SARASOTA - A push to raise salaries bumped up teacher pay 22 percent in the past five years, making the Sarasota County schools the second-highest paying district in Florida.
On top of that, a bonus designed to keep veteran educators makes Sarasota one of a handful of Florida communities where teachers can make $100,000.
But now a bad economy and less money for education has put Sarasota, and school districts across the state, in a scramble to lay off teachers, cut pay or freeze wages.
Several Sarasota School Board members say the district should consider cutting or at least freezing teacher pay as they slash $40 million from the 2009-2010 budget.
Board member Carol Todd says the board needs to look at cutting the 30 minutes added to the school day several years ago, a move that would save $14 million by cutting teacher pay about 7 percent.
Two others, Frank Kovach and Kathy Kleinlein, say the board may not have to do something so drastic but must look at other areas of the contract.
All of the board members and Superintendent Lori White agree all options need to be on the table.
The alternatives to cutting pay are just as grim, board members say: Layoffs, elimination of some academic programs or fewer classes.
"I don't think people realize how bad it is," Kovach said. "We have spent money that we simply cannot afford to spend and we can't keep doing it."
Any pay cut is likely to draw fierce opposition from the teacher's union. Administrators in Manatee tried to cut salaries by 1 percent and are now defending themselves against grievances filed by employees. Sarasota's teachers' union has vowed to fight pay cuts.
"It would plunge labor relations into a place where it doesn't need to be," said Barry Dubin, executive director of the Sarasota Classified/Teachers Association. "They think they're going to roll back teacher salaries and it's going to solve all of their problems."
How teachers earn $100,000
A few years ago, Florida school districts scrambled to outpay their neighbors.
The housing boom ushered tens of thousands of students into Florida schools. Coupled with a state law mandating smaller class sizes, that created a big demand for educators. In 2006, Florida hired a record 30,000 teachers.
At the same time, rising property values gave school districts extra cash, which many used to compete for the best teachers. Between 2003 and 2008, Florida teacher pay rose an average of 3 percent a year -- 16 percent overall.
Sarasota was one of those districts, bolstered by the proceeds of a one-mill property tax levy for schools that voters approved. Part of the increase paid teachers for the extra 30 minutes added to the school day in 2006.
During the school-tax campaign, some questioned using a special tax that expires in 2010 to pay for recurring expenses like salaries. But top school administrators and a majority of School Board members, citing the need for better pay and more teaching time, decided it was worth it.
The raises brought the district's average teacher salary to $53,809, second only to Key West's Monroe County.
And that comparison is based on salaries alone. Sarasota also offers seniority bonuses that pay veteran teachers as much as $10,000 a year. About half of the district's teachers receive the bonus, which costs $8.3 million a year.
Florida Education Association spokesman Mark Pudlow said he did not know of any other district that offered the same kind of bonus for seniority.
The bonus, combined with extra pay for supervising extracurricular activities and being department heads, pushes the pay of 18 Sarasota teachers over $100,000 a year -- higher than the state's average high school principal salary of $94,000. That figure is for all instruction employees, which includes district program specialists.
But now the mass of children who crowded classrooms during the boom has thinned.
The district's enrollment has dropped by 1,500 students -- the equivalent of 60 teachers. Since state funding is tied to number of students, that means the district is also losing dollars.
Property and sales tax collections -- two big sources of school funding -- also fell last year. In response, the district cut about 200 positions. Thanks to teacher turnover, no one was laid off.
For 2009-2010, school officials expect state funding to drop another 5 percent. They also expect local property tax collections to stay down. In all, school officials project the district will have $40 million less than needed to cover the current $428.5 million in spending.
With 85 percent of the district's operating budget paying for salaries, school officials say employees will inevitably be affected.
Union ready to fight
That sets up a fight with the influential teachers union. Any pay change must be negotiated with the union and approved by employees.
Union leaders say that before the board considers cutting teacher pay, it should look at things like the district's police force or cuts to busing.
"I'll give them all sorts of things to cut," Dubin said. "If they want my ideas for how to save money, I'll give them. But they're not going to like them."
And several teachers say they would stand behind the union. Sarasota High teacher Beth Hartman said most teachers put in extra time that does not show up in their paycheck.
"It isn't over when the bell rings," said Hartman, who has been with the district 30 years. "Most teachers work long, long days. When you leave your job, you've got papers to grade and lessons to plan.
"People in the community are aware of that and are very supportive of our efforts to help their children be successful."
Sarasota High teacher Lamar Holsopple says the school district could face another shortage in the next five years as large numbers of teachers retire. When that happens, the district will once again need competitive salaries.
"You can't just look at the situation now," said Holsopple, who has been with the district 35 years. "You have to look at the coming years and what's going to happen."
And dig into the numbers, teachers say, and the story looks different. Sarasota teachers got a 1 percent pay raise this year, but their health care costs increased and the district eliminated its subsidy for family members' health insurance. The 7 percent raise in 2006, they point out, compensated them for extending the school day by 30 minutes.
Cutting the 30 minutes -- or at least scaling back the pay teachers receive for it -- is among the ideas raised by board members. Members have also suggested making teachers' annual step raise a negotiable part of the contract.
"The comments are not popular I'm sure," said board member Carol Todd, "but I truly believe these cuts need to be made as far away from the classroom as possible."
Young teachers first to go
Other proposals would cut teaching positions. Eliminating block schedules at high schools would let the district cut 71 teaching jobs. Also a possibility: cutting dozens of data and reading coaches.
Since layoffs are based on seniority, the youngest teachers making the least money would be the first to go.
"Those people will be hurt the quickest," said school board member Kleinlein. "Some of these may be teachers whose spouses have lost their jobs, and may be the sole providers for their family.
Sarasota High teacher Anita Wexler, who has been with the district four years, said she hopes the board and union find a compromise that saves jobs.
Eliminating the extra half-hour of class and taking a 7 percent pay cut would be drastic, she said, but it could prevent deeper cuts.
"No one wants to lose money, but a smaller cut might be acceptable," Wexler said. "It's easy for someone with 10 years to say, 'I wouldn't vote for any pay cut.' They know they're safe. Those who are lower on the pay scale are the ones who are going to worry
If you don't really want to read this, here's a summary:
Idiot journalist thinks teachers are payed too much.
Manipulates false facts to try to prove her point
Classifies a raise as getting payed more money due to the 30 extra minutes of school added to our days recently.
Idiot Journalist gets article on front page
Luckily, a teacher at one of the schools in my district wrote back, and was published six days later. (Sorry about the double post. The combined articles are too long)
As a professional educator for 17 years, nine of those teaching journalism, I want to respond to the Dec. 2 news package "Teachers in Budget Spotlight."
The article and graphics use unclear or slippery language in several instances. The "bonus" that teachers receive is actually called "longevity pay." The pay is intended as an incentive for more experienced teachers to stay in the district, but whether or not the longevity pay is "lucrative" -- as the graphic accompanying the article said -- is debatable.
In this article and several previous articles, teacher compensation for the half hour of duty time added to the school day is frequently referred to as a "raise." Being compensated for one's time is not a "raise," but rather compensation for additional work performed.
The longevity pay for years of service peaks at 28-plus years of service at 21 percent. When this pay is based on the first-year bachelor degree teacher's pay, which is currently $38,997, the longevity pay would be $8,191; if it were based on a doctoral degree, it would be $9,687.
Two other points to clarify the graphics:
The summer school session runs for 24 days, not the 12 that were reported in the graphic.
Further, the figure reported for the National Board certification bonus was erroneous. I was one of the first six teachers in Sarasota County to become certified and, because of the state budget problems, last year's bonus was prorated at a reduced rate of $3,892 rather than the $4,549 reported.
The article infers that -- oh, my! -- teachers are so overpaid in the Sarasota County district. The article says that we have 18 teachers who make six figures; we have several thousand teachers in this district.
The tone of the piece seems intended to inflame readers with a sense of injustice that teachers are overpaid and that the union is hell-bent on keeping this supposedly outlandish practice in force.
I have lived in this county for 23 years and know that a significant draw for new residents is the high quality of schools. Our students and teachers consistently out perform other students in the state. One component of high property values in a community is the quality of the schools.
Times are indeed tough and property values have fallen. Tough decisions have to be made, but cutting teacher salaries should not be one of them.
We are losing students because families can't afford to live in Sarasota County. Many teachers have financial obligations based upon their current incomes. If teachers were to lose that 7.1 percent pay for a reduced duty day, many of them would have to leave Sarasota because they will not be able to keep their homes.
The article reports that a teacher with a doctorate degree and 29 years of experience makes $75,811 per year. Compared to other professions requiring that amount of education and experience, $75,000 a year is ludicrous, especially considering the huge contributions to society that most educators make.
The taxpayers of Sarasota County voted for the school-tax referendum because they knew the value of a quality education and believed in our teachers and our students. I have faith that in the next referendum our citizens will again do the right thing. The current data prove that what we are doing is working. The latest report shows our district has closed the achievement gap in every subgroup for standardized testing.
Our county and district will get through these tough times. We have just begun the search for suggestions as to what is essential and what is not.
One place to start is some supplements. Any supplement not having to do with academics or the arts such as band, chorus or orchestra should be cut.
I'm talking about athletics. If the parents want their children to play sports, then they can have the choice to do so on their on dime.
Another idea is lengthening the school day by an hour and 45 minutes, so we would have a four-day school week instead of a five-day school week. We would cut transportation costs by 20 percent and electrical costs significantly.
Our students are also required to acquire community service hours in order to qualify for the state's Bright Future Scholarships. Maybe we could have those students earn some of those hours at school doing food preparation and service and custodial duties.
We have the brain power and talent to survive this crisis. Let's work together -- with a tone of optimism -- and get through this, without losing all that we have gained for our precious youths.
Robin Ringo of Sarasota teaches at Pine View School in Osprey.
I actually didn't find this article that fucked up at all. Perhaps I'm bitter that you're saying the situation is so fucked up, when this is obviously a pretty freakin successful school district. Dallas Independent School District was found I think to be $80 million in debt this year? And it's one of the worst public school districts in the nation, but there are certainly worse. DC area? I think they've been cleaning up, but still... I mean, yes, it is messed up that you may have to get rid of some teachers in order to keep up with the shitty economy. It's the economy that's fucked up, not this suggestion.
I think I am just bitter. It sounds like your school district is awesome. I'm jealous! My school district sucked balls. This past Superintendent has done a horrible job, I hope he gets sacked and they get someone better. Boo crappy school systems.
EDIT: god's talking about the double post you made of just the article itself. You've actually made a triple post, I don't know if you noticed that. You should delete the first one.
EDITEDIT: Oh sorry read it wrong I totally thought it was saying get rid of the arts. I suppose I've been hearing that in so many other places I was quick to assume this person was against it as well. My bad. I cut that part out.
(CNN) -- Up and down the East Coast, residents and naturalists alike have been scratching their heads this autumn over a simple question: Where are all the acorns?
Oak trees have shed their leaves, but the usual carpet of acorns is not crunching underfoot.
In far-flung pockets of northern Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and other states, scientists have found no acorns whatsoever.
"I can't think of any other year like this," said Alonso Abugattas, director of the Long Branch Nature Center in Arlington, Virginia.
Louise Garris, who lives in the Oakcrest neighborhood of Arlington, Virginia, first noticed the mysterious phenomenon early this fall when doing yardwork beneath a canopy of large oak trees.
"I have lived in the area my entire life and have never not seen any acorns!" she said. Garris checked with some local plant nurseries and they confirmed her observation.
The mystery has found its way to the Internet, where a "No acorns this year" discussion on Topix.com yielded more than 180 comments from people reporting acorn disappearances as far away as Connecticut and North Carolina.
"WHAT IS GOING ON?" posted a resident of Maplewood, New Jersey. "Now we are finding dead squirrels! SHOULD WE ALL BE CONCERNED?"
Not necessarily, naturalists say. Last year Garris reported a bumper crop of acorns, which scientists say may be one clue to this year's scarcity. Virginia extension agent Adam Downing said acorn production runs in cycles, so a lean year is normal after a year with a big crop.
"It fits with the physiology of seed reproduction. The trees are exhausted, energy wise, from last year," Downing said.
But even he is surprised at the complete absence of nuts in parts of Virginia.
"There are plenty of acorns in most of the state, but zero acorns in some pockets," he said.
Downing said recovery from last year's big crop, combined with a much wetter-than-usual spring, probably accounts for the acorn absence. Meteorologists say the Washington-Baltimore area saw about twice as much precipitation last May as normal.
Kate McNamee, who runs a Washington-area, volunteer tree-planting project called "Growing Native," lends specific numbers to the acorn shortage. Her group collects hardwood seeds and plants trees to protect rivers and streams in the Potomac River watershed.
"Last year we collected 25,000 pounds of seeds, most from a bumper crop of acorns," said McNamee. "This year we only collected 10,000 pounds, and 90 percent of that was walnuts."
Even though this acorn shortage has not risen to the level of a crisis, scientists say it is important to watch closely. If the shortage continues for several years, other forces might be at work.
iReport.com: Skillful squirrel raids bird feeder
Garris said her observations got her thinking about other recent environmental issues.
"I had read about the collapse of the bee colonies, and it made me wonder, is something else going on here? Could this be affecting other systems?"
At the Long Branch Nature Center, calls and e-mails have been pouring in from people who want to donate acorns they've gathered in areas where they are plentiful.
It's also hard to think of acorns without thinking about squirrels. What happens to them when their favorite food disappears? Some Eastern Seaboard residents have reported seeing skinny, aggressive squirrels devouring bird feed.
"Especially in the depths of winter, there's not much else for the squirrels to eat. Some may switch their diet, many others probably won't make it," said Abugattas. "Squirrel and deer numbers will almost certainly go down."
But Doug Inkley, senior scientist at the National Wildlife Federation, said that wild animals can be resilient when their usual food sources go away.
Inkley cited a blight that destroyed 3.5 billion American chestnuts from 1900-1940, wiping out a common food source for squirrels, deer, mice and wild turkeys. But those animals adapted and survived, he said.
Barbara Prescott, a wildlife rehabilitation expert, agreed that squirrels are not fussy about their diet. She suggested that residents leave whole (not crushed) corn, peanuts and sunflowers in the seed as backyard treats.
John Rohm, wildlife biologist for Prince William, Loudoun, Fairfax, and Arlington counties in northern Virginia, has faith in the furry population.
"Animals are resourceful," he said. "If they're hungry, they're gonna find something to eat."
As a person who grew up on several acres dominated by red oak trees, acorns were quite common to my memory. Yet it seems like it's been years since I've been raking that yard up and found even a single acorn.
As a kid I recall there had been large numbers of chipmunks around. Then we had cats. After some years there weren't chipmunks anymore. The squirrels remained, however. I remember times I could look out the window and expect to see 6-8 squirrels scattered around the lawn. These days it's down to 1 or 2.
Should I be complaining of a crisis too? Or maybe it has something to do with there being half as many trees (which are twice as big).
"Animals are resourceful," he said. "If they're hungry, they're gonna find something to eat."
That sentence brings up an interesting point:
Humans are technically animals, right? I mean, we like to think we're better than others, but we just developed differently and use our advantages, don't we? A dog can't create a web page. My point is, we're resourceful too. Which leads me to wonder why we have trouble solving our own crisises.
Part of the difficulty is that if a squirrel can't find food for itself or for its family, it only has to worry about that small group. Many of our problems exist at a national or global scale, and so finding solutions that will hurt the fewest people and that people will go along with are much more difficult.
If you're talking about food, it's actually quite a shame. We should be able to create more than enough food to feed everyone adequately. The problem is that many poor farmers around the world don't have access to farm equipment or knowledge about farming techniques like crop rotation to increase yields. Many farms are just inefficient and could harvest more crops through consolidation of smaller plots.
And business is partly to blame. Companies like Monsanto create genetically engineered seeds to produce crops with higher yields, but typically those crops either don't produce their own seeds or the seeds they produce don't grow, so farmers have to constantly buy more seeds every year. I'm not sure how I feel about this, because these companies do need more money to continue researching, but they could probably sell their products for cheaper. Similar to drug companies, actually.
And, the problem is exacerbated by a bunch of jackasses in Washington who think that growing corn is going to solve our energy problems. This is partially why food prices have gone up in the US; farmers have stopped growing other crops, crops that people eat, in lieu of growing corn instead, because the government gives them subsidies to do so. As a result there is simply less food in the market, causing prices to go up and making it harder to afford for the less well off.
Ethanol from corn kernals is bad, between that and getting less energy than is put in. But what they're starting to do is use genetically modified E. Coli bacteria to break down the sugars in the corn husks and stalks, leaving the food for consuption and actually producing more energy than with the kernals.
I may be talking out of my arse here but I heard that it actually takes more energy to grow, collect and produce ethanol than what you will get when the product is finished.
I spent a bit of time researching it a year or two ago for a project for school. There are enough studies on both sides of the fence regarding its efficiency to warrant more investigation.
Although there has been a lot of work done in the field over the last several years, so it's hard to say if it's working right or not.
It's funny, a few years ago Castro wrote an open letter to the US condemning us for wasting precious food so horribly inefficiently on energy production while people around the world starve. He then outlined how it's going to simply raise our food prices anyway as farmers stop growing edible food. A week later the Economist wrote an article saying that it doesn't normally find itself agreeing with communist dictators, but this time he had a really good point.
I just think we should invest our time and energy into harnessing other kinds of fuels. For example, if we could power a car on stinky farts, we could convert our nation's gas stations into Whitecastles.
But if people in the US are still having trouble making bill payments and putting food on the table, there's no reason we should take precious food and turn it into fuel that, as you said, isn't even efficient.
A Monorail is more likely, though. Kukopanki, you're really not that wrong. Yes, Ethanol does save energy, but really, the amount of gas you put in to the production doesn't yield very much in America. Corn is a poor ethanol food, and using 1 gallon of petroleum to produce it yields about 1.1 gallons of Ethanol, not very effiecient. In other contries, like Brazil down there with you, Sugarcane is much more common for them than corn is for us. Additionally, its a better Ethanol food, too. The Brazilian Ethanol ratio is: 1 petroleum gallon to 7.5 ethanol gallons.
:tmyk:
John, I think that the system you refer to is crap. I really wish we didn't need cars to get anywhere. I HATE cars. But unfortunately, we have a lot of land, and so felt it necessary to spread out ridiculously.
So we need to demolish everything we've already built and build a few of these on the coast:
Ooh, I haven't read about that. I'll have to look into it.
You should pick up Microcosm: E. coli and the New Science of Life by Carl Zimmer. It's a great book about all the advances in the history of science (SCIENCE!?) thanks to E. coli. But you don't have to take my word for it!
That pyramid-city looks really cool! All of the inventions they were considering to use in order to build the mega-city sounded so cockamamie! The narrator started to sound silly towards the end.
Nah, you're right, if I could get away with just walking everywhere, that would be wonderful. I've just grown up going to schools way too far away to walk to every morning (my middle school and high school were 20 miles away from my house), and it was mostly the same with friends I met at those schools. Fun experiences, of course, but it does suck when you have to drive a half hour to see your boyfriend or best friends.
Which is probably another reason I like talking on the phone. I don't get to visit them at their house to talk to them very often, and visiting someone during school isn't really hanging out with them at all.
THE father of a toddler called Adolf Hitler Campbell says it is unfair that a store denied him a birthday cake with his child's name on it.
New Jersey man Heath Campbell, 35, has decorated his home with swastikas and says he is related to a member of the SS.
But he says it is the store that wouldn't write "Happy Birthday Adolf Hitler" on a cake that should be showing more consideration for other people's feelings.
"They need to accept a name. A name's a name. The kid isn't going to grow up and do what (Hitler) did," he told the Associated Press.
But the ShopRite store that refused the cake request says it did the right thing.
"We believe the request ... to inscribe a birthday wish to Adolf Hitler is inappropriate," spokeswoman Karen Meleta told the Express-Times newspaper.
The store has also refused to make a cake bearing the name of Mr Campbell's daughter, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell, who turns two in February.
Mr Campbell and his wife Deborah also have a daughter Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell, named for SS head Heinrich Himmler, who turns one in April.
He said he named his son after Adolf Hitler because he liked the name and because "no one else in the world would have that name".
"They're just names, you know," he told the Express-Times.
"Yeah, they (Nazis) were bad people back then. But my kids are little. They're not going to grow up like that."
"Other kids get their cake. I get a hard time," he said. "It's not fair to my children.'
Mr Campbell said he didn't expect the names to cause problems when the children start school.
Yeah, I was watching that on the news earlier today. I'm not sure how I feel about this one. Obviously, the children shouldn't be punished for things that are out of their control. I don't think the store should have refused him, but it's not a necessary service, he can buy the frosting tube and write it himself. It is the store's right to refuse service to whomever they wish. The father is just a dumb-ass. I understand what he's trying to say, but he should have been smart enough to understand what it would be like for him and his children when he named them.
Shouldn't Child Services be watching this guy? I mean, if he's shallow enough to not foresee the problems in naming his kids this, then he's probably doing some other stupid shit and not even realizing it.
Comments
If you don't really want to read this, here's a summary:
Idiot journalist thinks teachers are payed too much.
Manipulates false facts to try to prove her point
Classifies a raise as getting payed more money due to the 30 extra minutes of school added to our days recently.
Idiot Journalist gets article on front page
I support the teacher's views, of course.
I actually didn't find this article that fucked up at all. Perhaps I'm bitter that you're saying the situation is so fucked up, when this is obviously a pretty freakin successful school district. Dallas Independent School District was found I think to be $80 million in debt this year? And it's one of the worst public school districts in the nation, but there are certainly worse. DC area? I think they've been cleaning up, but still... I mean, yes, it is messed up that you may have to get rid of some teachers in order to keep up with the shitty economy. It's the economy that's fucked up, not this suggestion.
I think I am just bitter. It sounds like your school district is awesome. I'm jealous! My school district sucked balls. This past Superintendent has done a horrible job, I hope he gets sacked and they get someone better. Boo crappy school systems.
EDIT: god's talking about the double post you made of just the article itself. You've actually made a triple post, I don't know if you noticed that. You should delete the first one.
EDITEDIT: Oh sorry read it wrong I totally thought it was saying get rid of the arts. I suppose I've been hearing that in so many other places I was quick to assume this person was against it as well. My bad. I cut that part out.
There is an acorn shortage. Squirrels are going hungry.
Scientists baffled by mysterious acorn shortage
As a kid I recall there had been large numbers of chipmunks around. Then we had cats. After some years there weren't chipmunks anymore. The squirrels remained, however. I remember times I could look out the window and expect to see 6-8 squirrels scattered around the lawn. These days it's down to 1 or 2.
Should I be complaining of a crisis too? Or maybe it has something to do with there being half as many trees (which are twice as big).
That sentence brings up an interesting point:
Humans are technically animals, right? I mean, we like to think we're better than others, but we just developed differently and use our advantages, don't we? A dog can't create a web page. My point is, we're resourceful too. Which leads me to wonder why we have trouble solving our own crisises.
Part of the difficulty is that if a squirrel can't find food for itself or for its family, it only has to worry about that small group. Many of our problems exist at a national or global scale, and so finding solutions that will hurt the fewest people and that people will go along with are much more difficult.
And business is partly to blame. Companies like Monsanto create genetically engineered seeds to produce crops with higher yields, but typically those crops either don't produce their own seeds or the seeds they produce don't grow, so farmers have to constantly buy more seeds every year. I'm not sure how I feel about this, because these companies do need more money to continue researching, but they could probably sell their products for cheaper. Similar to drug companies, actually.
And, the problem is exacerbated by a bunch of jackasses in Washington who think that growing corn is going to solve our energy problems. This is partially why food prices have gone up in the US; farmers have stopped growing other crops, crops that people eat, in lieu of growing corn instead, because the government gives them subsidies to do so. As a result there is simply less food in the market, causing prices to go up and making it harder to afford for the less well off.
Although there has been a lot of work done in the field over the last several years, so it's hard to say if it's working right or not.
It's funny, a few years ago Castro wrote an open letter to the US condemning us for wasting precious food so horribly inefficiently on energy production while people around the world starve. He then outlined how it's going to simply raise our food prices anyway as farmers stop growing edible food. A week later the Economist wrote an article saying that it doesn't normally find itself agreeing with communist dictators, but this time he had a really good point.
I just think we should invest our time and energy into harnessing other kinds of fuels. For example, if we could power a car on stinky farts, we could convert our nation's gas stations into Whitecastles.
But if people in the US are still having trouble making bill payments and putting food on the table, there's no reason we should take precious food and turn it into fuel that, as you said, isn't even efficient.
:tmyk:
So we need to demolish everything we've already built and build a few of these on the coast:
You should pick up Microcosm: E. coli and the New Science of Life by Carl Zimmer. It's a great book about all the advances in the history of science (SCIENCE!?) thanks to E. coli. But you don't have to take my word for it!
"Everyone with a nose knows..."
Nah, you're right, if I could get away with just walking everywhere, that would be wonderful. I've just grown up going to schools way too far away to walk to every morning (my middle school and high school were 20 miles away from my house), and it was mostly the same with friends I met at those schools. Fun experiences, of course, but it does suck when you have to drive a half hour to see your boyfriend or best friends.
Which is probably another reason I like talking on the phone. I don't get to visit them at their house to talk to them very often, and visiting someone during school isn't really hanging out with them at all.