Tuesday, February 1, 2011


Here is tonight's agenda. I cannot find anything related to the bond issue. (Well I was wrong - Item 9 which appeared only informational was in fact the story) Now, I guess Presas-Garcia could raise it in relationship to one of the contract items. But there is no direct discussion of the issue.  If I am wrong tell me the item number and I will highlight it. ( I am sorry I missed this- I just did not see it - )

In fact the agenda seems kind of straight forward and without an indication for controversy.



Thanks for the help in identifying this.

9. Information, discussion, and possible action referencing the Lease Revenue Qualified

School Construction Bonds Series 2010A, 2010B, 2010C, and 2010E. Presentation made

by Estrada & Hinojosa – Financial Advisors, and Fulbright & Jaworski – Bond Counsel.

B. Recommend approval of the following Payment:

10. Recommend approval to pay Gignac & Associates Architects, LLP $10,181.22; (Daniel

Breeden Elementary School #144); Raba Kistner Consultants, Inc. $8,236.11; (Daniel

Breeden Elementary School #144) and Texas Descon, L.P. $222,845.00; (Brownsville

Early College High School and Brownsville Academic Center) for a grand total of

$241,262.33 to be paid from Local Maintenance Fund 199/Qualified School Construction

Bond Fund.
I want to see how their new  counsel handles Presas-Garcia going after Fulbright and Jaworski.

The construction issue is not  complex.  We build the schools now with only having to pay part of the costs, or build later and pay 100% of the costs.  Do we do it at the discount rate and at a time to avoid overcrowding or do we wait for overcrowding and pay 100% of the costs of construction?  We know for sure Presas-Garcia, Longoria and Saavedra prefer we wait for overcrowding and then pay 100% of the costs of new construction.


TPM - is a process which makes the school district look better than it is really doing.  It basically moves the campus out of not meeting standards to meeting standards based on a projected future pass.  It is important that the parents understand this is a deception.  It is used by every school district in the state.  The deception is from the state not BISD.  Parents need to understand this so they know the schools may not be doing as well as they think they are.  This was a good discussion.

BISD is Recognized without the TPM - so things are not totally bad.  It was noted that BISD would have been exemplary had the graduation rate been 95%.  So it is a mixed baggage


This was a discussion about how the budget process will work.  The big problem is, the Texas legislature may be in a special session without a budget at a  time that the schools will already be under their new budgets.

9. Information, discussion, and possible action referencing the Lease Revenue Qualified
School Construction Bonds Series 2010A, 2010B, 2010C, and 2010E. Presentation made

by Estrada & Hinojosa – Financial Advisors, and Fulbright & Jaworski – Bond Counsel.
Hinojosa opens with the TEA Commissioner changed the rules on the IFA rules.  On January 6, TEA requested an amendment to the application which will mean BISD is on the hook for $9 million dollars or about $650,000 a year.  The problem comes from a regulation related to the federal part. The TEA is trying to stop what they see as double dipping.
He then backtracks further and says he warned the board in past meetings this could happen.  Sorry I am not buying it.  A mistake was made - just be honest.  What is clear is, Estrada & Hinojosa was not clear about the reality behind the program.
He is now discussing that the benefit from the State is $19 million and BISD would have lost it had they not moved forward on December 7. 
The issue remains clear - we wait for overcrowding and then build without the state assistance or we build now with both the federal and state grant money and avoid overcrowding.  The bottom line is the federal and state government will pay 80% and BISD will pay 20%.
But we cannot get around the fact Estrada and Hinojosa messed up. He should have verified the rules just before December 7, 2010.
Presas-Garcia is BSing that she was not told all of the indicators - but she does not name the indicators.  But I think the Board needs to inform the people that the mistake was not made by the board,  but by Estrada and Hinojosa, and the TEA.
Springston is discussing the importance to the children  -Presas-Garcia is unimpressed that they are trying to help the children.  Portables are not how you teach children.
Hinojosa is reinforcing the claims that the TEA changed the rules.  He is also noting that BISD is getting a great deal by having the feds and state pay 80%.  We are not going to get this later.  It would be insane to not take the money now because IFA money and other such money will be removed from the state budget.  The point is, in 2012 when the classrooms are bursting at the seam BISD will be on the hook for 100% of the costs, because there will be no money in the state budget. If anything the state budget problems mandate BISD take the money now while it still exists.
Longoria asked a good question about the TEA changes. 90% of the interest is being paid by the feds.  The TEA represented they would treat the bonds as if no subsidy from the feds.  When the TEA decided they would take into account the federal subsidy, this decreased what the TEA would pay.  Hinojosa learned of the problem on January 6, 2011.
In March 2010, the TEA in writing to Hinojosa stated  the rules as followed on December 7, 2010.  But Hinojosa based on his own statements should have gotten confirmation before the December 7, 2010.   Yes the TEA is playing games, but Hinojosa did not do his job by confirming the rules.
Crockett of the TEA knew what he had on the web sight was misleading and he knew he lied to me.  This is total BS from the TEA.  Like I said I knew he was hedging his comments to me - which is why I tried to learn more about the problem.  Even then with my follow-up to the TEA I was mislead and made to believe the feds are the problem and not the TEA.  Again total BS by the TEA. 
Saavedra is trying to make it look like Springston was hiding this - Hinojosa made clear BISD and Springston were not informed right away.  Hinojosa is playing a numbers games.  The more he speaks the worst he sounds.  Again, yes the TEA changed the rules, but Hinojosa should have verfied the rules on December 7, 2010.
Escobedo makes clear BISD Aministration did nothing (told you he is protecting Springston) wrong on this issue and that the deal is still good and that BISD can still appeal. Like I said it is not a done deal.  Escobedo showed his cards when he said he would prefer to use other architectural firms.
I call it the way I see it - Hinojosa messed up and should have checked the rules before the December 7, 2010, - he did not.  This Board finally has a good reason to replace someone - Estrada and Hinojosa messed up an should be replaced.
The Fulbright lawyer is talking about his conversations with Lawrence Crockett  - I will file a complaint against Lawrence Crockett - this guy point blank lied to me - he mislead BISD - there needs to be accountability.  I will send the head of the TEA my phone and email records with an affidavit to verify Lawrence Crockett lied to me - this type game playing is not acceptable.
Longoria is trying to make it look like the original award letter is a smoking gun.  Fulbright counsel is making clear it is a form conditional award letter.  He is making clear there is no smoking gun in the letter.  Longoria is just proving to the listeners she is on a witch hunt and in the process is looking stupid.
Longoria must love looking stupid - she is trying to paint the original IFA application as having mistakes - evidence - none - Fulbright counsel is making it clear she is simply wrong.  Aguilar called Longoria to identify the errors -  the error is TEA's claim BISD was not deducting the Fed benefit - but this is not an error because the the TEA's claim is based on a change in the rules.
Pena is questioning whether or not we are being strong armed.  It is being made known that the TEA rules have not actually been changed yet.  The TEA is simply demanding a change without actually amending the rules.

What should be happening is the Board working together on an appeal.  I think the appeal is strong  But no, Presas-Garcia, Longoria, and Saavedra are interested more in throwing stones instead of protecting the BISD.  This is when you need a united front, but no these three are driven in trying to blame Springston.

There is a spitting match over a letter and some numbers - Presas-Garcia is claiming the letter shows Springston is making mistakes - Hinojosa is explaining Presas-Garcia is taking things out of context and that Springston has done nothing wrong.  Again an example of her desperation to make him look bad.

On this issue it is over and once again Presas-Garcia and Longoria have proven they are intentionally misleading the public through their convicted con-artist and convicted drunk media persons.  Yes there was a problem - but a problem created by the TEA with no fault on BISD Administration.  I will say Hinojosa messed up by not confirming the regulations before December 7, 2010.

The Board voted to amend the IFA Application with an appeal.  What an idiot Longoria is, she is told to reconsider the vote the winning side must make the motion - she then makes the motion even though she was on the losing side.

The vote was 4/3.  Presas-Garcia, Longoria,  and Saavedra voted to not accept the money - remember 80% will be paid by the state and feds.  People, no time in the future will this money be in the state or federal budget.  This means by turning it down BISD taxpayers would be 100% liable for the construction if BISD were to move forward in 2012 or 2013.  Presas-Garcia, Longoria and Saavedra proved they support reckless conduct when it comes to fiscal responsibility.  Also remember all this construction means local jobs for teh  construction industry which is hurting.

To be clear the original payment would have been $150,000, a year, if  BISD looses the appeal BISD will pay an additional $400,000 a year for a total of $650,000.


This 6th grade girl did a great story on her study as to why competitive swimming should start in middle school

Patrick Hammes

He begins by telling the Board he was wrong about his claim on the increase in travel pay.  He withdraw his claims.  He then went on to note the Board needs to be willing to also admit to their misrepresentations.

He's noting the new board is not keeping an open door as promised during the campaign.  He is demanding a conversation to deal with these issues related to the budget.

John "I kiss Presas-Garcia's Ass" Clark, rather than deal with the board's lack of communication he instead attacks Noe Hinojosa.  How is this being proactive and helping the process.  He point blank lies and says the TEA did not approve the IFA's before December 7, 2010.  They did approve the IFA's - they just changed the rule after the facts.   The teachers represented by this turkey need to change unions.

Does anyone know how many teachers he represents vs the union Patrick Hammes is part of?

They are in executive session over personnel matters


ITEM 10:  Escobedo left the building before the vote - the work has been done - they actually voted to not pay the bill  - now they have egg on their face - they can be sued - we are on a reconsideration - they now voted 6-0 to pay their bill.  Presas-Garcia, Longoria and Saavedra are idiots.  These three are determined to do injury to BISD


She tried to shut down items 18 and 19 without even knowing what they were about.  She made it clear she was opposing it because she opposes the bond money.  She got another lecture on reality and it passed 6-0.


Go to bed - it is done - no further action.

I may or may not have a post on Wednesday.    I am very close to getting on a plane and seeking medical treatment in NY.   I thought I had another TIA yesterday.  The VA's policy is they put you on the medication and if you do not have a TIA for a year they take you off the medicine until you have another one.

I am fairly  certain what happened yesterday was part of the hormone deficiency problem.  I am back on some vitamin D hormone replacement.  I have been recommended for testosterone injections. I do not know if the VA will approve it.  It has been a week and I am still waiting.  It may be time for me to just use a family endocrinologist in NY and just pay for my treatment.  The situation in Harlingen is a complete and total nightmare.  With the doctors overwhelmed they actually laid off a telenurse. 

Without this telenurse more vets will do walk ins and get the doctors further behind.  I went today to learn the VA scans in the recommendations from the private doctors and does nothing with them until the veteran shows up demanding action.  This is their actual policy.  Anyway I am off to bed -  it is so sad all these great doctors at the Harlingen facility are taking the blame for what is in fact bad decisions by incompetent administrators. 


Anonymous said...

Section XI Consent Agenda

Items 9 & 10 is where they will play politics at the expense of the children of BISD.

Anonymous said...

They are all idiots!

Anonymous said...

The taxpayers also need to be reminded that the bond issue that passed and everyone was so excited about was money that the state paid 76%. This is even a better deal.

Anonymous said...

Bola de mensos!

Anonymous said...

Mr. Clark couldn't represesnt many as AOBE (Mr. Hames) has 4000 ATPE is the next largest and the Classroom Teachers which is Mr. Clarks group doesn't have many left to represent. Many teacher/employees do not belong to any group. There are only about 7000 employees to represent.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for reporting the truth!!!

Anonymous said...

Mr. Clark's group only has around 40 members.

BobbyWC said...

I wish I could confirm this number. I found several articles - they always say how many in patricks group but never Clark's

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

You might be able to get a number from a public info request. I am sure they use payroll deduction.

Anonymous said...

how many students will fit in the new school?

Anonymous said...

I felt that the entire Board should have blasted Hinojosa for his carelessness. The majority Board members should have not cow towed to Hinojosa and seek his "expertise" wisdom for his mistake.

What was Hinojosa's comment about someone retiring and therefore Hinojosa had to come in and make the presentation and was therefore not fully versed in the details of the agenda item since he has not been a hands on supervisor. Did this person he mentioned retired or was he fired?

The Board should fire Hinojosa as well Fulbright & Jaworski! Afterall, why are we accepting verbal agreements with TEA instead of written agreements? Isn't this covered in Business Law 101?

You need to give credit to John Clark. I don't care about his political alliances, but I do care about his sincere concerns. It is true that anything dealing with construction, the BISD construction agenda item is usually rushed & cited as an emergency item but the details of the deals are handled more of an afterthought.

You should have posted Clark's comments. It is a feeling most BISD people would agree.

Anonymous said...

Point 1: It should be noted that this is a good deal. Had the board not done the amendment BISD would have to pay 100%. They need to think before they speak.

Point 2: The board or they parnoid 3 need to stop belittling BISD. Any attack on the Superintendent is an attack on BISD and all of its employees.

Point 3: It is important that everyone knows that BISD can provide numbers to the board for discussion but without solid numbers from the state (which we do not have), administration's hands are tied. Can BISD cut the budget without cutting personnel, yes. How? Everyone must be willing to compromise.

Point 4: If someone were willing to do so they should request a copy of the tape of the 2-1-11 meeting and send it to the Department of Education, TEA. The BISD board is going to bring BISD down, but perhaps that is their goal.

BobbyWC said...

I agree with you, as I noted, about Hinojosa - also Fulbright - I think they were negligent

But on Clark you are wrong - it was made clear - there was no rush - the IFA funds had been approved 6 months earlier - the vote wa taken as a deadline vote - had they not voted yes on December 6th it would have been the same as voting no

Clark new this and he chose to mislead people in his speach - Clark is no better and is probably worse than Presas-Garcia

Again by not voting on December 7th they would have said no to all of the money

This was not a rush and no argument can possibly be made it was a rsu - it was 6 months after the IFA money was approved

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

BISD is in the mess it is because of zayas and cortez, admit you idiots.

Bob, we know who is feeding you all this info. it's springston and zayas and we know zayas is pulling his strings from behind the scene, we are not stupid as you and he.

While you are at it, we don't you request a copy of the letter springston wrote to TEA.

BobbyWC said...

really - so everyone who watched Escobedo last night defend Springston imagined it - Why is Escobedo defending Springston - again?

Please tell us.

Can you produce any evidence that Zayas and Cortez forced the federal government to create this program and then force all of the schools who tried to use it use it and then forced the TEA to change the rules.

Really the conspiracy is that big - really?

But what clear Hinojosa and the Fulbrighth lawyer were nervous and playing word games.

You will hear no opposition from me, unless it will cost money, to fire both of these people.

Springston has to be able to rely on advice of the experts - I thing Hinojosa knew BISD was double dipping and played anyway - which is why by his own admission he withheld the bad news from Springston which only made things worse.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Let me get this straight. Presas-Garcia and her ilk want taxpayers to believe that spending .00013% vs. .00003% of BISD's annual budget in return for having the federal government picking up 80% of the tab for a significant improvement in District facilities is a bad thing ? Ridiculous.......I ethically achieved financial security following the simple advice of my father that goes like this. "Never take money advice from people with none of it." Presas-Garcia, Longoria, Saveedra, Quintanilla, and Montoya have no money SO.......This taxpayer says thank you to the board members that voted correctly last night. They did the right thing even in the face of impending reductions in state dollars. NOT doing so due to the impending reductions in state dollars is truly the hollow, irresponsible, and politically motivated argument.

Anonymous said...

Hey Bobby, Who do you think keeps blogging about Zayas and Cortez on your blog? Presas-Garcia, Longoria or Quintanilla? Any guesses?

Anonymous said...

To answer previous Anony.......

"BISD is in the mess it is because of zayas and cortez, admit you idiots."

"While you are at it, we don't you request a copy of the letter springston wrote to TEA."

Presas-Garcia's intellectual and grammatical limitations in full effect.

Anonymous said...

Seems that these people are following the BS of the Barrak/Barry Obama administration tactic of blaming the previous administration for everything. I think alot of the problem with the new board members, is that they are incapable of understanding what is being discussed.
They suffer from TMD - To Much Donkey, or JPD, Just Plain Dumb!