Liberals in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School system are trumpeting their needs -- for your cash. Despite their wild guess of projected enrollments, the increase in school enrollment was much, much less than they had anticipated. Of course, that doesn't mean they don't "need" more of your money. They're very upset that they might have to return millions of dollars to state (so they need more of your tax money locally). I expect that a "recount" of enrollment numbers will net some more students (guess they forgot to count all of 'em).

What's even more interesting is how the educrats who live off taxpayers' backs continue to explain that despite having 40% less students than they thought, they continue to claim that there's more so they need more -- and all "projections" into the future continue to be based on wild guesses -- all with high estimates, of course (because they need your money).

Even more interesting is that those who support massive schools, expansive government, socialist systems, light rail, smart growth, and other left liberal ideas for Charlotte, love to compare themselves to Portland, OR as their utopia. Making Charlotte exactly like Portland is an open, stated goal of these socialists. Of course, any problems in Portland won't be duplicated because the "right" people haven't been in charge.

But compare the reality of Portland vs. Charlotte and schools:

The Coming Depopulation of Charlotte's Schools

By Warren Smith

COMMENTARY--Timothy Egan caused a stir with his recent profile of Portland in the "New York Times." Portland, you may know, is a city that Charlotte's leaders have visited and sometimes say they want to imitate - especially when it comes to urban planning, "smart growth," and rapid transit. It's a city that has been successful at attracting what the cognoscenti are now calling the "creative class." Supposedly, these are the folk Charlotte needs to attract if we are to remain a vibrant, economically thriving city.

Egan's article highlighted Portland's attractions for the beautiful people. "The Pearl District in the heart of this perpetually self-improving city," Egan wrote, "seems to have everything in new urban design and comfort, from the Whole Foods store where fresh-buffed bell peppers are displayed like runway models to the converted lofts that face sidewalk gardens."

Everything, Egan concedes, "except children."

"Crime is down. New homes and businesses are sprouting everywhere. But in what may be Portland's trendiest and fastest-growing neighborhood, the number of school-age children grew by only three between the census counts in 1990 and 2000, according to demographers at Portland State University," he wrote.

Egan then comes to a conclusion that Charlotte should heed: "Portland is one of the nation's top draws for the kind of educated, self-starting urbanites that midsize cities are competing to attract. But as these cities are remodeled to match the tastes of people living well in neighborhoods that were nearly abandoned a generation ago, they are struggling to hold on to enough children to keep schools running and parks alive with young voices."

One of the main reasons for this childless Utopia is the price of housing. According to Egan, San Francisco, with its Silicon Valley chic, is the very poster child of the New Economy to which Charlotte aspires. But it has a median house price of about $700,000 - and the lowest percentage of people under 18 of any large city in the nation, 14.5 percent. That compares to 25.7 percent nationwide, according to the 2000 census.

Could this happen to Charlotte? Not only could it happen, it probably will. Nationally, the birthrate has dropped to the point that our current birth rate is barely above what demographers call the "replacement rate." America's population has shown modest growth over the past few decades, but almost all of that growth has been because of longer life spans, not more children. In fact, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of school-aged children in America is expected to fall significantly over the next 10 years, and possibly precipitously over the next 30 years.

And now, our leaders want us to spend more than $400-million on new schools, claiming that Charlotte's school population will grow by 50,000 over the next decade. Of course, it's possible that the population of Charlotte's school-aged children could grow while the rest of the nation's population goes down, but only in the dreams of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools officials could growth be this much. Indeed, even if the Charlotte region does grow, it is much more likely that most of the families with children will be moving to Cabarrus, Union, York, Iredell, and Gaston counties - where both land prices and taxes are significantly lower.

In Portland, not only are they not building schools, they're shutting them down. Egan closed his article with the story of Kenton Elementary School, which for 91 years had been an integral part of the city's north side. Egan penned a poignant requiem for this school. "But now the school will be shuttered," he wrote, "and improvements from Portland's beloved light rail line have contributed to rising real estate prices, defeating the broad goals of the mayor's effort to bring and keep young families in the city."

Could it happen here? It is happening here. Indeed, the next time you hear a proponent of light rail, the "creative class," or "smart growth" say we should look at Portland, don't argue with them. Just make sure that when they tell the story of Portland, they tell the whole story.

Warren Smith is the publisher of The Charlotte World. He can be reached at warren.smith@thecharlotteworld.com

Me, I love "shrinking" schools -- because if they cost less, then I have to pay less taxes, right? I know, I'm dreaming. If socialists/Democrats would even consider reality for a minute, they'd see they're headed down a path to destruction. Socialism fails every single time it's tried. Why can't they understand?

Posted by: Ogre at 01:17 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 986 words, total size 6 kb.