After fighting for over a month for release of documents through the Texas Attorney Generals office, the district finally released the online surveys they claimed showed a high level of support for the Global Science & Technology Center ("Global Taj Mahal"). After an independent review of these surveys it is obvious that most of those turning in one of these biased forms (with no place for negative comments) OPPOSED the GSTC funding and continuation of the project in this year of a major district budget crisis.
NEW: Complete Online Survey Results (54 with serious questions and against with 41 in favor and 3 neutral statements). Many of the "in favor" appeared in sequence and seemed to be responding to negative comments. How would they have access to these concerns without backside access to the survey???: http://www.newterritorysentinel.com/FBISD_Questionnaire_and_Answers_for_Global_Science_Center.pdf
UPDATE FB INDEPENDENT 5-28: http://fbindependent.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=1&twindow=Default&mad=&sdetail=1569&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=2531&hn=fbindependent&he=.com
Question to our superintendent: Why would the feasibility committee and the senior level admins at workshops and board meetings portray these results as overwhelming support for the project?
FB Star ran these "letters to the editor" this week on the opposition to the GSTC:
Teacher speaks out about
proposed Global Science Center
Dear Bev,
I enjoy reading the Star, to help keep me current on local Ft. Bend happenings, but I must admit, one of the first things I read is your column. I like the way you scorch people on Bev’s Burner.
I am a former teacher & current tax-payer in FBISD. We own a home and live in this district, but in my opinion, we need this new $26 Mil. Science Center, about as much as I need another navel.
I would be very interested on your ‘take’ about the rush to build a 26 million dollar science center for FBISD. AND the fact that there will be NO tax increase. This must be some kind of magic, no? Who ARE these “public-private partnerships” through which the purported financing will occur, and what do THEY have to gain?
Also I would be very interested in finding out EXACTLY how the FBISD faculty voted when this “study” was done. The report states that,...”the proposed science and tech center got high marks from the local business community and from FBISD teachers.” There is also a somewhat contradictory statement in the article which says...”A bond election isn’t a consideration since ‘the clear message the feasibility committee heard repeatedly is the public has no current appetite to fund this initiative’ with more taxes.”
It seems to me, that the most enthusiastic endorsement to build, comes from the CEO of Wallace Bajjali Development Partners. If THEY think this is such a grand idea, I propose they build it, privatize it, and then rent out the facilities to FBISD on an ‘as needed’ basis.
Thanks for lending me an ear, keep up the pit-bull journalism.
Sincerely,
Name withheld by request
Teacher says no to Tech Center,
spend the money on campuses in need
Dear Beverly,
I always read your column first and look forward to it. I’d like you to look into the science center issue. I am a teacher who has been in FBISD for 26 years and am retiring this year (after 41 years). I, along with most teachers I know (and I know a lot of them), do not support the center. We think the money should be spent on the campuses, not on ongoing transportation and maintenance no matter who pays to build it.
I am currently more interested in a quote from David Wallace’s report that I read in The “Star” today that says there is enough bond money from previous issues to fund the center in its entirety. If that’s true why don’t they use the money to replace the AC systems in older schools instead of telling us we have to wait 1 or 2 more years? I have been at ----- Elementary for 23 years and the AC system is in bad shape. Many mornings we don’t have air and they have to jump start it or some such thing.
You probably shouldn’t use my name or my school’s name because I don’t want the school to have to wait 5 more years in retaliation and my principal doesn’t know I’m writing this.
Name withheld by request
WE WILL UPDATE THIS AS THE BOT VOTE APPROACHES TO THIS NEAR 30 MILLION DOLLAR TAX PAYER SUPPORTED PROJECT!
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Upcoming Events-
Upcoming Events-
May 25 Holiday
June 5-6 High School Graduation
June 8 Regular School Board Meeting
June 8 Budget Workshop II
May 25 Holiday
June 5-6 High School Graduation
June 8 Regular School Board Meeting
June 8 Budget Workshop II
Friday, May 22, 2009
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Fort Bend Independent Covers GSTC Controversy--click title link below for more--
See: http://www.fbindependent.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=1&twindow=&mad=&sdetail=1554&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=2531&hn=fbindependent&he=.com
Global center: Education or entertainment
By SESHADRI KUMAR, Fort Bend Independent
Fort Bend ISD’s proposed Global Science and Technology Center, moving at lighting speed, slowed down a little bit Monday night.
The board of trustees, instead of adopting a resolution to authorize the superintendent to proceed with the planning and programming of the Global Center for Science and Technology, postponed any action to a future meeting.
Apparently, the delay is to reach unanimity among board members in supporting the project and to respond to the concerns expressed by at least two trustees. . .
Global center: Education or entertainment
By SESHADRI KUMAR, Fort Bend Independent
Fort Bend ISD’s proposed Global Science and Technology Center, moving at lighting speed, slowed down a little bit Monday night.
The board of trustees, instead of adopting a resolution to authorize the superintendent to proceed with the planning and programming of the Global Center for Science and Technology, postponed any action to a future meeting.
Apparently, the delay is to reach unanimity among board members in supporting the project and to respond to the concerns expressed by at least two trustees. . .
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
GSTC Project Vote Delayed For Now!
Staff report
CHRONICLE UPDATE: http://blogs.chron.com/fortbend/archives/2009/05/to_applaud_or_n.html
After quite a bit of public discussion and fanfare over several workshops and board sessions, the Global School & Technology Project (a duplication of the HMNS-Sugar Land science museum at Telfair) vote was avoided by the BOT for more discussions. Several trustee's appear to be on the proverbial fence regarding this issue and decided to start asking questions last Monday during the workshop session meant to receive the "sales"/feasibility committee report. The superintendent, Jenney, has been pushing the project forward since it was first announced in February.
Early Monday night, during the public comments section, obvious "meeting manuevering" took place to disallow several speakers a venue to air their disapproval of this controversial proposal that would spend an additional 30 to 50 million dollars of taxpayers funds during a district projected, first ever, $10 million dollar budget deficit. Several in attendance did finally get to speak. One defending the HMNS-SL project, due to open this October in Telfair (about 1.5 miles from the proposed GSTC project), urged the district to reconsider this expensive building plan and forge partnerships with the HMNS-SL museum in Sugar Land that won't cost any taxpayer dollars and has been successfully done in other districts for years, including neighboring HISD.
One FBISDWatch speaker reissued several TPIA requests concerning the GSTC process that the superintendent publically vowed to respond to in April, but has since referred them to one of the district's legal vendors, David Feldman, for challenge with the Texas Attorney General. Several of these questions continue to hinge on the concerns over an ongoing FBI investigation involving the regular district vendor PBK and their actions in another TX district involving special favors to some senior administrative district employees and board members including golfing junkets to exclusive California courses. As of this report no decision has come down from the AG's office on these lawful requests...
Stay tuned as we keep this story updated!
Background: http://www.fortbendweb.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1131&Itemid=101
CHRONICLE UPDATE: http://blogs.chron.com/fortbend/archives/2009/05/to_applaud_or_n.html
After quite a bit of public discussion and fanfare over several workshops and board sessions, the Global School & Technology Project (a duplication of the HMNS-Sugar Land science museum at Telfair) vote was avoided by the BOT for more discussions. Several trustee's appear to be on the proverbial fence regarding this issue and decided to start asking questions last Monday during the workshop session meant to receive the "sales"/feasibility committee report. The superintendent, Jenney, has been pushing the project forward since it was first announced in February.
Early Monday night, during the public comments section, obvious "meeting manuevering" took place to disallow several speakers a venue to air their disapproval of this controversial proposal that would spend an additional 30 to 50 million dollars of taxpayers funds during a district projected, first ever, $10 million dollar budget deficit. Several in attendance did finally get to speak. One defending the HMNS-SL project, due to open this October in Telfair (about 1.5 miles from the proposed GSTC project), urged the district to reconsider this expensive building plan and forge partnerships with the HMNS-SL museum in Sugar Land that won't cost any taxpayer dollars and has been successfully done in other districts for years, including neighboring HISD.
One FBISDWatch speaker reissued several TPIA requests concerning the GSTC process that the superintendent publically vowed to respond to in April, but has since referred them to one of the district's legal vendors, David Feldman, for challenge with the Texas Attorney General. Several of these questions continue to hinge on the concerns over an ongoing FBI investigation involving the regular district vendor PBK and their actions in another TX district involving special favors to some senior administrative district employees and board members including golfing junkets to exclusive California courses. As of this report no decision has come down from the AG's office on these lawful requests...
Stay tuned as we keep this story updated!
Background: http://www.fortbendweb.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1131&Itemid=101
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Upcoming Meetings For FBISD:
May 18 Regular School Board Meeting
May 25 Holiday
June 8 Regular School Board Meeting
June 8 Budget Workshop II
June 5-6 High School Graduation
May 25 Holiday
June 8 Regular School Board Meeting
June 8 Budget Workshop II
June 5-6 High School Graduation
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
FBN Covers Controversial GSTC Duplicate Project!
See this link: http://www.fortbendnow.com/2009/05/11/37808
Chronicle coverage: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nb/fortbend/news/6419925.html
& http://blogs.chron.com/fortbend/archives/2009/05/27_million_glob.html
"and would even likely increase area property values." Wallace -- This is standard special interest code for higher property tax appraisals via our CAD board.
--AND JENNEY PULLS A RABBIT OUT OF THE HAT AGAIN--
...Hohnbaum indicated she believes money used to build the center could be put to more effective use by shoring up science labs and facilities at individual district schools.
She also wondered whether building the center would undercut effort by the likes of the Houston Museum of Natural Science, which is working now on the conversion of a former prison building into a satellit museum, in Sugar Land’s Telfair community.
“Will they have a planetarium over there” at the Telfair museum? she asked Wallace.
“They have a portable planetarium,” Wallace replied.
“Do they have a theater?,” she asked.
“The prison had a theater there,” Wallace said. “I don’t know if they’re going to use it for that” once it becomes a museum facility.
“Will they have interactive labs?” Hornbaum asked Wallace.
Wallace said he assumes they will.
“I just am not convinced this is the time or place” to pay for and build such a center, Hornbaum said.
She added that she is in the construction business, and understands that materials and labor are relatively low now, but “it still is a great cost.”
Hornbaum said she would rather see science teachers and their students conducting “hands-on” experiments “every day right in their own classrooms.” Instead of making five or six trips each year to the district’s science center, classes could make those trips to the new satellite museum in Telfair.
“I don’t see it as the right thing right now,” she said of the administration’s proposal.
Bhuchar countered, saying she believes having a “central” facility for interactive labs and science experiments will prove to be more effective and less costly.
Broxson said among his concerns are those related to cost, since the Texas Legislature has not provided adequate state funding for school districts.
Noting Wallace had indicated private business might be willing to pay 50% or more of the proposed center’s annual operating costs, Broxson said he’d like more details about which businesses those might be.
If someone said “Hey, I’ll give you $27 million - I’m in,” Broxson added. “The bottom line for me is, how do we afford that in the midst of all the other needs we have before us? I don’t operate with the understanding that we have any money available to us.”
At that point, Dr. Jenney revealed that the district has an “investment fund” containing about $26 million - just $400,000 shy of the total initial cost of the center. Comprised at least in part of earned interest related to bond issues prior to 2007, the fund can only be used for certain purposes - one of them capital projects, such as the proposed science center.
Trustee Daniel Menendez asked that the district schedule another workshop on the proposal, to give him and the public time to digest details, especially the financial details.
That’s not likely to happen....(FOLLOW THE LINK ABOVE FOR THE FULL SOAP OPERA)
Chronicle coverage: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nb/fortbend/news/6419925.html
& http://blogs.chron.com/fortbend/archives/2009/05/27_million_glob.html
"and would even likely increase area property values." Wallace -- This is standard special interest code for higher property tax appraisals via our CAD board.
--AND JENNEY PULLS A RABBIT OUT OF THE HAT AGAIN--
...Hohnbaum indicated she believes money used to build the center could be put to more effective use by shoring up science labs and facilities at individual district schools.
She also wondered whether building the center would undercut effort by the likes of the Houston Museum of Natural Science, which is working now on the conversion of a former prison building into a satellit museum, in Sugar Land’s Telfair community.
“Will they have a planetarium over there” at the Telfair museum? she asked Wallace.
“They have a portable planetarium,” Wallace replied.
“Do they have a theater?,” she asked.
“The prison had a theater there,” Wallace said. “I don’t know if they’re going to use it for that” once it becomes a museum facility.
“Will they have interactive labs?” Hornbaum asked Wallace.
Wallace said he assumes they will.
“I just am not convinced this is the time or place” to pay for and build such a center, Hornbaum said.
She added that she is in the construction business, and understands that materials and labor are relatively low now, but “it still is a great cost.”
Hornbaum said she would rather see science teachers and their students conducting “hands-on” experiments “every day right in their own classrooms.” Instead of making five or six trips each year to the district’s science center, classes could make those trips to the new satellite museum in Telfair.
“I don’t see it as the right thing right now,” she said of the administration’s proposal.
Bhuchar countered, saying she believes having a “central” facility for interactive labs and science experiments will prove to be more effective and less costly.
Broxson said among his concerns are those related to cost, since the Texas Legislature has not provided adequate state funding for school districts.
Noting Wallace had indicated private business might be willing to pay 50% or more of the proposed center’s annual operating costs, Broxson said he’d like more details about which businesses those might be.
If someone said “Hey, I’ll give you $27 million - I’m in,” Broxson added. “The bottom line for me is, how do we afford that in the midst of all the other needs we have before us? I don’t operate with the understanding that we have any money available to us.”
At that point, Dr. Jenney revealed that the district has an “investment fund” containing about $26 million - just $400,000 shy of the total initial cost of the center. Comprised at least in part of earned interest related to bond issues prior to 2007, the fund can only be used for certain purposes - one of them capital projects, such as the proposed science center.
Trustee Daniel Menendez asked that the district schedule another workshop on the proposal, to give him and the public time to digest details, especially the financial details.
That’s not likely to happen....(FOLLOW THE LINK ABOVE FOR THE FULL SOAP OPERA)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
