So whats so great about Edmond in comparison to OKC?
I recently heard some classmates talking about how Edmond is a much better place in every way than OKC? Seems that their biggest point was that the houses were much nicer.
I disagree because I like the centrality of OKC and I think there are many new luxury homes in the metro. If I lived in Edmond, I think I would have longer commutes and would end up limiting my driving to mostly places in Edmond to save time. I wouldn't like that.

The same is said about every upper-class suburb outside of almost every big American city. This is a challenge for every city in almost every area you look. I'll throw out just a couple:

1. Education. Parents want their children to get the best education possible. Period. Comparing OKC and Edmond test scores is an embarrassment to our city. Maps for Kids or not. Every urban area district finds itself challenged by ever increasing numbers of immigrants who choose not to learn our language. This is very different from the immigration wave of years past. Assimilation was important then. Now, to assimilate to many immigrants is to "lose their identity and culture." This is having a huge impact on urban schooling.

2. Crime. See above.

These are challenges that Oklahoma City - and every other city in America - must address, sooner rather than later. Bill Gates recently said that American High Schools (especially in inner cities) are, (his exact word here), "obsolete." We all know the crime rates in our inner cities and, even now, in what were nice clean neighborhoods just 10-15 years ago. Property crimes, especially, are skyrocketing.

Those two points alone answer your question as to why even our former Mayor, of just a year ago, has chosen Edmond as his new home. These people are not to be blamed. The steps that need to be taken to reverse these trends are simply not possible in today's political climate - even in Oklahoma!

I think Edmond is a very upscale place, but I see Moore and far south OKC rapidly becoming the next Edmond. The growth in incomes and the huge high end homes going in make you think that the area will eventually become the wealthiest in the state within the next 5-10 years. Moore and Norman will eventually grow together into an endless urban area.

I think Edmond is a very upscale place, but I see Moore and far south OKC rapidly becoming the next Edmond. The growth in incomes and the huge high end homes going in make you think that the area will eventually become the wealthiest in the state within the next 5-10 years. Moore and Norman will eventually grow together into an endless urban area.

There are parts of Edmond that are dumps. Also. Please do not underestimate south Oklahoma City. There have been upscale areas since before I was born. Plus, there have been VERY wealthy people there too. In fact, when my family bought my home in 1961, my area was the "Rivendel" of the time.

Moore. It may be changing, but it is still largely blue collar., low to medium income.

Xrayman,

That is an incredible oversimplification of the problems inner-city schools have. People speaking Spanish is not the reason the schools are suffering.

Inner-city schools have been in decline since the "white flight" of the late 1960s.

A lot of people who value education left the districts. Period. Public schools cannot choose which students they have. They take everyone, including children who receive no help at home and whose families don't put a premium on education the same as many suburban residents.

There are many poor, undereducated people living in the inner city who DO value education, so I am not trying to stereotype. But schools can only do so much to educate a child if they are not also getting help at home. It's sad, but it is true.

Also, there are many delinquent students (again, schools cannot choose which students they get), and teachers in inner-city schools spend an extraordinary amount of time on disciplinary, rather than educational, pursuits.

I don't blame anyone for wanting what is best for their child. The fact is, if half of the suburban families returned, en masse, to inner-city schools, the educational environment would greatly improve.

We need to come up with creative solutions, like the magnet schools, to improve the quality of inner city schools. Our system is truly separate but unequal.

I was luck to attend Norman Public Schools, where parents are not just involved at home, but also with the school itself, PTA, school board, etc. The things our elementary school PTA provided were ridiculous, and on a per-capita basis, the overall income of our district was not that great, probably upper middle class.

There aren't substantial PTAs or anything else for these inner-city schools. They are not supported by their community in the same way suburban schools are. That is just a fact.

xrayman,

Another thing I take issue with is your comment about crime. Your quote: "Property crimes, especially, are skyrocketing" is not borne out by the facts.

Crime rates overall have been going down since their peak in the early 1990s. OKC is no worse, and in fact is better, than it was a decade ago in the crime department.

xrayman,

Another thing I take issue with is your comment about crime. Your quote: "Property crimes, especially, are skyrocketing" is not borne out by the facts.

Crime rates overall have been going down since their peak in the early 1990s. OKC is no worse, and in fact is better, than it was a decade ago in the crime department.

True, but our crime is a serious issue. We still rank in many categories of crime as one of the worst cities in the nation (my info is 5 years old though, so I admit that weakness):

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004902.html

Here are some other numbers that bear out a few of the things xrayman is alleging:

Public Schools

* 3 High Schools
* 5 Middle Schools
* 13 Elementary Schools
* Total enrollment in the Edmond Public School District is (in 2000)17,079
* Overall Student/Teacher ratio is 20 to 1.
* 85% of graduating students attend college.
* ACT Scores in Edmond average 22.7 (The U.S. Average is 21.0)
* SAT Scores in Edmond average 1153 (The U.S. Average is 1019)

Percent of population (Edmond) w/ college degrees: 43.5%, (OKC): 22.5%

CRIME
# Edmond's crime rate is 38% below the national average.

-- Oklahoma City doubles most national crime stat averages (or did in 2002):
http://oklahomacity.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm

OKC is ranked #13 in a list of America's unsafest cities according to a CNN report based on 2001 crime statistics.

Income:
Average Household Income in 2000
Edmond: $74,484
OKC-MSA: $50,474

1990 2000 Growth Rate
Edmond 52,315 69,476 32.8%
OKC 444,719 506,132 13.8%
***

I think it is safe to say that there ARE differences between the two communities. I don't know that there are any statistics that show that crime is "skyrocketing" as xrayman alleges. However, it's pretty darned safe to say that public school system in Edmond is better, the crime rate is lower, property values are higher, growth is higher, etc. Those statements are borne out by the facts.

Not that OKC is a bad place to live, heck, I moved here from Edmond and love it! If I were raising children, though, they'd be in private schools, or I'd be in a suburb.

Midtowner,

I did not take issue with the fact that Edmond has better schools. That much is obvious.

I took issue with his bewildering comment that the reason inner-city schools aren't doing well is because there are so many students who come from Spanish-speaking homes.

Furthermore, his comment that property crimes are "skyrocketing" is simply false.

Agreed that "skyrocketing" doesn't happen with crime unless there are extreme outside influences. "Increasing gradually" and "already at a very high level" would be accurate, however, at least as far as current statistics will tell us.

How spanish-speaking kids are influencing education is something that's difficult to quantify. That they are ruining education for everyone else would be even more difficult to quantify. I wonder, do they keep statistics on who is ruining education for whom?

There seem to be several factors that contribute to the type of student found in a city, certainly language MAY be one of them, however, other factors such as household income, parent's highest level of education attained, # of siblings, crime rate of the area, etc. are better indications I would think. Edmond, having excellent #'s in all of those areas would seem to indicate that this assumption of mine is fairly on-point (or maybe it's a coincidence?)

Xrayman,

That is an incredible oversimplification of the problems inner-city schools have. People speaking Spanish is not the reason the schools are suffering.

Inner-city schools have been in decline since the "white flight" of the late 1960s.

A lot of people who value education left the districts. Period. Public schools cannot choose which students they have. They take everyone, including children who receive no help at home and whose families don't put a premium on education the same as many suburban residents.

There are many poor, undereducated people living in the inner city who DO value education, so I am not trying to stereotype. But schools can only do so much to educate a child if they are not also getting help at home. It's sad, but it is true.

Also, there are many delinquent students (again, schools cannot choose which students they get), and teachers in inner-city schools spend an extraordinary amount of time on disciplinary, rather than educational, pursuits.

I don't blame anyone for wanting what is best for their child. The fact is, if half of the suburban families returned, en masse, to inner-city schools, the educational environment would greatly improve.

We need to come up with creative solutions, like the magnet schools, to improve the quality of inner city schools. Our system is truly separate but unequal.

I was luck to attend Norman Public Schools, where parents are not just involved at home, but also with the school itself, PTA, school board, etc. The things our elementary school PTA provided were ridiculous, and on a per-capita basis, the overall income of our district was not that great, probably upper middle class.

There aren't substantial PTAs or anything else for these inner-city schools. They are not supported by their community in the same way suburban schools are. That is just a fact.

Soonerguru,

Of course it was an over-simplification. My post wasn't intended as an in-depth analysis of our school system. But, if you don't think the influx of immigrants into our schools is not a problem, you are not paying attention.

You wrote that, "if half of the suburban families returned, en masse, to inner-city schools, the educational environment would greatly improve." Why would they want to? It's wouldn't be responsible for a parent to take their kids out of a quality school system and send them to an inner-city district as some sort of multicultural experiment. Most of us value our children more than that. You answered the biggest reason why that won't happen in your own post:
"teachers in inner-city schools spend an extraordinary amount of time on disciplinary, rather than educational, pursuits."
I couldn't have said it better. Now, why would parents in Edmond send their children "en masse" into that? It's not their responsibility to improve the schools in the inner-city by sending their children there! Kids shouldn't have to dodge gangs, knives, and the 'culture of the 'hood' when they go to school. It's about personal responsibility and it is the responsibility of the parents to make sure their children get the absolute best education they can. The fact that so many inner-city parents choose (a concept I know liberals have a hard time grasping) to not be involved, should not require an en-masse invasion from suburban parents who do. (Which was your idea (!) by the way.)

I know, it's my "narrow-minded" thinking, right? Unfortunately, your post was laden with talking points from the left who always seem to absolve inner-city parents of responsibility and blame it all on those awful suburban white people who took a flight for the burbs in the sixties. To me, and many others, that's the "narrow-minded" thinking. Too politically correct to see the forest for the trees.

xrayman,

Take off the Coulter glasses. Your hatred of liberals is blinding your interpretation of my commentary.

I never suggested that Edmond parents SHOULD put their kids in inner-city schools. I was merely pointing out that many good students who come from good homes that value school no longer attend inner-city schools. If there were some magical way to get them all back, the schools would improve. That's all I was saying.

I'm not suggesting that people engage in some social experiment. I'm just decrying the fact that our inner-city schools are so poor comparatively. Obviously, it's a fairly complex problem, but one we must face eventually if we are to make Oklahoma City a better place to live and work.

Regarding the immigrants, my sister taught at Columbus Elementary school. She is bilingual. The fact the students don't learn English at home is a challenge, but it is not an insurmountable one. Some of these immigrant families you blame for our poor school system are very supportive of their children getting a good education. The fact that they do not speak English is irrelevant.

Those students will have to work harder because they won't get a lot of help at home. But my sister was very impressed with many of the parents at her school. Sure, they were poor, but most of them went out of their way to drop off and pick up their children at school, and attendance was rarely an issue.

I seriously doubt you have spent one minute working in an inner-city school with a high immigrant population. They are not the reason our inner-city schools are behind.

Unfortunately, your post was laden with talking points from the left who always seem to absolve inner-city parents of responsibility and blame it all on those awful suburban white people who took a flight for the burbs in the sixties.

Where are the talking points? Do you disagree with the fact that schools declined after "white flight" occurred?

I was just proffering an opinion, based on my own personal observation and understanding. I come from a family of public educators, so my commentary is not without personal context.

If anyone appears to be subscribing to talking points, it is you. Every point you make is something anyone can pick up on ten minutes of listening to AM conservative talk radio.

Nowhere did I absolve anyone of personal responsibility. You made it very clear that people in Edmond and affluent areas have no responsibility for inner-city schools. Fine. Then you will not be consulted for a solution, either.

Unfortunately, our schools hold our city back, and this forum exists for people to exchange ideas on how to improve our city. Having everyone of modestly affluent means leave the city to live in Edmond does not seem like a workable long-term solution.

If you have any reasonable suggestions on how to improve our inner-city schools, I'm all ears. Unlike you, I will not simply shut down your opinion based on my perception of your political ideology. Good ideas come from all corners. Surely you don't subscribe to every move the Republican Party endorses, right? Do you feel that only self-labeled "conservatives" offer valid opinions and insights?

My girlfriend teaches in one of the more 'ghetto' schools in the Mid Del school system. It's absolutely true that she spends a lot of time on discipline. It's absolutely true that there are kids and families who simply don't care about grades or graduation -- they exist.

Soonerguru, as far as your assertion that if we moved better students into inner city schools, they would do better -- besides the fact that it would obviously boost averages, how would that help the poor students? I believe we've tried bussing, and help me out here -- are we still bussing poor kids to "rich" schools? I seriously don't know, but I seem to remember that they discontinued the practice after its efficacy was called into question.

What you say about immigrant students, at least from where I'm sitting (and based on no statistical data) also rings true. Some of my gf's best students are the children of spanish speaking parents. Those kids will have a real leg up on our kids in the future due to their bilingual abilities, at least assuming that they continue on through the higher ed system.

If you all are looking for why OKC schools are so far behind Edmond, let me spell it out for you -- socioeconomic status of the parents. You need simply to refer to the data above. I don't think it's a massive leap to tie that data to educational performance. I know that correlation does not necessarily equal causation, and that's not what I'm saying, however, socioeconomic status of the parents/kids certainly is a factor.

Where are the talking points? Do you disagree with the fact that schools declined after "white flight" occurred?

I was just proffering an opinion, based on my own personal observation and understanding. I come from a family of public educators, so my commentary is not without personal context.

If anyone appears to be subscribing to talking points, it is you. Every point you make is something anyone can pick up on ten minutes of listening to AM conservative talk radio.

Nowhere did I absolve anyone of personal responsibility. You made it very clear that people in Edmond and affluent areas have no responsibility for inner-city schools. Fine. Then you will not be consulted for a solution, either.

Unfortunately, our schools hold our city back, and this forum exists for people to exchange ideas on how to improve our city. Having everyone of modestly affluent means leave the city to live in Edmond does not seem like a workable long-term solution.

If you have any reasonable suggestions on how to improve our inner-city schools, I'm all ears. Unlike you, I will not simply shut down your opinion based on my perception of your political ideology. Good ideas come from all corners. Surely you don't subscribe to every move the Republican Party endorses, right? Do you feel that only self-labeled "conservatives" offer valid opinions and insights?

The only solution that I can think of would certainly not be popular, especially with the lower-achievers in the district. My solution would rely heavily on magnet schools. We'd need to add them at a much higher level than we have right now. Children who tested highly, showed that they were the best and brightest, etc. should be moved into schools that are new, clean facilities -- places where they can thrive, not be held back by thugs that have no future besides prison.

This would help to alleviate some of the inadequacies/disparities in educational opportunity just by providing an outlet, an avenue for our kids that are college bound to get away from the kids that are not. For the kids that are not college bound, why not start vo-tech training in the 9th grade? Give them an option for early graduation? If we can use the schools to churn out skilled kids with some real earnings potential in the workplace, great!

Then, of course, send the thugs off to "alternative acadamies" where they can be babysat until they are old enough to drop out, or actually earn their "certificate". This puts the pressure to achieve on the students, not the schools. It forces them to answer the question as to whether or not they will be successful.

I realize there are a lot of difficulties with this plan, and it'll never happen, but it sure beats what's going on right now.

It's funny, SoonerGuru. All of your insults about "AM radio"....."Coulter glasses"....ahh.....too many to mention.....could all be said about you! You sound like a typical poster at "Democratic Underground" who thinks Chomsky has the answers to all our problems. Those answers always involve the advancement of a left wing political agenda. See how it feels to be branded? Your name-calling and condescending remarks are tiring. If I have blinders, then I am not alone - as yours are keeping you from seeing that you are nowhere close to the "mainstream," and are swimming with the victims in the warm waters of the left.

You seem ANGRY that Oklahoma City is a conservative city. We have nothing to apologize for. You seem so interested in "building up our city" yet take every opportunity to tell us that we have to change many of our fundamental beliefs to become acceptable to you (and others) that want OKC to be another San Francisco, Seattle or Austin.

Since you have a sister who teaches at Columbus, then I will forego offering opinions on education. I can't possibly know anything about the problems of inner-city education. If only I had a sister who taught at Columbus.

I'm sorry. I am being just as much a jerk as you are - really to show you that to make arguments personal do nobody any good.

One thing.....you said:

Unlike you, I will not simply shut down your opinion based on my perception of your political ideology.

I did not shut down anything based on your political ideology. If anything was shutdown, it was because of your opinions - which are dictated by your political ideology. And yes, SoonerGuru, you shoot down a lot of what people say here due to their political ideology; complete with a lecture on how we will never grow without becoming more like you and your favorite left-wing cities. Which begs the question - If you hate how we feel around here, why do you live here?

xrayman,

We've taken a detour here.

So what do you think about the subject we were discussing in the thread?

***
Or, in the alternative, what are our city's fundamental beliefs you are talking about? I just moved here from Edmond, I didn't get that memo :D

longer commutes and would end up limiting my driving to mostly places in Edmond to save time.


I hate peoplethat do that. It is called laziness.



Moore and far south OKC rapidly becoming the next Edmond.


Sure. Except your wrong. Moore is straight-forward middle class. Good ol' down to earth Moore. Gotta love it down there. Please know that while Mo' has a slum between Santa Fe & Broadway, the rest of the city is quite nice.


The fact is, if half of the suburban families returned, en masse, to inner-city schools, the educational environment would greatly improve.

Now this includes me, and I speak for my group thus: No way. Won't ever happen, not unless the inner city becomes nicer before we decide to move.


OKC is no worse, and in fact is better, than it was a decade ago in the crime department.

It is still greek compared to Edmond.


Take off the Coulter glasses.

Can I keep mine on?


If there were some magical way to get them all back, the schools would improve. That's all I was saying.

... and it is so outlandish some people took offense to it. :fighting2

Look. Here is the facts I bring to this table: Edmond has been reanked by two completely differant organizations as America's best small town to live in. Versus other parts of ANY other city, people will want to go to Edmond.

What organizations have been smoking crack you ask? Actually, some pretty respectable ones to be honest. Universal Publications of New York (Yes, the liberal bias that published the how-to-kill Bush guide) and some other one... I do forget. Anyway, the liberals pride themselves on being stereotypical on suburbs, so what they deem as "top rated" must mean something. Especially if it is in OKC.

Also. It's not just Edmond, ranked in desirability it is the best suburb in OKC, but there are many other popular, very nice suburbs here in OKC. Over half of our metro's population is not in OKC, and then a good amount of what is "suburban" is in OKC city limits.

Midtowner,

Those are good points. AGAIN, I'm not suggesting we move affluent people into OKC's school system.

I guess, and this is admittedly a supposition on my part, that if there were a higher ratio of "good students" in a school, the school would fare better academically as a whole because the learning environment would be enhanced.

I'm not some crazy advocate of bizarre social engineering, I just struggle with the fact that we have these poorly performing schools, and it seems to me to be sad that students who attend those schools are already handcuffed upon graduation.

Midtowner,

Those are good points. AGAIN, I'm not suggesting we move affluent people into OKC's school system.

I guess, and this is admittedly a supposition on my part, that if there were a higher ratio of "good students" in a school, the school would fare better academically as a whole because the learning environment would be enhanced.

I'm not some crazy advocate of bizarre social engineering, I just struggle with the fact that we have these poorly performing schools, and it seems to me to be sad that students who attend those schools are already handcuffed upon graduation.

I realize that you're not advocating relocation of our students to "boost" schools. Just making the point (for people besides yourself) that it's been tried, and it's failed. I'm anticipating arguments and agreements.

What I'm saying is that what determines a good student is typically culture, socioeconomic issues, etc. There are some exceptions.

My suggestion was that we provide opportunities for those exceptions to test into/apply for participation in special schools for high achievers within the district. I realize it's an academic discussion at best, but I feel bad pointing out flaws in a system without having some alternative in mind.

What are you advocating then?

Or are you just raging against the status quo?

Ahh well. I see I am caught up in a mini-flame war, I'll just re post later.

Ahh well. I see I am caught up in a mini-flame war, I'll just re post later.

No flame war here...

Well at least for once, not from my end :D

xrayman,

First of all, answer the question: as a self-labeled conservative, do you believe Oklahoma City would be improved overall if it becomes an attractive place for people of all ideologies, viewpoints and backgrounds to live? Or do you prefer it to stay just the way it is.

Your question is a good one. The reason I have stayed here is I have had this strange optimism that Oklahoma City would become a cosmopolitan, interesting city, that it is on the verge of change and self-improvement. As MAPS and other things have progressed, I have nurtured my optimism.

When I hear comments you make of the "love it or leave it" variety, I have to ask myself if my feelings of optimism for OKC are quixotic. I can't really tell what, if any, things you would like to see OKC become that it isn't currently. The schools aren't your problem. The feelings of people who don't see the world as you do don't matter. The immigrants are a problem.

If I may say so, your viewpoints seem to correspond to someone who doesn't really want things to change.

I'm sorry if I got personal. I just think your comment that I was issuing "talking points" was ridiculous on its face and very insulting. My views do not correspond to "talking points" from Democratic Underground or anything else.

And another thing: You never answered this question. Do you believe only the views and opinions of self-avowed "conservatives" are valid? Do you agree with everything the Republican Party espouses?

Sorry if it got too personal.

do you believe Oklahoma City would be improved overall if it becomes an attractive place for people of all ideologies, viewpoints and backgrounds to live? Or do you prefer it to stay just the way it is.

Oh dear. So you are saying we are prejudiced? Explain this to me. I agree we are very un-cosmopolitan, but racist? We are Christian city, and more so than any other.

And besides, are you saying that you want the death of Edmond in order for OKC to BECOME cosmopolitan? Are you OK?

And, before this there was absolutely no mention of democrat-republicans in this thread. Please keep it that way. You seem to have a martyr complex unlike any other.

To help you out, I am sure many democrats live in Edmond.

Oh dear. So you are saying we are prejudiced? Explain this to me. I agree we are very un-cosmopolitan, but racist? We are Christian city, and more so than any other.

No, I'm not saying that. Where do you see that comment? I don't think people here are racist, although xrayman blames Hispanic immigrants for the decline of our schools.

Yes, we are somewhat un-cosmopolitan currently. But is that what we always want to be? If we are "uncosmopolitan," how will we fare in economic development?

So, we're a Christian city? I didn't get the memo. Does that mean we don't welcome Jews and atheists? Do we need to carry bibles to work with us?


And besides, are you saying that you want the death of Edmond in order for OKC to BECOME cosmopolitan? Are you OK?

No. I'm not saying that, and only a quasi-illiterate boob would suggest I said that, or someone who is just picking a fight. Edmond is fine. I have nothing against it. Last I checked, however, the subject of this message board was Oklahoma City, so I couldn't care less about Edmond. Am I OK? Absolutely, I even got a check-up at the doctor last week. Are you OK? Do you have reading comprehension problems? Do you have problems imagining things? Because you seem to be imagining things I didn't say


And, before this there was absolutely no mention of democrat-republicans in this thread. Please keep it that way. You seem to have a martyr complex unlike any other.

OK, so Reps and Dems weren't mentioned until now, but liberals were demonized earlier in the thread. So who brought the political garbage to the thread?

Regarding the martyr complex, you must be the biggest one on the board because you start commenting on posts that weren't even directed at you. How large is your persecution complex, pal?


To help you out, I am sure many democrats live in Edmond.

Great, and that relates to the issue of public school disparities how?

It's probably best to let this one cool down for a bit.

I'm not even going to get involved in the bashing but there is no doubt in my mind that socioeconomic issues have a direct correlation to successful students. When you have poverty stricken families and parents struggling to put food on the table, involvement in education becomes a luxury and secondary to 'surviving".

And there is not a doubt in my mind that a large majority of Spanish/Other language learners in a classroom can have a derogatory effect on the education of those who speak the English language. Please tell me how an English speaking teacher can successfully teach the English learners while having to accomodate those who don't? And even when they are involved in ESL - English as Second Language courses, the schools try to mainstream them I believe by 2nd grade. So, they know a little English and the teacher ends up working at the level of the majority - slowing down the teaching style to accommodate those who haven't mastered English. The test scores are incredibly low and they almost always correlate with the socioeconomic make up of the surrounding area. go to www.Greatschools.net (http://www.Greatschools.net) - type in Deer Creek, Edmond and then OKC - then compare the free lunch percentages to the test scores, also the demographic make up. You will notice the more kids who receive free lunch the lower the scores -

I personally think it is sad and encourage everyone to get involved in mentoring, tutoring and volunteer reading programs to help out in those areas.

Edmond attracts those in a higher income bracket - those who are professional, college educated residents. These same people are extremely interested in their children's education and very involved. The parent teacher ratios ( for those who meet with their children's teachers) are around 98%. The parking lots are overflowing on school activities after hours because the parent's make an effort to support their child's education.

Houses in the 110K range are selling in one day and there are very few of them available - a lot of it is due to the school district's reputation and the quality of life - higher property values equate higher taxes which in turn subsidize a lot of school programs and don't speed in Edmond- taxes help pay for more law enforcement which in turn hopefully discourages crime.

I realize that you're not advocating relocation of our students to "boost" schools. Just making the point (for people besides yourself) that it's been tried, and it's failed. I'm anticipating arguments and agreements.


We moved to a nice upscale area in CA and anticipated that our children would attend good schools. It turned out that the city decided to bus our neighborhood children across town (30 min) to schools where the school's population was 76% Hispanic in order to improve test scores and to integrate Caucasion/affluent students into the classrooms. The scores were among the very lowest in the entire state of California - gangs, horrible parental involvement.

I had many sleepless nights and was worried beyond belief. I couldn't put my kids there. They attended private schools at an enormous cost in addition to paying outrageous property taxes for public schools that we didn't utilize. Integrating didn't work, the school is still horrible to this day. All of my neighbors had their kids in private schools. It was a huge financial burden and one of the reasons that we moved to Edmond. I researched the city for months before relocating from CA. The reports on Edmond were very impressive.

If I had my way and in a perfect world, all children would have support and new school supplies, lunch money and new school clothes - help with homework and parental involvement. I wish parents would get off their butts and encourage and expect their kids to excel, no matter what circumstances they are faced with.

xrayman,

I apologized for getting personal with the thread. Sorry you took offense to it. Still, I find it odd that you suggest we "cool down" the thread when I have asked you very direct questions. I'm genuinely curious to hear your responses. I find your viewpoints fascinating and I'm just trying to understand you better.

No. It is, and I repeat, NOT about schools in Edmond. The metro has better school districts in second rate suburbs. Like Moore. Putnam City.

The thread does not need to cool down, pointed, direct questions are fine. If you're wrong, or feel the other person has a point, say so and move on.

Plenty of other things to disagree about :D

It's hard to disagree and be agreeable.

We've mentioned schools and neighborhoods.....in what other ways is Edmond better than OKC? How can we learn from Edmond?

Personally, I think we have to look at al of the city-wide beautification projects Edmond has put into place. The streetscaping projects have been finely done! Trees are planted everwhere. Sign ordinances restrict unslightly signs. Edmond park dept. crews are constantly cleaning the streets, in addition to taking care of the parks.

Edmond just doesn't rely on private companies to provide landscaping for their city. The parks dept. also takes part in median landscaping projects.

We've mentioned schools and neighborhoods, In what other ways is Edmond better than OKC?

You aren't seeing things like I am. Edmond DOES not have the metro's best schools, and yet it is not just the metro's best suburbs, oh but it is seen by some as the nation's best small town.

Folks, we may never uncover the secret of Edmond, and may die trying.

Some rich folks started moving up there and it started a trend, I suppose. Back in the day, the northwest side of the city was the wealthiest, and I suppose people just decided to move north! Closest suburb was Edmond.

Okay. The consensus seems to be to continue....


First of all, answer the question: as a self-labeled conservative, do you believe Oklahoma City would be improved overall if it becomes an attractive place for people of all ideologies, viewpoints and backgrounds to live? Or do you prefer it to stay just the way it is.
Every city has its political leanings. No, I do not think Oklahoma City would be a better city if it had more Michael Moore types - all in the name of "diversity." To turn it around, do you think Seattle, San Francisco, Austin, etc. would be more attractive places to live if they were more accepting of conservatives?

The reason I have stayed here is I have had this strange optimism that Oklahoma City would become a cosmopolitan, interesting city, that it is on the verge of change and self-improvement. As MAPS and other things have progressed, I have nurtured my optimism.

When I hear comments you make of the "love it or leave it" variety, I have to ask myself if my feelings of optimism for OKC are quixotic. I can't really tell what, if any, things you would like to see OKC become that it isn't currently.
More word games. Did I say "Love it or leave it?" No, I didn't. I simply asked why you choose to live here since you find the community so intolerant. You have disparaged our cultural attitudes as something that doesn't seem in line with your thinking at all. As far as hoping that will change - don't count on it. I have no idea what would give you that idea.

If I may say so, your viewpoints seem to correspond to someone who doesn't really want things to change.
Who said I wanted things to change? If we're still talking about the city culture, you're damn right, I don't want it to change! I don't see why it is seen as wonderful to allow a disintegration of our values as "progressive" or something that is desirable. We think differently, SoonerGuru. I don't need to "change" nor does this city need to "change" to become more acceptable to leftists like yourself.

I just think your comment that I was issuing "talking points" was ridiculous on its face and very insulting. My views do not correspond to "talking points" from Democratic Underground or anything else.
But it was okay to call my views "straight from a listen to AM conservative talk radio?" You are spouting "talking-points." When leftists tell people, like me, that we are somehow not quite "with it" because we don't think like they do and we need to "change" and be "more accepting," it makes me rather angry. A lot of our problems as a nation today - and even right here in Oklahoma City - is because we have been too accepting of the left and its anything goes, valueless, secularist view of society. No, I am not excited that I can drive by 39th and Penn and see men arm-in-arm - knowing they're going to the Habana Inn to engage on guy on guy anal sex. I still think that's disgusting, wrong, and I don't feel the need to "accept" any of that kind of crap. I am tired of it being shoved down our throats as if it is somehow acceptable behavior. More than that, I don't like my saying how I feel about it called "hate speech." That's just a way to shut people up who stand for conservative values. The left hate as much as anyone with their attitudes toward our city culture, conservatism, our president, etc. For me, it's a cultural issue and not even a religious one.

And another thing: You never answered this question. Do you believe only the views and opinions of self-avowed "conservatives" are valid? Do you agree with everything the Republican Party espouses?
No. I disagree with George W. Bush all the time. I disagree with conservatives on many things. I am not even a Republican, SoonerGuru. I am a registered independent who feels there isn't a dimes worth of difference between the two parties on a number of issues. Republicans are fearful of people like you and have come to believe that standing up for true conservative principles would not be popular with the elite intelligentsia.

I don't think people here are racist, although xrayman blames Hispanic immigrants for the decline of our schools.
Clever.....very clever. I am sick to death of the complete change in our cultural fabric. Sick of it. The tide is turning on this, too. People are finally beginning to see that the latest wave of immigration coming through the flood-gates these past 20 years have hurt our nation. As I pointed out before, immigrants of another time believed in assimilating into our society and becoming Americans - no hyphens. They learned the language. They didn't expect this country to accommodate their lack of English-speaking skills by enabling them with "For English press 1, For Spanish Press 2." Today's immigrants fly the Mexican flag outside of stores in South Oklahoma City. To me, that is DISGUSTING. If they are so proud of Mexico, El Salvador, etc. -- return and improve their homeland! I wouldn't move to Columbia, make it my new home, and fly the American flag! But in this new "multicultural" society, our AMERICAN CULTURE has taken a backseat to those from everywhere else! The illegals that are pouring over the borders only fuels the anger as we have a president and a congress unwilling to STOP IT. The answer is simple: Bring our troops home from Iraq - and put them on our Southern borders. We have every right to protect our country from those who come here illegally and bankrupt our public hospitals, fill our prisons and otherwise drain the public treasury. (All while they, block-by-block, change our cultural fabric to resemble their own heritage instead of becoming Americans.)

So, we're a Christian city? I didn't get the memo. Does that mean we don't welcome Jews and atheists? Do we need to carry bibles to work with us?
This just shows your own angry views toward Christianity. Again, look at what you wrote. That's Al Franken, Michael Moore, Barbara Boxer, Howard Dean, Noam Chomsky, Democratic Underground, Greg Palast, Jim Hightower, Molly Ivins, Howard Zinn, etc. TALKING POINTS. Twenty years ago, you wouldn't have written that statement because you would have offended the majority of people in this country who call themselves "Christians." Today, it's open-season on Christians and it's "hip" to be Atheist, Agnostic, "open minded"...

Edmond is fine. I have nothing against it. Last I checked, however, the subject of this message board was Oklahoma City, so I couldn't care less about Edmond.
OKC without its wealthier suburbs would be BROKE. Do you think people in Edmond don't contribute to the city's economy? In fact, I am sure a majority of executives who live here (and move here) live in ------ EDMOND. The message board doesn't just refer to OKC proper. If it did, it would be a discussion among urban hipsters and little else.

OK, so Reps and Dems weren't mentioned until now, but liberals were demonized earlier in the thread. So who brought the political garbage to the thread?
Excuse me? You demonize conservatives every chance you get.

See why I thought this thread should cool down? The left/right polarization is a serious one. The HATE that most on the left have for traditional values and the culture of the America I grew up in is palpable. We aren't going to solve it on OKCTalk. But, I also will not stand by and listen to anyone say that we need to "change," "adopt more of the leftish views," and all the rest of the pablum that I believe is destroying this country.

Flame away, my friend, and say what you like. However, one thing you cannot say is that I do not have principles and am not willing to stand up for them. I am not afraid of "offending" the always-offended victims on the left.

Remember, I suggested a time-out.


.

Yes I think a particular member quoted in the above post has been doing a little friendly (or not so) fire.

Nonetheless, this political jargon has nothing to do with why people move to Edmond. Well, actually it depends where SoonerGuru lives...

People moved to Edmond because of the white flight! Simple as that! When blacks started moving in the Village, NE OKC, etc. the whites moved north.

Racist? Na, not necessarily. Segregation will always occur naturally. It's just part of life. People tend to want to live around people more like themselves.

The white flight was a direct result of abuse from the urban school systems. "Integration" I think they called it. In other words, forcing the children of parents who purposely bought homes in nicer neighborhoods (for their children's educational benefit) to go to ghetto skools. Completely underming the free enterprise styem.

But, yes in OKC we are a very suburban city. But I was thinking the "OKC" in this thread meant Metro, not just inner city. Well, then this thread is easily answered.

Suburbs in OKC are far greater than inner city districts and always will be. OKC puts lots of community pride in their suburbs, but little in the inner city.

Why is this? Well the Guru was suggesting in vague referances that it is b/c OKC is prejudiced, and wants to confine "undesirables" to a corner of town that is out of the way.

Actually you are wrong, Guru. The very existance of old money families relocating to neighborhoods like Heritage Hills, Mesta Park, Edgemere Park, Crown Heights, etc, etc, is the very proof that it is not. These people were willing to face the undesirable lifestyle AROUND Midtown OKC in order to live close to work, in their grandiose McMansions, and pay excess money for their children to go the city's finest private schools.

Those that live in the suburbs just don't want to have to bother with all that, or can't afford to.

Sooner&RiceGrad,

For the record, I agree with you about the people who can afford to live in the inner city AND send their kids to private schools. Obviously, they are doing quite well to be able to do so.


The HATE that most on the left have for traditional values and the culture of the America I grew up in is palpable.

xrayman, thank you for your candid response. I could expect nothing less. Yes, you are consistent in your beliefs, I just don't agree with them. Fine.

For the record, you have no clue what my traditional values are. I grew up in strong Christian household with two parents who love each other, worked hard for everything they had, didn't drink, smoke or curse, and taught me right from wrong. We attended church every Sunday and Wednesday, and I spent at least two weeks per summer at church camp.

On family vacations, we would go to volunteer services to less fortunate people. I played every conceivable sport and got excellent grades. I treated my neighbors, friends and elders with respect.

I started working to earn MY OWN money when I was 14 and started a lawn business. I'm heterosexual. I believe in God. I follow the bible. I have never cheated on a girlfriend and I treat my fiance with the ultimate respect.

I want my children to get the best possible education, to serve their country, their neighborhood, and their community, to enrich their minds and offer their services to others less fortunate, and to leave the world a better place than they found it.

I guess, judging by all that, I'm some demonic left-wing heathen who reviles "traditional" values.

I should have known that you would resort to that insult of all insults that "conservatives" make when their arguments are hollow: You are an unamerican, immoral pagan without "family values." Give it a rest. I questioned your viewpoints, but I don't recall insulting your manhood or your humanity.

Why is this? Well the Guru was suggesting in vague referances that it is b/c OKC is prejudiced, and wants to confine "undesirables" to a corner of town that is out of the way.

Dude, if you're going to bring me into the discussion, at least read what I actually said before you begin superimposing your own prejudices into the thread.

I went out of my way to say that I don't think people in OKC are racist. However, if you don't believe that racial prejudice was a factor in OKC in the 1960s you must be very young or have a very shallow comprehension of our history.

I was born in the late '60s, so I wasn't around during the Civil Rights era, but I remember the 1970s very well in Oklahoma, and the "N" word was very common -- even in my grandparent's house. I loved my grandparents, but they were a product of their generation, and they were very, very racist. There are few people I know whose grandparents were any different.

Obviously, bussing was a failed experiment. You will get no argument from me. Also, I DO NOT BLAME people for moving to suburbs so their children can attend better schools. If I didn't think I would be able to get my daughter into a magnet school, I would consider the same thing. I AM NOT BLAMING PEOPLE IN EDMOND FOR WANTING A GOOD EDUCATION FOR THEIR CHILDREN.

It is possible to discuss a problem without advocating a solution. Hell, if the solution were easy to figure out, we would have solved it a long time ago. Discussion is a good thing. That I don't have a simple solution for the problem should suggest to you that I'm open-minded about examining the options. Some on this thread don't really care. Their kids are in good schools and that's all that matters to them, and it's up to the people whose kids are in bad schools to fix them. Certainly that is one philosophy, and if that's yours, fine. Others were trying to examine why we have this problem and what we can do to fix it.

It's pointless to assign blame at this point. White flight was over 30 years ago. It's ancient history, and no longer associated with racial prejudice. It's just people who can afford it seeking the best possible education for their children.

Since this is an OKC forum, it is logical to discuss what can be done to improve the inner-city schools. Doing so would benefit this entire community, whether your kids go to those schools or not. I'm sorry if you feel this a radical idea.

Dude, if you're going to bring me into the discussion, at least read what I actually said before you begin superimposing your own prejudices into the thread.

Oh, you are very much in the thick of this thread.


I went out of my way to say that I don't think people in OKC are racist. However, if you don't believe that racial prejudice was a factor in OKC in the 1960s you must be very young or have a very shallow comprehension of our history.

Oh yes, I understand you now, adn that racism while still being big nationwide, is nothing but history (sadly lots of it) here in OKC. I am not going to argue with you over where I thought you were calling OKC racist, I saw what I saw.


I was born in the late '60s, so I wasn't around during the Civil Rights era, but I remember the 1970s very well in Oklahoma, and the "N" word was very common -- even in my grandparent's house. I loved my grandparents, but they were a product of their generation, and they were very, very racist. There are few people I know whose grandparents were any different.

For obvious reasons you would never hear the "N" word around my house... but then again I grew up in Lawton so OKC standards are irrelevant for a semi-progressive army town at the time.



Since this is an OKC forum, it is logical to discuss what can be done to improve the inner-city schools. Doing so would benefit this entire community, whether your kids go to those schools or not. I'm sorry if you feel this a radical idea.

Well uhh... OKC as a city has already done this, we already have threads on MAPS for Kids, and yet this was not supposed to be one, which flusters me the most.

This thread is to discuss why Edmond is, or has become so much better than the rest of
OKC. I have consistantly pointed out that it is not all to do with schools. And provided reasoning.

Although this thread is confusing me so I won't be back in this one. :surrender

Give it a rest. I questioned your viewpoints, but I don't recall insulting your manhood or your humanity.
And I didn't yours. You know that as well as I do.

Although this thread is confusing me so I won't be back in this one. :surrender

I don't blame you a bit. SoonerGuru is a master at twisting words and claiming you said things you never said. It's all not real relevant anyway - except as a way for SG to tell us how we need to adopt "some of San Francisco's leftish ways." HIS WORDS, by the way, not any interpretation.

If I knew how to fly that little white flag - I would do it too. I didn't want to carry this on the other day. I have found that arguing with the superior attitudes of leftists is draining and makes me sad for what this country - used to be.

Oh good, I'm glad someone else noticed this.

*steps back in*

Maybe it's just some big April Fools joke? You got me!