An Andisheh Almanac - One of the best Andisheh Nouraee websites currently online

An Andisheh Almanac

Area Wife Guy keeps undermining his wife

Decatur’s school superintendent Gyimah Whitaker insists her husband Jason Whitaker’s bigoted podcast is not relevant to her work even though she had him produce the school’s podcast at his commercial recording studio.

Jason Whitaker clearly disagrees.

This week Jason Whitaker thanked his colleagues and fans for showing up at Decatur’s June 2 school board meeting (aka his wife Gyimah Whitaker’s office) to lobby in her defense.

It’s Jason Whitaker’s right to use his social media to cheer on and thumbs-up his wife. But there’s a reason Wife Guy is pejorative.

By aiming his podcast machine at Decatur he has obliterated his wife’s repeated assertion that her work is independent of her husband’s.

It wasn’t a very solid claim to begin with. By recording the school system’s podcast in Jason Whitaker’s commercial podcast studio for more than a year, the superintendent took the work of Decatur schools to the workplace of a loud and proud bigot. Gyimah Whitaker is the person who made Decatur schools a business partner of a man who repeatedly calls Muslim people “low-IQ” goat rapists, and who denies the humanity of trans people.

But Superintendent Whitaker can’t keep saying “my work has nothing to do with my husband’s work” while her husband is mobilizing his work colleagues and podcast listener(s) to show up at Decatur school board meetings and flood the board’s inboxes. The real Wife Guy move here would be for him to shut up.

Actually, she CAN keep saying that her work has nothing to do with her husband’s. She can say whatever she wants. But no one has to pretend to believe her anymore.

Also, some advice for Jason Whitaker’s friends: Don’t waste your time emailing the school board or speaking at our meetings. There’s very little indication the current board majority cares what anyone says about anything.

2026-06-05
Decatur’s School Board will do anything except what city residents want

What do I know about the New Markets Tax Credit program that I didn’t learn in the past hour? Zero.

What did I learn in the past hour? I learned NMTC was created to help economically distressed communities attract private capital. I learned Decatur’s school board is considering applying for an NMTC award to help pay for a new preschool building.

The census tract* where the Decatur school board (actually it’s just Superintendent Whitaker, Carmen Sulton, Hans Utz, and James Herndon) wants to build is, indeed, an NMTC-eligible tract.

Here’s a screenshot of the eligibility map:

Remember though: eligibility is just the minimum requirement.

Technically I am eligible to be President of the United States and People Magazine’s Sexiest Man Alive. Neither is likely.

Again, what I know about this program wouldn’t fill a Go-Gurt tube, but I’m guessing this program’s administrators would prioritize supporting communities that need investment but can’t otherwise attract it.

Decatur does not actually need help from a federal tax credit program to build or renovate a school. Decatur has a strong tax base and the school board has authority to issue bonds.

Decatur already has the ability to pay for what it needs (renovations of existing buildings, more teachers, higher pay). It even has the capacity to pay for a new building we don’t need but board is monomaniacally obsessed with.

What Decatur lacks is a school superintendent or school board majority that city residents trust. School leaders know this, which is why they’re doing everything they can to avoid putting the funding question in front of voters.

The school board doesn’t need help attracting investment. It needs credibility with the public. There‘s no federal program currently offering that.

(*If you want to find it on the map yourself, go here and search for Census Tract 13089022501)
Fediverse reactions
2026-06-01
Decatur: The way forward is a bond referendum

On Monday, Decaturish published essays by Decatur school board members, Tracey Anderson and Lorraine Irier. Among several concerns is their contention that the board’s three other members (Carmen Sulton, Hans Utz, and James Herndon), as well as City Schools of Decatur’s administration and myriad consultants, do not share vital, relevant information with them or the public in a clear, timely manner.

The focal point of their off-pissedness is the way the school board is pursuing the planning, financing, design and construction of a new early childhood learning center on the green space next to Ebster gym.

Writes Irier:

“Questions regarding financing structures, recusal standards, legal expenditures, contracts, and outside consultants have too often been treated as obstacles rather than legitimate oversight responsibilities. I have experienced firsthand how difficult it can be to obtain basic information necessary for effective board oversight, with requests for contracts, legal expenditures, and consultant information at times framed as disruptive rather than part of a board member’s fiduciary duties.”

Before running letters from Irier and Anderson, Decaturish asked Utz, Sulton and Herndon to respond. They declined.

Instead, at Tuesday’s public board meeting, Utz, Sulton and Herndon decided to show instead of tell.

Shortly after the meeting began, Utz motioned to withdraw from the agenda a planned vote on the new daycare building’s financing.

Everyone observing the meeting could plainly see that Irier and Anderson were surprised by Utz’s surprise motion. Irier’s jaw literally dropped. Anderson asked a series of follow-up questions.

It wasn’t a surprise to everyone though. Sulton and Herndon were evidently not caught off guard. They asked no questions.

By that point, the five board members had been in the same place for six hours at multiple meetings. Utz, Sulton and Herndon did not tell Irier and Anderson what they intended to do. The secrecy, furtiveness and clique-ishness that Irier and Anderson noted in writing was acted out in the meeting, and recorded for posterity on Zoom.

What Sulton, Utz and Herndon did to Irier and Anderson in that meeting, they’re doing to others.

Here’s what Decatur Mayor Tony Powers said about the school board in March:

“I, for one, am tired of the interactions that we continue to have with our [school board]. It is not acceptable behavior, in any case, whatsoever. It is not open. It is not transparent. It is not good governance.”

And here’s what Decatur City Commissioner Mark Arnold said about the school board’s pursuit of the new daycare center in March:

“I think what CSD has done is a gross violation of our values, our traditions, our processes, and I think they’ve demonstrated extraordinarily bad faith.”

The problem here isn’t hurt feelings or bonhomie for bonhomie’s sake. This problem is that this is lousy governance of the city where I live and the schools my children attend.

City residents have five school board representatives. Three of them are excluding the other two from overseeing an issue of great importance. Three of them are alternately ignoring, thumbing their noses or otherwise hissing at reasonable public inquiries and/or opposition. Irier and Anderson aren’t the ones being shoved aside. The Decatur residents they represent are the ones being shoved aside.

I believe that every person on the board and the superintendent want to push the city to close education achievement gaps. I believe they want to do that by offering the best early childhood education possible to all Decatur children, even if their families can’t afford tuition at College Heights. Just typing those words on my own blog is music to the ears of my increasingly left-tilting head.

While I was watching Tuesday’s board meeting on Zoom, my eavesdropping 10th grade daughter said “Are they talking about the buckets?”

What buckets, I would have asked, but before I could ask she started describing a hallway at Decatur High School with several buckets to catch water leaking from the ceiling. Before I could ask a follow-up, she pivoted to “My art teacher has to buy her own pens. She shouldn’t have to buy art supplies.”

The kid’s breathless riff at me unintentionally distilled our school board’s dilemma. It’s every school board’s dilemma, in fact. Schools and school systems have more needs than they have resources to meet those needs. Using every dollar as wisely as possible isn’t a nice-to-do. It’s a must-do.

Her distillation of the problem also points the way to a solution.

The school board is clearly at an impasse. Some board members and city residents want to build a new daycare facility that will require $23 to $28 million in new financing. Other board members and city residents think the city can deliver equally great early childhood education to all of our children by creating new learning spaces inside existing, underused school buildings.

If we can agree on how to achieve the big shared goal (education equity via early childhood learning) at lower cost, the city will have more resources to ensure that gains made with 0-4s will stick for K-12s — such as more instructors for kids who need extra help, pay raises for our educators and support staff.

A citywide referendum on the proposed new early childhood learning center is the way forward. Along with subverting the will of Decatur’s residents (which would be bad enough), funding a building without putting it to a referendum would add $6 million to the price tag. Let’s also put alternative solutions (such as retrofitting existing spaces) to a vote. While we’re referend’n, let’s put funding for repairs and upgrades at Decatur High School to a vote, too. Put the Posca pens on the ballot, too. I’m sure the art teacher would appreciate that.

Based on what I know right now, I would vote to fund renovating parts of College Heights or another CSD elementary building, and providing additional tuition-free care there. I am eager to vote to tax myself to pay for kids to attend the same facility that served our family so well.

Proponents of a new ECLC building have said my preferred option (renovation) is not viable, but haven’t convinced me. My willingness to take them at their word has been fading as months have gone by without meaningful explanations of costs and considerations. What little willingness I had left vanished completely when a senior Decatur school official depicted the SoulShine daycare on West Howard Ave as a literal fireball (see the photo on this page if you think I’m exaggerating).

To be clear, I’m not saying that proponents of a new ECLC are lying about their budgets. I am saying that I have a benefit of the doubt budget and that CSD exhausted it. Thanks to poor communication, questionable math, and bad attitudes, proponents of a new building do not have my support.

I’m just one person though. All Decatur voters should decide.

Putting municipal bond questions to voters is as American as eagles wearing shades and bandanas. It’s as American as German Chocolate Cake, which is from Pennsylvania. And it’s way more American than the song “American Woman,” which is Canadian. Have you listened to the lyrics? They are not happy with us.

So, yeah, a bond referendum would be patriotic af, help our city settle a contentious issue, and (I hope) generate the money and political agreement to provide early childhood education for kids who need and deserve it. Also, I wouldn’t have to write about this again, which would be a relief to me and tens of others.
Fediverse reactions
2026-05-13
Yes to education. No to a new building.

Update: City Schools of Decatur Board Members Tracey Anderson and Lorraine Irier published letters in Decaturish today documenting the shifting justifications, evasion, poor cost oversight, and disdain for public scrutiny that have characterized the school system’s relentless push to construct a new preschool building.

On Tuesday, May 12, City Schools of Decatur’s Board of Education will vote on requiring city residents to pay to build a new early childhood learning center — aka a daycare building on the green space across from the Ebster gym.

Q: How much is the school board proposing to spend on this new building?

A: We don’t know. The price tag keeps changing. It was $23 million for a while. At a recent board meeting there was a discussion of trying to save money by paring back some unnecessary design elements. Between that meeting and today (May 11), the price jumped to $28 million (see slide 20).

Q: How many children who live in nearby Decatur Housing Authority apartments might attend the preschool?

A: We don’t know. The city says the school is necessary to serve kids who live in DHA housing who might not otherwise have access to quality early education. At one point, the board estimated 67 children would attend the new ECLC. That number keeps dropping. A board member told me today that the best current estimate of potential students from nearby DHA homes is just 22.

Q: How will the much discussed (and much needed) proposed renovations at Decatur High School proceed?

A: We don’t know. The board’s presentation to take on $28 million in debt for a new preschool does not address renovations at the high school.

Q: If Decatur spends $28 million, plus annual operating expenses of roughly $1.5M, to close achievement gaps for just 22 potential preschool students preschool, how much will Decatur plan to spend on closing achievement gaps for K-12 students?

A: We don’t know. When Decatur teachers, residents and two school board members, ask that question at public meetings, and note that there isn’t enough staff in elementary, middle and high school to devote the necessary time to students who need extra help, they don’t get direct answers from the board.

Q: With the city’s elementary enrollment declining, wouldn’t it be more cost effective to renovate rooms in existing buildings (ex. Westchester, Glennwood and College Heights) to meet our small city’s early childhood education needs?

A: We don’t know. I’ve read board members quoted saying that would be more expensive, but I’ve never seen those estimates.

Q: If Decatur is considering moving some Pre-K classes from College Heights to Westchester, Clairemont or Glennwood (as board member Han Utz suggested was possible at an April board meeting), would it really cost more than $23-28 million to renovate 2-4 classrooms at College Heights to serve 22 additional 0-3 year olds who live less than a mile away?

A: We don’t know. Because it doesn’t appear the school board is even considering that.

Q: How much of the estimated $1.5 million in annual operating expenses at a new school for would be paid for by Decatur taxpayers, and how much will be paid through education philanthropy, as Superintendent Whitaker suggested is likely?

A: Superintendent Whitaker said at a recent public meeting that Decatur wants to pursue philanthropic support for early childhood education, but that education philanthropists will not give the city money until a new school building is completed and operational. Let’s set aside for a moment the fact that education philanthropists do, in fact, commit to conditional funding for viable long-term projects. If we just take the superintendent’s answer it’s: We don’t know.

Q: Do Decatur residents support spending tens of millions of dollars on a new school building for kids ages 0-3?

A: We don’t know. 3 of the 5 board members strongly oppose putting the new building and its funding to a referendum. They’re even considering a special funding mechanism (Certificates of Participation) that would add 20% ($6 million!) to the building’s overall price tag just because doing so would deny voters a chance to vote yes or no. (Again, see slide 20)

Q: Will school board member James Herndon, who previously recused himself from a vote involving the new building because he has a professional conflict of interest, recuse himself on May 12. Or will he cast the deciding “yes” vote on a spending package expressly (see page 20) crafted to circumvent the will of Decatur voters?

A: We don’t know. It seems he likes suspense.

***

Sometimes when I go out to eat, the server will tell me there’s a special and describe it. If the server doesn’t say the price, I’ll ask. The server never says “We don’t know.”

Is it too much to ask of Decatur’s school board that it exercises the same level of fiscal due diligence as a diner considering the fish entrée? I’m worried the answer is, yes, it is too much to ask.

If the board votes “yes” to funding a new building tomorrow, they’re unfortunately voting “no” to fiscal responsibility, transparency, honesty, fiscal due diligence, community input, peer input, and the democratic process of a voter referendum. I’ve lived here since 2006 and haven’t previously witnessed our elected officials acting this disdainfully of their own constituents. I’m not alone.

I support education for all of Decatur’s kids and am willing to pay for it. I oppose spending $23-28 million on an unnecessary new building. Buildings don’t teach kids. Teachers do.

Yes to education. No to a new building.

***

2026-05-11
Free parking isn’t cheap
It is practical for Decatur to help people who live near busy commercial districts by banning non-resident parking on certain residential streets. I just want the city to price exclusive parking rights fairly.

The city is proposing charging residents on busy streets $25/year for exclusive rights to park on a street near their home. Is that a fair price?

Let’s compare $25 for a year of parking to what Decatur charges for the private use of other public spaces.

Reserving a public tennis court in Decatur costs $5 per hour. All-day admission to a swimming pool costs $6. All-day rental of the picnic pavilion at Oakhurst Park costs $180.
- Picnics: $180
- Swimming: $6
- Tennis: $5
- Car: $.068
Is it fair or reasonable to charge a city resident 73x more to play tennis on a public tennis court than a resident is charged to leave a private vehicle on a public right of way? Two of the six pillars of Decatur’s Destination 2030 plan are “Climate Action” and “Safe Mobility”? Does charging less than 7 cents per day to park support either of those pillars?

Another method of determining a fair price would be to consider property taxes. My back-of-the-envelope match suggests 150 square feet (roughly the amount of space a Kia Telluride takes up when parked on the street) taxed at the city’s millage rate would be about $283/year. That’s 11x what the city is proposing charging for parking.

If you prefer an apples-to-apples, or parking-to-parking comparison, the cheapest parking deck in Decatur I can think of is the $6/day courthouse deck. A year of weekday parking there at $6/day is $1,560. If you think that’s a lot, I paid $1.35 the other day for 30 minutes of metered parking.

Am I suggesting a parking permit should cost $65,700, the annualized price of a picnic table in Oakhurst Park? No. That would be absurd. But less absurd than giving away a public resource for a tiny fraction of its value, and in opposition to our stated climate and mobility goals.

Charge a fair price for parking and use the money on projects that reduce Decatur’s car dependency. Fewer of us would need to park on the street to go to Taqueria Del Sol if there were protected bike/scooter paths leading in and out of downtown from our neighborhoods.

I’m not anti-car. I own 3 of them. I just don’t think it’s anyone’s duty to subsidize my car ownership, or vice versa.

Subsidize this instead.
2026-05-04
Ride with Respect

MARTA Airport Station

2026-04-12
My latest post on LinkedIn

What Dispensing Waffle Batter At A Hampton Inn Taught Me About B2B Sales

2026-04-05
No Kings

Decatur, Georgia on March 27, 2026

We are winning.

2026-03-30
Decatur’s School Board Needs to Stop It

I support CSD’s commitment to providing quality early childhood education to everyone in Decatur, regardless of their family’s ability to pay preschool tuition. As Superintendent Whitaker noted at March 25’s school board community meeting in Oakhurst, the best way to close reading achievement gaps in adolescence is with early childhood education that prevents the gaps from developing.

Nevertheless, I do not believe a large capital investment in a new building would serve Decatur’s children better than other possible investments. I urge the board and CSD’s administration to utilize existing buildings instead to expand and enhance the city’s early childhood education options.

CSD’s administration and its board have not convinced me or many of my neighbors why a new $23 million building is the correct solution to meeting our shared goal of providing excellent early childhood care to Decatur’s kids.

Additionally, Decatur City Commissioner George Dusenbury presented compelling evidence at a recent public meeting that CSD’s existing ECLC plan is grossly overpriced.

Dusenbury said the contractor’s estimate for the new building is about $4 million too high. Even if one supports building a new ECLC facility, does anyone support paying $4 million too much for it? $4 million would pay for a lot of preschool tuition for a lot of kids.

The board needs to stop. Stop the building. Also, stop being so petulant about the opposition to the building. It’s dividing the city.

At last week’s board community meeting, an audience member opposing the new building’s location said that LaGrange has done a better job of historical preservation than Decatur. Utz replied sarcastically, asking if the speaker was recommending Decatur build its new preschool in LaGrange? The audience jeered him.

Perhaps mistaking the jeers for cheers, three days later Utz attended Talley Elementary School’s fundraiser wearing a shirt that reads “I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you.”

Anyone who knows me knows I am a connoisseur of ridiculous t-shirts, but I’ve never seen that one before. Then again, I’ve never typed “What would Melania wear to an elementary school carnival men’s fitted medium” into Temu’s search bar.

Board chair and new building supporter Dr. Carmen Sulton took a different approach. She wasn’t sarcastic at last week’s community meeting. Instead she used her eyes to shoot ice lasers at the room when opponents of the new building were speaking. Watch a meeting video to see for yourself. You may want to grab a sweater first.

I attended the meeting expecting to hear Utz and Sulton try to persuade the audience that their preferred idea (a new building) is better than all the other possible solutions (renovating existing neighborhood school buildings). They’re proponents of the building, so surely, given an audience of taxpayers and a microphone, they’re going to press their case, right?

Wrong.

They didn’t bother talking up their preferred plan. They didn’t compare a new building’s cost or efficacy to renovation options. They didn’t contradict Commissioner Dusenbury’s evidence of $4 million in inflated cost projections. They didn’t contradict recent criticism that a new building would use up much more of the site’s greenspace than originally promised. At this point their argument for the new building is just to be annoyed at people who don’t agree with them.

Credit where it’s due: at least Sulton and Utz showed up. Board member James Herndon didn’t even show up. No explanation for his absence was given.

In my opinion, Decatur’s success as a city is downstream of our community’s dedication to its schools. Pursuing the ECLC plan as it is currently conceived weakens the city by eroding public confidence in our schools.

The board can fix it. First it has to pause the ECLC building project. Then it has to reopen public discussion about how best to expand our early childhood learning options. Third, the board needs to give fair consideration to all options. Fourth, no more graphic tees.

Decatur’s city commission is outraged. Mayor Tony Powers says the school board has destroyed public trust. Commissioner Mark Arnold says the school board is acting in gross violation of Decatur’s values, traditions, processes and is acting in “extraordinarily bad faith.”

Decatur’s state legislators are also worried. They are trying to force the school board to put the new building’s funding to a citywide referendum. They say the school board hasn’t been transparent about its choices, and hasn’t listened to community input.

On Friday the school board met to discuss a possible referendum. Board members Tracey Anderson and Lorraine Irier voted ‘yes’ on holding a referendum. Utz, who was quoted by WABE in January dismissing opponents of the current ECLC plan as a “loud, angry minority,” voted ‘no’ on holding a citywide referendum. Sulton and Herndon also voted ‘no’.

At the next community board meeting, I hope residents explain to Utz, Sulton and Herndon that if they believe that a happy majority of Decatur residents actually supports the construction of a new, $23 million school building they should have no problem putting the question to a citywide vote.

Unfortunately, even if we explain it to them, we can’t understand it for them.

2026-03-29
Dog ears

2026-03-22