- December 25, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
Schools lose their autonomy when they accept state and federal money
Dear Editor:
Laughing sadly that Flagler Schools "competed" for federally funded data-collection and evaluation representatives and have labeled these workers "teacher support staff."
The Sustainable Education Evaluation and Compensation project that a SEEC representative said will focus on "improved measurement and tracking this coming year" is so removed from supporting teachers in helping students learn the basic skills of acquiring, evaluating and applying knowledge that we're micro-measuring before teaching and learning can take place. Even worse, more record-keeping, data-entry and paperwork will be heaped on teachers, which will reduce their time for direct observation and interaction with students.
Years ago my mother said, "The minute the schools accept a federal (state) dollar, they've surrendered their autonomy." Now we have the unimaginable reality that schools compete for an additional layer of federal data buracracy. Welcome to the Matrix.
Karen Jacobs
Bunnell
Doing nothing is not an option; accept the Army Corps’ solution
Dear Editor:
It never ceases to amaze me how individuals can form opinions without researching the facts. A recent letter to the Palm Coast Observer by Ms. Bellin appears to be one case in point regarding the project proposed by the Army Corps for beach renourishment of the Flagler County beaches
Ms. Bellin asks the public to reject the proposal as wasteful. That suggestion is without foundation or merit. I suggest that the public read the entire 300-page report that took years of research and data accumulation, and then form an opinion. The proposed project is over a 10-year period to try and maintain the valuable natural resource of our beaches.
It would be very easy to armchair-quarterback an opinion that anything done to try and thwart the effects of Mother Nature is a waste of time. However, doing nothing at all is not an option. Watching Florida's most valuable natural resource (attraction) simply erode away would be the same thing as accepting the fact that people throughout the United States should not be allowed to live anywhere nature can effect our well being.
We would like to believe that there should be a guaranteed means of protecting the natural erosion of our beaches, but there is not. The city of Flagler Beach pursued one such proposed means of permanent beach protection only to discover that it had no foundation.
Do the proper research or due diligence, then form your own conclusions. If you should come upon a solution to the beach problem better than the proposed methods, please share it with us. Maintaining the majestic splendor of our beaches is in the best interest of all citizens that own property in Florida.
Mike Flank
Flagler Beach
Red light cameras violate our rights
Dear Editor:
Mr. Nilsen is absolutely right!
We are a nation of laws and not men. In other words, no one is above the law — up to and including the president of the United States.
Unfortunately, Mr. Nilsen cannot have it both ways or his argument falls apart.
If "the law is the law,” then it is being broken first and foremost by our local and state government installing and utilizing the cameras in the first place.
Government and its agents, local or otherwise, are not protected by the Constitution. They are accountable to it. It is the leash by which we keep them at heel.
We, the people, own all of the property, both public and private, in the United States: State houses, city halls, the White House, the Washington Mall, national forests, etc. Government is merely an agent on our behalf.
I, as someone protected by our Constitution, can surveil my private property any way I see fit, short of violating Natural Law and the Constitution. Our government cannot do so without a specifically limited warrant issued by a judge on a case-by-case basis or by our consent.
Just as the authorities cannot place a surveillance device in my front yard without obtaining either a warrant or my consent, they cannot place a surveillance device on "our (public) private property" without the consent of the governed or a specifically limited warrant issued by a judge on a case-by-case basis.
If a police officer cannot clearly articulate "probable cause" to you or a judge as to why they are detaining, surveilling or issuing you a ticket, they are in violation of the law if they attempt to do so. See the Fourth Amendment.
By establishing and utilizing a camera to issue tickets, the authorities are implying that they have already clearly articulated probable cause to you or a judge before a violation of any kind has occurred. Future crimes? Without cause?
So, I'm with you 100%, Mr. Nilsen! We are a nation of laws and not men. And laws not based in the Constitution are not laws at all, but tyranny.
Timothy Hall
Palm Coast
