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.
Showing posts with label Colleen McHugh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Colleen McHugh. Show all posts
Monday, September 21, 2009
Monday, September 07, 2009
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!!!
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!!!
Thursday, May 14, 2009
In spite of these statutes, many states and school authorities still harass home-schooling parents.
Home-schooling is a great success. That’s why many public-school authorities hate home-schooling parents.
Home-schoolers are a direct challenge to the public-school monopoly. This monopoly makes it almost impossible to fire tenured public-school teachers or principals. As a result, tenure gives most teachers life-time guaranteed jobs. They get this incredible benefit only because public schools have a lock on our children’s education.
If public-school employees had to work for private schools and compete for their jobs in the real world, they would lose their security-blanket tenure. That’s why school authorities view home-schooling parents who challenge their monopoly as a serious threat.
Many school officials also can’t stand the fact that average parents who never went to college give their kids a better education than so-called public-school experts. Successful home-schooling parents therefore humiliate the failed public schools by comparison.
Home-schooling parents also humiliate school authorities who claim that only certified or licensed teachers are qualified to teach children. Most home-schooling parents thankfully never stepped foot inside a so-called teacher college or university department of education. Yet these parents give their children a superior education compared to public-school educated kids.
Also, many public-school officials resent home-schoolers because the typical public school loses about $7500 a year in tax money for each child that leaves the system. Tax money is the life blood of the public-school system. Tax money pays for public-school employees’ generous salaries, benefits, and pensions. Is it any wonder why school authorities don’t want to lose their gravy train?
For these reasons, until fairly recently, most state legislatures either outlawed homeschooling or tried to strangle it to death with regulations. In 1980, only Utah, Ohio, and Nevada officially recognized parents’ rights to homeschool their children. In most other states, legislators continually harassed or prosecuted home-schoolers under criminal truancy laws and educational neglect charges.
By 2004, however, pressure from parents, Christian home-schooling organizations, and recent court rulings pushed all fifty states to enact statutes that allow home-schooling, as long as certain requirements are met. These requirements vary for each state.
In spite of these statutes, many states and school authorities still harass home-schooling parents. That is because the Supreme Court slapped parents in the face when they gave local governments the right to regulate home-schooling. As a result, many home-schooling parents are still harassed by local school officials.
If you are a homeschooling parent, you must know how to protect your legal rights. To do this, you should seriously consider joining the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA). Founded in 1983, HSDLA provides its members with legal representation against local school officials who might harass you, demand to supervise your home-schooling, or demand to periodically test your home-schooled children. You can join at their web site, http://www.hslda.org.
The Rutherford Institute is another well-known organization dedicated to protecting parents’ rights and providing legal help to home-schooling parents. Their website is http://www.rutherford.org.
Read more information about “Public Schools, Public Menace.”
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
(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
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
(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)
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)
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)
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)
(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)
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)
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)
(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)
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)
Friday, November 02, 2007
Another piece of evidence of the school to prison pipeline........
do with the hand we're dealt
E-mailed from the blogkeeper of I Speak of Dreams:
Study cites troubles with juvenile courts
Children accused of crimes in the U.S. juvenile court system often find themselves represented by lawyers who know nothing about their cases and under pressure to plead guilty, experts said on Wednesday.
"People would be outraged by many of these practices if they occurred in an adult system," said Cathryn Crawford of the Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University Law School.
She was one of the authors of a report that looked at the juvenile court system in Illinois timed to mark the 40th anniversary of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that children accused of delinquency are entitled to a lawyer and due process in the courts...
Reaction from one Illinois juvenile public defender:
After reviewing the study, Brian Dees, an assistant public defender assigned to Sangamon County juvenile courts, said, “I don’t think it’s indicative of what we do here.”
Dees said defense attorneys normally meet with juveniles and parents before the first court hearing. Plea bargains are not forced on anyone, he said, and juvenile defendants don’t plead guilty on their first appearance. “We like to win trials,” said Dees, who has represented juveniles for eight years in Sangamon County. “We do everything we can. I’m not sure what they’re talking about...”
E-mailed from the blogkeeper of I Speak of Dreams:
Study cites troubles with juvenile courts
Children accused of crimes in the U.S. juvenile court system often find themselves represented by lawyers who know nothing about their cases and under pressure to plead guilty, experts said on Wednesday.
"People would be outraged by many of these practices if they occurred in an adult system," said Cathryn Crawford of the Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University Law School.
She was one of the authors of a report that looked at the juvenile court system in Illinois timed to mark the 40th anniversary of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that children accused of delinquency are entitled to a lawyer and due process in the courts...
Reaction from one Illinois juvenile public defender:
After reviewing the study, Brian Dees, an assistant public defender assigned to Sangamon County juvenile courts, said, “I don’t think it’s indicative of what we do here.”
Dees said defense attorneys normally meet with juveniles and parents before the first court hearing. Plea bargains are not forced on anyone, he said, and juvenile defendants don’t plead guilty on their first appearance. “We like to win trials,” said Dees, who has represented juveniles for eight years in Sangamon County. “We do everything we can. I’m not sure what they’re talking about...”
Another piece of evidence of the school to prison pipeline........
do with the hand we're dealt
E-mailed from the blogkeeper of I Speak of Dreams:
Study cites troubles with juvenile courts
Children accused of crimes in the U.S. juvenile court system often find themselves represented by lawyers who know nothing about their cases and under pressure to plead guilty, experts said on Wednesday.
"People would be outraged by many of these practices if they occurred in an adult system," said Cathryn Crawford of the Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University Law School.
She was one of the authors of a report that looked at the juvenile court system in Illinois timed to mark the 40th anniversary of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that children accused of delinquency are entitled to a lawyer and due process in the courts...
Reaction from one Illinois juvenile public defender:
After reviewing the study, Brian Dees, an assistant public defender assigned to Sangamon County juvenile courts, said, “I don’t think it’s indicative of what we do here.”
Dees said defense attorneys normally meet with juveniles and parents before the first court hearing. Plea bargains are not forced on anyone, he said, and juvenile defendants don’t plead guilty on their first appearance. “We like to win trials,” said Dees, who has represented juveniles for eight years in Sangamon County. “We do everything we can. I’m not sure what they’re talking about...”
E-mailed from the blogkeeper of I Speak of Dreams:
Study cites troubles with juvenile courts
Children accused of crimes in the U.S. juvenile court system often find themselves represented by lawyers who know nothing about their cases and under pressure to plead guilty, experts said on Wednesday.
"People would be outraged by many of these practices if they occurred in an adult system," said Cathryn Crawford of the Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University Law School.
She was one of the authors of a report that looked at the juvenile court system in Illinois timed to mark the 40th anniversary of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that children accused of delinquency are entitled to a lawyer and due process in the courts...
Reaction from one Illinois juvenile public defender:
After reviewing the study, Brian Dees, an assistant public defender assigned to Sangamon County juvenile courts, said, “I don’t think it’s indicative of what we do here.”
Dees said defense attorneys normally meet with juveniles and parents before the first court hearing. Plea bargains are not forced on anyone, he said, and juvenile defendants don’t plead guilty on their first appearance. “We like to win trials,” said Dees, who has represented juveniles for eight years in Sangamon County. “We do everything we can. I’m not sure what they’re talking about...”
Monday, May 21, 2007
We seem to operate as though we are a rich district, and we are not." Colleen McHugh sure got rich
Tuesday, August 29, 2000
CCISD raises property tax rate by 7 cents
Owner of $75,000 home to pay $42 more per year
By Chris Neely
Caller-Times
Caller-Times
After approving general fund expenditures of more than $213 million Monday, CCISD trustees raised the district's property tax rate 7 cents to $1.57 per $100 valuation.
Under the new rate, the owner of a $75,000 home with the standard $15,000 exemption would pay the Corpus Christi Independent School District $942 per year, $42 more per year than with the $1.50 rate.
The vote comes a year after the board voted to cut the rate by 5 cents.
Included in the budget is $330,000 for a parity raise for auxiliary staff in the CCISD.
The board deadlocked the last time that raise came up for a vote, so trustees agreed to reconsider it Monday.
The district also approved expenditures of $11,621,700 for food service and $16,065,380 to repay debts in building projects for which the district issued bonds. In all, the district's expenses total $244,223,677.
The new tax rate and budget leaves the district with a deficit of $713,568.
Voting for the budget and the tax rate were Trustees Dot Adkins, Manuel Flores, Lucy Rubio, Rene Vela and Harry Williams; voting against them both was Trustee Vicki Rothschild and Board President Pinky Brauer.
District staff urged trustees to consider raising the tax rate to $1.58, the maximum increase allowed without approval by voters. The budget that would have been funded by that tax rate fell on a 3-4 vote, with only Flores, Vela and Williams voting for it.
"I cannot in good conscience vote for a tax increase of this magnitude," Brauer said.
Bullet-biting
Brauer urged more bullet-biting and belt-tightening for the district.
Williams said the $1.58 would carry the district away from crisis management when budget time rolls around next year.
"Let's get ahead of next year," Williams said. "Let's be proactive. We say we want the best, but we're not willing to pay for the best."
Flores said the district staff deserves the board's full support.
"Times are tough, but they were a lot tougher last year, and the district was kept together by a valiant group of employees," Flores said.
State funds
Passing the $1.58 would have given the district another $329,200 in state funds each year from 2001 to 2003.
By passing the $1.57 rate, the district forfeits that money. Vela said not taking advantage of that money in light of the $713,568 budget deficit was irresponsible.
Rothschild said she wanted to see the district cut more than it had.
"Being proactive isn't only raising the tax rate," Rothschild said.
Rubio also urged further cuts before trustees voted to defeat the $1.58 tax rate proposal.
"I ran stressing accountability," Rubio said. "We have not been as accountable as we could be. We seem to operate as though we are a rich district, and we are not."
'My pie is about gone'
Many audience members who spoke before the vote urged trustees to raise the tax rate to the maximum so that they would not leave any money on the table in Austin.
But resident Joe Cole, noting that most of those speaking in favor of the tax hike were teachers or consultants, urged restraint.
"That money on the table is my money," Cole told trustees. "Everybody wants a piece of the pie. Well, my pie is about gone."
Band uniforms for Ray HS
One item added to the budget at the last minute was $72,000 for new band uniforms for Ray High School. Dozens of parents, teachers and band members turned out for the meeting to tell trustees about the ragged condition of their uniforms.
"You have given other bands new uniforms," said Jaime Martinez, a Ray drum major. "Now it is our turn."
Staff writer Chris Neely can be reached at 886-3794 or by e-mail at neelyc@caller.com
CCISD raises property tax rate by 7 cents
Owner of $75,000 home to pay $42 more per year
By Chris Neely
Caller-Times
Caller-Times
After approving general fund expenditures of more than $213 million Monday, CCISD trustees raised the district's property tax rate 7 cents to $1.57 per $100 valuation.
Under the new rate, the owner of a $75,000 home with the standard $15,000 exemption would pay the Corpus Christi Independent School District $942 per year, $42 more per year than with the $1.50 rate.
The vote comes a year after the board voted to cut the rate by 5 cents.
Included in the budget is $330,000 for a parity raise for auxiliary staff in the CCISD.
The board deadlocked the last time that raise came up for a vote, so trustees agreed to reconsider it Monday.
The district also approved expenditures of $11,621,700 for food service and $16,065,380 to repay debts in building projects for which the district issued bonds. In all, the district's expenses total $244,223,677.
The new tax rate and budget leaves the district with a deficit of $713,568.
Voting for the budget and the tax rate were Trustees Dot Adkins, Manuel Flores, Lucy Rubio, Rene Vela and Harry Williams; voting against them both was Trustee Vicki Rothschild and Board President Pinky Brauer.
District staff urged trustees to consider raising the tax rate to $1.58, the maximum increase allowed without approval by voters. The budget that would have been funded by that tax rate fell on a 3-4 vote, with only Flores, Vela and Williams voting for it.
"I cannot in good conscience vote for a tax increase of this magnitude," Brauer said.
Bullet-biting
Brauer urged more bullet-biting and belt-tightening for the district.
Williams said the $1.58 would carry the district away from crisis management when budget time rolls around next year.
"Let's get ahead of next year," Williams said. "Let's be proactive. We say we want the best, but we're not willing to pay for the best."
Flores said the district staff deserves the board's full support.
"Times are tough, but they were a lot tougher last year, and the district was kept together by a valiant group of employees," Flores said.
State funds
Passing the $1.58 would have given the district another $329,200 in state funds each year from 2001 to 2003.
By passing the $1.57 rate, the district forfeits that money. Vela said not taking advantage of that money in light of the $713,568 budget deficit was irresponsible.
Rothschild said she wanted to see the district cut more than it had.
"Being proactive isn't only raising the tax rate," Rothschild said.
Rubio also urged further cuts before trustees voted to defeat the $1.58 tax rate proposal.
"I ran stressing accountability," Rubio said. "We have not been as accountable as we could be. We seem to operate as though we are a rich district, and we are not."
'My pie is about gone'
Many audience members who spoke before the vote urged trustees to raise the tax rate to the maximum so that they would not leave any money on the table in Austin.
But resident Joe Cole, noting that most of those speaking in favor of the tax hike were teachers or consultants, urged restraint.
"That money on the table is my money," Cole told trustees. "Everybody wants a piece of the pie. Well, my pie is about gone."
Band uniforms for Ray HS
One item added to the budget at the last minute was $72,000 for new band uniforms for Ray High School. Dozens of parents, teachers and band members turned out for the meeting to tell trustees about the ragged condition of their uniforms.
"You have given other bands new uniforms," said Jaime Martinez, a Ray drum major. "Now it is our turn."
Staff writer Chris Neely can be reached at 886-3794 or by e-mail at neelyc@caller.com
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Different "Graduation Plans" courtesy of actuarial nanotech......More than beech theives
Editorials
Bring CCISD selection process into light of day
The secrecy surrounding the current search for a new superintendent is indefensible. Did we learn nothing from the previous fiasco?
Friday, April 6, 2007
The selection process that will ultimately produce a finalist for superintendent of the Corpus Christi Independent School District is up and running.
On Wednesday the trustees interviewed four candidates for the post - including Scott Elliff, interim superintendent since the resignation of Jesus Chavez in February 2006.
That much we know of a certainty. It also seems safe to assume that the four individuals in question could fairly be considered the finalists from the field of 25 applicants who were being considered for the position.
However, should we at this late date be dealing in "seems" and "assume" when it comes to the process that will determine who is to lead the city's largest school district?
The question arises: Why has the Board of Trustees gone to such lengths to keep the public from getting anything more than a fleeting glimpse of the action? After all, the previous superinten-dent hunt, which saw Shoney Bria first accept, then decline the post, was grievously marred by the secrecy that surrounded it.
But - again - the board apparently believes that the releasing of names could prove ruinous for the applicants back in their home districts.
That, however, looks more and more like a smoke screen. School districts throughout the length and breadth of the nation are seeking leaders, and up-and-coming administrators are looking to move into superintendencies in larger districts.
The curtain of confidentiality is, at long last, nonsensical. More to the point, it does a disservice to the community. Consider: As matters now stand, we do not even know how many of the contenders will find favor with the trustees and be presented to the public. It could be one. Then again, it could be two, perhaps even three.
Concern for confidentiality is, or should be, trumped by another, vastly more important consideration: the public's right to know, and its right to have at least some role to play in the process.
The trustees' refusal to lay out the cards is beyond irritating; it borders on the outrageous.
Particularly disturbing is the fact that three new trustees elected last year - Carol Scott, John Longoria and Dwayne Hargis, all of whom emphasized their intent to bring new openness to the board - appear to have bought into the mum's-the-word ethos that has dominated this exercise.
To be sure, they (and their colleagues) could, and should, reverse their field - but the time remaining in which to keep this selection process from
Bring CCISD selection process into light of day
The secrecy surrounding the current search for a new superintendent is indefensible. Did we learn nothing from the previous fiasco?
Friday, April 6, 2007
The selection process that will ultimately produce a finalist for superintendent of the Corpus Christi Independent School District is up and running.
On Wednesday the trustees interviewed four candidates for the post - including Scott Elliff, interim superintendent since the resignation of Jesus Chavez in February 2006.
That much we know of a certainty. It also seems safe to assume that the four individuals in question could fairly be considered the finalists from the field of 25 applicants who were being considered for the position.
However, should we at this late date be dealing in "seems" and "assume" when it comes to the process that will determine who is to lead the city's largest school district?
The question arises: Why has the Board of Trustees gone to such lengths to keep the public from getting anything more than a fleeting glimpse of the action? After all, the previous superinten-dent hunt, which saw Shoney Bria first accept, then decline the post, was grievously marred by the secrecy that surrounded it.
But - again - the board apparently believes that the releasing of names could prove ruinous for the applicants back in their home districts.
That, however, looks more and more like a smoke screen. School districts throughout the length and breadth of the nation are seeking leaders, and up-and-coming administrators are looking to move into superintendencies in larger districts.
The curtain of confidentiality is, at long last, nonsensical. More to the point, it does a disservice to the community. Consider: As matters now stand, we do not even know how many of the contenders will find favor with the trustees and be presented to the public. It could be one. Then again, it could be two, perhaps even three.
Concern for confidentiality is, or should be, trumped by another, vastly more important consideration: the public's right to know, and its right to have at least some role to play in the process.
The trustees' refusal to lay out the cards is beyond irritating; it borders on the outrageous.
Particularly disturbing is the fact that three new trustees elected last year - Carol Scott, John Longoria and Dwayne Hargis, all of whom emphasized their intent to bring new openness to the board - appear to have bought into the mum's-the-word ethos that has dominated this exercise.
To be sure, they (and their colleagues) could, and should, reverse their field - but the time remaining in which to keep this selection process from
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)