baker]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:17:53 -0600 Memphis Flyer
Read the Catton trilogy first. It is about a whole army, the people and their experiences.
Posted by ArlingtonPop]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:02:39 -0600 Memphis Flyer Does this mean the Flyer isn't going to sponsor a name the "room" contest? I think Phlo and Jeff could really get into that.
Posted by Drift Boat]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:23:07 -0600 Memphis Flyer Posted by Jackson Baker]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:38:41 -0600 Memphis Flyer
This is the start of Round 2 apparently. In the past couple weeks, we've had the budget for the combined districts released (including proposed cuts), the General Assembly getting primed to pass new legislation, the suburbs walking away from the negotiating table in the N-T case, Mays getting set to rule on the last part of N-T, and the suburban community groups going to the SCC to plead their case.

For an issue that was fairly dormant for a few months, a lot has flared up or will be flaring up in the near future.

As a suburban resident, I'm obviously watching closely, because these next few months will determine my next step, either
A) stick around and wait it out with confidence that my community will be preserved, or
B) get my house and finances in order to be able to make a move across the county line

I'm pulling hard for A) because it will save me money and headaches, but with so much of my finances and my children's future tied to this issue, a flare up of this much action is going to catch my attention.
Posted by GroveReb84]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:23:45 -0600 Memphis Flyer
I understand your point, and I am also tired (and so weary) of hearing and talking about the schools, but this story is one that just won't go away. It is constantly popping up as front page news at the CA (at least on their website), after two years the judge still hasn't completed his ruling, and the General Assembly won't either pass the legislation to enable municipal districts for the whole state or some other group of counties, or just announce they don't have the votes, they just don't feel like dealing with it, or anything to give us some sense of where this is going.

But, in our defense, the list of the CC8 demands was so mean-spirited and outrageous it brought the whole thing back to life, and the 1400 school teachers - don't even get me started on that.
Posted by GWCarver]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:00:51 -0600 Memphis Flyer
Your board. Do what you wish with it.

If your paper wants to publish stories about the merger of the schools, which is a hot topic, it is not unreasonable to expect those invested, on both sides, to comment on it.
Posted by ArlingtonPop]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:56:41 -0600 Memphis Flyer Posted by BruceVanWyngarden]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:55:11 -0600 Memphis Flyer
Evidently, Bruce and Jeff are getting impatient, so I will be short.

It seems to me that if the SCC on one hand asserts that by "codified law", the unincorporated kids "belong" to the Unified System, even though they are part of the diversity in muni schools,

And on the other hand accuse the munis of resegregating (intentionally or not) because the munis will lose diversity without those same children, it might give Judge Mays a problem with the SCC case.
Posted by ArlingtonPop]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:35:45 -0600 Memphis Flyer
I assume only one thing. That is the quality of the law firm representing the CC8.
Posted by oldtimeplayer]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:20:06 -0600 Memphis Flyer Posted by BruceVanWyngarden]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:18:32 -0600 Memphis Flyer
I think you are trying to interpret the law the way you would see it. Lot of "ifs"in there, too.

We shall see, should it get that far, how Judge Mays sees it.

I may also pass a bit of advice along your way that a very wise man told me once.
Posted by ArlingtonPop]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:06:41 -0600 Memphis Flyer Posted by Jeff]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:01:44 -0600 Memphis Flyer
You keep saying that we can't count the unincorporated kids. If Mays determines we need a remedy and we ask Mays for those districts as a remedy and he grants them to us, then the Unified Board will lose those heads and their budget dollars.

The county BOE won't have much of a say in the matter.
Posted by GroveReb84]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:43:49 -0600 Memphis Flyer
1) It is found that there is no Equal Protection issue.
2) It is found that there is an Equal Protection issue, and some remedy is proposed and created to fix it.
3) It is found that there is an Equal Protection issue and no remedy can properly address it, in which case the defendant loses the challenge outright with no remedy available.

Option 2 is a worst case scenario for us right now. Option 3 won't even be an issue.
Posted by GroveReb84]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:39:03 -0600 Memphis Flyer
I understand what you are saying, however, you have not looked up discrimination.

There are two sides to this, intentional discrimination and discrimination based on results of said action. In an ordinary trial where race was not included, the case would be under normal scrutiny and intent to discriminate would have to be proven by the plaintiff.
Posted by oldtimeplayer]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:19:08 -0600 Memphis Flyer
I know what you write, you feel this in your heart. What is in your heart and what the law is are completely two different things.

No elected school board satisfies everyone.
Posted by oldtimeplayer]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:51:18 -0600 Memphis Flyer