I was told her and Debbie Riddle are birds of a feather abnd flock together......I think that trash need to go it stinks

Thursday, September 17, 2009
CAN CCISD'S SCHOOL BOARD CAROL SCOTT (WHO IS BENG PAID BY LAS BRISAS ENERGY) CONTINUE TO BE A "TRUSTEE" OF OUR CHILDREN? [Facebook discussion]
(To participate in this dicussion, join facebook.com and add homervillarreal@gmail as a friend. The following is an truncated abridgement of the discussion on the above mentioned issue:

Homer Villarreal
CCISD’s John Longoria just reported that Tomas Duran was a consult for CCISD, but has left. I understand (and again) I am prudently generalizing from John’s update that Thomas Duran now (who is tied in with all the big time insurances like Entrust) is free and legally able to bid on the CCISD Health Insurance. .. I believe that when they go out for insurance (from sources, I believe) will be between Carol’s buddies – Art Granato and Thomas Duran.

Homer Villarreal
WATCH CAREFULLY... Read More…Another question to ask is: “Did the Scotts use ‘La Brisas’’ money to get a new American Federation of Teachers President? I hear Art Granato donated to him also… I am just connecting the dots. Jeff Kane did comment on our board that it was “gray area” … his word was ‘leveraging”… Rene Saenz who sits on the Health Insurance Committee feels that the pressure that will be excerted by different parties will be fierce. So the new AFT president was handpicked by Carol so to speak, if the info is true.

Mark A. Di Carlo
Homer: McMurrey show, AFT President, is on my Voices show on Friday at 10:00 P.M. (On my webcite also) But I do not get it, are you inferring you campaign for the job as Union President and raise money to do it? Maybe so . . . . might have been a good subject.

Carolyn Moon
The new AFT president is a member of the CEC. send me an e-mail later.

Amadora Zapata
Yeah, AFT was the Scott's project according to my sources. They are eroding the credibility of our community: the SCOTTS.

Homer Villarreal
Homer Villarreal: " A regional government, for protecting the agenda and whims of a wife of a city councilman only, is but a carcass, and soon falls by its own CORRUPTION and decay."

Debbie Allen
There is a beauty to a cat fight; because it stems from the soul of a woman. Carol has to go!!! Yeah, the truth of her evil does not seem to matter to her, only the way she chooses to interpret it. But it is survival of a fitness. We are being taken by her, and I am sure not gonna, not gonna put up with it.

Rene Saenz
Amadora, "AFT is the scott's project" what are you inferring? I'm a member of AFT and there was no project there. In fact, I talked to Ray, the new prez, the entire time during his campaign. In fact, in the beginning we were trying to decide who should run, me or him. In the end, I deferred since I had other projects going on. I believe your source... Read More/sources are all wrong. I'm the ultimate source on this issue. But we agreed on one thing, the past president had to go. If you really want the inside, I know it all.

Amadora Zapata
I respectfully disagree Mr. Saenz...and for you to believe that the ultimate source was yourself in re: to the "Carol"/Kailo connection (implied) on the "Las Brisas dollars" (in addition to the Art Granato 's/lobbying interests in this matter) - is quite delusional, and to venture beyond the bucket of this complex issue and investigation by myself... Read More and ours in the region. To question me(or anyone here), is a matter of credibility. But be forewarned, You are welcome to post, but to admonish if "you have a dog in the fight" there are the consequences. If you are participating especially in defense of a party in question, the AFT PREST. or SCOTT's hand in this matter, you become fare game. With that said let's begin.
Mr. Saenz you were not the main source. You sit on the board that will be instrumental in later being used to justify awarding the "Health Insurance" bid contract. The board you sit on will be the raison d'etre for the Scotts (continued in another posting).
33 minutes ago • Delete

Amadora Zapata
It does not take a rocket scientist to see the "project" or "connection" between the AFT post and Carol Scott! The former AFT president took a position against "Las Brisas." But then again before proceeding, abiding by the rules of fair play, and the audience following this "connecting-the-dots" progression and story, I have to ask you sir, "Do you have a dog in this fight?" Admit it if there is, if not it will surface believe you me.

Amadora Zapata
I don't think you are being fully straight forward. Your version might just be sectarian view of the a road of intricate paths and bypaths. You are welcome to email me and share what your experience in attempting to unseat the former President. It is my duty to listen to all parties so as to not only be fair, but responsible in piecing the final view.
15 minutes ago • Delete

Amadora Zapata
What makes this so unethical Mr. Saenz is the fact that Carol Scott (is/and was being paid by "Las Brisas" an enormous salary. The former president was merely trying to be a voice for the children (adocating for the right cause) was slaughtered by a high-paid, unethical party who happened to be the President of CCISD board. She was being paid (thousands of dollars)as Prest. of the CCISD board to stifle someone who was taking against her client (LAS BRISAS). He as just trying to be a voice for the kids (in this particular issue). As far as where he stood on the school politics also, despite how controversial and different from our view, should not have been suppressed by a corporation promoting "breathing black smoke" (as Carolyn Moon put it) and paying a public official to sell out (Carol Scott/Kailo) thousands of dollars.
How could Carol Scott Scott advocate for our children, if she taking a hefty paycheck from Las Brisas?

Rene Saenz
The former AFT president took no position. I was at that meeting when the motion was made. And guess who moved the motion to take the position against Las Brisas? I made the motion and argued forcefully for it. The motion passed unanimously. In fact the former President, who you defend, had a worker who was recorded as saying her personal beef was ... Read Morenot with the building of Las Brisas, her beef was with Scott. The motion was very clear, protect the students and teachers, not go on a personal crusade against an individual for personal reasons. I do not defend Scott's postion. That's hers to take. I don't agree with it. And yes I do sit on the board that will be dealing with the Health Insurance, the very insurance that covers me and my family. Personally I think humana stinks and I will be arguing that we move to the state insurance for teachers. Personally, I think the current president of AFT is much better than the previous one. I will not e-mail you to discuss AFT politics but you are

Rene Saenz
more than welcome to contact me. One more question...how does a Amadora Zapata, with blond hair and blue eyes, where a Wisconsin shirt rather than a TEXAS shirt? Be warned that we longhorns kick ass.

Homer Villarreal
THANKS FOR POSTING MR. SAENZ:
FACT: CCISD Board President CAROL SCOTT both is and was being paid by LAS BRISAS ENERGY.
FACT: SHE WAS BEING PAID TO ATTEMPT TO STOP CRITICISM OF LAS BRISAS, the former President was critical (and I did interviewed him at Taqueria Guadalajara in Annaville).
FACT: Then it logically follows that Carol Scott as a "public official" was a high-paid "Aggressor" by LAS BRISAS to eradicate disgruntled parties with Las Brisas. In short, the entire staff of CCISD was under the gun of a Chair of the board, Ms. Scott (remember, she is a public official who both took and is taking money from Las Brisas). The few that spoke up were targeted (via Las Brisas' dollars) and punished (via las Brisas' dollars).

FACT: Ms. Scott as Chair of CCISD School Board used CCISD Employees and buses and pupils to make TV commercials that earned her a lot of money.
FACT: Ms. Scott her leverage as chair to hire "Skip" Noe (who coordinated efforts and is piecing the road open for Las Brisas to established themselves with various municipal and an inter agency network). Note: Angel Escobar wished not to venture in the 'gray area" that the EDC and Carol Scott are espousing.
FACT: The new AFT President was stamped and endorsed by a corporate movement with multi-million dollars interests being represented by KAILO (formerly Scott Public Relations).

CCISD Board PRESIDENT is their high-paid face -- i.e., Las Brisas Energy. In fact send I dare you to send an email to Las Brisas Energy at www.lasbrisasenergy.com/contact.html -- while on their website hit the contact button: and guess who will receive the message in her cell phone and computer? YOU GOT IT RIGHT. CCISD BOARD PRESIDENT CAROL SCOTT. She is the gatekeeper and face of Las Brisas Energy in the area.
Homer Villarreal
This issue is a legal matter and Las Brisas Energy has no right to pay public officials to do their bidding in our schools and use "divide and conquer" tactics to hurt and punish anyone in the district (or the community) who is against the children breathing "black smoke" (as Carolyn Moon so poetically put it).
Posted by HOMERO VILLARREAL at 9:59 PM
1 comments:

herownself said...

To use my comments (not that I disavow) them, from the message section of Facebook is underhanded.

It makes one wonder whose water you're carrying, Miss Zamora.
September 19, 2009 4:21 PM

And the reason they can find all those drop out is because they are incarcerated ....duh. Like CCISD did not know! They put them there.

Guess Truant officers are lazy to do their JOB! Carol Scott cares about that crap organization Citizens "against law suit abuse" She Has abused her position for self gain and should be impeached or pay for the costs if it were you or me to produce the same exact commercial.

Let's all get out there and get these kids back in school.

Hit the streets to get students in school
CCISD prepares for 2nd dropout prevention walk

By Elvia Aguilar (Contact)
Originally published 05:33 p.m., September 2, 2009
Updated 11:06 p.m., September 2, 2009

CORPUS CHRISTI — CCISD is looking for volunteers who can walk the walk and talk the talk.

About 480 high school students have not returned to school this year. Corpus Christi Independent School District officials need help giving those students a phone call Tuesday and a home visit Sept. 12 as part of the Operation Keeping Every Youth in School walk, a dropout recovery effort.

Monica Bayarena, principal of Coles High School and organizer of the walk, said of the 468 homes visited last year, 215 students returned to school. Of those students, about 60 dropped out, but 19 received a General Educational Development diploma and 27 graduated. The rest are still enrolled.

“Operation KEYS was clearly a success last year,” Bayarena said. “It gave our community an opportunity to work together to make a difference in the lives of our youth. Every child counts.”

Volunteers will call students from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Tuesday at the district’s administration building, 801 Leopard St., to confirm student addresses and whereabouts. About 40 phone bank volunteers will be needed.

“Those who may not be able to walk or can’t be out in the heat too long can help us by making a few phone calls,” Bayarena said. “They can volunteer 20 minutes or whatever they can. They don’t have to be here all day.”

About 400 volunteers will be needed to knock on doors of high school students who haven’t returned to school. Volunteers will be paired with an educator. Volunteers will be asked to share life experiences to encourage the students’ return.

If a student decides to register for school, then he will be directed to his respective high school where district staff can answer additional questions and enroll them that day.

The program started last year and is modeled after one in Houston.

The list of unenrolled students may be narrowed if volunteers find that they left the district or already returned to school.

About 280 high school students dropped out of the Corpus Christi Independent School District in 2007.

TO VOLUNTEER

Register at www.ccisd.us

You must follow these rules in order to post comments:

* 1. Keep it clean.Comments that are obscene, vulgar, lewd or sexually-oriented will get the ax. Creative spelling of such terms also will be banned.
* 2. Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
* 3. Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything.
* 4. Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
* 5. Keep it local. Do not post direct links to sites outside of Caller.com.
* 6. Police yourselves. Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
* 7. Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
* 8. Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
* 9. Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
* 10.Help us get it right. If you find a factual error or misspelling, email newmedia@caller.com or metrodesk@caller.com, or call 886-3697.

(6) User Comments:
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 718561 on September 3, 2009 at 1:06 a.m.

we have a high crime and dropout problem. WHAT IS THIS TELLING YOU? SOMETHING IS WRONG HEAR. the teachers need to get their act together and fix this problem. their are major issues in this school district. can't the teachers motivate students and be better role models. theirs a big problem with one sidedness. only certain kids get taught others fall threw the cracks this must be lazyness. something is wrong and it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 706310 on September 3, 2009 at 1:39 a.m.

in response to 718561

You've got to be joking. The problem is the parents not being responsible for getting their kids to school, not the teachers. It is not the job of the teacher to get your kid to school. The teacher presents the subject material and the grade received is what the student earns. If this was a question of whether the subject material is presented right, then that is on the teacher. However, this is about getting the students to show up to class. I guess it's typical to blame others instead of placing blame where it really lies, the parent and the student.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 718343 on September 3, 2009 at 5:34 p.m.

in response to 718561

Your kidding right? This is no one's problem but the parents and kids fault. Place the blame where it really belongs right smack dab back on the parents.
If the parents were not lazy and would get their act together and make their little darlings go to school instead of being afraid of them or letting the little darlings do what ever the heck they wanted to do then the problem would be solved.

There is no way I would walk the streets to try to get these kids back in school when it is the parents responsibility.

No one makes my kids wake up and come to the home school classroom they know it has to be done no if's and's or but's about it. If they decide not to participate they know there will be consequences. Instead of facing the hassle of extra chores along with extra homework and privliges taken away they chose to come to class each and every day.
No one has to walk the neighborhood here.

Oh and it is here not hear.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 711842 on September 3, 2009 at 5:48 p.m.

in response to 718561

Does your post criticizing this terrific effort actually say, "Something is wrong HEAR"?

Additionally, do you write, "THEIR are major issues in this school district"?

And then...."THEIRS a big problem," followed by "others fall THREW the cracks," and "this must be LAZYNESS."

You are right....something is wrong and it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.

Enough said.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 361861 on September 3, 2009 at 7:21 p.m.

in response to 718561

This is the most ridiculous comment I've ever read. You have no idea what you're talking about. Teachers teach each and every day. We don't wait for everyone to show up. We hope they do, but continue to work hard to educate those that are present. We make phone calls and home visits when needed. Absences concern us daily, but the ones that should be concerned are not. Some parents don't care if their kids go to school or not. They are the only ones to blame. I wish every citizen of this city would trade jobs with a teacher for a week. I can guarantee you that your opinion would change after the first day. I work hard and take my responsibility to educate every child very seriously.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 718259 on September 3, 2009 at 9:47 p.m.

Let's all get out there and get these kids back in school. We had 27 kids graduate in addition to the others that are still persevering to get a diploma. These kids need a second chance, and education is their ticket to a better future.

Thanks in advance to all the volunteers that plan on attending this event. We changed lives and made a difference. I can tell you that I was choked up at our H.S. graduation last May when many students were walking the stage because someone cared enough to find them and keep hanging on to them during the school year.

Great job Coles H.S. for working so hard to make a difference!!!

(4) That all advertising and representations made on behalf of the school to prospective students are truthful and free from misrepresentation .....

Chapter 46 PROPRIETARY SCHOOLS

Sec. 46-1. Purpose and construction of chapter.

Sec. 46-2. Definitions.

Sec. 46-3. Establishment of authority of city secretary as proprietary school licensing officer.

Sec. 46-4. Application for permit; permit fee.

Sec. 46-5. Exceptions for accredited schools.

Sec. 46-6. Minimum standards.

Sec. 46-7. Issuance or denial of permit; transferability; renewal.

Sec. 46-8. Administrative appeal.

Sec. 46-9. Appeal to the city council.

Sec. 46-10. Revocation or conditioning of permit.

Sec. 46-11. Bond requirements.

Sec. 46-12. Public nuisances.

Sec. 46-13. Injunctions.

Sec. 46-14. Prohibited acts.

Sec. 46-15. Penalty.

Sec. 46-1. Purpose and construction of chapter.

This chapter is and shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the state and of the city for the public safety, comfort, convenience, welfare and protection of the city and the citizens thereof, and all of the provisions of this chapter shall be construed for the accomplishment of that purpose.

(Code 1958, § 28A-1; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-2. Definitions.

As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them:

(1) Proprietary school (hereinafter referred to as "school"): Any business enterprise operated for a profit or on a nonprofit basis which maintains a place of business within the city; and (a) which offers or maintains a course or courses of instruction or study; and (b) at which place of business such a course or courses of instruction or study is available through classroom instruction; to a person or persons for the purpose of training or preparing such person for a field of endeavor in a business, trade, technical or industrial occupation, except as hereinafter excluded.

The definition of a proprietary school shall not include the following:

(i) A school or educational institution supported entirely or partly by taxation from either a local or state source;

(ii) A parochial, denominational or eleemosynary school or institution;

(iii) A course or courses of instruction or study sponsored by an employer for the training and preparation of its own employees;

(iv) A course or courses of study or instruction sponsored by a recognized trade, business or professional organization for the instruction of the members of such organization;

(v) Private colleges and universities which award a baccalaureate, or higher degree, and which maintain and operate educational programs for which credits are given. A majority of said credits must be transferable to a college, junior college or university supported entirely or partly by taxation from either a local or state source;

(vi) A private school which provides a basic academic education comparable to that provided in the public schools of the state;

(vii) A school offering a program only for children six (6) years of age or younger;

(viii) A school which is regulated and licensed under the laws of the State of Texas.

(2) Owner: Every person having a legal or equitable interest in the assets, or income or both, of such school--If the school is owned by an individual--That individual; if the school is owned by a partnership--All full, silent and limited partners; if the school is owned by a corporation--The officers and directors of the corporation.

(3) School employee: All instructors, administrators, solicitors, clerical and office personnel employed by the school.

(4) Shop course: A course of instruction in one of the manual arts or industrial arts, sometimes called a "ski,: including but not limited to welding, metalworking, woodworking, automotive mechanics, appliance servicing and repair.

(5) Solicitor: A person who solicits business for a proprietary school, or who offers to sell or sells any instruction or course of instruction offered by a proprietary school.

(6) Notice to the school: Written correspondence sent to the address contained in the application or affidavit.

(Code 1958, § 28A-2; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970; Ord. No. 9858, § 1, 7-29-1970)

Sec. 46-3. Establishment of authority of city secretary as proprietary school licensing officer.

The city secretary is hereby commissioned, authorized and directed to enforce this chapter, receive all applications for permits issuable hereunder, and receive and receipt for permit fees tendered therefor. The city secretary shall promulgate such rules and regulations as he deems appropriate to govern hearings before him under the terms of this chapter.

(Code 1958, § 28A-3; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-4. Application for permit; permit fee.

Every owner desiring to obtain a permit to operate a proprietary school within the city shall make a verified application to the city secretary (upon forms furnished by the city secretary) setting forth the following information:

(1) The name or title of the proprietary school;

(2) The addresses of the school or schools, administrative offices, dormitories and cafeterias, and other food service and housing establishments connected in any way to the school;

(3) The legal structure of the school (individually owned, partnership or corporation) and the names and addresses of all owners of the school, and if owned by a corporation, the date and state of incorporation, the charter number, the names and addresses of the officers, directors and all stockholders owning more than five (5) per cent of the outstanding shares of the corporation;

(4) A current balance sheet of the school, certified by a certified public accountant;

(5) The names, addresses, educational and teaching qualifications and teaching fields of all instructors employed by the school;

(6) A list of equipment available for instruction in each course of study taught by the school;

(7) The maximum number of students to be enrolled in each course of instruction offered by the school and the ratio of equipment and instructors to students;

(8) The specific fields and courses of instruction which will be offered and the specific purpose of such instruction;

(9) Copies of all contracts or agreements which will be signed by students attending said school;

(10) Copies of all current catalogues, bulletins, published materials, form letters, circulars and all advertising copy which is transmitted to the public or prospective students;

(11) An affidavit by each owner, solicitor and school employee sworn to before a notary public, containing the following information:

(a) Full name and address of said person and the capacity in which he serves the school; and

(b) The city, county and state of said person's permanent residence and places of residence for the past five (5) years; and

(c) The name and address of said person's employer or employers for the past five (5) years; and

(d) Whether or not said person has ever been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor other than traffic violations, or a crime involving fraud; and

(e) Three (3) persons who may be contacted concerning said person's good moral character; and

In the case of office and clerical personnel, the owner may submit an affidavit setting forth the above information concerning all clerical and office personnel, which information shall be based upon the owner's investigation and knowledge. Information submitted to the city secretary pursuant to subsection (11) shall not be open to public inspection.

(12) A copy of all written contracts or written outlines of all oral commitments or agreements made by the applicant with an apartment house owner for student housing, or with the owner of an establishment serving food to students, or with any other person planning to perform services for the students to be enrolled and to whom the students may be referred by the school.

(13) The applicant shall attach to the application a permit fee in the amount of twenty-five dollars ($25.00).

(Code 1958, § 28A-4; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970; Ord. No. 9858, §§ 4, 5, 7-29-1970)

Sec. 46-5. Exceptions for accredited schools.

Any proprietary school accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency approved by the United States Office of Education under the provisions of Chapter 33, Title 38, U.S. Code, and subsequent legislation which requires the evaluation of such agencies and the issuance of an official list by that office and those schools approved by the veterans approval agency of the Texas Education Agency shall not be required to file the matters set out in section 46-4, subsections (5) through (12); provided, however, that the city secretary may, after due notice to the school, require the filing of the information contained in such subsections (5) through (12). In lieu thereof, such school may file an affidavit attesting to its accreditation or approval as herein set out with the twenty-five dollar ($25.00) permit fee attached thereto. In the event said approval or accreditation is withdrawn, the owner shall immediately notify the city secretary of the withdrawal of accreditation or approval and file with the city secretary within ten (10) days the information set forth in section 46-4.

(Code 1958, § 28A-5; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-6. Minimum standards.

No proprietary school located in the city shall be issued a permit to operate under the provisions of this chapter until the city secretary shall have determined that said school is maintained and operated, or in the event of a new school that said school can be reasonably maintained and operated, in substantial compliance with the following minimum standards:

(1) That the school applying for a permit is in solvent condition;

(2) That the school has presently available, of quality and kind customary for the type of schooling proposed, space, equipment and instructional materials to train the number of students proposed to be enrolled in the courses that are advertised and scheduled;

(3) (a) That, for each shop course offered by a school, there shall be not less than one qualified teacher or instructor for each class of twenty (20) students, or less; provided, however, that whenever such teacher or instructor is assisted by an adult aide, working in his presence in the class, such class may include not more than thirty (30) students. A nonshop course shall have a ratio of not less than one teacher to thirty (30) students.

(b) During the conduct of a class the teacher or instructor in charge shall have full visibility of the entire classroom and the classroom shall be arranged to afford such visibility.

(c) Every school instructor shall possess the training, by education and/or experience, customary for teachers of the course he professes and for which he is assigned by the school.

(4) That all advertising and representations made on behalf of the school to prospective students are truthful and free from misrepresentation and fraud;

(5) That any dormitory or eating facility offered by the school or with which the school has any contractual connection, is clean, healthful, safe and adequate for the number of students proposed to be served and that the supervision of the same is adequately maintained at all times;

(6) That the premises and conditions under which the students work or study shall be sanitary, healthful and safe according to the standards required by the health department of the city and of the state and by the fire prevention code of the city;

(7) That prior to enrollment, the student has been presented with a published statement of total tuition charges and/or part payments thereof, fees required, and all charges to be made for books, equipment, and supplies needed by the student, and if housing is provided for the students, all charges therefor, or if housing is not furnished, a statement to that effect;

(8) That the school adheres to a tuition refund schedule, if any, as presented to the student in published form prior to enrollment in the event that the student shall discontinue the training or be excluded therefrom;

(9) That the school is equipped and able at all times to comply with its contractual relationships with the enrolled students;

(10) That the facilities, class instruction rooms, housing quarters, and eating facilities shall at all reasonable times be open to inspection by city secretary or his designated agents;

(11) That all equipment furnished shall be suitable and modern in nature, similar to that which is customarily used in the work that would be performed by a student taking that course of instruction upon completion of the course;

(12) Such other reasonable standards as the city secretary may promulgate and publish, and which are adopted by ordinance of the city council, after notice to the affected schools and a reasonable time allowed for compliance.

(Code 1958, § 28A-6; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970; Ord. No. 9858, § 2, 7-29-1970)

Sec. 46-7. Issuance or denial of permit; transferability; renewal.

(1) On the final passage of this chapter, each proprietary school as defined herein, shall within thirty (30) days make application for a permit under the provisions of this chapter. Failure to make such application shall be considered a violation of this chapter, and each day that the applicant fails to make application shall be considered a separate violation.

(2) Upon receipt of the application specified in section 46-4 hereof, the city secretary shall within twenty-one (21) days consider said application and either issue or deny a permit to operate a proprietary school. An assistant city attorney and the chief of police shall aid the city secretary in evaluating and investigating any application upon request by the city secretary. The director of planning and urban development and director of finance shall provide written comments to the city secretary about the application within fourteen (14) days of its receipt by the city secretary. The city secretary may consider both oral and documentary evidence concerning the issuance of said permit from any interested person.

(3) If the city secretary is of the opinion that the applicant has complied with the provisions of this chapter, then he shall issue a permit to operate a proprietary school to said applicant.

(4) If the city secretary, after considering said application, shall determine to deny the applicant a permit, the city secretary shall specify the reasons therefor, provided, however, that said reasons for denial shall not be binding upon the city secretary in any subsequent proceeding. He may deny an applicant a permit on the ground that an owner or solicitor of the school has been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude, or a crime involving fraud. Pending the final determination of the issuance or denial of a permit under the provisions of this chapter, a school in operation when the permit application is filed with the city secretary may continue to operate. Any school which is not in operation when said application is filed may not begin operation until its application is granted.

(5) The permit shall be issued to the owners of said proprietary school and shall be nontransferable. The permit specified for herein shall be for a period of one (1) year. Thereafter, each owner of a proprietary school shall make application for a permit at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the current permit. In the event of a change of ownership of the proprietary school, the permit specified herein shall be revoked by operation of law and the new owner of the proprietary school must within ten (10) days after the change of ownership, apply for a permit to operate a proprietary school.

(6) After the issuance of the permit, the school shall file with the city secretary all contracts and agreements specified in subsections (9) and (12) of section 46-4 hereof which are to be used by the school and which have not heretofore been filed with him.

(Code 1958, § 28A-7; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-8. Administrative appeal.

Should the applicant be dissatisfied with the denial of the permit by the city secretary, the applicant shall within seven (7) days after receipt of notice, file with the city secretary a request for an administrative hearing before the city secretary on said denial, which officer shall, within five (5) days after the receipt of said notice, set a time and place for said administrative hearing on the denial. Said hearing shall be held within twenty-one (21) days from the receipt of the request for a hearing. At said administrative hearing, the applicant may appear in person or by counsel and present evidence to the city secretary in support of the granting of the permit specified herein. The city secretary, upon his request, shall be furnished counsel by the city legal department. All interested persons may also appear and present oral and documentary evidence to the city secretary concerning the issuance of a permit to the applicant, and all parties shall have the right to cross-examine. The city secretary shall within seven (7) days issue an order granting or denying a permit for the operation of a proprietary school in the city and stating the reasons therefor.

(Code 1958, § 28A-8; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970; Ord. No. 9858, § 3, 7-29-1970)

Sec. 46-9. Appeal to the city council.

If the applicant for a permit under this chapter is dissatisfied with the order of finding of the city secretary after an administrative hearing before the city secretary, he shall have the right to appeal to the city council by filing a written notice of such appeal with the city secretary within ten (10) days after receipt of the notice that his permit has been denied or revoked. Upon the filing of such notice of appeal, the application for said permit and all papers possessed by the city secretary in connection with such application and such permit shall be delivered to the city council and such matters as may be in controversy shall be heard by the council within fourteen (14) days after receipt of notice of appeal and the council shall, within ten (10) days thereafter, affirm, reverse or modify the order of the city secretary. The parties may appear in person or by attorney, present evidence and have the right of cross-examination.

(Code 1958, § 28A-9; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970; Ord. No. 9858, § 6, 7-29-1970)

Sec. 46-10. Revocation or conditioning of permit.

The city secretary shall have the authority to revoke the permit theretofore issued by him or to place reasonable conditions upon the continued operation thereunder. Before revoking or conditioning said permit, the city secretary shall afford the applicant or holder of such permit an opportunity to be heard in connection therewith in person or by counsel and that officer shall, at least thirty (30) days prior to the date set for a hearing on such revoking or restriction, notify in writing the holder of such permit of the date and purpose of said hearing and assign therein the grounds for the action contemplated to be taken and as to which inquiries shall be made on the date of such hearing. After decision of revoking or conditioning by the city secretary, a proprietary school permit may be revoked or conditioned by the city secretary for the following reasons:

(1) The failure of the permit holder to comply with the minimum standards required of a proprietary school under the provisions of section 46-6 hereof; or

(2) The use by an employee, solicitor or representative of the school with the knowledge of the owner of fraud or misrepresentation in procuring a student's enrollment; or if any such incident is called to the attention of the owner and remedial steps are not taken by the owner including restitution of fees collected and expenses incurred by the prospective student; or

(3) The failure on the part of the school to carry out and comply with each and every contract and agreement made and entered into by said school with any student; or

(4) The use by the school of deceptive or fraudulent advertising in any form; or

(5) The violation by the owner of a school of section 46-14(1)(c) hereof; or

(6) The filing of false information with the city secretary by an owner of a school; or

(7) The failure of the owner of the school to notify the city secretary in writing of the withdrawal of accreditation or approval as required in section 46-5 hereof.

(Code 1958, § 28A-10; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-11. Bond requirements.

(1) The city secretary shall not issue a permit to operate a proprietary school until the applicant has filed with the city secretary a bond in the sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) signed by a solvent surety company authorized to do business in the state, payable to the city, conditioned to provide indemnification to any student or enrollee or his parent or guardian suffering loss or damage as a result of:

(a) Any fraud or misrepresentation used in procuring his enrollment; or

(b) The failure on the part of the school to carry out and comply with each and every contract and agreement made and entered into by said school, acting by and through its officers and agents with any student or enrollee; or

(c) The student's inability to complete the course or courses because the school ceased operation, or failed to furnish the facilities advertised or included in the contracted agreement.

(2) The aggregate liability of the surety as to the total of all claims and demands under the bond is limited to the penal sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00).

(3) A surety on said bond may be released therefrom after said surety shall have made a written notice thereof directed to the city secretary at least thirty (30) days prior to said release, provided, however, that such release shall not affect the surety's liability for acts arising prior to the surety's release.

(4) The surety bond shall cover the period of the permit except when said surety shall be released in the manner provided by subsection (3) hereof.

(5) The permit shall be suspended by operation of law when said proprietary school is no longer covered by a surety bond as required by this section; but the city secretary shall cause said proprietary school to receive at least ten (10) days' written notice prior to the release of said surety to the effect that said approval shall be suspended by operation of law until another surety bond shall be filed in the same manner and like amount as required for the initial surety bond.

(6) Each solicitor shall have a bond in the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) conditioned that he will reimburse any student or prospective student for any money paid or expenses incurred as a result of fraud, or misrepresentation in securing the enrollment of the student. All such bonds and any action thereon shall have venue in Corpus Christi, Nueces County, Texas, and shall be filed with the city secretary. Any solicitor who solicits business for a proprietary school, or who offers to sell or sells any instruction or course of instruction within the city offered by a proprietary school located outside of the city shall file a bond as herein provided. The aggregate liability of the surety as to the total of all claims and demands under the bond is limited to the penal sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00).

(7) The city secretary may notify the affected surety company of any alleged violation of the bond required by section 46-11(1) which may come to his attention.

(Code 1958, § 28A-11; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-12. Public nuisances.

The violation of subsections (1)(a), (1)(b) or (1)(c) of section 46-14 hereof is declared to be public nuisances.

(Code 1958, § 28A-12; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-13. Injunctions.

Whenever the city secretary has probable cause to believe that any proprietary school has committed any of the acts declared in section 46-12 hereof to be a public nuisance, the city secretary shall have the duty to make application to a court of competent jurisdiction for an injunction restraining the commission of such acts.

(Code 1958, § 28A-13; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-14. Prohibited acts.

(1) It shall be unlawful for any owner or school employee of a proprietary school within the city to:

(a) Operate such school without a valid permit to do so issued by the city secretary; or

(b) Utilize advertising designed to mislead or deceive prospective students; or

(c) Accept a contract from a solicitor who does not have a bond as required in section 46-11(5) hereof in effect and on file with the city secretary.

(2) It shall be unlawful for a solicitor to:

(a) Solicit a prospective student without having a bond as required in section 46-11(5) hereof in effect and on file with the city secretary; or

(b) Use fraud or misrepresentation in procuring a student's enrollment.

(3) It shall be unlawful for any owner or school employee to violate any provision of this chapter.

(Code 1958, § 28A-14; Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Sec. 46-15. Penalty.

Any owner or school employee who commits any prohibited act as set out in section 46-14 hereof shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be subject to a fine as provided in section 1-6, and each day that any prohibited act continues shall constitute a separate offense.

(Ord. No. 9797, § 1, 6-17-1970)

Why would or how could everyone we spoke with at CCISD denied the accusations

show details 12:21 AM (4 hours ago)
Email by Jaime Kenedeno


Wake up boy and girls, Politics have no place in high school athletics. Who would transfer a winning coach right before the season begins and more importantly why? Once the Article is written it will be published and all of the research connecting the dots to the ones who leverage bond finances and campaign finances for a position that can only be earned.

TTFN




FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



LULAC Council No. 1 and the American GI Forum will hold a press conference to address concerns regarding the forced transfer of Mary Carroll High School Volleyball Head Coach Doris Elizondo; who holds 149 wins and 5 losses as well as 5 consecutive District Championships and 2 undefeated District seasons while at Carroll High School .



Certain members of the Carroll High School Boosters have pressured Carroll High School Administrators to transfer Ms. Elizondo for reasons that have not been made clear or were either not presented to Ms. Elizondo in a timely fashion; allowing her to address or correct them.



LULAC Council No. 1 and the American GI Forum feel that Ms. Elizondo has been denied due process within the CCISD administration and therefore, her civil rights are being violated both by the school's administrators and those members of the Carroll High School Boosters who have targeted her for removal.



The press conference will be held in front of Mary Carroll High School (on Tiger Lane side in front of the school offices) at 4:00 pm on Wednesday, May 7, 2008 .

Money, Money Teen A Bean Land here is a prelude to your request......

When parents are so busy trying to "make it" and believe their child's teacher cares then when they realize everything they have to do is for naught, It is not worth trying to be good....... but must trust another to care for the very reason they are so busy trying to "make it" .

CCISD's, Shirley Duke and Breeding Principals allow the waste of time our children endure selective waste such as Ms.Feydo of Calk Elementary with payment for state law sanctioned "failure to educate" MOTTO~

The only reason these idiots were there openly admitted it, was for the money money, money, money,I love money" as the teacher said when requesting her students "lunch money" on the one day I went to school with my son.

Guess the free lunch kids were "outsourced" or "downsized" since they had no money?

Good, better to know bad news immediately!!

And those that are responsible for their children could care less, then intentionally force you to choose work or for the very care that is no longer provided.



And those that are responsible for our children could care less......"money, money, money,I love money" the teacher said when requesting any/all the students "lunch money" on the one day I went to school with my son. In a kindergarten's class, the teacher was most enthusiastic when collecting the kindergartens students by singing to them ....."money, money, money,I love money"~

If she paid attention to her class like she did to the class her child was in, which was more than 5 times in a 2 hour period.
I knew then she was not worth a dime of money she so loved from her students.

What a waste of penny's CCISD paid, what a waste of time for me, my son and those students and parents who trusted her with their children.

The only child she was concerned with was her own, oh and our students lunch money.

Teen Bean Land

Ten Signs that You Need to Find a Different Kind of Education for Your Child.....

Ten Signs that You Need to Find a Different Kind of Education for Your Child

by Jerry Mintz

Many parents do not realize that the education world has changed drastically since they were in school. Back in those days, schools were smaller, class sizes were smaller, dropout rates were lower, violence in school was almost unheard of, teachers were not terrified of showing affection to the children, or of teaching and discussing moral values. Even through rose-colored glasses, we know that school back then was no picnic, was far from perfect, but at least the teachers and usually the principal knew every student by name at a minimum, something which is not necessarily true today.

Because our public school system has now considerably deteriorated, many parents, teachers, and individuals have taken it upon themselves to create public and private alternatives to that traditional system which is definitely failing. It is important for parents to know that they now have choices, alternatives to the neighborhood school. How do you know that it is time to look for another educational approach for your child? Here are some of the signs:

1. Does your child say he or she hates school?
If so, something is probably wrong with the school because children are natural learners. When they're young you can hardly stop them from learning. If your children say they hate school, listen to them.

2. Does your child find it difficult to look an adult in the eye, or to interact with children younger or older than they are?
If so, your child may have become "socialized" to that very narrow group which many children ordinarily interact with in most schools, and may be losing the ability to communicate with a broader group of children and adults.

3. Does your child seem fixated on designer labels and trendy clothes for school?
This is a symptom of the shallowness of the traditional schools' approach, causing children to rely on external means of comparison and acceptance, rather than deeper values.

4. Does your child come from school tired and cranky?
This is a sure sign that their educational experiences are not energizing but are actually debilitating.

5. Do your children come home complaining about conflicts that they've had in school and unfair situations that they have been exposed to?
This is a sign that your school does not have a proper process for conflict resolution and communication.

6. Has your child lost interest in creative expression through art, music, and dance?
These things are generally not encouraged in the traditional system today and are not highly valued. They're considered secondary to the "academic" areas. In some cases, courses are not even offered in these areas any more. This tends to extinguish these natural talents and abilities in children.

7. Has your child stopped reading for fun, or reading or writing for pleasure? Are your children doing just the minimum for homework and going off for some escapist activity?
This is a sign that these spontaneous activities are not being valued in their school and another sign that they are losing their creativity.

8. Does your child procrastinate until the last minute to do homework?
This is a sign that the homework is not very interesting to, is not really meeting his or her needs, and is tending to extinguish their natural curiosity.

9. Does your child come home talking about anything exciting that happened in school that day?
If not, maybe nothing exciting is happening for your child in school. Would you want to keep working if your job was like that?

10. Did the school nurse of guidance counselor suggest that your child has some strange three lettered disease, like ADD, and that they should now be given Ritalin or some other drug?
I suggest that it is more probable that the school has the disease, EDD--Educational Deficit Disorder, and time to get your child out of that situation!

If your child has exhibited several of these characteristics, it is time for you to start looking for an alternative. In most parts of this country today, there are many options to choose from. For example, 30 states have now enacted legislation which allows groups of parents and teachers to create charter schools, schools which are not stuck with having to fulfill the myriad of state regulations but can create their own individualized approach. Four years ago there were only five of these charter schools in the country. By the end of this year there will be more than 1000 of them! Also, there are 4500 magnet schools throughout the country, public schools which specialize in a an area of expertise, and draw students from a wider area.

In most communities there are many private alternatives quietly offering a different educational approach. For example, there are over 4500 Montessori schools based on the experiential approach designed by Dr. Maria Montessori, and hundreds of Waldorf schools which put equal emphasis on traditional academics areas and the arts. There are hundreds of independent alternative schools, many emphasizing participant control with parents and students taking responsibility for their own educations.

Many public school systems have a variety of alternative programs within their systems. These are divided into two general approaches: 1. Public Choice; those programs which are open to any student in the community. Sometimes they are called Schools Within Schools. 2. Public At-Risk; those programs for children who have had a variety of problems coping with school. These programs run the spectrum from helpful to dumping ground. Examine them closely before making a decision to enroll.

Parents of over a million children in this country have checked off "none of the above" and decided to teach their children at home. It is now legal in every state and does not require teacher certification. Homeschooling has taken a variety of approaches. Some try to create "school at home" with a fairly standard curriculum, the main difference being that they can teach it one-to-one with their children. Some families have signed up with a curriculum which has been designed by an umbrella school. This school will help the parents with the curriculum and in some cases, grade homework, providing a basic curriculum for the parents to follow and helping with any report forms that are necessary. A third approach is one which is called "unschooling." In this case the parent bases their educational approach on the interest of the child and builds on that rather than a pre-set curriculum. It could be said that in some of these cases they design their curriculum "retroactively," keeping records of the activities throughout the year and at the of the process dividing the experiences into the appropriate subject area.

Overall, since most states require some form of testing of homeschoolers, it has been shown that remarkably, as a group, they average in the 85th percentile compared to the 50th percentile of the average public school student. There are now so many homeschoolers around the country that virtually all homeschoolers are part of some kind of homeschool group. Some of these groups have coalesced into homeschool resource centers and some of them will operate as often as four or five days a week. Generally, colleges have discovered that homeschoolers make such good students that they welcome homeschooling students to apply to their schools.

As more and more parents become aware of these choices and as they make these choices, we hope that the system will evolve into one which meets the needs of an increasing number of students. Meanwhile, don't wait for that system to change. Take responsibility for your child's education. Find out what your choices are and choose what is best for your child.

None of these signs by themselves should be taken as a reason to panic. But if you have noticed several of them, you should certainly explore educational alternatives.

Cause for concern gives also the factor that any policy perspective will always have to operate along the lines of defining social groups. It may come

ISEC 2005

Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress
International Special Education Conference
Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity?

1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland
home
about the conference
programme
registration
accommodation
contact
Equality of Opportunity as a Rationale for Inclusive Education

Dr. Christian Liesen
Institute for Special Education – University of Zurich, Switzerland
Hirschengraben 48, CH-8001 Zurich
liesen@isp.unizh.ch


This paper seeks to discuss whether the principle of equality of opportunity could serve as a rationale for inclusive education. The first section aims at positioning the topic within the inclusive education discourse, narrowing down the scope. The second section presents a brief analysis of the notion of ‘equality of opportunity’ as well as some of its implications, while the third section addresses the question of how we are to know whether opportunities are equal. The last section seeks to draw some conclusions with respect to inclusive education. – It should be pointed out that the paper is solely meant for discussion.

1. The case for inclusive education: reasons and rationales

Many arguments have been brought forward to strengthen the case for inclusive education. Yet it is not always easy to follow the lines of reasoning, and little reflection is needed to notice certain contradictions and ambiguities and a good deal of eclecticism in the literature. The crux is, as Alan Dyson observed, that

(i)nclusion is different from many other fields of inquiry in that it is premised on an answer rather than a question. That ‘answer’, of course, is that inclusive education is superior in one or other way to non-inclusive education. The strength in this position is that it enables a relatively young field to define and advance itself in the face of considerable hostility. (…) The danger, however, is that it becomes all too easy for thinking on inclusion to descend from analysis to polemic, and for certain values and beliefs to become ossified, ultimately to the detriment of those marginalized groups on whose interests the inclusion movement claims to act. ( Dyson, 1999, p. 43f. )

Dyson has suggested to distinguish between two different but intersecting dimensions of the inclusive education movement: One is primarily concerned with providing a rationale for inclusion, whereas the other concentrates on the realisation of inclusion. Each dimension can again be subdivided into different discourses as follows. A rationale for inclusive education is either sought with reference to rights and social justice or by rigorously questioning the efficacy of special education (while claiming the superiority of inclusive education). The realisation of inclusion is frequently discussed either with respect to the political struggle for the implementation of inclusive education, or it is concerned with what inclusive education looks like inpractice (cf. Dyson, 1999, pp. 38-43 ). It is safe to say that these two dimensions / four discourses deliver a felicitous depiction of the inclusion debate’s crucial building blocks.

This paper is concerned with adumbrating the question whether equality of opportunity could serve as a rationale for inclusive education. It belongs, hence, in the context of the rights and social justice discourse. Concededly, the most important (and most interesting) question would actually be how the different building blocks interrelate, or ought to interact, in order to achieve progress in the field. Dyson does offer some very sensible and perspicacious suggestions on this (cf. ibid., pp. 44-48). The line of reasoning chosen here, by contrast, will allow only for a few rather cautious remarks in the final part of the paper. Proposed is the idea of merging, in a way, ethical considerations and empirical research in order to substantiate the case for inclusive education. As a consequence, some fundamental policy issues will emerge, alongside certain difficulties inherent to the rhetoric of inclusion.

2. Equality of opportunity

Let us shed, as a first step, some light on the principle of equality of opportunity. Peter Westen (1990) has presented an illuminating formal analysis. He states that opportunity

designates both a single concept and a multiplicity of conceptions. Each opportunity is like every other in that all opportunities reflect a certain formal relationship among agents, obstacles, and goals; but each opportunity also differs from other opportunities in that each is a relationship among particular agents, particular obstacles, and particular goals. ( Westen, 1990 , p. 171, italics added)

This may seem simple enough. Nevertheless, an important point with respect to the rhetoric of opportunity is already implied here: When opportunities are stated as a reason for, say, political action, speakers often do not specify the particular agents, obstacles, and/or goals they have in mind. Such a speech may still meet with approval although the underlying conceptions of speaker and listener may turn out to be radically different on closer examination. Rhetorical difficulties like these should be kept in mind.

Equal opportunities do not lead to equal outcomes. On the contrary, equal opportunities lead to inequality. There is sense in which a strong commitment to equality of opportunity is incompatible with equality of outcomes, and a society that aims at equalising opportunity is very different from a society that aims at equalising outcomes. The reason is that

(a)n ‘opportunity’ to attain a goal is a chance to attain a goal, not necessarily a guarantee of attaining it. Insofar as people have opportunities that are less than guarantees of what they wish, some of them will inevitably attain goals that others fail to attain. To create equal opportunity, therefore, is virtually always to allow people ‘to become unequal by competing against [their] fellows.’ (Westen, 1990, p. 176f.)

That equality of opportunity leads to inequality has some deeper implications. It can be argued that opportunities express and deliver a certain kind of liberty or freedom which is essential for society and which can not be achieved otherwise. Equality of opportunity is indispensable. T.D. Campbell enunciates the point as follows:

An opportunity may be said to occur when an agent is in a situation in which he may choose whether or not to perform some effortful act which is considered to be desirable in itself or as means to the attainment of some goal which is considered to be desirable. An opportunity is thus a type of liberty or freedom for it involves the absence of prohibitions or obstacles limiting what agents may or can do or acquire. […] (A)n opportunity is something which the agent may or may not take advantage of depending on whether or not he chooses to do so. One of the points about describing a situation as an opportunity is that this indicates that the outcome of the situation depends in part on the choices made by the person who has the opportunity. Opportunities can always be missed or passed up, neglected or rejected. Of course I may be forced to have an opportunity (as when I was compelled to go to school) but it is not an opportunity which I am forced to have if the attainment of the desired goal does not depend to some extent on my choices, that is, for instance, if whether or not I become educated as distinct from go to school, does not depend to some extent on my own volitions. If education as such could be compelled then we would not speak of educational opportunity, at least not in those cases where it is compelled. ( Campbell, 1975, p. 51/54, italics added )

It is true, of course, that not all opportunities are of particular concern to us. People do not care for all kinds of opportunities; they care first and foremost for educational and occupational opportunities. A ‘fair’ or ‘equal’ distribution of opportunities is relevant and vital especially in these domains. What comes into play here, then, is that equality of opportunity must be seen as a matter of distributive justice. A just society will usually seek to equalise opportunities in the sense of distributing them fair an equal. It is worth noticing, however, that opportunities can not be created or distributed at will. Westen notes that

creating one opportunity may mean denying another. Thus, whenever a society creates an opportunity by removing an obstacle that affects people differentially, it denies people the opportunity to benefit from the differential. And, whenever a society creates an opportunity by removing human obstacles, it denies people the opportunity to exploit those obstacles. This does not mean that societies should refrain from creating opportunities. It means, rather, that … the significant question for opportunity is not ‘Whether opportunity?’ but ‘Which opportunities?’ (Westen, 1990, p. 171)

Consequently and in most cases, with equality of opportunity as a rationale for inclusive education, apparently interests will have to be balanced. The interests of those who are excluded from participating effectively in society – of which the education system forms an essential part – will have to be weighed against the interests of those who are successful within such a framework and ‘benefit from the given differential’. A society will therefore have to deliberate about equalising opportunities, which is, ultimately, a democratic process (belonging to the realisation dimension).

It should be emphasized, however, that when a mismatch between a person’s situation and what may be called the dominant cooperative framework of society occurs, the results may be devastating. Being excluded from participating in the most basic interactions and cooperation of society strongly calls for compensation and adjustment. On this basic level, the interest in inclusion will by and large outweigh the interests of those who may be deprived of being as successful as they could be otherwise. If people are denied basic opportunities in this sense, they will normally be in the position of making strong claims in the cause of justice. But the question of particular interest is then, of course, ‘How do we know they are denied these opportunities?’, or more general, ‘How do we know whether opportunities are equal or not?’, e.g. in an education system.

3. How do we know when opportunities are equal?

We have seen so far that we should focus our attention on educational and occupational opportunities; that opportunities secure individual liberty and freedom and lead, consequently, to inequalities; and that equality of opportunity is a matter of distributive justice and may result in strong claims of justice in at least some cases. But on what grounds is it legitimate to judge whether opportunities are equal or not? How do we assess and evaluate equality of opportunity, especially with respect to inclusive education?

There is a substantive answer to this question. Any inquiry into whether opportunities in a given society are equal or not – or within parts of a society, such as the education system – will have to start from ascertainable inequalities under the prevailing circumstances. These inequalities will have to be sufficiently and adequately described in a way that most people would agree is accurate. (We will look at an example in a moment.)

The crucial point to be addressed will be whether or not the portrayed inequalities indicate that the principle of equality of opportunity has been violated. Onora O’Neill (1977) has argued that two different positions suggest themselves. One may be called the ‘formal’ (or ‘liberal’) position. It stresses that inequalities are due to the fact that people may choose to or refrain from taking advantage of the opportunities at hand. The members of society may be extremely unequal in educational and occupational attainment, but if so, it must be the result of the varying capacities, volitions, and desires of those to whom the respective selection procedures are applied. Once the distributive and selective procedures are fair, there is nothing left to complain about. As O’Neill points out,

(s)uch an ‘equal-opportunity society’ would … not be characterized by equal incomes or equal property holdings or equal standards of living or of education. (…) Equal opportunity in the formal sense does not ensure equal success or equal health or equal status, but only the fair application of the rules governing the pursuit of such goods. This is the equality of opportunity of … a society in which there are winners and losers, and in which winning appears often as merited by the winners and losing as deserved by the losers – for did they not all have equal opportunity to win? ( O'Neill, 1977 , p. 180)

The other position may be called the ‘substantive’ (or ‘egalitarian’) position. It stresses that inequalities must not indicate a disproportionate success of certain social groups in a society. Instead, all major social groups – but not all individuals – must fare equally well.

An equal-opportunity society on the substantive view is one in which the success rates of all major social groups are the same. (…) A strong commitment to substantive equality of opportunity demands that any under-representation of some group in some line of employment / income group / educational group be due solely to the unmanipulated choice of members of that group. (…) Substantively equal opportunity is achieved when the success rates of certain major social groups – such as the two sexes, various ethnic groups and perhaps various age groups – are equalized. It is not breached when there are large differences between the most- and least-successful members of these groups, provided that there are equally large differences between the most- and least-successful members of other major social groups. It is not true in a society which aims at substantively equal opportunities that all individuals have the same chance of any given type of success. For individuals are all members of many differently defined groups, and substantive equality of opportunity seeks only to equalize their chances qua members of certain major social groups; it seeks to eliminate inter-group differences, but not to alter intra-group ones. ( O'Neill, 1977 , p. 181-83)

This position is ready to acknowledge that people’s perspectives in life are not exclusively ascribable to a person’s capacities, volitions, and desires. As a matter of fact, there are disadvantages which are undeserved and beyond individual control, such as being disabled or of old age. The ‘substantive’ position is concerned with identifying adequate characteristics of major social groups to enable sound comparisons and call for compensation where needed.

To illustrate, a good example are some results from the PISA study (cf. www.pisa.oecd.org). The OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is an internationally standardised assessment that was jointly developed by the participating countries (30 OECD member states plus 13 associated countries in the first assessment in 2000; at least 58 countries will participate in the next assessment in 2006). PISA claims to assess “how far students near the end of compulsory education have acquired some of the knowledge and skills that are essential for full participation in society.” The idea is to give information about the capacities and the potential of education systems. Does an education system prepare students well?

It is only recently that OECD has published some findings concerning equity and quality in the light of the PISA 2000 results. The report states that

(i)n sum, PISA 2000 results show that students in integrated education systems perform, on average, better than those in selective education systems, and that their educational performance is less dependent on their background. Many factors may be at play here. A higher average performance suggests that the more heterogeneous student groups or classes in integrated education systems could have a beneficial effect for the lower-performing students. Also, the flexibility offered by an integrated system may allow students to improve their performance while keeping their academic options open. ( OECD, 2005 , p. 89)

In the main findings section, the report reads:

A striking result was the advantage that comprehensive education systems appear to have in terms of student performance (quality). PISA 2000 results suggest that the performance of students enrolled in comprehensive education systems is less dependent on their socio-economic background. ( ibid., p. 94)

From the perspective of equality of opportunity, it is not so much the aspect of performance (‘quality’) that is of interest here but rather the aspect of uncoupling socio-economic background and performance (‘equity’). There are some countries – Germany is a sad example – in which the social background of a student has a very strong impact (‘predictive power’) on student performance. This means, to put the matter bluntly, that it is not a student’s capacity to perform that determines what he or she will achieve, but first and foremost his or her socio-economic background. The result is that students with a low social background are manifestly underrepresented on the higher levels of the education system.

The ‘liberal’ position has no option but to ascribe this situation to individual factors, say, motivation or ability. This is highly implausible, at least in the case of countries that have had to experience a rude awakening by PISA, such as Germany or Switzerland. ‘Substantive’ equality of opportunity, on the other hand, is precisely concerned with cases like these: Members of a major social group – i.e., students with a lower socio-economic background – are disadvantaged due to factors that are undeserved and beyond individual control, while other groups display disproportionate success. This does call for an equalisation of opportunities.



4. Equality of opportunity and inclusive education: some considerations

In the final part of this paper, I would like to draw some conclusions concerning equality of opportunity and inclusive education.

First, I think that equality of opportunity can serve as a rationale for inclusive education if and only if inclusion is understood in the sense of equity. This would mean to adopt the substantive view of equal opportunity, and will require to provide empirical evidence to show that a major social group of society is indeed undeservedly disadvantaged. It would also mean to suggest that some form of inclusive education is the right course of action to take.

Second, to provide a rationale for inclusive education is obviously very different from the realisation of inclusive education. It should be kept in mind that other interests will have to be allowed for as well and that there might be considerable opposition, even if the claims could compellingly be shown to be legitimate ones. This should not belie the fact, however, that being in the position to provide a rationale for inclusive education is very different from simply claiming that it is right. It is precisely because different and mutually incompatible interests are involved that arguments have to be provided (and there are some highly interesting contributions in this kind of spirit, for example Booth & Ainscow, 1998; Pijl, Meijer & Hegarty, 1997; Vitello & Mithaug, 1998 ).

Third, if this idea bears any validity at all, it has to be pointed out that the rhetoric of inclusion tends to disguise some fundamental points here, especially in relation to policy. For example, the rhetoric of ‘celebrating diversity’ tends to downplay the fact that different legitimate interests are involved and have to be balanced. Cause for concern gives also the factor that any policy perspective will always have to operate along the lines of defining social groups. It may come as a surprise that this is not only due to administrative reasons (cf. Dever, 1990 ) but is also demanded from an ethically informed perspective. There are no claims of distributive justice – and hence no rationale for inclusive education – without the construction of social groups. The talk of heterogeneity isn’t much help in these matters, the more so as it quite often blurs who is thought to be the target group of inclusion within the inclusive education discourse.

Fourth, it will be as unavoidable as it is fruitful to strive to merge ethical considerations and empirical research in some respect. The idea behind this is that an empirical basis is indispensable in order to substantiate claims, while at the same time ethical considerations are indispensable to provide a sensible interpretative framework for empirical findings and to draw sound conclusions. One main feature of these arguments, reasons and rationales is that they must be eligible to convince others on grounds they can not reasonably reject – to convincingly argue the case.

Fifth, there seems to be a broad consensus that inclusive education has to be conceptualised as a general education topic, not as another issue of special education. Equality of opportunity might help us to engross the implications of what this actually means. It might help us to see the big picture.

Sixth, it has to be pointed out that there is not one choice in these matters, but many. There is no unequivocal course of action to take. Dyson’s proposal to talk not of inclusion, but of inclusions, and to seek not a single form but a wide range of inclusive practice and organisation (1999, p. 46), deserves a good deal more of attention. Moreover, I think the field of special education should be very serious about Seamus Hegarty’s remark that inclusive education has to be about changing and modifying system in a way that preserves all its strengths (cf. Hegarty, 1998 , p. 156).

References

BOOTH T. & AINSCOW M. (eds.) (1998) From Them to Us. An International Study of Inclusion in Education. London: Routledge.

CAMPBELL T.D. (1975) Equality of Opportunity. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 75, 51-68.

DEVER R.B. (1990) Defining Mental Retardation from an Instructional Perspective. Mental Retardation 28 (3), 147-53.

DYSON A. (1999) Inclusion and Inclusions: Theories and Discourses in Inclusive Education. IN Daniels H. & Garner P. (eds.) World Yearbook of Education 1999: Inclusive Education. London: Kogan, 36-53.

HEGARTY S. (1998) Challenges to Inclusive Education: A European Perspective. IN Vitello S. & Mithaug D.E. (eds.) Inclusive Schooling: National and International Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 151-65.

O'NEILL O. (1977) How Do We Know When Opportunities Are Equal? IN Vetterling-Braggin M., Elliston F.A. & English J. (eds.) Feminism and Philosophy. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 177-89.

OECD (2005) School Factors Related to Quality and Equity. Results from Pisa 2000. Paris: OECD.

PIJL S.J., MEIJER C. & HEGARTY S. (eds.) (1997) Inclusive Education: A Global Agenda. London: Routledge.

VITELLO S. & MITHAUG D.E. (eds.) (1998) Inclusive Schooling. National and International Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

WESTEN P. (1990) Speaking of Equality. An Analysis of the Rhetorical Force of Equality in Moral and Legal Discourse. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

home . about the conference . programme . registration . accommodation . contact
The University of Strathclyde Association of Directors of Education in Scotland NASEN Inclusive Technology Ltd Greater Glasgow & Clyde Valley Tourist Board Virtual Staff College

2. A juvenile has the right to have an attorney present during interrogation.

TEXAS JUVENILE LAW

In Texas, juveniles are defined as minors, older than 10 years of age and under the age of 17. Juveniles are treated differently than adult offenders and the general goal of the juvenile system is rehabilitation as opposed to punishment. However, the penalties in the juvenile system can still be severe. Some offenses, such as truancy and breaking curfew, are unique to juveniles, and would not be illegal if the accused were an adult. The juvenile justice system generally moves much more quickly than does the adult criminal justice system. Don't wait to hire a good juvenile defense lawyer to represent your child. Call Attorney David Finn at: 214-651-1121.

There are separate courts and rules that govern the juvenile process. The juvenile court system will generally make every effort to rehabilitate the child rather than simply incarcerate him. Only in extreme cases, such as serious felonies, usually involving allegations of violence or the use of a deadly weapon, will a juvenile be tried as an adult. The juvenile courts may hold a hearing to determine whether to transfer the juvenile to the adult court system. This is called a "transfer hearing." The court will base its decision to transfer on the following factors:

1. The seriousness of the offense
2. The child's criminal sophistication
3. Previous criminal record
4. Previous attempts to rehabilitate the juvenile offender
5. The court's belief that future attempts at rehabilitation will be unsuccessful

While many of the laws governing juveniles may differ from the adult system, the rights that juveniles enjoy are virtually identical to those enjoyed by adults.

1. A juvenile must be read his Miranda rights if placed under arrest.
2. A juvenile has the right to have an attorney present during interrogation.
3. A juvenile has the right to know the specific charges being brought by the State.
4. A juvenile has rights against self-incrimination.
5. A juvenile has the right to confront his accuser and examine witnesses.
6. A juvenile has the right to appeal the court's decision.
7. A juvenile does have the right to a jury trial during the adjudication phase

If a juvenile finds herself in a situation involving the police or other law enforcement, please remember the following information:

1. You do not have to submit to a search unless you have been placed under arrest.

If you are asked to give permission to search you should politely but firmly decline. If the police say they have a search warrant, ask to see it.

2. Do not resist arrest.
3. Do not volunteer information or answer questions without your attorney present.
4. Provide only your name, address, and phone number.
5. Call your parents as soon as possible.
6. Insist that your parents and an attorney be present during questioning.
7. Do not discuss your case with anyone other than your attorney.

Do not discuss your case with your friends or classmates.

Finally, do not attempt to represent yourself in court. Hire an experienced criminal defense attorney, preferably one who is board-certified in criminal law.

Texas Juvenile Justice: Overview

Taking Into Custody; Issuance of Warning Notice: Texas Family Code Section 52.01

A child may be taken into custody: pursuant to an order of the juvenile court; pursuant to the Texas laws for arrest; by a law enforcement officer if there is probable cause to believe that the child has engaged in conduct that violates the penal laws of Texas or any political subdivision or delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision. It is the duty of the law enforcement officer who has taken a child into custody to transport the child to the appropriate detention facility if the child is not released to the parent, guardian, or custodian of the child. If the juvenile detention facility is located outside the county in which the child is taken into custody, it shall be the duty of the law enforcement officer who has taken the child into custody or, if authorized by the commissioners court of the county, the sheriff of that county, to transport the child to the appropriate juvenile detention facility unless the child is released to the parent, guardian, or custodian of the child.

Delinquent Conduct: Conduct Indicating a Need for Supervision:

Texas Family Code Section 51.03

(a) Delinquent conduct is defined as:

1. conduct, other than a traffic offense, that violates a penal law of Texas or of the United States punishable by imprisonment or by confinement in jail;
2. conduct that violates a lawful order of a municipal court or justice court under circumstances that would constitute contempt of that court;
3. conduct that constitutes: Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), Flying While Intoxicated, Boating While Intoxicated, Intoxication Assault, Intoxication Manslaughter, and Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol by a minor (DUI).

(b) Conduct indicating a need for supervision includes:

1. conduct, other than a traffic offense, that violates the penal laws of Texas of the grade of misdemeanor that are punishable by a fine only (class c-misdemeanors); the penal ordinances of any political subdivision of Texas; the absence of a child on 10 or more days or parts of days within a 6 month period in the same school year or on 3 or more days or parts of days within a 4 week period from school; the voluntary absence of a child from the child's home without the consent of the child's parents or guardian for a substantial length of time or without intent to return; conduct prohibited by city ordinance or by state law involving the inhalation of the fumes or vapors of paint; or an act that violates a school district's previously communicated written standards of student conduct for which the child has been expelled under Section 37.007(c), Texas Education Code.

Release from Detention: Texas Family Code Section 53.02

(a) If a child is brought before the court or delivered to a detention facility, the intake or other authorized officer of the court shall immediately make an investigation and shall release the child unless it appears that his detention is warranted under subsection (b), below.

The release may be conditioned upon requirements reasonably necessary to insure the child's appearance at later proceedings, but the conditions of the release must be in writing and filed with the office or official designated by the court and a copy furnished to the child.

(b) A child taken into custody may be detained prior to hearing on the petition only if:

1. the child is likely to abscond or be removed from the court's jurisdiction;
2. suitable supervision, care, or protection for the child is not being provided by a parent, guardian, custodian, or other person;
3. the child has no parent, guardian, custodian, or other person able to return the child to the court when required;
4. the child may be dangerous to himself or herself or the child may threaten the safety of the public if released;
5. the child has previously been found to be a delinquent child or has previously been convicted of a penal offense punishable by a term in jail or prison and is likely to commit an offense if released; or
6. the child's detention is required under subsection (f), below.

(c) If the child is not released, a request for detention hearing shall be made and promptly presented to the court, and an informal detention hearing shall be held promptly, but not later than the second working day after the child is taken into custody. If the child is taken into custody on a Friday or Saturday, then the detention hearing shall be held on the first working day after the child is taken into custody.

(d) A release of a child to an adult must be conditioned on the agreement of the adult to be subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and to an order of contempt by the court if the adult, after notification, is unable to produce the child at later proceedings.

(e) If a child being released under this section is expelled from school in a county with a population greater than 125,000, the release shall be conditioned on the child's attending a juvenile justice alternative education program pending a deferred prosecution or formal court disposition of the child's case.

(f) A child who is alleged to have engaged in delinquent conduct and to have used, possessed, or exhibited a firearm in the commission of the offense shall be detained until the child is released at the direction of the judge of the juvenile court, a substitute judge, or a referee appointed, including an oral direction by telephone, or until a detention hearing is held.

Detention Hearing: Texas Family Code Section 54.01

(a) Generally speaking, a detention hearing without a jury shall be held promptly, but not later than the second working day after the child is taken into custody; provided, however, that when a child is detained on a Friday or Saturday, then such detention hearing shall be held on the first working day after the child is taken into custody.

(b) Reasonable notice of the detention hearing, either oral or written, shall be given, stating the time, place, and purpose of the hearing. Notice shall be given to the child and, if they can be found, to his parents, guardian, or custodian. Prior to the beginning of the hearing, the court shall inform the parties of the child's right to counsel and to appointed counsel if they are indigent and of the child's right to remain silent with respect to any allegations of delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision.

(c) At the detention hearing, the court may consider written reports from probation officers, professional court employees, or by professional consultants in addition to the testimony of witnesses. Prior to the detention hearing, the court shall provide the attorney for the child with access to all written matter to be considered by the court in making the detention decision. The court may order counsel not to reveal items to the child or his parents if such disclosure would materially harm the treatment and rehabilitation of the child or would substantially decrease the likelihood of receiving information from the same or similar sources in the future.

(d) A detention hearing may be held without the presence of the child's parents if the court has been unable to locate them. If no parent or guardian is present, the court shall appoint counsel or a guardian ad litem for the child.

(e) At the conclusion of the hearing the court shall order the child released from detention unless it appears that he is likely to abscond, suitable supervision is not being provided to the child, he has no parent or guardian able to return the child to court when required, he may be dangerous to himself or others, or he has previously been found to be a delinquent child or has been previously convicted of a penal offense higher than a Class C misdemeanor and is likely to commit an offense if released. If the judge concludes that the child should be detained, the detention order extends for no more than 10 working days. Further detention orders may be made following subsequent detention hearings. The initial detention hearing may not be waived, but subsequent detention hearing may be waived.

Note: No statement made by the child at the detention hearing shall be admissible against the child at any other hearing.

Preliminary Investigation & Determinations; Notice to Parents:

Texas Family Code Section 53.01

On referral of a child, the intake officer, probation officer, or other person authorized by the court shall conduct a preliminary investigation to determine whether the person referred is a child and whether there is probable cause to believe that the child engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision. If it is determined that the person is not a child or there is no probable cause, the person shall immediately be released. The child's parents are to promptly receive notice of the whereabouts of the child and also a statement explaining why the child was taken into custody. If the child is alleged to have engaged in delinquent conduct of the grade of felony, or conduct constituting a misdemeanor offense involving violence to a person or the use or possession of a firearm, illegal knife, or club, then the case is immediately forwarded to the office of the prosecuting attorney.

Summons: Texas Family Code Section 53.06

The juvenile court shall direct issuance of a summons to the child named in the petition, the child's parents, guardian, or custodian, the child's guardian ad litem, and any other person who appears to the court to be a proper or necessary party to the proceeding. A party, other than the child, may waive service of summons by written stipulation or by voluntary appearance at the hearing.

Service of Summons: Texas Family Code Section 53.07

If a person to be served with a summons is in Texas and can be found, the summons shall be served upon him personally at least 2 days before the adjudication hearing. If he is in Texas but cannot be found, but his address is known or can be ascertained, the summons may be served on him by mailing a copy by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, at least 5 days before the day of the hearing. If he is outside Texas but can be found or his address is known, service of the summons may be made either by delivering a copy to him personally or mailing a copy to him by registered mail, return receipt requested, at least 5 days before the day of the adjudication hearing.

Attendance at Hearing: Parent or Other Guardian: Texas Family Code Section 51.115

Parents or guardians of a child are required by law to attend each court hearing affecting a child held under: possible transfer to criminal district/adult court; adjudication hearing; disposition hearing; hearing to modify disposition; release or transfer hearing. If a parent or guardian receives notice of any of these proceedings and is a resident of Texas, failure to appear could result in a fine for contempt of court.

Photographs & Fingerprints of Children: Texas Family Code Sections 58.002-0021

With limited exceptions, a child may not be photographed or fingerprinted without the consent of the juvenile court unless the child is taken into custody or referred to the juvenile court for conduct that constitutes a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by confinement in jail (which means a Class A or Class B misdemeanor). However, this prohibition does not prohibit law enforcement from photographing or fingerprinting a child who is not in custody if the child's parent or guardian voluntarily consents in writing. Furthermore, this prohibition does not apply to fingerprints that are required or authorized to be submitted or obtained for an application for a driver's license or personal identification card.

Note/Exception to General Rule stated above: Law enforcement may take temporary custody of a child to take the child's fingerprints if the officer: has probable cause to believe that the child has engaged in delinquent conduct; the officer has investigated that conduct and found other fingerprints during the investigation; and the officer has probable cause to believe that the child's fingerprints will match the other fingerprints. Law enforcement may take temporary custody of a child to take the child's photograph if the officer: has probable cause to believe that the child has engaged in delinquent conduct; and the officer has probable cause to believe that the child's photograph will be of material assistance in the investigation of the conduct. However, in either instance, unless the child then placed under arrest, the child must be released from temporary custody as soon as the fingerprints or photographs are obtained.

Waiver of Rights: Texas Family Code Section 51.09

Unless a contrary intent clearly appears elsewhere in the Family Code, any right granted to a child by this Section or by the constitution or laws of Texas or the United States may be waived in proceedings under this section if:

1. the waiver is made by the child and the attorney for the child;
2. the child and the attorney waiving the right are informed of and understand the right and the possible consequences of waiving it;
3. the waiver is voluntary; and
4. the waiver is made in writing or in court proceedings that are recorded.

Polygraph Examination: Texas Family Code Section 51.151

If a child is taken into custody pursuant to an order of the juvenile court or pursuant to the laws of arrest by a law enforcement officer, a person may not administer a polygraph examination to the child without the consent of the child's attorney or the juvenile court unless the child is transferred to a criminal district court for prosecution in the adult system. Bottom line: Do not consent to a polygraph examination without consulting with your lawyer.

Physical or Mental Examination: Texas Family Code Section 51.20

(a) At any stage of the proceedings the juvenile court may order a child who is referred to the juvenile court or who is alleged by a petition or found to have engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision to be examined by the local mental health or mental retardation authority or another appropriate expert, including a physician, psychiatrist, or psychologist.

(b) If, after conducting an examination of a child and reviewing any other relevant information, there is reason to believe that the child has a mental illness or mental retardation, the probation department shall refer the child to the local mental health or mental retardation authority for evaluation and services, unless the prosecutor has filed a court petition against the child alleging delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision.

Election Between Juvenile Court & Alternate Juvenile Court:

Texas Family Code Section 51.18

(a) This section applies only to a child who has a right to a trial before a juvenile court the judge of which is not an attorney licensed to practice in Texas.

(b) On any matter that may lead to an order appealable under Section 56.01 of the Family Code, a child may be tried before either the juvenile court or the alternate juvenile court.

(c) The child may elect to be tried before the alternate juvenile court only if the child files a written notice with that court not later than 10 days before the date of the trial. After the notice is filed, the child may be tried only in the alternate juvenile court. If the child does not file a notice as provided by this section, the child may be tried only in the juvenile court.

(d) If the child is tried before the juvenile court, the child is not entitled to a trial de novo before the alternate juvenile court.

Transfer/Waiver: Texas Family Code Section 54.02

The juvenile court may waive its exclusive original jurisdiction and transfer a child to the appropriate criminal district court to be tried as an adult if the child is alleged to have violated a penal law of the grade of felony if the child was 14 years of age or older at the time he is alleged to have committed the offense, if the offense is a capital felony, an aggravated controlled substance felony, or a felony of the first degree; or 15 years of age or older at the time the child is alleged to have committed the offense, if the offense is a felony of the second or third degree or a state jail felony.

The juvenile court judge is not required to certify a child to stand trial as an adult. It's a judgment call. The juvenile court judge will investigate the matter and hold a hearing on the transfer request. The judge orders a complete diagnostic study, social evaluation, and a full investigation of the child, his circumstances, and the circumstances of the alleged offense. At the transfer hearing the court may consider written reports from probation officers, professional court employees, or professional consultants in addition to the testimony of witnesses. In making her decision whether to transfer the case to the adult court, the judge considers: (1) whether the alleged offense was against person or property, with greater weight in favor of transfer given to offenses against a person; (2) the sophistication and maturity of the child; (3) the record and previous history of the child; and (4) the prospects of adequate protection of the public and the likelihood of the rehabilitation of the child by use or procedures, services, and facilities currently available to the juvenile court.

Determinate Sentencing: Texas Family Code Section 53.045

If a child is accused of a very serious criminal violation, or habitual felony conduct (see section below), the prosecutor can pursue what is called determinate sentencing. In order to pursue determinate sentencing the prosecutor files a petition with the grand jury, basically asking the grand jury to grant the prosecutor's request to pursue determinate sentencing if the child is convicted. If 9 members of the grand jury approve the petition, then determinate sentencing becomes a viable sentencing option for the judge/jury if the child is convicted of the offense. Determinate sentencing doesn't mean that the child will be tried as an adult in a criminal district court. The case remains in the juvenile court even if the grand jury grants the request for determinate sentencing. but the stakes for the child are raised dramatically if the grand jury grants the prosecutor's petition for determinate sentencing.

Eligibility: The prosecutor can pursue determinate sentencing if the child is charged with habitual felony conduct, or if the child is charged with any of the following offenses:

capital murder, murder, manslaughter, aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated assault, aggravated robbery, injury to a child, elderly, or disabled individual if punishable as a felony other than a state jail felony, felony deadly conduct involving the discharge of a firearm, aggravated controlled substance felony, criminal solicitation of a minor, indecency with a child, arson, if bodily injury or death is suffered by any person by reason of the commission of the arson, intoxication manslaughter, or attempted murder or attempted capital murder. If your child is charged with one of the offenses listed above, she is eligible for determinate sentencing even if this is her first offense.

Impact: If the grand jury grants the prosecutor's request to impose determinate sentencing, and the child is convicted of habitual felony conduct or any of the offenses listed above, then the court or jury may sentence the child to commitment in the Texas Youth Commission with a possible transfer to the institutional division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (adult prison system) for a term of: up to 40 years if the conduct constitutes a capital felony, first-degree felony, or an aggravated controlled substance felony; up to 20 years if the conduct constitutes a second-degree felony; and up to 10 years if the conduct constitutes a third-degree felony. So instead of being sent to the Texas Youth Commission until the child turns 18, determinate sentencing would allow the child to be sentenced to up to 40 years in the adult prison system by a judge or jury.

Habitual Felony Conduct: Texas Family Code Section 51.031

(a) Habitual felony conduct is conduct violating a penal law of the grade of felony, other than a state jail felony, if:

1. the child who engaged in the conduct has at least 2 previous final adjudications as having engaged in delinquent conduct violating a penal law of the grade of felony; and,
2. the second previous final adjudication is for conduct that occurred after the date the first previous adjudication became final; and,
3. all appeals relating to the previous adjudications have been exhausted.

Review by Prosecutor: Texas Family Code Section 53.012

The prosecuting attorney shall promptly review the circumstances and allegations of a referral made to her for legal sufficiency and the desirability of prosecution and may file a petition without regard to whether probable cause was found during the court's preliminary investigation.

If the prosecutor does not file a petition requesting the adjudication of the child referred to the prosecutor, the prosecutor must terminate all proceedings, if the reason is for the lack of probable cause; or return the referral to the juvenile probation department for further proceedings.

The prosecutors have considerable discretion and control over your child's case.

Deferred Prosecution: Texas Family Code Section 53.03

(a) Subject to subsections (e) and (g) below, if the preliminary investigation results in a determination that further proceedings in the case are authorized, the probation officer or other designated officer of the court, subject to the direction of the juvenile court, may advise the parties for a reasonable period of time not to exceed 6 months concerning deferred prosecution and rehabilitation of a child if:

1. deferred prosecution would be in the best interest of the public and child;
2. the child and her parent, guardian, or custodian consent with knowledge that consent is not obligatory; and
3. the child and his parent, guardian, or custodian are informed that they may terminate the deferred prosecution at any point and petition the court for a court hearing in the case.

(b) Except as otherwise permitted, the child may not be detained during or as a result of the deferred prosecution process.

(c) An incriminating statement made by a participant to the person giving advice and in the discussion or conferences incident thereto may not be used against the declarant in any court hearing.

(d) The court may adopt a fee schedule for deferred prosecution services. The maximum fee is $15 per month.

(e) The prosecuting attorney may defer prosecution for any child. A probation officer or other designated officer of the court may defer prosecution for a child who has previously been adjudicated for conduct that constitutes a felony only if the prosecuting attorney consents in writing.

(f) The probation officer or other officer supervising a program of deferred prosecution for a child shall report to the juvenile court any violation by the child of the program.

(g) Prosecution may not be deferred for a child alleged to have engaged in conduct that constitutes: driving/flying/boating while intoxicated, intoxication assault, intoxication manslaughter, or that constitutes a third or subsequent offense of consumption of alcohol by a minor or driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) of a minor.

First Offender Program: Texas Family Code Section 52.031

A juvenile board may establish a first offender program for the referral and disposition of children taken into custody for: (1) conduct indicating a need for supervision; or (2) delinquent conduct other than conduct that constitutes a felony of the first, second, or third degree, an aggravated controlled substance felony, or a capital felony; or a state jail felony or misdemeanor involving violence to a person or the use or possession of a firearm, illegal knife, or club, or a prohibited weapon, as described by Section 46.05, Texas Penal Code. If the child has previously been adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct he may be ineligible for the First Offender Program. Also, the child's parents or guardian must receive notice that the child has been referred for disposition under the First Offender Program.

Teen Court Program: Texas Family Code Section 54.032

A juvenile court may defer adjudication proceedings during an adjudication hearing for not more than 180 days if the child:

(1) is alleged to have engaged in conduct indicating a need for supervision that violated a penal law of Texas of the grade of misdemeanor that is punishable by a fine only or a penal ordinance of a political subdivision of Texas;

(2) waives the privilege against self-incrimination and testifies under oath that the allegations are true;

(3) presents to the court an oral or written request to attend a teen court program; and

(4) has not successfully completed a teen court program for the violation of the same penal law or ordinance in the two years preceding the date that the alleged conduct occurred.

Note: The teen court program must be approved by the court.

Adjudication Hearing: Texas Family Code Section 54.03

This is what is commonly referred to as the "guilty-not guilty" phase of a trial. A child may be found to have engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision only after an adjudication hearing. The child is presumed innocent unless and until the prosecution proves that the child is guilty of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof is on the state. The verdict must be unanimous.

At the beginning of an adjudication hearing the juvenile court judge shall explain to the child and his parent, guardian, or guardian ad litem: the allegations made against the child; the nature and possible consequences of the proceedings; the child's privilege against self-incrimination; the child's right to trial and to confront witnesses; the child's right to representation by an attorney if he is not already represented; and the child's right to a trial by jury.

Only material, relevant, and competent evidence in accordance with the Texas Rules of Criminal Evidence may be considered in an adjudication hearing. Hearsay testimony is generally not admissible. A statement made by the child out of court is insufficient to support a finding of delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision unless it is corroborated in whole or in part by other evidence. An adjudication of delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision cannot be had upon testimony of an accomplice unless corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the child with the alleged delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision; and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the alleged conduct. Finally, evidence illegally seized or obtained is inadmissible in an adjudication hearing.

A child may be found guilty of committing a lesser-included offense of the offense charged.

If the judge or jury finds that the child did engage in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision, then the court or jury shall state which of the allegations in the petition were found to be established by the evidence. The court will then set a date and time for the disposition hearing.

If the judge or jury finds that the child did not engage in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision, the court shall dismiss the case with prejudice.

Disposition Hearing: Texas Family Code Section 54.04

This term can be confusing. What we're talking about here is the "sentencing" phase of the proceedings. The disposition hearing only comes into play if the child has been found guilty of the delinquent conduct or criminal activity alleged in the petition. If the child is found not guilty of all allegations during the adjudication hearing then there is no disposition hearing.

The disposition hearing is separate, distinct, and subsequent to the adjudication hearing. There is no right to a jury at the disposition hearing unless the child is in jeopardy of a determinate sentence as approved by the grand jury. If the child is eligible for determinate sentencing, then the child is entitled to a jury of 12 persons to determine the sentence.

At the disposition hearing, the juvenile court may consider written reports from probation officers, professional court employees, or professional consultants in addition to the testimony of witnesses. Prior to the disposition hearing, the child's lawyer is to have received all written matter to be considered in disposition. No disposition may be made unless the child is in need of rehabilitation or the protection of the public or the child requires that disposition be made. No disposition placing the child on probation outside the child's home may be made under this section unless the court or jury finds that the child, in the child's home, cannot be provided the quality of care and level of support and supervision that the child needs to meet the conditions of probation. If the judge or jury grant probation, the court will attach various conditions of the probation. Depending on the nature of the charges and the child's criminal history, if probation is not granted, the child could be sentenced to a term of confinement in the Texas Youth Commission.

Payment of Probation Fees: Texas Family Code Section 54.061

If a child is placed on probation, the juvenile court, after giving the child, parent, or other person responsible for the child's support, a reasonable opportunity to be heard, shall order the child, parent, or other person, if financially able to do so, to pay to the court a fee of not more than $15 a month during the period that the child continues on probation. If the court finds that a child, parent, or other person responsible for the child's support is financially unable to pay the probation fee, the court shall enter into the records of the child's case a statement of that finding.

Monitoring School Attendance: Texas Family Code Section 54.043

If the court places a child on probation and requires as a condition of probation that the child attend school, the probation officer shall monitor the child's school attendance and report to the court if the child is voluntarily absent from school.

Restitution: Texas Family Code Section 54.048

A juvenile court, in a disposition hearing, may order restitution to be made by the child and the child's parents. This applies regardless of whether the petition in the case contains a plea for restitution.

Admission of Unadjudicated Conduct: Section 54.045

During a disposition hearing, a child may admit having engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision for which the child has not been adjudicated and request the court to take the admitted conduct into account in the disposition of the child's pending case. If the prosecutor agrees in writing, then the court may take the admitted conduct into account in the disposition of the child. However, a court may take into account admitted conduct over with exclusive venue lies in another county only if the court obtains the written permission of the prosecuting attorney for that county. A child may not be adjudicated by any court for having engaged in conduct taken into account under this section unless the conduct taken into account included conduct that took place in another county and the written permission of the prosecuting attorney of that county was not obtained.

Community Service: Texas Family Code Section 54.044

If the court places a child on probation, the court shall require as a condition of probation that the child work a specified number of hours at a community service project approved by the court and designated by the juvenile probation department. This requirement may be waived if the court finds that the child is physically or mentally incapable of participating in the project or that participating in the project will be a hardship on the child or his family or that the child has shown good cause that community service should not be required.

Note: The court may also order that the child's parent perform community service with the child.

Child Placed on Probation for Conduct Involving a Handgun:

Texas Family Code Section 54.0406

(a) If a court or jury places a child on probation for conduct that violates a penal law that includes as an element of the offense the possession, carrying, using, or exhibiting of a handgun, and if at the adjudication hearing the court or the jury affirmatively finds that the child personally possessed, carried, used, or exhibited a handgun, the court must require as a condition of probation that the child, not later than the 30th day after the date the court places the child on probation, notify the juvenile probation officer who is supervising the child of the manner in which the child acquired the handgun, including the date and place of any person involved in the acquisition. The juvenile probation officer is then to relay any relevant information regarding the handgun to the police. Your lawyer should be with you when this takes place.

Note: Information provided by the child to the juvenile probation officer regarding the acquisition of the handgun and any other information derived from that information may not be used as evidence against the child in any juvenile or criminal proceeding.

Rights of Appeal: Warning: Texas Family Code Section 54.034

Before the court may accept a child's plea or stipulation of evidence in a proceeding under this title, the court must inform the child that if the court accepts the plea or stipulation and the court makes a disposition in accordance with the agreement between the state and the child regarding the disposition of the case, the child may not appeal an order of the court pursuant to an adjudication hearing, a disposition hearing, or a hearing to modify disposition, unless the court gives the child permission to appeal; or the appeal is based on a matter raised by written motion filed before the proceeding in which the child entered the plea or agreed to the stipulation of evidence. An appeal from an order of a juvenile court is to the court of appeals and the case may be carried to the Texas Supreme Court by writ of error or upon certificate, as in civil cases generally. The requirements governing a juvenile appeal are as in civil cases generally.

Note: An appeal does not suspend the order of the juvenile court, nor does it release the child from the custody of that court or of the person, institution, or agency to whose care the child is committed, unless the juvenile court so orders. However, the appellate court may provide for a personal bond pending the appeal.

Sealing Juvenile Records: Texas Family Code Section 58.003

One of the most important things that can be done for a juvenile is to get the juvenile records sealed as soon as allowed by law.

The benefits of sealing a child's juvenile records are immense. Once the records are sealed, information relating to the arrest, detention, prosecution, and conviction, are physically sealed and/or destroyed. This means that the child can start adulthood with a "clean" slate. And it also means that the child is authorized by law to say that he has never been convicted.

Section 58.003 of the Texas Family Code provides that, except for juveniles who received a determinate sentence for engaging in delinquent conduct that violated a penal law such as murder, capital murder, manslaughter, aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated assault, injury to a child/elderly/disabled person, arson, indecency with a child, etc., or engaged in habitual felony conduct, the juvenile records may be sealed if the court finds that 2 years have elapsed since final discharge of the person or since the last official action in the person's case if there was no adjudication; and if since that time the person has not been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude or found to have engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision and no proceeding is pending seeking conviction or adjudication.

A court may also order the sealing of records concerning a juvenile adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct that violated a penal law of the grade of felony (not including many determinate sentences) if: the person is 21 years of age or older; the person was not transferred by a juvenile court to an adult criminal court for prosecution; the records have not been used as evidence in the punishment phase of a criminal proceeding under Article 37.07, Code of Texas Criminal Procedure; and if the person has not been convicted of a penal law of the grade of felony after becoming age 17.

If a child is referred to the juvenile court for conduct constituting any offense and at the adjudication hearing (guilt/innocence) the child is found to be not guilty of each offense alleged, the court shall immediately order the sealing of all files and records relating to the case.

David Finn is board certified in criminal law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. Call today for a free initial consultation.


The information contained in this web site is intended to convey general information about David Finn, PC. It should not be construed as legal advice or opinion. It is not an offer to represent you, nor is it intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Any email sent via the Internet to David Finn, PC using email addresses listed in this web site would not be confidential and would not create an attorney-client relationship.