Tuesday, January 11, 2011


The meeting appeared to have started before 5:30. So far as  I can see it has been very uneventful. Presas-Garcia showed up late and Longoria is not there.

I was told no one would show to speak - it is part of the sit and wait and allow the TEA to do its job.  So other than an announcement about a Freda Kalho exhibit no one spoke.  Again this is consistent with what I was told would happen.  Do not fret people - it is being worked on behind the scenes.  I have assurances on this.

Now something just happened which has me pissed. Peña has been expressing her concern over the delay in completion of the tennis courts. I am glad she raised the issue. She was wrong to indicate it was put on the back burner. I am glad Springston addressed her allegation - I am mad because he is regularly accused of wrongdoing by Presas-Garcia and he sits there like a eunuch.

For the record there was just cause for the delay. I just did not like his tone towards Ms. Peña when he says nothing to Longoria or Presas-Garcia.  I want to be clear - I think it is a good thing for Springeston to correct the trustees, but my problem is his silence when it is Presas-Garcia or Longoria.

They are in executive session.

They came back and voted on something which was a 6-0 vote - so it was no big deal apparently - I missed it - I stepped out for a second and then they were voting.

It is over.  I was told that the board members were given some information about their conduct.  I have decided to not publish most of what I have been told because the sources all have an agenda.  The claims range from dissatisfaction expressed by Thompson and Horton as to how the board is conducting itself - ( I will not discuss the specifics unless the source brings me the "alleged letter."  I say alleged because I have concerns  I was being played.)

I am getting a ton of nonsense thrown at me which I cannot verify so I will not publish it.

I will say this - I was told something this morning which proved true at this evening's meeting.  There was  calm.  Hopefully it is not the calm in the middle of the storm.  Hopefully it is a long-term calm.  But they are buying time for action to come from the outside.  Let's see what happens.

Well it is over - uneventful.  Whatever the legal issues, they decided to not act on them.


Anonymous said...

Maybe he has had enough or it could be he was letting her say things that would get the attention of TEA when they view the meetings. She has been meddling with governance at most of the meetings this is something that TEA does not like and will take action.

BobbyWC said...

Two responses - but first - my long term readers know I am a strong advocate for a strong and independent superintendent - I have blogged that I believe they should be hired and fired by the regional TEA office. This would make for a better system.

So was I was glad he set the record straight as to the just cause for the delay on the tennis courts. Yes. I was glad Peña raised this issue - unlike the corrupt 4 she is always raising issues about the children - her concern about music for special needs was right on - she demonstrated a clear understanding about dealing with the parents - I was impressed. This is what I want to see from our trustees.

I agree she was a bit heavy handed with Springston - but how is that interfering with governance?

But I will agree with you 100% on why Springston finally responded to claims against administration. I am proud of him for it - I am not faulting him for responding because it was Peña - my issue is why he does not do the same thing with Longoria and Presas-Garcia - but like you said - maybe next week - he did not have a reason to correct Presas-garcia this week - so maybe if he did he would have.

But something else - and I will be careful here because I am getting this from several sources but cannot confirm it - TEA is mad and appears to be taking a bit of a mediation approach. I think they empowered Springston - this is good. I was told to look for this.

Anyone who knows my long term writings knows - I 100% oppose anyone strong arming the super -

I blogged very clearly that Gonzales lost his job over this issue - although it should have been because of his incompetence.

Gonzales played the game to get the job and found himself a victim of the game.

Springston played the game and found himself being a target of the game. This problem will not resolve itself without intervention from the TEA

I do not care who the superintendent is - he needs to be strong and independent. If the board has a problem with him/her they should have to go to the regional TEA to investigate their claims. If the TEA finds board members are filing bogus claims then the TEA should be allowed to take action against the board member.

If the TEA finds justification in the complaints against the super then they should assist the board in removing the superintendent if the complaints so justify the removal of the superintendent.

Anyway - if someone wants to write something on trustees and governance and state the specific act of the trustee which interfered with governance I will post it. This applies to all trustees equally.

I will continue to do my work behind the scenes. The influence peddling must end.

We need a simple rule - any trustee who has taken money from a vender or who has met with a litigant must recuse themselves from votes on the matter. This one rule which would apply to everyone equally. It would fix the vender and influencing problem overnight.

What reason would any honest trustee object to such a rule?

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

You misunderstood me I was talking about CPG and governance. Not Pena.

BobbyWC said...

I just got an email which asked if I would pull back on the 4 if they stopped the score settling and allowed the Rendon, Juarez, and Healthsmart lawsuits to play out?

Yep - they need to focus on the children - if they would just focus on reviewing special services on the merits I think they can force positive change -

Saavedra needs to pull back on her concerns of too many kids getting special accomodation - I know of an ARD from today wherein BISD wants to take the child out of special services - she is in 6th grade and just last year was reading at a second grade reading level. We cannot push these children out prematurely.

I have been helping this child with her social studies projects. I think it is a great project.

She cannot focus - it drives me nuts how hard it is for her to focus. Her handwriting has fallen apart -

During Christmas I had her and her sister over to make Christmas cookies - they had never made cookies - I was exhausted trying to get her to focus - she could not do it -

how are the teachers not seeing this?

Anyway I had the parent demand she be tested for ADHD - they will begin the process.

My point is - we should not be mustering children out of special services to accomodate Saavedra - the numbers are the numbers and BISD needs to defend the reality.

I do agree when there is clear evidence BISD is abusing special accomodation in testing it needs to stop and those responsible for it need to be fired. It is a serious matter - but we should not muster the kids out too fast.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

that is what I thought "misunderstood" but I needed for you to make the clarification.

But I am serious - I do not care who the trustee is - if they are interfering with governance we need to correct them and the BV is open to any valid complaint against any trustee - no exceptions

On that ADHD kid - I just remembered BISD fought us on getting the brother tested. We were wrong - well the pediatric psychiatrist tested him and he has ADHD and he doing quite well on his medication. In fact in the last 6 months I have seen a new young man.

He got help - he was treated by a great pediatric psychiatist who recognized BISD was clueless in how to deal with children with biologically based mental health problems. This is why we need a PhD therapist with a strong background in biologically based mental illness heading Special Services

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

At your request I am not posting your comment - I have asked someone for information on the issue - I will ask the TEA tomorrow

Good Question - hopefully she has the proof

But I will tell you - if she has the proof I suggest she consult an attorney and seek advice - she needs to preserve her rights - if her attorney agrees she should call a press conference and let the parents know what is happening

If what you are saying she is clearly endangering the kids - the parents need to know this

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Thank you for all your work! Please keep us informed with the latest.

Anonymous said...

Budget workshop tonight, should be interesting.

Anonymous said...

We are also so tired of all this corruption going on with over zealous administrators. I, as a para-professional, feel that we are up against a cartel. They hire unqualified people and invent positions for their friends or relatives, then spend thousands on needless items. I am sorry to vent Bobby, but I am sure this is common at BISD.