Regardless of whether the Christ Our Shepherd Lutheran Church rezoning request is approved or not, Editor Beverly owes the church an apology.
Accusing the church of “worship of the almighty dollar” is inexcusable.
Keep in mind that this is a church that has dutifully served God and our community for 30 years. To flush that kind of valued commitment from the church down the toilet with one editorial flush is offensive.
We are talking about a church that has been successful in its ministry and has grown to the point that their current space is inadequate and they have no land to expand.
The $3.5 million offer for the property has been made to sound like profiteering but the site, according to the Fayette County Tax Office, is valued at $3.1 million.
The church membership and staff are not taking the money and stuffing it into their personal banking accounts. They will use the funds to reinvest in a larger site and a new facility while continuing to glorify God.
The church was accused of not abiding by the deed covenant on their land. The truth is that they met every obligation of the covenant in full for the complete term of the contract plus an additional 10 years.
In addition, the children do not vote on church business, so please stop distorting the numbers by including the children in the “voting members” figure.
I am not a member of Christ Our Shepherd but I know that whenever Pastor Weber was needed as a minister, volunteer firefighter, public safety chaplain, master of ceremony for the 9-11 memorial, etc. he answered the call.
I have seen countless members of Christ Our Shepherd serve as excellent examples of Christ through community service and participation in our armed forces. The frivolous dismissal of their 30 years of labor out of love deserves an apology.
Cal was greatly angered in the past when I stated that one of his remarks about the Westside annexation proposal was a “scare tactic” and a “lie.” Cal preferred that I used the term “exaggeration.”
My wife agreed with him and she is right 99 percent of the time.
I now offer Mr. Beverly a public apology for a poor choice of words on my part.
It is my hope that Mr. Beverly will do the same for the church because where your editorial is, there is your heart also.
Steve Brown, mayor Peachtree City, Ga.
Church ‘aware what a covenant means’
In trying to understand your comments about Christ Our Shepherd Lutheran Church and our potential move to a new location, can I assume that you were having a bad day when you wrote that article?
Surely your vicious written attack on the church has to be attributed to something.
We are well aware of what a covenant means. We do not worship the almighty dollar.
Our mission statement: “Through the power of the Holy Spirit we prepare to share Christ’s love and forgiveness, and to care for all people and God’s creation by praying, worshipping, studying, serving, giving and building relationships.”
I am extending an invitation for you to come visit and worship with us so you might see for yourself who we are and what we stand for.
I believe an apology is in order.
Ken Gaynor Peachtree City, Ga.
[The editor replies: No one, not even a sterling community member like Christ Our Shepherd Lutheran Church, can or should be able to turn in a collection of community service points and redeem them for a rezoning prize. Please point out any factual errors in my column about the proposed Walgreens rezoning, and I will correct the errors in next Wednesday’s paper. And given the widespread public dislike for the change from a church to a 24-hour drugstore, perhaps church members would like to revisit their decision in view of the final part of the church mission statement: “building relationships.” Not much relationship building is being accomplished with this rezoning, I suggest.]
PTC hasn’t made its case to create special tax district solely for EMS
The Peachtree City mayor and council have requested that the Fayette County Commission establish a special tax district for Peachtree City to allow the citizens of Peachtree City to not pay the portion of county tax that goes to Emergency Medical Services on their tax bill.
I do not believe that Peachtree City properly accounts for the real and true costs of their own Emergency Medical Services.
I have read the report, which Peachtree City paid for, that suggests that the city consider other options, including consolidation with Fayette County Emergency Services.
I understand that some things are ripe for consolidation and some others are not. For example, I understand the need for local policing, if for no other reason than to enforce local laws and ordinances.
Fire and medical emergencies do not differ in themselves because they occur on one side or another of an imaginary line (the city boundary).
Fire and medical services should then be handled in the best possible way for the citizen who needs the service, at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer.
Fayette County Emergency Services are the equal of, or better than, any emergency services in this state. That leaves the issue of cost.
Common sense tells us that consolidation of facilities, equipment and management staff would probably yield savings to the taxpayer, taxpayers in Peachtree City and those elsewhere in Fayette County.
If it did not do that, what possible reason would anyone have to consolidate any services, and we do know that services in other locations have been consolidated?
Neither the Peachtree City staff nor the City Council did an honest and accurate study of this issue, which prevents us from having any discussion on the facts.
The truth is, we do not have any proof of the correct course of action. We have the opinions of the Peachtree City Council and mayor.
As a city taxpayer, and citizen, I do not like something as important as Emergency Medical Services and my taxes to be determined by their opinions. I want them to be determined by the facts.
I will not support this EMS District because we do not know the facts and the reason we do not know the facts is because the Peachtree City government either does not know the facts or they do know the facts and they do not want to tell us.
Peter Pfeifer Fayette County Commission, Post 3
Fayette seniors need more services
Fayette County has the largest population of citizens over age 55, according to the 2000 census count and published through the Atlanta Regional Commission.
In addition, the “Baby Boomer” population (those born between 1945 and 1960) will begin entering “old age” (65) in 2010.
Now when the majority of people survive into old age (65-74) and a good many continue into very old age (85 and older), society as whole is confronted with a host of new issues, such as caring for a larger number of frail people and providing income support for a larger group of people who no longer work.
In fact, nationally, almost 400,000 grandparents aged 65 or more had the primary responsibility for their grandchildren who lived with them.
Fayette County is progressive and has prepared in many areas of its population’s needs, but seniors need more services to meet the future demands.
This is simply a fact of life. Aside from the financial implications, we are talking about real people, our family members, neighbors and those who fall through the cracks.
It would be difficult to explain the importance and benefits of the work we do at Fayette Senior Services, but I received the following letter at Christmas and it says a lot, especially if you read between the lines. Please let your county officials know if you agree that Fayette citizens deserve more and that now is the time to prepare.
“Some may have known my Mom as Ernestine or Tina Grasso. She really enjoyed everyone at the Friendship Center.
“She talked so much of all the wonderful people there and of all the fun trips she took, all of the crafts she made and even the van rides to and from my sister Roslyn’s house, where she lived. It made me so happy to know she had a community she belonged to.
“For years, I wished for her to be more outgoing, but she was somewhat shy and feared her cough would bother others. All of you helped her to overcome that.
“I have always known my mom to be a kind person. I never heard her judge or belittle anyone, so I knew she could gain friends easily.
“Thank you for helping her realize that she was truly the wonderful woman I have always known her to be. She loved all of you, and for that, we do too. Thank you. The Grasso Family.”
Susan Bajalcaliev, Fayette Senior Services Center Manager Fayetteville, Ga.
2 perspectives on annexation of 400 acres on PTC’s Westside: For ....
The city of Peachtree City is experiencing the same problem that nearly every state and municipality is experiencing, and that is a financial struggle.
No elected official likes to raise taxes and of course no resident likes to have their taxes raised. But in a city such as ours, how can we afford to pay for the basic necessities and luxuries that we have become accustomed to without either raising taxes or finding other sources?
One of our primary departments that have suffered as a result of finances has been the police department.
According to the 2004 budget, Peachtree City has experienced a 185 percent population growth since 1985, but the police force has only grown 145 percent in the same time. The presence of more people simply means more police officers are required.
Compared to national standards, our police department is roughly 30 officers shy of having a full force.
When you take into consideration that Peachtree City’s police participate in crime prevention efforts and community activities, their patrol time is reduced and their response time is increased. Both of those can and will have an adverse effect on our safety.
Now what does this have to do with annexation? The city receives an impact fee on all new residential development.
The developments in the West Village are paying $1,637 per house for an impact fee, compared to $1,283 for the Smokerise development.
The new area that is being requested to be annexed could add in excess of $1,000,000 to the city’s income. This doesn’t include property taxes which could add in excess of $1,500,000 every year when the development builds out.
To deny the annexation request and yet offset the loss of revenue that it would bring would require each Peachtree City household to pay nearly $130 more per year in taxes.
Add to that, the development will still be built, albeit to a smaller degree, yet all of that tax revenue will go directly to the county.
Peachtree City’s police department will still be the first responder to any emergencies, as will their fire department. This will add an additional drain on our emergency services when they are already under-funded and under-manned.
Of course, Peachtree City could approach the county and ask them to offset the costs, but good luck on that one.
Once again, I ask that you contact the City Council and voice your support for the annexation proposal. This development will add value to our community and will once again put Peachtree City into the national spotlight as a landmark development.
Dana Kinser Peachtree City, Ga.
And against ...Wieland annexation: Heads they win, tails we lose
I continue to follow the latest annexation demand from the Wieland corporation. They have now tossed a church property into the pot providing Peachtree City forks over the annexation, er, make that sewer lines, to them.
I suppose next to come will be the mayor/City Council may see the bet and raise it by a road and maybe a couple of soccer fields. And so it will go.
My problem with this annexation is:
1. I believe the road was a done deal from the start. New Wieland customers would be most reluctant to buy into a home where they had to drive three miles and through a mess of traffic lights just to get to the road (Ga. Highway 74) in back of their houses.
It’s possible the developer simply filed a preliminary plan which anyone could improve on; make the mayor aware of it and sit back and await predictable developments.
2. Until Police Chief Murray and Fire Chief Lohr affirm that they are fully staffed to meet the current needs of the city, I strongly feel more annexation is wrong.
At this year’s City Council budget workshop it was explained to the council and mayor that we have neither the police nor fire protection staff we need for Peachtree City as it now stands.
I firmly believe both of them. Neither of these gentleman are the empire-building type. They wouldn’t ask for what they didn’t honestly know they need. They didn’t get near what they asked for, at least at that time.
3. The developer has nothing to lose by pursuing the matter and agreeing to almost any condition the city might set down. All direct costs will simply be paid by the future homeowners and infrastructure to the current Peachtree City taxpayers.
4. Extending MacDuff Parkway to Hwy. 74 is a sword that cuts both ways. It will make it more convenient for those who exit Peachtree City by Hwy. 74 North.
It will also provide a nice alternate to Coweta County residents who will prefer to zoom down MacDuff to avoid the current mess between Wal-Mart and the 54/74 intersection.
Based on our last conversation, I also don’t believe the mayor has any problem with expanding MacDuff to a four-lane or more if it’s needed in the future.
We should probably rename it to something like “Hwy. 54 Bypass.” It will make it much more dangerous for bikes and golf carts crossing this road as well.
To be fair, in my last conversation with Mayor Brown about this concern, he was clear that he was more than willing to install any number of speed-reducing devices. Thus, we would still be treated to many times more traffic through our neighborhoods, just moving slower.
If it could be proven how it would benefit the city as a whole and our leaders would fund the police and fire departments with the same zeal they do as recreation, dog parks, etc., I would not be totally opposed to annexation.
John Dillahunt, Wynnmeade subdivision Peachtree City, Ga.
What we’ve got here is a failure to communicate
This series of point and counter-point letters began when Misters Donahoo and Jansen sent in calm, rational, and reasonable letters in support of Secretary Rumsfeld.
Mr. Parker responded on Jan. 5, 2005, with what I viewed as excessively slanderous, and largely irrelevant leftist political rhetoric. Hilariously, Mr. Parker accused both of being Republicans while if he had simply bothered to check the Web site address Donahoo closed with, he would have discovered that Donahoo is a Southern Democrat.
We now find that this kind of carelessness with fact is completely in character for Mr. Parker.
On Jan. 19, I responded to Mr. Parker’s letter with a critique of his rhetorical style, pointed out the uselessness of quibbling now over past details of events that will only be properly adjudicated in the fullness of history, and challenged him to come up with some good ideas for winning the war.
Though my intent was to help Mr. Parker get off the hate track and onto the constructive discussion track, I failed. His response of Jan. 26 is simply a largely incomprehensible and juvenile snit fit.
He seems to think that reference to Karl Rove as Goebbels is acceptable if it was “meant as historical analogy only.” No, Mr. Parker, it is not acceptable by any concept of decency and civility and you are demeaning yourself to persist in such reprehensible practice.
Your snide remark about “non de cerebrates” is simply sophomoric. Do you actually believe that using disgusting analogies and accusing people of not thinking is a good argument or way to influence others?
Next, Mr. Parker lapses into rhetorical nonsense to the effect that my letter just didn’t work. I leave it to the readers to decide.
Mr. Parker says that what he got from my letter was that I know his name and that “anyone who criticizes the government is an anti-American leftist.” There he goes generalizing from the specific. Mr. Parker, I said you are anti-American.
Next, Mr. Parker proceeds to mind-reading and clairvoyance. He says he “knows my type all too well.” He says I am the type that shot up Sarajevo, killed the czar and his family, massacred Armenians, sat on the McCarthy committee, am intolerant, and given the opportunity acquire brown shirts and swastikas and eventually Death’s Head insignia.
Mr. Parker, your hubris fairly takes my breath away. It was sufficiently shocking that two prominent Democrats I know called to say that you were “way over the top.” Who do you think you are bringing to your side with such childish, vile invective?
Done with being disgusting, Mr. Parker now proceeds to a silly quiz implying that I don’t know of my oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. The purpose of this foolishness is to introduce the idea that his past “holding our leader’s feet to the fire is the most wholly American thing we do.” He says this applies both in conflict and peace.
There are certain proper and customary restraints on our freedoms and the exercise of what we view as responsibilities.
For example, we revere freedom of speech, but we know that all must refrain from yelling, “Fire!” in a crowded theater.
In time of war, public utterances come to the attention of the enemy. Mr. Parker’s recent public comments can only give aid and comfort to the enemy.
Despite all Mr. Parker’s past and future criticism, we are going to have four more years of President Bush. While it is clear that Mr. Parker does not approve of the way Bush is leading the country, he does want the country to win, doesn’t he?
Perhaps a little history will clarify matters.
Immediately after the attack on Pearl Harbor, there was some suspicion that FDR might have had prior knowledge of the attack. Though that issue is not fully resolved to this day, Republicans did the honorable thing and did not make an issue of it in time of war.
FDR chose not to help our forces trapped in the Philippines by Japanese forces. Tens of thousands of American servicemen died in combat, were beheaded, bayoneted, marched to death, left to die of disease and starvation, or spent the whole war in horrible confinement.
Thousands of Japanese-Americans were locked up in the western deserts for the duration.
After a few landings in the Pacific, the main war effort continued in north Africa with landings that were opposed by the Vichy French who killed thousands of Americans.
Thousands of Americans were killed in training exercises preparing for the Normandy Invasion.
In 1944, General Patton was often denied ammo and fuel and his headlong thrust into the heart of Germany was repeatedly stopped ostensibly to allow the Allies to catch up.
There is a developing consensus among some historians that WWII in Europe could have been won in the fall of 1944 if Patton had been reinforced and allowed to proceed. This would have saved tens of thousands of Americans who were killed in the Battle of the Bulge and subsequent combat.
I could go on and on. Bush’s alleged errors pale compared to these. The Republicans could have acted just as childish, arrogant, and holier than thou as Mr. Parker. They could have “held FDR’s feet to the fire” on all these points and many, many more.
They did not, because in the midst of war the only thing that can be done is to get on with winning as quickly as possible. Republicans were the loyal opposition. They tried to help the war effort rather than pin the tail on the donkey at war.
For the record, the only listed error I hold against FDR is not allowing Patton to move ahead as quickly as possible. War is hell.
Sniping from the peanut gallery does not make wars go better. It makes the enemy feel that our resolve is weakening and that they just need to hold on, kill more Americans, and they will win. It worked in Vietnam and, if Mr. Parker and his ilk have their way, it will work again.
Your criticism of government and our leaders is fine with me, Mr. Parker, except about the war in time of war when it helps the enemy to kill our servicemen and defeat our country.
Listen to some fine Democrats, like Senators Miller and Lieberman and a host of others. If you keep just drinking that Michael Moore Kool-Aid, you are not going to help yourself, your party, or your country.
Take lots of notes and bide your time. After the war, testify before the Iraq War Commission, write articles, and author a history book on the whole horrible issue. It’s the American way.
If you just can’t wait for the war to get over, why not complain about Bush fixing Social Security, or the evil ownership society? I’m confident you can find plenty to complain about that doesn’t endanger our troops and our survival.
Now, just to rev up things a little more, I have to tell you that, like most leftist and some conservatives, you seem confused about the position of fascism and Nazism on the political continuum. You throw all that fascist/Nazi rhetoric around as though you think they were somewhere down near the conservative end of the scale. Wrong again!
Mussolini and Hitler were from their earliest days Marxist. It was only after they made some changes in Marxist doctrine and had a big falling out with Stalin that Communists began to accuse them of being right-wing. They may have been to the right of Stalin but they were way left on the overall political continuum until their dying day.
A similar thing happened when the Soviet Union got into name-calling contests with Maoist China. Both sides referred to each other as fascists. Fascism and National Socialism (Socialism, get it!) emphasize the power and importance of the state over the people.
Conservatism emphasizes individual liberty, private property, capitalism, low taxes, and reducing the power of government. The far extreme right is libertarianism, not fascism/Nazism. Conservatism is inherently anti-collective and anti-tyranny.
Oh, I know, leftists love to call the various military dictators of the world right-wing but that is just more of the big lie. Military dictators may or may not be socialists but they are never over on the right with Republicans, conservatives, and Libertarians striving for less oppressive government and greater freedom and liberty for the people.
Yes, I know, you and the leftists in academe, the media, and Hollywood have been selling the big lie of the fascist/Nazi danger on the right for many years but like so much of your shtick, it just won’t fly anymore.
What more do you have to offer, Mr. Parker? More irrational blather? A constructive idea for how to win the war? A rational rebuttal of my scandalous ideas about the political continuum?
Bring it on!
Don Dickinson Peachtree City, Ga.
Parker writes amusing fare
I was fearful last week that Don Dickinson’s very thoughtful and insightful letter would serve to dry up the pen of Timothy J. Parker.
I truly look forward to what I think is the comedic genius of Mr. Parker and have eagerly awaited the delivery of The Citizen for the past two years for Tim’s prose.
Tim’s analysis and observations on the current political and world situation are hilarious and I hoped that a logical critique of his work would not result in less input from Tim.
Tims’s letter of Jan. 26 was not up to his usual standards but I did get a chuckle from his ninth-grade Latin. I’m glad that he is still writing.
On the off-chance that Mr. Parker’s main purpose is NOT trying to keep ME laughing, I would like to share a thought with him.
The recent passing of Johnny Carson brings to mind a skit Carson did with George Gobel in 1968 which may serve as therapy for Tim.
Gobel was discussing how one knew when he was no longer in the mainstream. Being at a party where everyone is wearing a tuxedo and you have brown shoes on was described as the ultimate in being “out of it.“
I believe that Tim has called attention to his brown shoes. He now has two choices: Get a pair of black shoes or be quiet and hope no one else notices.
Danel E. Carr Peachtree City, Ga.
Roark cribbed evolution column
Monroe Roark’s thinly veiled diatribe against the theory of evolution in the Jan. 12 Peachtree Citizen would normally be dismissed as little more than the ramblings of a frustrated third-string conservative columnist.
Sadly, it’s more than that: Roark’s column is a case of plagiarism, plain and simple.
His smug disclaimer at the end of his column stating “some” of the information in his column comes from an anti-evolution Web site doesn’t disguise one singular odious fact: His column was lifted (sometimes verbatim) from a copyrighted 1985 magazine article of one Dr. Jerry Baughman.
In fact, if you disregard Roark’s unrelated three paragraph introduction, the entire remaining 10 paragraphs of his 13-paragraph column were lifted (often in their entirety) from Dr. Baughman’s work. Even the single Bible verse cited by Roark was from Baughman’s article.
While I recognize that there is precious little original thought amongst conservatives, The Citizen can do a bit better than wholesale plagiarism.
Bob Jensen Peachtree City, Ga.
Stem-cell story lacked moral basis
Apropos of our recent sparring matches regarding embryonic stem cells, The Citizen last week ran a sunny report on UGA’s new half-million dollar grant to develop an embryonic stem-cell-based test for spinal muscular atrophy.
Not only did the author, whose objectivity is clearly suspect given her description as “an information specialist with the University of Georgia Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute,” omit the moral component of destroying embryonic stem cells, she also failed to mention what would be done if the disease were detected.
I’ll let you guess. Okay, time’s up. If an unborn child were found to have this admittedly horrible disease, it would be killed, aborted, terminated, euthanized, or whatever you want to call it.
And this is only the beginning. We could eliminate all undesirable children before birth with this wonderful new advance in science!
Let me spell out the moral calculus: scientists would kill one life (an embryo) for the purpose of determining whether another life should be terminated or not. Now we’re no longer talking about destroying embryos to save lives, but to end them!
And you thought I was exaggerating about a slippery slope. Welcome to the Brave New World.
Trey Hoffman Peachtree City, Ga.
Alternatives to abortion available
In the Free Speech section on Jan. 19, someone wrote in regarding abortion, attempting to justify it. This person went so far as to instruct those of us who are morally opposed to abortion to find a way to make it unnecessary.
I have news for this person: Abortion is already unnecessary. First, there is abstinence, which is fool-proof birth control. If a woman is in such financial dire straits that she cannot afford to support a child, then she should not engage in sex.
Next, there is birth control of many varieties, and cost should not be an issue. Health departments and other organizations offer birth control based on income and many times it is available free of charge.
Finally, there is adoption, which is the best thing a woman can do with a baby she cannot support or does not want.
Furthermore, to say that women have abortions because they don’t have the “financial, emotional, social support they need to successfully raise a child ... and keep a pregnancy they so often dream of but cannot afford to maintain” is simply untrue.
I think for most women, it’s a matter of not wanting to be pregnant and the “easy” solution is to have an abortion.
It’s time for women to step up and stop making excuses.
Tammy Newman Senoia, Ga.
North Fayette residents need district voting to get fair representation
When the local officials failed to address the issues in North Fayette, Rep. [Virgil] Fludd took the lead in allowing the citizens of the Fayette community to be heard. Thank you, Mr. Fludd.
As I listened to multiple, negative issues at the Jan. 22, 2005, public meeting with respect to at-large voting vs. district voting, I am now convinced that district voting is the answer.
The most appalling rhetoric was when [Fayette County Commission Chairman Greg] Dunn [said] that after hearing the many issues from the community, he still had not heard any issues relating to district voting.
Mr. Dunn again turned a deaf ear when he had an opportunity to respond positively, which is always the case for citizens living in North Fayette.
When my husband and I moved to Fayette County in 1996, we were proud to be homeowners in North Fayette, and still are to some extent. As new residents, finding support for our issues was a stretch. We finally, however, connected with North Fayette Community Association.
Subsequently, we were confronted with issues facing our neighborhood: lights and roads. After submitting several petitions and telephone calls every week, two years later we accomplished lights and the resurfacing of two 20-year-old county roads.
Our next issue was the absence of fire hydrants for the safety of the neighbors. As of now, we still do not have fire hydrants.
Have our local officials assisted in any of our endeavors? I think not.
North Fayette’s tax base is one of the highest in this area. Why are we not getting our worth? Accountability is an obligation, not a luxury.
Where do we go from here? Historically, when race and social inequalities were used to obstruct the upward mobility of African-Americans, the discriminatory practices by the masses became a blocking effect by whites, an unfavorable image of blacks was, of course, established.
Recently some of our politicians have made district voting a race issue. This type of rhetoric, rage, and bitterness is unacceptable behavior.
The matter of the fact is that Fayette County is a diversified community. If our elected officials are so concerned about pleasing all of their constituents, then why not change the system so that everyone’s vote has full value?
When our needs are not met, we can vote these people out of office. I ask the question, Is at-large voting the benign unseen Machiavellian whip?
For the above reasons, I urge the legislators and officials of Fayette to support district voting. Change is inevitable.
Doris M. Anthony (retired professor) Fairburn, Ga. (Fayette County)
Feds will require district voting
As a recent reader of your paper, and in an attempt to gather some basic understanding of the issues around Fayette County district voting, let me see if I have the talking points correct:
1. The county is divided up into several districts, each of which has a representative (commissioner) who is to represent the interests of the distinctly designated district.
2. The registered voters of the entire county are permitted to elect the designated representatives of all districts, not just their own district.
Proponents for the change in the system argue that their interests can be ignored because even if a majority or even a unanimous vote in their specific district for a candidate is a fact, if the remainder of the county registers a higher plurality of total votes in the county-wide election for all districts, the candidate of that district in question will still lose, in spite of the contrary verdict of the district’s voters.
Proponents of keeping the system, as is, allude to a “race factor,” or that the county is doing just fine, so “why change?”
It would appear on the surface that this issue is representative of many similar instances of representation and governance of its citizens that have been reflective of the history of this state and this region.
There may well be several ways for this county to respond and conduct its affairs to what appears to be a legal point of contention.
An enlightened community would conform to a system that is more equitable and conforms to fairer standards of representation.
If the county rebuffs the petition for change, it may find itself the object of scrutiny and adjudication under the Federal Voting Rights Act, and the petitioners for change will prevail.
Fayette County would do itself proud by doing the right thing up front and not becoming another focus of embarrassment for the state of Georgia.
Mervine Garlow Peachtree City, Ga.
Clayton State graduation rates on rise
Last [month], the U.S. Department of Education released a national study analyzed by the Education Trust which reported graduation rates for all higher education institutions within the United States.
While the figures express Clayton State College and University as having a 13.4 percent graduation rate, this percentage was based on Clayton State’s 1998 enrollment figures which focused on a cohort of just 155 first-time, full-time freshmen.
Since the 1998 study, Clayton State’s enrollment has grown tremendously with the steady addition of new programs of study.
There are several reasons why Clayton State students sometimes take longer than the traditional four-year college track, and these reasons do not reflect negatively on the university.
In fact, part of Clayton State’s mission includes helping students succeed at a pace convenient for their goals, not only in education, but also in life.
Clayton State educates a large number of non-traditional students, students who do not fall into the 18- to 21-year-old college student profile.
Our students, whose average age is 28, often have outside responsibilities such as family and full-time jobs that make graduation a more distant goal than students who come to the university straight out of high school.
In addition to age diversity, the university also makes education available to minority and first-generation students and helps every Clayton State student achieve his or her academic goals.
Clayton State has also implemented several new initiatives as part of the university’s strategic plan, all aimed at positively impacting the student success rate.
Named three times by U.S. News & World Report as the most diverse student body in the South, Clayton State serves a wide range of students. We are also proud to acknowledge that a large number of students transfer into Clayton State every year.
Thomas K. Harden, president Clayton College & State University Morrow, Ga.
