Thursday, July 30, 2009

BISD THE MESS ONLY GETS WORSE

For months my friend complained in writing to BISD, including to Hector Gonzales, to have his son tested for ADHD. BISD refused. They had an ARD, which in my opinion is a complete waste of time. The child’s pediatrict psychiatrist is currently trying to get the child adjusted to his 3rd ADHD medicine. Some of these medicines can cause violent reactions. My point is, why for months did Special Services and Hector Gonzales simply dismiss this parent, only to have a pediatric psychiatrist to diagnose the problem? Incompetence - my long term readers remember me posting Hector Gonzales’ e-mails on the issue wherein I was able to show he just passed them around to be ignored. This is his management style.

I have said before I believe this Board is acting politically as to Gonzales and not on the merits of his incompetence. This is sad because it could mean the Board failed to properly investigate Gonzales and will loose the up and coming hearing. I would hope the hearing officer would agree Gonzales filing a lawsuit which proved he has zero knowledge of the administrative process concerning the discharge of BISD administrators and teachers would be enough to justify his discharge. Again this goes to his competence.

Two interesting things stand out about the up and coming hearing. Gonzales’ supporters went dead silent demanding that BISD state the reasons why Gonzales is being discharged the moment Gonzales had the letter outlining the reasons and chose to not go public with the claims. If you know the claims are fabricated then why not go public?

But the other side is, this case should be fact driven and not legal advice driven. I am confused why the Board had to waive partial attorney client privilege in order to be able to present the facts. It almost appears like they need their attorney to explain their reasoning for the discharge of Gonzales. In argument this would be the case in any normal case, but there is something more here which sounds odd. I think the Board has concerns about loosing the hearing. It is no great secret that I think Saldana would do the dirty work for the devil if paid enough. Maybe my bias is coming through - who knows?

Because I have not seen the claims being made, or the evidence in support of the claims I cannot predict the outcome of the hearing. But as we all know this will not stop supporters on both sides from making incredibly stupid and ill-founded predictions. They do have a 50/50 chance of being right - so what the hay - have at it - you can claim brilliance for being right, albeit based on zero kowledge of the facts and law.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

BREAKING NEWS: Bobby has a friend! Does your "friend" know this?

complained in writing to BISD, including to Hector Gonzales, to have his son tested for ADHD. BISD refused. They had an ARD, which in my opinion is a complete waste of time.

You aren't an attorney. You aren't a psychiatrist. Your opinion is meaningless.

My point is, why for months did Special Services and Hector Gonzales simply dismiss this parent, only to have a pediatric psychiatrist to diagnose the problem? Incompetence

No. They have to investigate everything especially something that some parents feel is over diagnosed.

"I have said before I believe this Board is acting politically as to Gonzales and not on the merits of his incompetence.

When did you say this?

This is sad because it could mean the Board failed to properly investigate Gonzales and will loose the up and coming hearing.

Prognosticating and backtracking. It's like riding a bike, eh Bobby?

Again this goes to his competence.

No, it goes to him trying to defend his reputation. But you wouldn't know anything about suing someone to defend your reputation. Would you Bobby?

Gonzales’ supporters went dead silent demanding that BISD state the reasons why Gonzales is being discharged the moment Gonzales had the letter outlining the reasons and chose to not go public with the claims. If you know the claims are fabricated then why not go public?

Maybe negotiations were taking place that needed to be kept quiet. It's kind of like a gag ruling. Maybe no one cared what made up demands or evidence or opinion were found in the letter. I'm not so sure Gonzales' supporters, as you call them, weren't asking to reveal the letter.

But the other side is, this case should be fact driven and not legal advice driven. I am confused

Confusion is something you are good at. Distraction even more. But if you must know go to the hearing and find out.

It is no great secret that I think Saldana would do the dirty work for the devil if paid enough. Maybe my bias is coming through - who knows?

When and where do you claim this?

Because I have not seen the claims being made, or the evidence in support of the claims I cannot predict the outcome of the hearing.

Yes you can. But you won't because you've been reading 1984. You were always at war with Eurasia.

But as we all know this will not stop supporters on both sides from making incredibly stupid and ill-founded predictions.

C'mon Bobby, tell us who you are talking about. We know who it is you're talking about. You're just scared to type it out. Live free, not in fear.

They do have a 50/50 chance of being right - so what the hay - have at it - you can claim brilliance for being right, albeit based on zero kowledge of the facts and law.

What do you know about the law? Have you been practicing again? You're still whining over being bitch-slapped over the insurance case.

BobbyWC said...

Any of my regular readers know I have repeatedly stated that the Board was acing politically - There is no back tracking - I know what the facts are he should be fired.

I have made my opinion of Saldana clear many times, and my regular readers know this - just runb a search in teh top left hand corner - run Saldana and run gonzales my words are there.

I argued his lawsuit was going to be dismissed - all of his supporters were wrong and I was right

I have no problem with him defending his reputation - personally I think the APA on this issue is unconstitutional = but the law remains the law and as the super he ignored it and prematurely filed a lawsuit - this is established law.

exactly where has Gonzales or anyone else posted the claims for independent review = no where so no one but the lawyers know the facts.

reality matters

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Have you notified anyone about "established law"?

How do you know what the facts are? Who has provided you with these facts?

BobbyWC said...

How does the following translate into me knowing the facts to be presented at the hearing?

"Because I have not seen the claims being made, or the evidence in support of the claims I cannot predict the outcome of the hearing."

Now my belief about he needs to be fired is based on my knowledge of his role in the mismanagement of Special Services.

A new complaint goes to the child who caused BISD to get sanctioned last year - immediately after complying with the sanction order they abandoned the child - she is now expected to be a drop out because she did not get the help they stated they would give her - another year of failure.

The problem is TAKS - everything is TAKS and the kids in need of special services are being passed along under the rules so the belief is they do not need an education.

The child denied teh ADHD examination had BISD's own in house psychologist recommend a classroom of less than 10 students - the ARD committee ignored her recommendation - then they kicked the kid out of school because he could not learn - yes BISD at its best

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Hearing starts Monday Morning at Security Services.

Anonymous said...

You still haven't answered have you notified anyone about "established law"?

"where so no one but the lawyers know the facts."

So you've been talking to the lawyers? Then why did Gonzales opt for a public hearing? One side opted to try this in the press and it wasn't Gonzales. So who do you have more respect for?
What are you going to do when Gonzales is back and Colunga is gone?

BobbyWC said...

What do you mean what am I going to do - how stupid is that? It's politics and normal emotionally stable people move on.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

This is the jist of the removed comment - can anyone tell me what language it is in and what it means.

"If someone were in possession of evidence that did determine the outcome of the hearing, that person would be in a position to make a prediction?

"Established procedure does not apply when criminally manipulated from within otherwise starr chambers would begin. The case was not dismissed. It was moved to another court, and it left a forwarding address."

what was criminally manipulated and what was moved to another address?

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Did you walk to school or did you take your lunch?