• Welcome!
    Logout|My Dashboard

Sorry, it’s too late to intervene - The Galveston County Daily News : Editorials

January 28, 2015

Sorry, it’s too late to intervene

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.


    You must be a subscribed user to comment on this story.

  • Jbgood posted at 9:41 pm on Thu, Mar 6, 2014.

    Jbgood Posts: 2129

    corrections to last post,... how many times should a board hire paid help....not how many times "show"..... sorry...

  • Jbgood posted at 9:38 pm on Thu, Mar 6, 2014.

    Jbgood Posts: 2129

    I'd ordinarily agree with Mr. Taylor on this one, IF THAT LAST SOLVENCY PLAY, WHICH LMISD HAD PAID HELP IN MAKING AND PRESENTING TO THE STATE HAD PASSED! We all know it did not!
    So for me, this is what broke the camel's back! It is time, if there ever was time for a change, it is now!!! How many times show a board hire paid help, EXPERTS, paying them EXPERT money, to make and present a solvency plan just to have the state, turn it down?
    Come on now!!!! yall working me to hard on this! It is time for a change,...apologies to Ms. Watkins, and no real reflection on her,...but it was time to make a change!
    Mr. Taylor was right about one thing, the state should have acted years ago, but BETTER LATE THAN NEVER! The damage done in the time they should have acted but did not, can not be minimized nor negated! It is what it is!

  • MissionaryMan posted at 7:55 am on Mon, Mar 3, 2014.

    MissionaryMan Posts: 1915

    Ooops! That should have read, "their supporters who fought Mr. Burley protesting "against" him for doing what the district was being forced to do".

  • MissionaryMan posted at 7:53 am on Mon, Mar 3, 2014.

    MissionaryMan Posts: 1915

    I've been reminded that Mr. Burley was the first person to start making necessary cuts to the district, not Ann Dixon.

    This goes as far back as even when Dr. Johnson was superintendent that he and then soon afterwards Mr. Burley saw that due to the districts financial situation the district needed to close/consolidate schools and cut some of their staff. Of course history reminds us of certain current school board members and the Mainland Ministerial Allaince and their supporters who fought Mr. Burley protesting him doing what the district was being forced to do.

    After some members of the current school board completed their task of fulfulling their own personal agenda by getting rid of Mr. Burley were they forced to hire Ann Dixon to do what Mr. Burley attempted to do, but the board and their supporters wouldn't allow him.

    We need to give credit where credit is deserved and it certainly goes to Mr. Burley for starting the process, not Ann Dixon.

    We really should focus on what matters the most and that's where we are at today, but history will always remind us of exactly how we got here!

  • IHOG posted at 2:38 pm on Sun, Mar 2, 2014.

    IHOG Posts: 2486

    At least one generation of LM ISD students were cheated of the education their parents paid for because the state let promisses dictate state actions.
    More promisses and state inaction may cheat another generation of students.

    The state should offer to convert all LM ISD schools to State charters.
    The financial mess would be instantly solved. All local school taxes would be surplus and ripe for total repeal except for debt service.
    Without Local school taxes to pay many parents could use the savings to get their children in even better private schools.
    New residents and businesses would be attracted to LM by the lower tax burden.
    LM could become the top city in Galveston county instead of one of the three worst cities in Texas.

  • MissionaryMan posted at 12:06 pm on Sun, Mar 2, 2014.

    MissionaryMan Posts: 1915

    I agree that it is too late for TEA to do anything at this point, however in all of my discussions with TEA it always came down to having to replace our school board members in order to change the direction in which the district was heading because th voters were the one who put these people in their seats even when they weren't qualified to run a lemonade stand.

    TEA would do well to send in a monitor seeing how the district's operational and financial failures occurred under the governance of these elected school board members and therefore they are in no better position today to clean up their own mess at this point so someone else needs to do what they've already proven that they can't.

    The only reason that the district wouldn't want a monitor coming in is because when they go through the books with a fine tooth comb, they are likely to find exactly where the financial trouble started, where the money went and who was responsible for signing the check.

    They will also look at curriculum and student safety within the district finding that it is a HOT mess, something TEA already knows.

  • bvresident posted at 9:00 am on Sun, Mar 2, 2014.

    bvresident Posts: 1555

    I didn't give Taylor his nickname, "Hubris", without reason. He frequently writes opinions that have little or no factual basis behind anything he says. It seems to be an opinion that many editors around the country have-they believe themselves to be so much more intelligent than their readers and therefore they don't feel it necessary to provide the same vetting they want everyone else to provide.

  • Robert Buckner posted at 8:10 am on Sun, Mar 2, 2014.

    Robert Buckner Posts: 752

    Nice thought Herber. In reality, if Terri Watkins is really that good of a superintendent then LMISD should have brought her on board a couple of years ago. The ISD board makeup is still pretty much the same as its been for a few years as we've watched the steady downfall of LMISD. The board is ultimately responsible for the state of LMISD. Your editorials are wishful thinking. Nice in content but lacking in reality. I really hope I'm wrong but I do not think so this time.