Tuesday, April 2, 2013


I think the good stuff will not start until about 6 - so be patient - I will type and post and then edit later as time permits.

Dr. Saavedra is out of town - interesting how this will impact Presas-Garcia's and Luci Longoria.

Pay adjustments have been pulled from agenda to be handled all at once during regular budget discussions

There have been a lot of presentations.  It might be 7 p.m. before the fireworks begin - although Presas-Garcia did a crying scene stealing the show from the athletes who worked so hard.  It was shameful - "Be like me and you will succeed, all while crying."


Presas-Garcia wants answers on the process, but then defends the police needing it because of events - but bus drivers do not?  Then Peña raises the question as to why Rendon is giving more hours to some drivers than others.  She said "hours should not be based on liking someone"  Apparently favored bus drivers and monitors are getting 40+ hours while others are struggling to get 32 hours.


Escobedo gave Fernando Ruiz a lot of leeway to reprimand the Board - all the way to the point of accusing the Board of threatening past and present superintendents.  He went on to calling on greater protections for the superintendent against the Board Members.


Luci Longoria is demanding the Rules be changed to allow her more than 2 minutes.  She wasted 30 seconds demanding more time - she is now claiming in conclusory words she is a victim calling it a "personal vendetta."  She is not outlining violations - she is simply attacking Enrique Escobedo as being against her.  She is now claiming to be a constitutional scholar and claiming the constitution has been violated.

Longoria actually stated the constitution is being violated.

Presas-Garcia is claiming the Rules were violated by not allowing her to speak.  She is claiming Peña claimed Escobedo violated her rights also in the past - Presas-Garcia  fails to mention she had no complaints when Escobedo repeatedly shut Peña down.

No action against Escobedo


Presas-Garcia is claiming Escobedo is violating her rights.  She is now claiming they need to be a Board of 8 - exactly when did she care about the Board of 8 when she had the majority and silenced Pena at every turn?  Presas-Garcia just basically threatened Escobedo that his time on the Board is shorter than hers.  I am listening to Longoria explain the constitution.

Even though this is a censure of Presas-Garcia Longoria is attacking Escobedo - when he was voting with them why were they not complaining then?

Pena is saying none were elected to make a fool of themselves or be clowns.  She is claiming the Board is causing people to leave BISD and be embarrassed by the Board.  She is saying that when she is told to stop talking she stops - because the Rule says stop - this is a clear attack on Presas-Garcia - she is claiming the community looks upon them as evil. 

Powers - asks key word for censure - lawyer says means the majority of the Board believe the acts of the Board Member are unacceptable - past conduct.  It has no impact on future.  She accuses Escobedo of being disrespectful to women. 


Escobedo moves for censure based on acts in Board Meetings and outside Board Meetings.  Record will be sent to TEA.  Presas-Garcia continues to argue after the time for argument is closed, while claiming she follows the Rules.


A majority not including Presas-Garcia and Longoria voted to table the new school calender.  The teachers were not happy with the proposed calender.


The policies are being reinforced to force a greater disclosure of conflict of interests with businesses.


Longoria is claiming that using the email system to discuss issues may constitute a walking quorum.  She is now suggesting that Board Members limit  how many items they submit.  The problem appears to be Board Members are forced to ask if their items will be on the agenda.

The issue is agenda items.  Presas-Garcia is complaining again this is a conspiracy against her.  She fails to mention that what was happening was Board Members would bully the superintendent to put things on the agenda after the deadline.  The compromise may be to allow the Members to put items on the agenda, but respect the deadline and then limit how many items they can put on the agenda.  But the idea that a Board Member can bully the superintendent to put an item on the agenda after the deadline is unacceptable.

Longoria moves that the policy be put back the way it was.  The Motion died.  Had Longoria simply moved to amend the rule to limit the number of items with no bullying of the Superintendent she would have won the issue, but she could not even go along with what a clear majority would have supported.  She wants unlimited items with no clarification that there shall be no bullying of the superintendent.

My note - every Member should be allowed to put 3-5 items on the agenda every meeting without needing any one's permission.  Any Member who tries to bully the superintendent to put an item on the agenda after the deadline should face censure.


Presas-Garcia wants Thompson Horton to be allowed to keep the cases they have.  Montoya notes the cases will go to the new law firm.

Thompson Horton has been terminated


Baltazar Salazar  - is the new counsel - I did not hear the first name for sure - if I am wrong let me know - the first recommended attorney failed to secure 4 votes.   If it is Baltazar Salazar a quick google search tells me nothing about him.  Once someone confirms for me I have the right guy I will do more research.

I have to say Escobedo moved this issue along way too fast - that is why I  could not clearly hear the names of the attorneys.


They came back and voted unanimously for something - I did not hear it.  They then adjourned.


Anonymous said...

Who is Mr. Atkinson I think she must have meant Mr. Powers.

BobbyWC said...

I have no idea

Anonymous said...

Taming of the Shrew- it's about time!

Anonymous said...

Bobby, not for posting. I know you said you would edit later. Remember that censor and censure although similar are not interchaneable. Cata was censured. I'm glad you gave a blow by blow since I do not subscribe to Time Warner. Rather dismayed on choice of Attorney. After seeing the attorney presentations, the man chosen gave the worst presentation. Oh well, what else is new? Keep up the good work.

BobbyWC said...

I do not mind friendly corrections - they are helpful - It was a stupid mistake on my part - as soon as I saw your post I understood and saw how stupid the mistake is - I am on very little sleep and failed to catch an obvious mistake - Keaaton gets up 3-4 times a night to go to the bathroom - i am so so tired - I will make the corrections

I believe getting it right is best as as team effort


Also I am concerned how the attorney was chosen - I did not like how fast he went

bobby WC

Anonymous said...

I think the reason that it went so fast was because they were all there to hear the presentations and they had time to make a decision. It was going to just be putting up a name until they had the votes. For the person who doesn't have TW you can watch on your computer.

Anonymous said...

Bobby, did they approve all the pay adjustments for a select few?

BobbyWC said...

I made the corrections - I even found a few more corrections - I will always find corrections - unfortunately I do not really read the words I read the substantive intent of the words - words have zero meaning - it is their context and how they are connected - this is how I read - I have been tested for analytical skills - they are way above average - this is why it is so hard for me to see every little grammatical error. I can read a really bad post in terms of grammar and know exactly what the poster is saying because I am reading for content - not grammar -

I do love reading the NYT because I read it slowly with the intent of watching every phrase and word use -

This has always been a weakness for me - but like my mentor told me years ago - you can teach a comma, but you cannot teach strong analytical skills - you can teach the process - but you either have the skill or you do not

2 years before the Berlin Wall came down I did a graduate paper on Glastnost and Perestroika in the USSR while plugging it into the concept of a Revolution of Rising Expectations. I used UN documents and a CIA magazine back then called "Problems with Communism". I also used several NYT articles.

I had been taught a long time before how to build a model of analysis. Once I had my model my goal was to plug in the data. My conclusion was the Soviet Union under Gorbachev would fall and the Berlin Wall would come done.

My professor gave me an A- and said the A- minus was for the quality of the model of analysis and depth of research. He then noted it would never happen. I visited him after law school and asked if he still thought I only deserved an A- and he said his training left him biased against believing the Soviet Union would ever collapse. You see I was trained as a Sovietologist and he was trained as a Russian Studies analyst. He never had a fighting chance. They are two different approaches to analysis when it comes to the old Soviet Union.

After law school I interviewed at Baker and Botts. I was invited to a meet the partners party. I was introduced to the partner then in charge of their international division. Latin America was their big market - his racist attitude towards Latin America wanted to make me puke.

I spoke with several partners and asked why they did not have an office in Baku and Moscow. they asked why and I said Texas - oil

Three years later they were in Moscow -

An analytical mind will never see all the grammatical errors - the design of the brain prevents me from seeing all of the errors. I can assure you if I could afford a professional editor who understood their only job is to check for structure I would. years ago I hired a secretary for this purpose - she insisted her job was to completely change everything - analysis is not subject to change - fix the grammar and leave the analysis alone.

thanks again for your help - it was a stupid mistake - I know the difference but an real real tired. I am hoping if I leave Keaton outside until midnight playing (which is what she is doing right now) she may let me sleep through the night)

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

okay where on the computer can you watch the meeting?

I think I heard they put off the pay adjustments until budget time and they would handle it all at once, but I could be wrong.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

I cannot publish your comment because it contains defamation per se if I cannot prove it -

This is the deal - any lawyer hired will always be hired to do the majority's dirty work - it is sad but true - but also good lawyers are always fired for not doing the dirty work of the majority.

This is an interim hire - what Presas-garcia needs to do is push the issue of a permanent hire. Of course when they hired Thompson Horton she had no interest in pushing for permanent counsel - but Presas-Garcia needs to make an issue of this every meeting until the request is made for a permanent attorney. this nonsense of endless interim counsel has to change

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

I believe the RFQ was for a permanent hire not an interim.

BobbyWC said...

I think page 10 below verifies what you are saying


It says for one year - this in my opinion makes the majority which voted for this a joke - why were the people not allowed to have the firms bid in an open process like last time.

Presas-Garcia has a valid complaint on this one - but like I said any firm hired will be hired to do the dirty work - the issue now is will Salazar recommend refiling Healthsmart - that is the goal and Presas-garcia has only pushed Escobedo even further into that direction.

But for sure the majority made themselves look corrupt by doing it this way

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

"But for sure the majority made themselves look corrupt by doing it this way" Really? Anything the Board does is looked as corrput by a select few. What can you do!

BobbyWC said...

until we have a real newspaper - nothing

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

This is the online source for KBSD it is on all of the time.

Anonymous said...

They used the usual procedure for obtaining professional services. The RFP's were sent and then the firms presented at a special called mtg on Monday night. They were given equal amounts of time to present then the board members were allowed to ask question. CPG no knowing the process asked if the administration was going to rank them or make a recommendation. Dr. Montoya informed her it was the board attorney and they did not participate in the choosing.

BobbyWC said...

transparency says it should have been done at the regular board meeting. I did just check the agenda postings - what they did was post it at he last minute which is why a lot of us never saw it - this does not speak of transparency

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

I am sorry but they posted it within the required amount of time. It was listed on the web site when the regular meeting was posted. They always do these types of meeting in a special meeting as they then have time to make a personal decision before voting. Theis meeting was televised also. To post it at the last minute it would have to be an emergency meeting and this one was not. This is when it was sent out and it is also posted at the same time
Sent: Thu, Mar 28, 2013 6:49 pm
Subject: Agendas (SCBM 04-01-13, RBM 04-02-13, Budget Mtng 04-03-13)

Attached please find the following agendas:

Special Called Board Meeting
Monday, April 1, 2013 @ 5:30 p.m.
1900 East Price Road, Boardroom

Regular Board Meeting
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 @ 5:30 p.m.
1900 East Price Road, Boardroom

Budget Committee Meeting
Wednesday, April 3, 2013 @ 4:00 p.m.
1900 East Price Road, Boardroom

Please print as needed.

Thank you,

BobbyWC said...

i am not saying they posted it outside the rules, but when I did my story on the agenda it had not yet been posted - that is what I mean - I am not saying there is a timing problem

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

The video of the presentation of the law firms is posted on the BISD web site. If you wish to see only Mr. Salazar go to 36 min and that is about where he starts his presentation.

BobbyWC said...

thank you so much - I will make a special post of it - it takes my readers to make the BV work

Thanks again

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...


click for lawyer meeting

Anonymous said...

My only comment after watching his presentation is he knows the board/administration and the good bad and the ugly. Hopefully he can do what he said he could if chosen.

Anonymous said...

"It says for one year - this in my opinion makes the majority which voted for this a joke - why were the people not allowed to have the firms bid in an open process like last time."

Seriously Bobby! Did you not see the posting of Monday's meeting? Come on... stay focused my friend. We need you to be on the ball, Sir.

BobbyWC said...

The Tuesday agenda was post very early this time compared to other weeks - The Monday meeting was not posted yet - I had no reason to go back and see if they posted a special meeting

Anyone is free to check their agenda - not just me

I have posted the video so everyone can see it

From the moment of the vote I said I did not like how fast they went

Bobby WC