Fort Bend ISD parents want greater role in rezoning
School board trims procedure, forms committee
By ZEN T. C. ZHENG
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
Some parents, community activists and a school board trustee are upset with a Fort Bend Independent School District decision to reduce the number of public meetings from three to one on annual plans to redraw attendance zones.
"It's extremely disappointing. They're taking away the taxpayers' right to participate in the process. That shows the district doesn't want to foster good will with the community," said Rosalia Guerrero, a member of the Concerned Citizens Group, a district watchdog organization formed in 2006 during rezoning that stirred strong public protest.
Stan Magee, the lone board trustee against the new policy proposed by the administration, also questioned the administration's practice of crafting a policy for the board to adopt.
Guerrero, a Sugar Land resident, said she was disappointed by the rest of the board.
"They were elected to represent the community and supposed to work for the community more and not less. But they were doing just the opposite," she said. . . (follow the link for more)
http://missouricitychatter.blogspot.com/2007/11/chron-community-upset-at-recent-fbisd.html
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nb/fortbend/news/5321399.html
See additional comments from FBISD taxpayers discussing this in the community on different blogs:
http://blogs.chron.com/fortbend/archives/2007/11/fort_bend_isd_d.html
http://www.fortbendnow.com/opinion/3534/magee-fort-bend-isd-community-input-on-attendance-zoning-loses-out
http://missouricitychatter.blogspot.com/2007/11/chron-community-upset-at-recent-fbisd.html
http://fbisdwatch.blogspot.com/2007/11/houston-chronicle-covers-fbisd-vote-to.html
http://www.fortbendweb.com/webapp/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=viewnews&id=830#topcomment
-----------
FBW comment/opinion:
This decision by all but 1 of the BOT members would seem to defy the promises made for more open forums and public input during the recent bond campaign. Is this what our new superintendent and board has in store?
8 comments:
Previously viewed area blog comments on this issue:
fbisdwatch said...
Recent FBN comments:
1 Muckraker - Nov 14, 07:26 PM
“which effectively eliminates the revised Board Policy FC-R, which was amended two years ago to provide three community meetings with the school board.”
Mr. Magee,
Please continue to open up the process and share inside information with the public. I can’t think of any reason for them to reduce public involvement unless it is akin to what happened during the supposedly open bond meetings, which turned out to be a very carefully selected steering group.
Please help keep the process open and the general public/taxpayers/voters involved. I’ve served on a “rubber stamping” committee for the school district. We don’t need these and they are an insult to any thinking person.
Thank you for getting this out to us!
2 Rodrigo Carreon - Nov 14, 08:32 PM
Voter agree that elected officials that fails to work with the public, Must step down ! As a FBISD bond committee member and present board meeting(11/12/07) attendant, I agree with Mr. Magee wording, that the public has to be included for all re-zoning actions. The board has deny public inputs from the previous re-zone plan that left Fresno students divide out for two middle school (Lake Olympia & Christa McAuliffe).
Administrators are un-experience with communities they’re not from or don’t live in. They’ll be directed to follow FBISD zone plans or risk losing job? School district Residents or taxpayer should know their communities and school campuses to be re-zone, of FBISD they pay taxes to.
3 Carlos - Nov 14, 10:14 PM
One more reason why the public should have said NO to the bond. Now we have NO leverage at all. Although I’m not happy about this.
I TOLD YOU SO!
As far as I’m concerned you ALL voted for this when you gave them their Half a Billion Dollars of OUR money. Nows guess what STAN – you helped them get where they are. You and your PRO BOND kiss the rich developers a@@‘s voters can sleep in this pig pen, after all you built it!
l’m putting my child in private school.
November 15, 2007 1:16 PM
fbisdwatch said...
more:
4 Carlos - Nov 15, 12:31 AM
Muckraker – “very carefully selected steering group.
Yes a VERY select steering committee to which Mr. Magee was party too and a very integral part of which makes me wonder about his motives NOW? Please share with us Mr. Magee why you are suddenly turning on your pals? I can’t wait to hear this one. Let me get my hip boots on.
5 Muckraker - Nov 15, 07:46 AM
Perhaps an election is coming up. Does anyone have the last several disclosure filings for Magee and the other board members? Do you Mr. Cain have a cross-list of vendors and contributors?
6 anonymous - Nov 15, 08:27 AM
I see no issue with this. This is why we elected them. Communities control the board through the elections. Once elected they are in charge of making the tough decisions. On attendance zoning, the only public input they have or ever will get is from people who don’t want to go where they are being assigned. As I see it I would rather they be making the decisions than many who post on this site.
Carlos — you told us so, I assume you now feel better. I am happy to suffer in the “pen” we built, thanks for making more room.
7 Bob Dunn - Nov 15, 09:14 AM
The topic of this opinion piece is the FBISD Board’s policy toward changing school attendance zones.
I am politely reminding posters to stay on topic or, if you want to discuss something else, compose a suitable letter to the editor and take the topic of your choice to that resulting comment thread.
8 Jimmy Kilpatrick - Nov 15, 11:18 AM
The issue at hand is community involvement. We may elect people to position of trust but open and honest input is required.
Considering parents are limited to three minutes before the board we need public input on zoning. I hope this isn’t common trick or racially based con by the administration since the white population in the district is dropping.
Where are the checks on line Mr. McGee?
November 15, 2007 1:17 PM
anonymous said...
this reminds me of the monday bot session where it looked like they were silencing a group of parents from sienna. i had to get what was going on from the houston news.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=5762399
November 15, 2007 2:08 PM
kidsfirst said...
The idea of placing accounting records online for the public is a good one, but it doesn't appear, after recent board votes, that they are headed in this direction.
November 16, 2007 4:47 AM
fbisdwatch said...
More:
9 Muckraker - Nov 15, 04:19 PM
“On attendance zoning, the only public input they have or ever will get is from people who don’t want to go where they are being assigned. As I see it I would rather they be making the decisions than many who post on this site.”
I see anon it is better to not allow the public any input in a democracy, because it will only lead to complaints. I believe Pol Pot would agree with you.
10 Carlos - Nov 16, 02:03 AM
This is just one more example of what we can expect in the future. Less parent input. After all we are “Partners” with FBISD. Now maybe the public will realize we are “Minority” partners at best. At worst – I hate to think about it. One more step towards communism. We’re like those happy little crabs in that pot of cold, hmm warm water – until… and then it’s too late!!!
11 anonymous - Nov 16, 08:35 AM
“I see anon it is better to not allow the public any input in a democracy, because it will only lead to complaints.”
Not what I said. I said input should be at Voting Booth, or better yet running for a position.
Also, they are allowing for public input on what they had determined to be the best plan rather than letting the sqeaky wheel determine the plan.
Rather than spending time listening to parents who will likely not be affected by it they will limit their time to people who will be directly affected by it.
Is it the best plan? No. Is it better? Yes.
12 Jimmy Kilpatrick - Nov 16, 09:04 AM
Facists may be a better term!
13 Muckraker - Nov 16, 10:06 AM
“Is it the best plan? No. Is it better? Yes.”
Sounds like an opinion, but not one those in democratic societies should support. Let’s take for example the national presidential primaries going on. Much of that involves people directly impacted and much positive and negative comments are being exchanged. I don’t think applying your logic in a supposedly open system is effective. Again I’m sure many closed totalitarian systems utilize just such tactics, for them I’m sure the strategy is sound, but not for those paying the taxes and voting.
I support open systems and ongoing discussions, especially if we are not to be hypocrites. Public schools are democratic institutions answerable to the many publics they serve…not elitist closed systems…(is this your version of semper fi?)
November 16, 2007 7:08 AM
anonymous said...
i've never seen our form of government characterized this way,
"letting the sqeaky wheel determine the plan."
November 16, 2007 8:48 AM
fbisdwatch said...
More:
14 Muckraker - Nov 16, 10:36 AM
“Not what I said. I said input should be at Voting Booth, or better yet running for a position.”
How does giving voters a very limited choice of hand picked insider candidates give them access to publically addressing concerns in a democracy? Taxpayers have every right to speak up in fair and open forums, that is democracy. I suppose you think China’s actions in Tiananmen square were justified…
15 Rodrigo Carreon - Nov 16, 12:46 PM
Elected official must step forward to open doors for more public input an issues, or step down/back thence take care ofr own personal issues at home. Leadership from more public input.
16 anonymous - Nov 16, 02:00 PM
“Let’s take for example the national presidential primaries going on”
Again, now is the time for public input. After they are elected I do not want them holding public input meeting after public input meeting before they do something. If this is what you want, then why even have elected officials, just leave everything up to public input and vote on every thing that needs to be done.
“Again I’m sure many closed totalitarian systems utilize just such tactics”
Elected officials are not in a totalitarian system.
You should vote for people who will best represent what you want. If that person does not exist, you can either run for the position yourself or wait for the next election.
Officals should be held accountable for their actions. We have the right be kick someone out of office or not elect them should they choose to run again.
17 Anon - Nov 16, 02:25 PM
Muckraker – - seems like an appropriate name based on your comments. You really don’t understand representative government at all, if you think this is how our system operates. “A few elitist candidates?” Are you kidding me? Look at who has run for the school board very closely before you sound off. I don’t think that Rodrigo Carreon would appreciate being called an elitist, or Ann Hopkins, or Noel Pinnock, or Larry Danna, or on and on and on. The truth is any citizen can file and run for the school board, or any other office. Why don’t you give it a shot? But before you do, I think you need to study up on democracy and the representative form of government. I do not understand how a change in an administrative policy, that does not impact anyone negatively is the equivalento of fascism (Jimmy Kilpatrick), Pol Pot (Muckraker) or Communist China in Tianmen Square (Muckraker again) has any bearing on the school board in Fort Bend. You folks need to find a better hobby!!
18 Muckraker - Nov 16, 02:44 PM
“Elected officials are not in a totalitarian system.”
Elected officials are not in totalitarian regimes? That’s an interesting misnomer. Even in the old days of the USSR and currently in China they claim to have elections of party officials by the party, not much dissension with the tanks to keep the public quiet. Yes they do have elections. I can just imagine your system with no town hall meetings or other forums and the very few hand picked insider candidates to give off the facade of a democratic venue….what a wonderful world for the few elites running it, right anon?
So I see your official position is that only the candidates should be seen and heard and not the public. What pseudo-meritocracy BS….have you had a chance to visit and talk with the retired Fidel yet?
Very reminiscent of last days of the Weimar Republic….
19 Muckraker - Nov 16, 04:17 PM
“Tianmen Square (Muckraker again) has any bearing on the school board in Fort Bend. You folks need to find a better hobby!!”
Keeping an eye on people like you anon, anonymous or whatever handle you choose is a great hobby in a real democracy…at least until it’s outlawed by the elites. As for the list of mostly indpendent candidates that lost, the answer is simple. Move towards direct elections through individual districts, which I believe is what one or two of those were advocating during that election cycle.
You also forgot to mention the author of the OP/ED piece we are commenting on, a current board member. Obviously he is very concerned about less public involvement/voice, while you only offer political apologetics with little understanding of schools place in a democracy…yes corporatism is not representative government, but that sounds like your background…
November 16, 2007 1:23 PM
anonymous said...
This doesn't appear to me a very healthy course that FBISD is charting.
November 17, 2007 5:47 AM
fbisdwatch said...
More:
20 Cheryl Hill - Nov 16, 10:02 PM
What Mr. McGee reports is not surprising; it’s actually more of the same. What everyone seems to forget is that high level employees, regardless of their titles, are just employees; and, the individuals voted on by the voters are just individuals voted into office. We get so caught up in living well that we forget to be vigilant about substance because we get caught up in the fluff of things like the architectural beauty of buildings rather than the substantive quality of the learning. In forgetting, we lose our way, and the result is: The children, who? While we are not looking, our children’s education and what we thought we voted for become hijacked.
21 Kyle Stanley - Nov 16, 11:26 PM
Mr. Magee,
All I can say is that the BOT’s decision to reduce community input on attendance has a chilling effect. First, when ordinary citizens are prevented from taking part in democracy, it reduces the overall scope of community input that is vital to the health and well-being of our educational services. Second, it also has a negative effect on future decisions such as new schools (e.g. placement, naming) as well as diluting the overall perception of the district in the public eye.
In other words, if a school district is going to set a positive example for all of its residents, then it needs to encourage taxpayers who care about education to get involved, not shut them out.
22 Muckraker - Nov 17, 09:02 AM
“In other words, if a school district is going to set a positive example for all of its residents, then it needs to encourage taxpayers who care about education to get involved, not shut them out.”
Kyle,
Please contact the BOT and admins and let them know that you do not support this decision. Get others in your community/neighborhood to do the same. The special interests controlling our current board need to be sent a strong message!!!
“While we are not looking, our children’s education and what we thought we voted for become hijacked.”
Very good point Cheryl!
23 Cheryl Hill - Nov 17, 09:26 AM
“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.”-Abraham Lincoln
November 17, 2007 7:46 AM
More:
Fort Bend ISD decreases public forums on zoning
Strong emotion may still be a vivid memory of many who went through the massive school attendance zone changes in 2006. Parents and teachers stood in long lines during those numerous community forums waiting for their turn to exercise their freedom of speech.
With a new round of rezoning on the horizon, district officials have decided to cut the number of community forums down to one.
School board last week approved a proposal made by the district administration to change the board policy that had previously required at least three community forums during attendance zone redrawing.
Superintendent Tim Jenney described the change as "streamlining the process."
Trustees voted 6-1 for the reduction in the number of public meetings. They also gave nods to a district plan to form a facility utilization committee made of district administrators and three principals from the elementary, middle and high school levels of campuses to be affected by rezoning. The committee is responsible for making recommendations for rezoning.
Stan Magee was the lone trustee who voted against the board policy change that included the creation of the committee.
Magee called the board policy change a move aimed at reducing public input to the minimum.
He was also upset with the fact that the facility use committee includes no community member.
In addition, Magee questioned why the administration set a policy for the school board and why the rest of the school board would "rubber-stamp" a decision that should have been made by the board itself.
Jenney and board president Cynthia Knox said the channel for public input remains open. Although the policy allows for one public meeting, the board can call more community forums "if needed," Knox said.
Knox said next year's rezoning would involve two new elementary schools, unlike last time when the changes affected the entire district.
District spokeswoman Mary Ann Simpson said for rezoning that is not expected to create a lot of controversy, one community meeting would handle it. However, she also said the board can still decide to hold more meetings if it desires.
Magee said that unless sufficient public forums are held, one can't assume there is no contention in the community.
As to the facility use committee containing no member of the community, Trustee David Reitz said the public can e-mail or call school officials for their opinions and speak at the community meeting.
A side note:
I covered a workshop of two Katy school district rezoning committees last Wednesday. The committees were formed by the district and are made mostly of parents whose children would be affected by the attendance zone change due to the opening of two junior high schools. Each committee gathered in a separate room in the district's administration building and brainstormed on the best way of rezoning with some school officials. The committees' proposals would help the district come up with a final plan. The workshop was one of several before the district administraion makes recommendations.
What do you think about the Fort Bend school district board policy change?
Posted by Zen T.C. Zheng at November 18, 2007 02:03 PM
Comments
Some of you may be interested in a piece by one of the board members opposing less parental involvement in school issues:
http://www.fortbendnow.com/opinion/3534/magee-fort-bend-isd-community-input-on-attendance-zoning-loses-out
Posted by: fbisdparent at November 19, 2007 03:49 PM
"Jenney and board president Cynthia Knox said the channel for public input remains open. Although the policy allows for one public meeting, the board can call more community forums "if needed," Knox said.
Knox said next year's rezoning would involve two new elementary schools, unlike last time when the changes affected the entire district.
District spokeswoman Mary Ann Simpson said for rezoning that is not expected to create a lot of controversy, one community meeting would handle it. However, she also said the board can still decide to hold more meetings if it desires."
Apparently Ms. Simpson thinks that rezoning will only happen once ever again. This isn't a one time policy only to be used next year (who do they think they are kidding?)...Mr. Magee is absolutely right, they are just trying to cut the public off from the debate. How undemocratic! More should speak up.
Posted by: taxpayer at November 19, 2007 03:58 PM
Since when would the board seek more meetings as suggested in the article when they already have a committee of inside managers and just one public hearing? They know it takes much longer for the public to even get the message. This is business as usual!
Posted by: FBISDWatch at November 19, 2007 06:54 PM
"Superintendent Tim Jenney described the change as "streamlining the process."
I've never heard less involvement of the public quite put this way.
Posted by: fbisdparent at November 20, 2007 10:18 AM
FBISD must schedule too hold one re-zone meeting forum at each school campus being effected by re-zoning an before re-zoning takes place, for public input to be heard by elected officials. If FBISD officials care to hear public input?
Posted by: rodrigo carreon at November 20, 2007 01:32 PM
This is blatant trampling of our rights and democracy. Jenney has begun building his notorious legacy in Fort Bend that will be written on the FBISD Wall of Shame. Those on the board who are leashed by the administration need to rethink the commitments they professed to the community when they ran for the board. Knox's statement is also full of holes. This is a formal board policy that governs not just next year's zoning, but years to come. So the public will have to beg for more meetings as district and the board please... They think taxpayers and voters are naive just like that.
Posted by: trish at November 20, 2007 04:06 PM
"I covered a workshop of two Katy school district rezoning committees last Wednesday. The committees were formed by the district and are made mostly of parents whose children would be affected by the attendance zone change due to the opening of two junior high schools. Each committee gathered in a separate room in the district's administration building and brainstormed on the best way of rezoning with some school officials. The committees' proposals would help the district come up with a final plan. The workshop was one of several before the district administraion makes recommendations."
This is an excellent and inclusive idea as long as the committee is formed through a randomized process so that all opinions are honored. Certainly it is superior to silencing and limiting participation, such as the current FBISD BOT policy...
http://fbisdwatch.blogspot.com
Posted by: FBISDWatch at November 21, 2007 10:13 AM
Trish,
That attitude is known as the "cattle" mentality. It's how they view us...I agree it is an admin and board perceptual problem. Magee was right on this one!
Posted by: taxpayer at November 21, 2007 10:16 AM
Why would they care anymore, that got their big special interest bucks and kept the inside vendors happy...I wonder when the public will see that they can better bargain when these guys/gals come around looking for taxpayer hand-outs?
Posted by: bravo at November 21, 2007 02:44 PM
Personally, I feel that the process is already to closed and controlled. I a diverse school district like this you are only creating problems with this type of policy.
"Knox said although the committee doesn't contain community members, the public can bring their ideas and concerns to school officials during the public hearing"--Chron. com-Fort Bend County News, Nov. 21, 2007.
The above quote from Mrs. Cynthia Knox does not sound as if the democratic process is in play; it sounds like a play to control in ensuring that the autocratic process prevails. I learned the difference between democratic and autocratic rule as a high school senior in my Government/Civics Class in 1965-1966, surely Mrs. Knox as an educated professional knows the difference.
I agree queen and I'm tired of the rhetoric of command and control. I've seen this in other school districts too.
Post a Comment