quote:

---

Originally posted by: New Adjunct
"Acccording to the HA just now the Lamar County Schools bond isse has failed again by a sliver. It makes me want to cry. Of course these are the same people who don't mind if their students have one computer per class, or wait out a tornado in trailers. For that matter, these are the same people who, failing to educate their children, expect me to do it for free. It takes 60% to pass the issue, and it got 59.15% If you live in Lamar County, oh educators, and you failed to vote today, you should be ashamed."

---

Interesting Analysis, New Adjunct. I support this bond issue (but not the one to rennovate the athletic facilities at usm). That being said, my views on what it takes to educate a child have changed drastically since I first came to usm. I have noticed that some of the very best usm undergraduates have been from poorly funded school districts. Some of the worst usm undergraduates have been from prosperous school districts. I am sure the usm office of institutional research has the data to test this hypothesis (if the university had any interest other than generating maximum tuition revenue), but I see no significant difference in the undergraduate students who come from prosperous schools as compared with those who come from poorly funded schools. Success at usm seems to be more related to motivation than to the secondary school district. A student ranking #1 at a poorly funded school will probably do well here. A student ranking #1 at a prosperous school will probably do well here. Generally speaking, the reverse seems to be true also. These are my qualitative observations with a very limited population. I would think the university would ask such questions and obtain the answers, if it has not already done so. I suspect the Lamar County students will fare just as well regardless of the bond issue outcome (but I do regret that it has evidently not passed).

First, let me say I voted for the School Bond Issue.

However, school board/supt might want to revisit the their strategy.

 

Almost every voter wants to know where the schools are/were to be built.  If consultants were hired to determine needs, surely location was decided.

Over $5,000,000 vaguely identified as land cost, misc.  Again, better informed voters make better decisions.

 

Last school bond issued failed, then a follow up vote a short time later failed.  Hopefully it will not happen again

 

 

I do not reside in Lamar County, but I do own property there... So I could not vote on the bond issue, although it could have affected my taxes...

I think the problem is "Oak Grove myopia." Too many Oak Grovers (Oak Grovicans?) forget that they live in an unincorporated area.

Let me point out that folks down in Baxterville or up in Sumrall see their local schools in comparison with Oak Grove & the result is a backlash. For what the district spent so Gary Pack would have a fine venue for his senior football season, they could have essentially rebuilt the Baxterville Attendance Center from the ground up. (I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I'll wager that sans equipment the Oak Grove stadium would appraise for about double what the Baxterville school would.)

Another factor that probably came into play is the higher number of "transient" residents in the Oak Grove area who simply didn't vote. Meanwhile, the long-time rural residents were going to the polls & voting against raising their taxes to provide what they perceive as excessive luxury features in the Oak Grove schools.

Should the bond issue have passed? I think so. Would I have voted for it had I been able? Yes. Do I think the bond issue failed because Lamar County residents don't value education? No. It failed because the school board & superintendant were not adequately sensitive to the cultural divide in their county.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: ram
"I don't live in Lamar County, but I work with people that do.  Basically the Grovers and Canebrake folks supported the bond issue.  Folks farther away from the fashionable 98 corridor were skeptical for the reasons Invictus has described.  I have heard  people from more rural areas of Lamar County say, "Our kids don't have enough books, but the kids in Oak Grove have a new stadium."  Irrespective of the pure logic in a statment like this, as an expression of emotional reaction, I think it explains the "backlash" that Invictus has observed."

---

And as a "Grover", I too am angry when I see the new stadium at the high school and hear of rats and wasps in the outbuildings of the elementary school.  Nonetheless, I voted for the bond issue.

Invictus,

Prior to the new OGHS, the Oak Grove schools were dumps and the most over crowded in the county. Trailer use was the heaviest in Oak Grove. The last bond issue provided money for all the schools including a new high school for both Sumrall and Purvis, but it was soundly defeated by Purvis and Sumrall voters. Apparently they were happy with their lousy schols. This bond issue provided much more money per pupil to Purvis and Sumrall than to Oak Grove. Plus, at least 80% of all the tax revenue of Lamar County comes from the Oak Grove area. Oak Grove should have incorporated years ago when they had the chance.

Curmudgeon, with sadness I must acknowledge that you are probably right. Having lived in, and owned a business in, Purvis, and having worked at the school district office in the last bond election, I saw this attitude first hand. There are some wonderful people down there, but there is also an ingrained attitude of unwillingness to pay for what's important. And frankly, the new football stadium at OG did not help matters. The only solution I can think of is for OG to incorporate, form its own school district, and let the rest of the county go its own way. (And yes, I can already see all the flaws in that suggestion myself.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Invictus
"

I am aware that everything you are saying is true. But as ram pointed out up-thread, voters are seldom "logical" & there are some major "emotional" issues involved. If the voters in Sumrall, Purvis & elsewhere were logical, the vote would have gone differently, I'm sure.

If you don't understand this emotional factor, I suggest you drive down to Baxterville & look around. Then ask yourself, "What do these people think when they go by a development like Canebrake or Bent Creek?" And believe me, that stadium at OGHS did not help at all.

As I said earlier, I think the real factor is that the bond issue was not sold properly door-to-door in the areas where it was most likely to be resisted. "

---

I agree that the vote was irrational. Many rural people in humble dwellings pay almost no tax because of homestead exemption. The cost would have been largely borne by Oak Grove residents. The poor country folks wanted to stick it to those snooty Oak Grove people by screwing their own kids. The last time they pulled that stunt, Oak Grove got a new high school. You don't have to be real smart to figure out how the 3/5 Oak Grove Lamar County school board will react this time. Why spend money on people who are obstructionists?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Curmudgeon
"The poor country folks wanted to stick it to those snooty Oak Grove people by screwing their own kids."

---

Was this a Freudian slip, Curmudgeon?

Does it surprise you that the "poor country folks" regard Oak Grovers as "snooty?"

quote:

---

Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"This is so funny, because when I was in HS back in the day (mid '80s), Grovers were seen as hicks and not snooty at all.  Of course, this was pre-Canebrake, pre-white flight, pre-Turtle Creek Mall, pre-westward expansion, etc.  How Hattiesburg has changed since then!"

---

Back in the days when 98 was a two-lane & a body could drive from then-Exit 13 all the way out to 589 at 9 o'clock at night and not see another car, the folks in Purvis thought Oak Groverss were in-bred rednecks...

I am a USM faculty who has lived in the hinterland past Purvis for coming on close to a decade. My kid is in Purvis Middle school, and is excelling academically (of course!). The teachers are great. However, the infrastructure is the pits. The band hall/auditorium is a fire trap, the classrooms are packed to the gills, and so on.

The issue why many of my neighbors voted neh (I was yeh), has little to do with resentment about the "grove" or nuances about the bond proposal. The populace out my way are generally hard core anti-tax Bu****es. They want public school teachers to instill "discipline" (i.e., whack the kid) and to "be more accountable." If money is needed, "let the government fix it." The notion that we are responsible for our local government, and that if we don't pony up there is no public education, doesn't click with many (not all though) of these folks.

As more professionals, and people who understand that all taxes aren't the work of the Devil, migrate to the hinterlands, the demography of the area will change, and perhaps (ever optimistic) a bond issue for education will pass.