The truth is becoming painfully obvious; the land buyers seemed to be one step ahead of the school system on several purchases. As a result, the speculators walked away with millions of your tax dollars. They apparently did so with little or no risk… it’s not speculation when they buy a tract knowing that there’s a willing buyer with lots of money in their back pocket.

Superintendent Alvin Wilbanks has promised a review of policies and procedures, but that shouldn’t be enough for Gwinnett taxpayers. During the time that these land deals were being brokered, the School Board was under pressure to make its land-buying process more transparent, as the County Commission had done. Wilbanks refused and the School Board members circled the wagons around him.

A little sunshine may have saved the taxpayers millions.

Personally, I will not be satisfied until I see some heads on pikes. Consider this my formal request that District Attorney Danny Porter empanel a special grand jury to investigate. Given the facts already uncovered and in comparison to the BoC land scandal, the depth of the corruption of the school system’s land buying process requires nothing less.

The four deals, which occurred between 2005 and 2007, cost the district a total of nearly $42.6 million. Had the school district acquired the property for the same prices the real estate investors paid for it, taxpayers would have saved $14.55 million.

Frequent fast profit made off schools  | ajc.com

I was going to let this one go, but I can’t. Let me state it simply– just because the white guy talks about blacks doesn’t necessarily mean that he’s talking bad about blacks.

In yet another example of racial hypersensitivity, some parents and the head of the Gwinnett NAACP are calling for the resignation of Gwinnett County School Superintendent Alvin Wilbanks for a comment that he made last month during a public meeting about the disproportionate discipline of minority students in Gwinnett. As reported in the AJC:

The comments in question occurred last week during a presentation about the disproportionate discipline of minority students in Gwinnett. An administrator said the issue is a problem for school districts nationwide, except for Idaho, according to a study. Wilbanks then asked the administrator, James Taylor, executive director of the department of academic support:

“Do they have any blacks in Idaho? They don’t have many.”

According to the AJC article, “African-American students made up less than one-third of the population at Gwinnett County Public Schools last academic year, but they accounted for nearly half of those facing disciplinary panels for bad behavior. Of 1,910 discipline hearings held in 2007-08 to dole out long-term suspensions or expulsions to students, 931 of those were held for black students. About 18 percent, or 345, discipline panels were held for white students.”

When facts are relevant

To put Wilbanks’ comment in the proper context, let us examine some facts.

According to 2006 census data, blacks make up .7% (that’s less than one percent) of Idaho’s population while the national rate is 12.8%. In other words, there are significantly fewer blacks living in Idaho than in the nation at large. (Whites make up 95.2% of Idaho’s population.)

In comparison, blacks make up 29.9% of Georgia’s population, significantly higher than Idaho or the national average. In fact, Georgia has the third highest black population by state while Idaho is fourth from the bottom of the list– according to the latest data, only 6,103 blacks live in Idaho and, of course, only a small percentage of that number are high school students.

So Wilbanks was absolutely correct when he opined, “They don’t have many [blacks in Idaho].”

When facts are insufficient

So was Wilbanks, as one woman claimed, “…making a stereotypcial (sic) comment that the reason we have this problem is because we have a lot of black students…” or was he simply comparing the numbers to explain why one state did not experience the “problem” of disproportionate discipline while every other state in the nation did?

Unless his critics are able to discern the intent of his heart, I contend that there is too little in his comment to accuse him of racial insensitivity, much less racism, especially in comparison to the degree of fact in the comment.

It’s because a white guy said it, right?

It is the current culture of victimhood and racial hypersensitivity that gives rise to the type of reaction generated by Wilbanks’ comment. It’s the same thin-skinned ignorance that caused a black County Commissioner from Texas to erupt when a fellow Commissioner (a white guy) used the term “black hole” to describe where some lost paperwork went. (According to that same black politician, the terms “angel’s food cake” and “devil’s food cake” are racist, too.)

What if any black guy had made the same statement as did Wilbanks? Would there be the same outrage, or would Wilbanks’ critics engage in the same racial duplicity that excoriates a white person for using the word “nigger” but gives every black rapper a pass for saying the same and worse?

Is it ‘racist’ if it’s true?

Is it “racist” for me, a white guy, to point out that black women have killed more of their offspring through abortion (over 13 million since 1973) than have died from AIDS, violent crimes, accidents, cancer and heart disease put together? That, on average, 1,452 black babies are aborted every day in the United States? [Source]

Or that the abortion ratio for black women (503 per 1,000 live births) was 3.0 times the ratio for white women (167 per 1,000 live births); or that the abortion rate for black women (30 per 1,000 women) was 3.1 times the rate for white women (10 per 1,000 women)? [Source]

Or that the latest and most comprehensive study confirms that the abortion rate is declining for white women, but not for blacks and Hispanics? [Source]

Would it even be “racist” for me to then opine that black women have lesser regard for the sanctity of life than do white women?

Or does truth really not matter to blacks when it is a white person making the statement?

The bigger question

I contend that Wilbanks’ comment struck a chord because it reminded parents of a social truth that the black community has failed to address. Sadly, the critics may never comprehend that. The most insidious aspect of racial hypersensitivity is that it distracts its victims from addressing root issues and causes.

The disparity in disciplinary hearing numbers highlights one of two realities: either black students in Gwinnett are the victims of a vast white conspiracy resulting in numerous false accusations and malicious prosecutions… or there is a serious cultural deficiency that must be addressed.

A quick look at the type and seriousness of the offenses for which students are subjected to long-term suspension or expulsion may reveal that black students are more likely to commit infractions that warrant a hearing. I seriously doubt that infractions warranting long-term suspension or expulsion by white students are being overlooked. Folks like NAACP branch president Jorge Portalatin are welcome to disagree, but they better bring facts. That is the only way that a legitimate claim of disproportionate discipline can be sustained.

Perhaps the lack of self-control among black students results from the disproportionate number of fatherless or broken homes; absentee or disinterested parents; or a culture that criticizes those who achieve and succeed as “acting too white.”

Portalatin and the rest will never address those questions, because to do so would require turning the spotlight on themselves. It is so much easier to blame “the system” or “whitey.”

The end result is irresponsibility perpetuated. Oh… and more disciplinary hearings.

Comment leads to call for superintendent’s ouster | ajc.com