Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

A school board pay raise now doesn’t make sense

Dear Editor, 

When people were telling us to “think of the kids” and talking about how the increased taxes were going to be used on the schools, they failed to mention part of that would be to give school board members a raise. I’m gonna give supervisors the benefit and believe they didn’t know part of that money was going for a raise either. 

But look, I’ve run businesses before and when my people did great, I made sure to offer up a bonus or something along those lines, to make sure they were appreciated. But what exactly has this school board done? They did make a good hire in Dr. Chip Jones. But we haven’t seen the impact of his hiring yet, as he won’t come on board until July. So what exactly are we rewarding these school board members for? I keep thinking about this line here from what they said. 

“PECPS values the continued commitment, time, and service that School Board members dedicate to supporting the students, staff, and families of the division. Their leadership plays an essential role in the ongoing success of the school system.” Shouldn’t we start seeing some of that success before we start rewarding the higher ups? Don’t talk to me about sports or anything like that now. I’m talking about grades in the classroom. We haven’t seen any new test results since Dr. Johnson resigned, yet the school board is here giving themselves a raise and talking about the ongoing successes. If the schools were so successful that it justified increasing salaries, why was there a need to make a change at all? 

Thomas Babbage
Prince Edward

 

Maybe the school board is to blame too 

Dear Editor, 

All these people at the county meetings kept saying how we need to spend more on schools, how we need to give the new superintendent the stuff he needs to succeed. And so the school board goes and votes to give itself a raise? Is that somehow supposed to help the kids? And yes, I know this is for the future, before anyone rushes out to point that out. But no offense, I don’t see where anything has happened worth giving more money.

Now maybe I’m wrong and the next round of test results show nothing but positives for Prince Edward. I would be happy to see it. But we haven’t seen that yet. In fact, the only thing changed from last fall is a new superintendent on the way and construction ongoing for a new elementary school. But somehow, now seemed like a good time to increase the pay of school board members. And I understand that the school board has to come up with the policies, look at the construction designs and make decisions. I understand that $200 a month is not much when it comes to what’s involved. But if this statement they made was supposed to make me say ‘boy, they need a raise’, it failed. 

“Members contribute time and expertise through service on local committees and participation in statewide initiatives to stay informed on educational policies and best practices that directly impact the PECPS community. PECPS values the continued commitment, time, and service that School Board members dedicate to supporting the students, staff, and families of the division. Their leadership plays an essential role in the ongoing success of the school system,” is what their statement in The Herald story says. Show me where in all that politician speak there is a tangible result that benefits our kids? Why now? Why couldn’t this wait another year until we see some solid results and improvement? Because here’s the thing. If the school board is so essential to the district’s success, maybe they’re also essential to hold responsible for its failures. And maybe we need to think about that, when they come up for re-election. 

Scott Denny
Prince Edward

 

Making a case against solar

Dear Editor, 

An article was recently published discussing data center and data center energy requirements in Virginia and elsewhere.  The article discusses resistance solar facility contractors are finding in rural locations that are being sought to support data center projects.  Some of it has to do with the lack of transparency in contracting energy projects required to support – in particular – hyperscale data center construction and their requirement for solar energy support.  But much of it comes from the amount of land required for solar panel installation.  Hyperscale data centers require between 20 to 100 megawatts of continuous energy to operate.  20 to 100 megawatts of continuous electric energy would require from between 500 to 2500 acres of land according to one source from Advanced Engineering at Mega International.  According to the article, Loudon County supervisor, Mike Turner, in his study, suggests the average data center in that area requires 1000 acres of solar panels to support its energy needs.

Alternatively, a small modular nuclear reactor may require between 7 acres for a site generating 300 megawatts up to 35 acres to generate as much as 900 megawatts of continuous energy.  Contrast this against a solar site generating 100 megawatts for only peak energy using between 250 to 300 acres of land and up to 2500 acres of land required to produce the same amount of energy continuously.  It’s easy to come up with a scenario where highly inefficient and unreliable solar energy may be set aside for something better. 

Meta – a hyperscale data center owner and operator – has recently signed a 20 year contract with an Illinois nuclear powered electric provider.  Amazon is currently constructing a data center next to a nuclear energy site in Berwick, Pa.  And others, according to research in this article, are bringing their own energy source with them and are returning unused electricity from those generators back to grids where they co-locate. 

The argument can be made that solar energy may soon be passed over for small nuclear plants co-located where energy can be used by data centers and other users and where excess produced energy can be returned to the grid.  Far less land would be consumed to provide more reliable and consistent energy independent of weather or sun conditions.  That being the case, Buckingham and other counties are correct in their decisions to limit the amount of land allocated for solar projects and the hope is that they continue to do so. 

Pete Kapuscinski
Dillwyn