Answer this honestly.

[MannyIsGod]

So, with all the excitment over the Iraqi election and the proudly held purple finger......

How many of you will have a "purple finger" tomorrow? Are you planning on voting?

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Yes.

[Guru of Nothing]

Is this a trick question?

[MannyIsGod]

Is this a trick question?

Well, unless Mississippi is having an election, you don't count.

However, no it's not a trick question, I was just wondering how many people in here were planning on voting in tomorrows election. Actually, to be honest, I wonder how many people in here were even aware of the election tomorrow.

There are some fairly important issues. The ACCD bond issue is up, as is the slot for district 121 in the state legislature.

[Guru of Nothing]

So, it was a trick question.

[exstatic]

I don't live in the City, but I do vote in at least every major election.

[MannyIsGod]

It's not a city election, and how the hell do you define "major"? There are some pretty big issues up for this one.

The ACCD bond issue is pretty large, and if you live in district 121, you're voting for your state rep.

[timvp]

I only vote when I'm paid to.

:smokin

[exstatic]

OK, Manny, I don't even live in the county, nor do I live in 121.

By major, I mean the even numbered year November elections for House, Senate, and Prez. There are, of course, other issues and candidates on those ballots.

[MannyIsGod]

You know, I'm on the record on giving Duff shit for not voting, so I think I should apply that equally.

A lot of major legislation comes as the result of elections not held at those times. And it's a sad fact that many people choose to simply ignore these elections.

There are plenty of people in here that love to complain about city council and the like, but usually ignore city/county elections. It's one thing to gripe about the things that go on that you disagree with, but it's another thing when people bitch and moan and don't even go vote.

I can't vote in the 121 race, but it's probably going to be taken by a republican. Those parts of the county aren't exactly democrat friendly.

I do plan on voting against the accd bond package.

I plan on voting for enviromentalists for Bexar Met and SARA, and these positions have more value than people realize.

Anyhow, I'm very intersted in seeing how many people in this forum actually vote in the election tomorrow/later today.

[NameDropper]

I already voted. I don't have a purple finger but I came home with some beer and chips.

[exstatic]

OK, Manny you convinced me. There is no election in my city today, but just because of your insistance, I will drive on down there, sneek a peek at the voter role, and forge someone's signature so that I can vote today. :rolleyes

[NameDropper]

I think Manny's point is that many cheered with the Iraq vote was a success yet many of here at home are too lazy to get off our fat asses to vote yet we can sit on our fat asses and bitch.

[dcole50]

senators who rarely even show up to vote on important bills can also dip their fingers in ink for the appropriate photo op.

[Samurai Jane]

Already done, we actually voted early.

[MannyIsGod]

OK, Manny you convinced me. There is no election in my city today, but just because of your insistance, I will drive on down there, sneek a peek at the voter role, and forge someone's signature so that I can vote today. :rolleyes

Bitch, I wasn't just talking to you.

But you may want to consider voting in not so "major" elections when they come up if you plan on bitching as much.

[MannyIsGod]

I think Manny's point is that many cheered with the Iraq vote was a success yet many of here at home are too lazy to get off our fat asses to vote yet we can sit on our fat asses and bitch.

Apparently I am capable of making a point, thanks.

[MannyIsGod]

Already done, we actually voted early.

Awesome, it's good to see some people put their money where their mouth is.

[exstatic]

You know, I'm on the record on giving Duff shit for not voting, so I think I should apply that equally.

A lot of major legislation comes as the result of elections not held at those times. And it's a sad fact that many people choose to simply ignore these elections.
...
blah blah blah

Bitch, that was in direct response to my previous post. I'm supposed to know when you switch to the public voice within a post? Face it, Manny: if Duff is apathy personified, you're nagging personified. You'll make a great mother, someday.

[MannyIsGod]

Bitch, that was in direct response to my previous post. I'm supposed to know when you switch to the public voice within a post? Face it, Manny: if Duff is apathy personified, you're nagging personified. You'll make a great mother, someday.

Ok fucker, if you want to take things so literaly, tell me where in that post I told you to go out and vote TODAY?

And if you want to make things so personal, I'd be careful of the stones you throw living in a glass house.

[MannyIsGod]

Actually, upon rereading the post, I don't see where I directed it to you at all.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Uh, back on topic.

Just voted.

I sure hope that was a new role sheet I signed, but there were only three more sigs ahead of me in my district's log.

[MannyIsGod]

I doubt it was. I went earlier today in the afternoon, I was only the tenth person to have voted.

[NameDropper]

Apparently I am capable of making a point, thanks.


Well excuse me. I get the point.

[MannyIsGod]

I wish more people would.

[scott]

Voting is for the naive.

[NameDropper]

Well it appears only 3% of registered voters were naive enough to vote.

[scott]

Damn, that sucks- I was just kidding (obviously).

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

~ 39,000 in the ACCD election. Damn.

I think it was a mistake for those who voted against the bond issue, but they had more votes.

[Useruser666]

Can't vote for SA mayor.

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah, I didn't think many people here would have voted. A lot of people love to talk shit about what happens in the world, and how things suck, but the easiset method they have of making a difference is completely fucking ignored.

3%

Wow.

Joe, I voted against the bond package. They had their head up a huge ass by trying to place the school in the medical center area on a lot that didn't even meet the size needs they declared.

A new bond can be brought before voters in as little as 3 months, so I'm not going to sit here and fall for their scare tatics.

[T Park]

I would vote, If I lived in city limits

[MannyIsGod]

it was a county wide election! It had nothign to do with city limits, I also live outside of them.

[travis2]

I voted for the ACCD package...and I'm with Johnny. It was a big mistake to turn it down.

And what I read said the downtown plan didn't meet the district needs, not the Med Center plan.

But whatever...the votes are cast.

[ididnotnothat]

I voted NO.

[MosesGuthrie]

Not voting is for the weak.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

I voted for the ACCD package...and I'm with Johnny. It was a big mistake to turn it down.

And what I read said the downtown plan didn't meet the district needs, not the Med Center plan.


My thoughts exactly.

Plus, where better to forge a bond with the medical community than @ the Medical Center?

I even remember that article in the ExNews a few weeks ago talking about the average commute from St. Philips to the Med Center was under an hour each way using VIA.

[travis2]

My thoughts exactly.

Plus, where better to forge a bond with the medical community than @ the Medical Center?

I even remember that article in the ExNews a few weeks ago talking about the average commute from St. Philips to the Med Center was under an hour each way using VIA.

It was by Gloria Padilla. I ran across it while I was making sure I had my facts straight.

[CommanderMcBragg]

The people have spoken and did speak before but the ACCD leaders refused to listen so the people used their votes to make their voices heard.

[MannyIsGod]

I've disagreed with both Jane and Travis in the past, but for what it's worth they have 204809328302983092832 times more respect from me than most people in here as of today.

It starts in your own backyard, and I'm glad that some (3% or so) realize that regardless of agreement/disagreement.

[travis2]

*fingertips to eyebrow*

[SPARKY]

Why are you people surprised? San Antonio, home of CA Stubbs, votes against public infrastructure funding?

I'm shocked.

[MannyIsGod]

* Three studies recommending a downtown location for the Allied Health campus were supressed by the ACCD Board. Dr. Orozco and others are considering legal action to get the reports released.
* ACCD has publicly released a $450 million budget that shows fund distribution specific to each bond item, however the actual bond and related documents indicate no specific fund allocation. Therefore, if this bond passes ACCD does not have to follow the guidelines they've outlined publicly.
* ACCD argues that the Medical Center location is necessary to consolidate training resources, however the majority of clinical training for family practice, geriatric, and pediatric programs happens in downtown hospitals already. Furthermore, renown diabetic and clinical research clinics are located downtown.
* It's true that a majority of students who attend all ACCD campuses combined come from north, north east, and north west areas of town. However, the nursing and dental programs at SAC and St. Phillips provide education to a whopping 80% of students who come from downtown, south, east, and west areas of town. The proposed Medical Center location will limit access for these students, while a central city location would provide equal access to students from all parts of the city.
* ACCD has publicly stated they need 20 acres to build the Allied Health Facility. The actual proposal outlines only 10 acres. The county has offered the 12.5 acre Brady Green site located downtown, and ACCD already owns adequate land contiguous to St. Phillips. As proposed, the ACCD is going lease land in the Medical Center which will cost much more than the other sites.
* According to proponents, if this bond doesn't pass, we'll have to wait 2-4 years before another is proposed. This is a scare tactic. Legally, another bond can be proposed in as little as three months.



Some of the reasons why I voted against it. There is pressure to get this thing back on the ballot by may, and I really hope they do. They are debating on what they need to fix, and finding that out, but I think everyone knows the issue at hand was the location of the medical college. Not only that, but I woudl hope they would change the budget provision in the actual bond.

[travis2]

ACCD to reconsider location for health careers campus (http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/stories/MYSA122704.online.accd.4bf31998.html)

Web Posted: 12/27/2004 05:13 PM CST

Karen Adler
Express-News Staff Writer


With pressure mounting on the Alamo Community College District — and just three weeks to go before early voting starts on a $450 million bond election — the board of trustees has called a special meeting for Thursday night to reconsider the location of the controversial nursing and allied health careers campus.

In accordance with state law, the meeting will be closed to the public because board members will be discussing real estate. Any vote taken will be done in an open, public meeting afterwards.

The board will discuss new information about a potential site, board Chairman Charlie Conner said.

"We could leave it as is or we could take a vote," he said. "We want to make sure we made our decision based on all the information available."

The ACCD board voted 5-4 on Dec. 14 to build the campus on the Northwest Side in the South Texas Medical Center, but the decision has been blasted by community groups, business leaders and local elected officials who want the $100 million facility to be built in the inner city.

The announcement of Thursday's meeting was welcome news to members of Communities Organized for Public Service and Metro Alliance, two of the city's most powerful grass-roots organizations. The groups have lobbied ACCD to build the campus in the central part of the city, which is in the federally designated empowerment zone.

There, they say, the campus will spur economic development and be accessible to students from all parts of town, especially those who live in the less prosperous East and South sides.

"The fact that they're actually meeting gives us hope that they will make a decision in favor of passing the bond," said Sister Gabriella Lohan, a representative of Metro Alliance. "Should the facility be placed at the medical center it will create unnecessary opposition to the bond."

The health careers campus is part of a $450 million bond issue on the Feb. 5 ballot. The bond package would fund improvements and expansions for each of ACCD's colleges as well as the construction of the district's fifth campus on the Northeast side in Live Oak. Early voting starts Jan. 19.

The bond — which will require a property tax increase — will be presented as an all-or-nothing proposal to voters.

"This bond is so important, so very important," state Sen. Leticia Van de Putte said. "The only negative we have heard is on one part of the bond, the $100 million that goes to the allied health and nursing facility. That tells you this bond has a very good chance of passing if that part is taken care of."

Adding an extra thorn to the issue is that the plan requires moving the nursing and allied health programs at St. Philip's and San Antonio colleges, which are both near downtown, to the new campus in the medical center. Students still will take prerequisite courses at St. Philip's or SAC, or at ACCD's other colleges, but, once they are accepted to the nursing and allied health programs, they will have to continue their training at the medical center.

But for some, it further supports the perception that all good things eventually go to the more affluent suburbs.

Van de Putte is part of a delegation of lawmakers and business leaders that met with ACCD officials last week to urge them to re-evaluate the location decision. Also last week, the board of the University Health System unanimously passed a motion asking ACCD to consider building the campus in the empowerment zone and specify a site later.

The health system owns a 10-acre property in downtown San Antonio that has emerged as the front runner among those pushing for an inner-city site. The University Health Center — Downtown, often referred to as Brady Green, is near Santa Rosa and Baptist hospitals and the University of Texas at San Antonio's downtown campus, said Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff.

"What we're trying to do is provide a reasonable option for them," he said. "Everything is right there together."

Two consulting groups were hired by ACCD to evaluate 10 locations all over the city, including Brady Green, and both selected the medical center as the No. 1 choice in part because of its proximity to health care institutions and students and the availability of land. The largest concentrations of current allied health and nursing students are on the Northwest and Northeast sides of the city, and the population center of the city is now on the Northwest Side.

Conner, the ACCD board chairman, has said the Brady Green site is too small, and it's impossible to renovate existing buildings into medical laboratories.

ACCD needs about 20 acres to build a 250,000 square-foot facility that can help meet Bexar County's quickly growing need for medical technicians, radiographers, licensed vocational nurses and other health care workers. The programs at St. Philip's and SAC now turn away hundreds of qualified applicants.

The South Texas Medical Foundation has offered a 99-year lease on 20 acres to ACCD for less than $5 million.

ACCD trustee Dr. Bernard Weiner, said he'll attend Thursday's meeting with an open mind, but he believes the medical center is the best choice for students.

ACCD has thoroughly evaluated all the possibilities, and "nobody's come up with a different location that will work," said Weiner, a family practice physician.

"It's not our job to give economic incentives and play political games," he added. "It's purely education. That is our job."

[travis2]

Gloria Padilla: In ACCD fight, focus on future (http://www.mysanantonio.com/columnists/stories/MYSA012305.1H.accd.29add4d3.html)

Web Posted: 01/23/2005 12:00 AM CST

San Antonio Express-News

It is 8:53 a.m. as I step onto the No. 26 bus that will take me from St. Philip's College to the South Texas Medical Center. I am the only person besides the driver on board.

I am not a regular bus rider. Most of my mass transit experience has been on vacation.

My journey on this chilly Friday morning is spurred by the Alamo Community College District's controversial plan to build a nursing and allied health campus in the medical center area.

I did not grow up in San Antonio. I wasn't here when the great controversy over the location of the University of Texas Health Science Center and UTSA in the northern sector of the county divided this community.

I am, however, well-aware of the deep scars those decisions created.

It bothers me that the ACCD's plan to move the nursing and allied health programs from San Antonio and St. Philip's colleges has reopened those wounds. Opponents to the plan are threatening to bring defeat to the college district's $450 million bond election on Feb. 5.

Accessibility for minority students is a key issue. To hear some opponents to the campus location talk, the medical center is almost inaccessible from economically deprived areas of our community.

They raise some serious questions.

Will the students who attend those programs at St. Philip's and San Antonio colleges, and the communities they serve, be shortchanged if programs are moved to the northern sector of the county?

Do the programs have to be located near the inner city or the East Side to maintain enrollment?

How difficult is it to travel from to East Side to the medical center, anyway?

I grew up in the Lower Rio Grande Valley, where many of us had to travel hundreds of miles to get an education. I find it difficult to oppose something that will enhance education in our community because it's 15 miles away.

And so I board a VIA bus at St. Philip's College on Martin Luther King Drive and travel to the transit station between the Audie Murphy VA and University hospitals to learn firsthand what that commute would entail.

I worry whether the black cat that runs in front of the bus on Montana near Hackberry is an omen.

Headed to work


As the bus heads west into downtown, it slowly fills with other commuters. I am no longer alone.

I get off the bus at Navarro and Commerce streets at 9:10 a.m., and walk a block to board the No. 92 bus to the medical center.

Chilly gusts of wind are brutal, and there's no bus shelter here to escape them.

At 9:15 a.m. I board a "skip bus" on Route 91 at the suggestion of a young medical technician heading to work at the medical center. A skip bus means it will take me to my destination with minimal stops.

I am all for that.

On the way, I visit with Rose Mary Lopez, 23, a medical assistant at University Hospital, as we head north on Fredericksburg Road. She's been commuting on this route from her South Side home for about eight months.

A Kennedy High School dropout, Lopez earned a GED and went to Texas Careers so she could pursue a job that paid more than minimum wage to support her son, Dominique, 6, and her daughter, Vanity, 4.

Lopez would like to own a car and is saving for one, but she is not sure she is ready to trade in her $20 monthly bus pass just yet.

Her medical training allows her to earn $8 to $9 an hour. Lopez wants to be a physical therapist, but that's on hold as she juggles two jobs to support her young family.

It's 9:51 a.m. as we arrive at the transit station by University Hospital. Lopez bundles up against the cold and waves goodbye as she heads off to her 12-hour shift at 10 a.m.

This trip, with one transfer, took 58 minutes.

Not a bad ride


I don't plan to linger at the medical center. Buses for the return trip downtown are lined up at the transit station. This time, I take a "frequent" bus instead of a skip bus. It's 10:20 a.m. when I board a bus on Route 92.

As its description implies, the frequent bus provides frequent service, but it makes more stops along the way. Those extra stops add about 20 minutes to the trip, explains veteran VIA bus driver William Hernandez during an eight-minute stop at the Crossroads Mall Park & Ride.

I arrive back downtown about 11:10. I have a few minutes before my connecting bus arrives, so I get off the bus a few blocks from my transfer point to enjoy some fresh air.

I board my transfer along Route 26 at 11:24 a.m.

At 11:36 I am back at Mittman and Martin Luther King Drive. The return trip took one hour and 16 minutes. According to MapQuest, a car trip from St. Philip's to the medical center takes approximately 25 minutes.

The public transit commute was long, but not unpleasant. I shouldn't have worried about that black cat.

Students commute now


There is no question that ACCD will have to work out some direct transit to the medical center from its other campuses if the nursing and allied health programs are moved north.

Before I return to my car, I go in search for some nursing students. I spot a young woman in a white coat — but it's a chef's jacket, not a lab coat.

The culinary arts students directs me to the cafeteria, where I find five women enrolled in the LVN program that began this month.

Surprisingly, they all live in the North Side. Three live in the northwest area, one in the north central and one northeast. They each spend 25 minutes to an hour driving to the East Side campus each day.

Four of the women say they support moving the program to the medical center area.

Veronica Campbell, who is African American and moved to Bexar County recently, is concerned that moving the nursing program from St. Philip's will hurt its status as a predominantly minority-serving institution.

"I live closer to the medical center, but if the program is moved it would hurt minorities. I am concerned about what it would do to the neighborhood," Campbell said.

Maria Cardenas lives outside Loop 1604 near Potranco Road. Having the nursing and allied campus at the medical center would be to her benefit, she said. Her commute to school is sometimes more than an hour, but she doesn't mind.

She, her husband and their three children moved here from Eagle Pass so she could go to school.

"At Southwest Texas Junior College, they selected only 10 students for the LVN program each year from the 200 who applied," she said.

Cardenas plans to stay in San Antonio to work when she graduates in a year.

Her $5,000 investment, which includes tuition, books and supplies, will make her eligible for jobs that pay $12 to $14 an hour. If she goes into the home health industry, the pay could be as much as $18 an hour.

Right now, 1,263 students are enrolled in the health occupation classes at SAC and St. Philip's. Another 769 students are on waiting lists.

Construction of a nursing and allied health campus at the medical center will allow the college district to double its enrollment capacity in those programs over a five-year period.

Fighting wrong battle


I have listened to the passionate arguments made by those who want to locate the nursing programs out north and those who want to leave them near where they are now.

Both sides make valid points. Is the medical center location the best place for the nursing and allied health programs?

We may never know. The ACCD should have spent more time exploring all its options. But it did not.

Arguing about what they should have done is not going to change the Feb. 5 ballot on the $450 million bond election.

The proposal before the voters includes funding for the nursing campus, the four existing community college campuses and construction funds for a fifth campus.

It's disheartening to hear opponents of the ACCD bond issue vowing to defeat it solely over the location of the nursing and allied health campus.

Instead of fighting over location, we should be concentrating on ways to make this site work for everyone.

Are there ways to improve accessibility through better mass transit?

What can we do to increase enrollment in these programs, regardless of location, among the less fortunate students in our community?

There are no easy answers, but fighting is only going to make that job harder to accomplish.

[MannyIsGod]

I read the one about the commute. It's a tough call, because neither site in it's entirety would have been the 20 acres they need. But with the downtown campus, they would have been able still use existing SAC and St Phillips faciliites.

I really hope they can get this into the next election in May. I think we'd have to wait untill November if that one doesn't go through. I don't know what the provisions are for a special bond election beforehand or if it's even possible.

[travis2]

I read the one about the commute. It's a tough call, because neither site in it's entirety would have been the 20 acres they need. But with the downtown campus, they would have been able still use existing SAC and St Phillips faciliites.

I really hope they can get this into the next election in May. I think we'd have to wait untill November if that one doesn't go through. I don't know what the provisions are for a special bond election beforehand or if it's even possible.

Nothing I've read even mentions the possibility of a special election. I don't know if the county will go for it...mainly because of the expense.

[Useruser666]

Makes more sense to put it in the medical center.

[Clandestino]

med center made more sense..

also, unless you are from the east, south or west side of town nobody wants to go to those areas...

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah, your 2 opinions mean shit because you didn't vote. Blow me.

[Useruser666]

Yeah, your 2 opinions mean shit because you didn't vote. Blow me.

Yeah, people who vote are better than people who don't! :rolleyes Especially people who weren't even eligible to vote.

[Clandestino]

Yeah, your 2 opinions mean shit because you didn't vote. Blow me.

if you're talking to me, then you are wrong as usual... i voted for it..

manny, when did you have time to vote...i mean, in between the making of all those super bowl monkey commercials and all... it would seem like you wouldn't have had time...

[Duff McCartney]

If I'd have known that the bond wasn't gonna pass I'd have voted....but then what difference would it have made..I'm just one man.

Anywho, my bio professor said that some of the stuff on the bond they did need...but (and I'm not sure what) he said there was something that they whacked on the bond that killed it. I think it might have been the medical center thing but I forgot.

[spurster]

I voted against it because the bond package took away development from the poorer downtown while adding a whole bunch to the richer north. Of course, the richer area is a nicer place, and if every decision is made that way, we might as well depopulate downtown now. This is supposed to be San Antonio's colleges, not San Antonio's northside colleges.

And they can submit a revised bond package that will pass fairly quickly.

Edit: I mean the county's colleges.

[MannyIsGod]

Hey, I provided some facts earlier in this thread as to why I voted against it.

80 freaking percent of the students using the college do not come from the northside. Why should they always have to be the ones commuting?

I still don't understand the appeal of the medical center area when there isn't enough space and much research in the medical area goes on downtown as well.

The ACCD needs that bond package badly, but they need to do it right.

[travis2]

Hey, I provided some facts earlier in this thread as to why I voted against it.

80 freaking percent of the students using the college do not come from the northside. Why should they always have to be the ones commuting?

I still don't understand the appeal of the medical center area when there isn't enough space and much research in the medical area goes on downtown as well.

The ACCD needs that bond package badly, but they need to do it right.

Actually, most of the students in the affected programs do come from the north side.

And the land problem is even WORSE downtown.

I think the choice as given was the right one.

[MannyIsGod]

Where is your source for the student figures Travis, because the one I have states 80% of the affected students do not come from the Northside.

[Useruser666]

I think the proper place to train medical professionals would be in or near the medical center.

[MannyIsGod]

I think the proper place to train medical professionals would be in or near the medical center.

Even when there's just as much if not more research going on downtown?

[Useruser666]

Was the bond to build a campus to train researchers only?

[SPARKY]

Ask Yonivore where he does his research.

[MannyIsGod]

Was the bond to build a campus to train researchers only?

No, the bond was not only to build a campus either.

However, the reasoninging behind the ACCD location choice was a consolidation of reaserch, playing off the assumption that the medical center is the centerpiece of everything medical in the city. It is not, just as much goes on downtown.

[SPARKY]

Of course the facilities are going to be close to where those with the clout want to office and what not.

[MannyIsGod]

Chris, are you registered to vote outside of Bexar county?

[Clandestino]

Hey, I provided some facts earlier in this thread as to why I voted against it.

80 freaking percent of the students using the college do not come from the northside. Why should they always have to be the ones commuting?

I still don't understand the appeal of the medical center area when there isn't enough space and much research in the medical area goes on downtown as well.

The ACCD needs that bond package badly, but they need to do it right.

there is a good reason 80% of the students using accd don't come from the northside... it is because most people don't want to go into those poorer neighborhoods where the majority of accd colleges are...

if accd built a school in the med center then i bet the rest of san antonio would go there...

[Clandestino]

Even when there's just as much if not more research going on downtown?

do you have proof of this?

[MannyIsGod]

Carlos Guerra: The failure of ACCD's bond can be fixed — downtown

Web Posted: 02/08/2005 12:00 AM CST


San Antonio Express-News

The surprise in Saturday's election wasn't the rejection of the Alamo Community College District's bond issue, but that the margin was that close.

Yes, a small, dedicated bunch will vote against any bond, and since most are decided by small margins, these voters can be decisive. That is why bond proponents must always work to incorporate other voter groups that perceive their interests to be threatened into coalitions that will promote the issue.

Obviously, that didn't happen. ACCD's $450 million bond proposal lost despite the strong support of some very powerful interests.

It should now be brought back in a passable form because community colleges are too important.

These schools' vocational and technical training makes many workers more employable.

And they are also places where many start on the road to becoming the first in their families to earn college degrees, where others beef up academics for university admission and where others who flunked out of four-year schools get a second start. They are schools of first — and of last — resort for many.

But state funding hasn't kept pace with the growth of community colleges, and they are hurting.

Saturday's bond would have paid for renovating San Antonio College, St. Philip's, Palo Alto and Northwest Vista and built a fifth campus for ACCD's 52,000 students.

But what doomed ACCD's bonds were plans to move nursing and allied health programs from St. Philip's and SAC to a new, stand-alone school in the Medical Center.

Proponents argued that its proximity to the University of Texas Health Science Center made it the logical location.

But opponents pointed out that UTHSC conducts a lot of its pediatric clinical training, family practice research and training, and geriatric in-patient admission and teaching in inner-city downtown locations, very close to where the Texas Diabetic Institute is located.

"I wasn't against the bond and its components, they were great things," says pulmonologist Carlos Orozco, who unwittingly became a leader of the opposition. "But they were forcing the (nursing) campus to be built on the North Side after (UTHSC) moved pediatrics (training) to Santa Rosa, geriatrics to the Nix and family practice to the Brady Green because that is where the clinical experience is. And the Texas Diabetic Institute, one of the most renowned places for this research, is on the West Side; it's where people are learning from patients about cardiology, nephrology, podiatry and you name it."

But ghosts of the past also hexed the bonds. Locating the medical school in the far Northwest Side was broadly opposed, as was the decision to locate UTSA even farther north of our city's core. These are realities many did not want the ACCD to repeat.

But there were also concerns about where students would be best trained.

"We're talking about students (studying to become) licensed vocational nurses," Orozco says. "If they needed to study the molecule of a certain disease or a certain gene sequence, then you would send them to the medical school. But if they're going to take care of patients, you put them where they will get the clinical experience."

Orozco now says that he is eager to join a new effort that will promote passage of the bonds and the location of the nursing school in the city's central core.

"Now we have a chance to get together as a community," he said Monday, "and we can take it back and do it right."

I think at this point the ACCD needs to stop the sour grapes and get this thing on the May election. The vast majority of that bond needs to go through quickly, but the new school needs to be fixed.

[Clandestino]

I voted against it because the bond package took away development from the poorer downtown while adding a whole bunch to the richer north. Of course, the richer area is a nicer place, and if every decision is made that way, we might as well depopulate downtown now. This is supposed to be San Antonio's colleges, not San Antonio's northside colleges.

And they can submit a revised bond package that will pass fairly quickly.

Edit: I mean the county's colleges.

no matter what is built in the poor areas nothing is going to help it... look, they built the sbc center smack on the east side in a predominantly black area, but you you don't see all sorts of building going on... you see cars stream in during concerts, games, the stock show...then you see them stream back out...

[MannyIsGod]

if accd built a school in the med center then i bet the rest of san antonio would go there...

Well,they woudln't have much of a choice now would they?

Fortunetly, they do get a choice to decide where it's built. I guess a majority of the people who vote on the "poorer" neighborhoods don't mind their neighborhoods all that much after all?

[MannyIsGod]

no matter what is built in the poor areas nothing is going to help it... look, they built the sbc center smack on the east side in a predominantly black area, but you you don't see all sorts of building going on... you see cars stream in during concerts, games, the stock show...then you see them stream back out...

First of all, it doesn't happen overnight. The SBC already has led to street improvements in the area. The first step in developing an area is developing the infrastructure.

It's not a magic bean that grows a beanstalk to the clouds overnight, but economic revitalization is far from the impossiblity you paint it as.

[Clandestino]

Well,they woudln't have much of a choice now would they?

Fortunetly, they do get a choice to decide where it's built. I guess a majority of the people who vote on the "poorer" neighborhoods don't mind their neighborhoods all that much after all?

if it is built in the poorer neighborhoods the majority of the students will be from the poorer sections of the city... if it was built in the northside then it would be a school for everyone...

fact is, people not from those neighborhoods don't want to go into them... and they don't... look at st philips...prime example right there...

but look at utsa, students from all over sa...

[Shelly]

My husband did his fellowship at the Brady Green (which was through the Health and Science Center). That place is a dump!

[Clandestino]

First of all, it doesn't happen overnight. The SBC already has led to street improvements in the area. The first step in developing an area is developing the infrastructure.

It's not a magic bean that grows a beanstalk to the clouds overnight, but economic revitalization is far from the impossiblity you paint it as.

yeah, of course they made the streets nicer...they want you do be able to drive in and drive out... manny, why don't you accept the fact that the majority of non-black people would not be on east side of town after dark if the spurs didn't play there... same as non-mexicans on the S/SW side...

[TheMrPeanut]

UTSA is not a Community College.

I think it is a shame that some students don't want to attend SAC or St.Phillip's because of the location..but I guess they should understand why the people in those areas don't want the new school in the Medical Center.

[MannyIsGod]

You can't compare the only major 4 year university in town with SAC!

Actually, if you wanted to, I would bet money that SAC draws just as many people from the northside as UTSA does form the southside, so it's a wash.

You're throwing the word fact around without very much to back it up other than your opinion of what side of town people would rather live on.

However, downtown is not the same as placing it on commerce and 36th, and is central to EVERYONE.

[Clandestino]

You can't compare the only major 4 year university in town with SAC!

Actually, if you wanted to, I would bet money that SAC draws just as many people from the northside as UTSA does form the southside, so it's a wash.

You're throwing the word fact around without very much to back it up other than your opinion of what side of town people would rather live on.

However, downtown is not the same as placing it on commerce and 36th, and is central to EVERYONE.

i wasn't referring to the location being central to everyone.. i was referring to who lives in the neighborhood...

the same way many non-hispanics don't like venturing into the soutside, many non-blacks don't like being in the black side of town either... it is a feeling of safety issue... i'm not saying more crime is committed in either of those two areas, but they are not perceived by outsiders as safe places...

[MannyIsGod]

ok, so now what you are saying is that the reason the ACCD location shouldn't be downtown is because of crime?

[exstatic]

Manny, he's been saying that for the whole thread. :lol

It DOES take time to develop an area around a sports complex. Friggin Sunset Station didn't pop up overnight, and NO ONE used to venture to the other side of 281/I37 at night, either.

[Clandestino]

Manny, he's been saying that for the whole thread. :lol

It DOES take time to develop an area around a sports complex. Friggin Sunset Station didn't pop up overnight, and NO ONE used to venture to the other side of 281/I37 at night, either.

LOL!!! I guess since I didn't specifically say, "THE EAST SIDE IS DANGEROUS...THE S S/W IS DANGEROUS TOO" he didn't understand... Maybe I should attach an mpeg saying what I mean... he sure as hell should be able to hear me...

[MannyIsGod]

LOL!!! I guess since I didn't specifically say, "THE EAST SIDE IS DANGEROUS...THE S S/W IS DANGEROUS TOO" he didn't understand... Maybe I should attach an mpeg saying what I mean... he sure as hell should be able to hear me...


Fuck, well I hear Detroit is pretty dangerous too!!!! It's a good thing the ACCD isn't planning on building a school there!

I admit, I made the mistake of taking what you were saying in context of the thread. FUCK!

However, I don't think crime likelyhood came into much consideration for any campus location considering that the ACCD runs their own police department which has a good record of keeping crime limited on ACCD campuses.

So, I guess your arguement had relevence at some point.

[exstatic]

Why not put the ACCD campus out by SW Reseach Institute/ SW Foundation for Biomedical Research? That's near NW loop 410, but is pretty far west, and not too far north of 90. You can buzz up 151. Plenty of land out that way.

[travis2]

Where is your source for the student figures Travis, because the one I have states 80% of the affected students do not come from the Northside.

From http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/stories/MYSA020105.01B.accd_students.633341e3.html


Though ACCD data show that the highest concentrations of its nursing and allied health students live in the north half of the county, some students fear that putting the new campus in the South Texas Medical Center will deter lower-income residents who live in the southern half.

[travis2]

More stuff...

Comment: Voters must consider the needs of students, not special interests (http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/stories/MYSA122904.7B.comment.weiner.51465196.html)

Bernard K. Weiner


A lot has been written about the placement of a college to train medical personnel as proposed by the board of the Alamo Community College District.

Most articles have not taken pertinent facts into consideration. The board did not make its initial decision to locate the college in the South Texas Medical Center arbitrarily or capriciously.

Taken into consideration were two independent studies conducted by two groups. Among the many factors studied were whether the site offered sufficient space or would require additional land; whether it offered reasonable and convenient access to students and faculty and was equally accessible from all areas of the district; the cost of land; bus access; whether buildings would have to be torn down; whether public utilities are available at the site; whether there are significant drainage problems; and whether the site is within a flood plain.

The studies were done by two separate groups, neither of which was part of the board, and they rated the available properties separately on the pertinent factors. Both came back with the medical center as the best location.

Concerns have been expressed that St. Philip's College and San Antonio College will lose programs if a new nursing and allied health campus is built in the medical center area. Studies show, however, that neither college will lose enrollment. Students in the nursing and allied health programs at San Antonio and St. Philip's colleges will still have to take their prerequisite courses on the main campuses. For example, students in the nursing program will take about 40 percent of their coursework at San Antonio College or St. Philip's College.

Therefore, the colleges actually will increase their capacity for enrollment as students satisfy their prerequisites and transfer to the new health campus.

New and expanded facilities are needed to accommodate the significant growth at ACCD. Student enrollment has grown by 41 percent the past six years. Current enrollment exceeds 50,000 students. Bexar County's population grew from 998,000 in 1980 to 1.4 million in 2000. The number of public high school students in the past seven years has grown by almost 10,000. The ACCD colleges — Northwest Vista, Palo Alto, San Antonio and St. Philip's — have an open admission policy that allows all high school graduates, including students earning their GED, to enroll at any of the ACCD colleges. Enrollment is projected to grow to 68,000 by 2010.

I feel that the responsibility of the board is to the students of our district. We are charged with providing students with the best facilities and equipment possible. This includes adequate building space, parking and computers.

One of the concerns was transportation to the medical center site from all parts of the city. The board took into consideration the possible expansion by VIA of express buses to the area as part of the tax increase approved by voters in November. The ACCD board thought all this out and arrived at its decision with the students in mind, which is a tremendous change from the way the board has operated in the past.

To those who oppose the upcoming bond issue, I must remind you that it will be the students who are hurt if the bond issue fails. There will be no new facilities, no parking garages added to existing colleges and no new equipment purchased.

At the two hearings conducted by the ACCD board, many special interests were represented. However, I saw only one student, a young man from Northwest Vista, speak out. He pleaded for the bond issue to pass so he would not have to wait for hours to access a computer. None of the other protesters identified himself or herself as a student.

It has been said that this bond issue will be brought back in May with a change in location of the medical college. We must remember that the cost of a bond issue is expensive ($300,000 to $400,000) and it would prohibit a second election in just a few months.

It seems to me that thoughtful persons would consider the students who would be adversely affected if the bond issue fails. It is my hope that voters, after thoughtful contemplation of all the issues and benefits to students, will go to the polls and support this very important bond issue, which will affect the children of Bexar County for years to come.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernard K. Weiner, M.D., is District 1 trustee for the Alamo Community College District.

[travis2]

This was the original E-N editorial in support of the bond issue. Personally, I find it interesting that even the editorial board, which tends to be somewhat (but not overly) left-of-center, said that the opposition to the site selection was politically/emotionally based.

Editorial: ACCD bond plan deserves approval (http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/editorials/stories/MYSA122104.06B.accd1ed.27f27470.html)

The rapid growth of the Alamo Community College District speaks well of its efforts to make higher education accessible in Bexar County.

In the past six years the district's student population has grown from 35,465 to 50,056, creating a need for a fifth community college campus and expansion of existing campuses.

Preliminary discussions for a much needed bond issue to fund those projects were derailed two years ago after a public corruption scandal resulted in the indictment of three board members.

The district's healing process has been slow, but the election of new board members and the hiring of a new chancellor have helped.

The board is counting on the community's restored confidence in its leadership for passage of $450 million in bonds on Feb. 5.

ACCD officials make a strong case for the passage of the bonds, which will not only pay for a new campus in Northeast Bexar County but also for expansion and improvements at Palo Alto, Northwest Vista, St. Philip's and San Antonio colleges and a new $100 million nursing/allied health campus.

The district spent a lot of time with a community advisory board establishing the community colleges' needs.

However, we are concerned about the board's apparent naivete in the process of choosing the site of the new nursing/allied health campus.

The ACCD administration plans to move the nursing programs from San Antonio College and St. Philip's College to its own stand-alone campus at the South Texas Medical Center.

The plan has great merit; it would enhance enrollment opportunities for the nursing programs, which have long waiting lists.

Unfortunately, the ACCD board members' political insensitivity to the emotionalism attached to location could undermine their efforts.

The college district's plan to establish the nursing school campus in the medical center area is strongly opposed by many who would prefer to see the programs remain where they are or relocated downtown.

The debate has opened old political wounds.

The board was negligent in not recognizing the festering resentment left after the establishment of the University of Texas at San Antonio and the University of Texas Health Science Center in the northern sector of the county.

State Rep. Robert Puente, one of the more vocal opponents, has vowed to work against the entire bond proposal.

We hope he reconsiders.

Bexar County's higher education needs far outweigh the controversy about the location of the nursing campus.

The ACCD board could have handled the location of the nursing campus more diplomatically. More time could have been spent researching downtown sites, but this bond issue should not go down because of that one factor.

The last college district bond issue was more than 17 years ago.

The ACCD and San Antonio residents seeking accessible higher education opportunities desperately need approval of this bond issue for the development of the northeast campus and for the upgrades at the four existing campuses.

It deserves voter support.

[ididnotnothat]

The bond failed.

[Clandestino]

Fuck, well I hear Detroit is pretty dangerous too!!!! It's a good thing the ACCD isn't planning on building a school there!

I admit, I made the mistake of taking what you were saying in context of the thread. FUCK!

However, I don't think crime likelyhood came into much consideration for any campus location considering that the ACCD runs their own police department which has a good record of keeping crime limited on ACCD campuses.

So, I guess your arguement had relevence at some point.

why do you think they voted along these lines? only hispanics and black aren't afraid to go to school in their communities..the rest of the city are afraid to go into these neighborhoods... wake up farmboy...

An analysis shows Hispanic and black communities voted against the Alamo Community College District bond last weekend, while the Anglo community largely favored the proposition — a tension played out from the beginning of the debate over the $450 million initiative.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA020905.1B.accd_precincts.8cc8d1c8.html

[MannyIsGod]

The studies were done by two separate groups, neither of which was part of the board, and they rated the available properties separately on the pertinent factors. Both came back with the medical center as the best location.

Travis, there are MORE (theree more I believe) reports beyond those 2 which reccomended a downtown location, but the board has yet to make them public. The opposition was going to sue to have them released, but I'm not sure if they still have plans to do that considering they won.



At the two hearings conducted by the ACCD board, many special interests were represented. However, I saw only one student, a young man from Northwest Vista, speak out. He pleaded for the bond issue to pass so he would not have to wait for hours to access a computer. None of the other protesters identified himself or herself as a student.

That's pretty fucked up. I didn't know, but everything I've worked on lately has either been coal plant related or rereg related, and I wish I had known the showing at the hearings had been so small.


We must remember that the cost of a bond issue is expensive ($300,000 to $400,000) and it would prohibit a second election in just a few months.

I don't want to hear about that becasue it is saying that people shoudl put their concernts aside because of the cost of an election.

The ACCD needs a bond. They need to get a corrected one on the board May. Shit, if you can't resolve the medical college situation, then you REMOVE it from the bundled bond.

However, I'm also curious as to have much of that would apply now because most of the research has been done, and they aren't starting from scratch. I don't think they'd have to spend nearly that much. I think it's the usual in scare tactics from an editorial and that pisses me off even more. Why not come out and say that the actual cost would be much less because most of the work has been done? Why do they have to spin facts to scare people into voting for their bond?


I can understand the sentiment of the 2nd editorial. By and large that bond as a great thing for the ACCD. But it feels fucked when they won't listen to the constitancy because then the only way you have of expressing how you feel is to vote it.

I won't argue that the motivation for most of the people who voted was soley based on not wanting it go to the northside in an emotional arguement. But at some point, those people have a right to have their tax dollars spent closer to them, and not farther from them.

There are studies that show a downtown location would be better, 3 of them. I don't know much about locating schools and I went into this with an open mind. But when you hear Dr. Charlie Orozco and Dr. Robert Jimenez (Chairman, University Health System) say some things that the ACCD has just swept under the rug, then yeah, I wonder.

Either way, the bond needs to come up in May. There's not a good enough reason out there to prevent it from happening.

[MannyIsGod]

Clad that article does nothing to support your hypothesis that the main issue of contention with the campus location was based on crime.

Zero.

[travis2]

Travis, there are MORE (theree more I believe) reports beyond those 2 which reccomended a downtown location, but the board has yet to make them public. The opposition was going to sue to have them released, but I'm not sure if they still have plans to do that considering they won.




That's pretty fucked up. I didn't know, but everything I've worked on lately has either been coal plant related or rereg related, and I wish I had known the showing at the hearings had been so small.



I don't want to hear about that becasue it is saying that people shoudl put their concernts aside because of the cost of an election.

The ACCD needs a bond. They need to get a corrected one on the board May. Shit, if you can't resolve the medical college situation, then you REMOVE it from the bundled bond.

However, I'm also curious as to have much of that would apply now because most of the research has been done, and they aren't starting from scratch. I don't think they'd have to spend nearly that much. I think it's the usual in scare tactics from an editorial and that pisses me off even more. Why not come out and say that the actual cost would be much less because most of the work has been done? Why do they have to spin facts to scare people into voting for their bond?


I can understand the sentiment of the 2nd editorial. By and large that bond as a great thing for the ACCD. But it feels fucked when they won't listen to the constitancy because then the only way you have of expressing how you feel is to vote it.

I won't argue that the motivation for most of the people who voted was soley based on not wanting it go to the northside in an emotional arguement. But at some point, those people have a right to have their tax dollars spent closer to them, and not farther from them.

There are studies that show a downtown location would be better, 3 of them. I don't know much about locating schools and I went into this with an open mind. But when you hear Dr. Charlie Orozco and Dr. Robert Jimenez (Chairman, University Health System) say some things that the ACCD has just swept under the rug, then yeah, I wonder.

Either way, the bond needs to come up in May. There's not a good enough reason out there to prevent it from happening.

I'd like to see those reports myself.

I guess my main point was that, regardless of which "side" you are on, there is sufficient evidence of demagoguery "scare tactics" over this issue. Could the ACCD have done a better job educating the voting public? Sure. Did the opponents of the issue use their own "loaded words" to sway public opinion? Absolutely.

I don't know what the BC Elections department budget is, so I can't say whether another $300-400K would be a large expense. In any case, it will eventually have to be recouped from you and me. How it's done I don't know and in any case that's a different debate.

[MannyIsGod]

I don't think that 300-400k is the actual election cost, but research and preperation for a bond by the ACCD as well as other costs leading up to the election. But I can't imagine a single issue in an election balllot costing 3-400k each election, we'd go fucking broke!

[MannyIsGod]

Honestly, if you look at the 2 reports actually released, then it does look like it's a slam dunk decision for the Med Center. But there is much more information that is not being released, and that is usually the case with city politics.

You'd think not even 3 years after ACCD Board members were indicted over bridery charges, they'd be WAY more open about things.

[travis2]

I don't think that 300-400k is the actual election cost, but research and preperation for a bond by the ACCD as well as other costs leading up to the election. But I can't imagine a single issue in an election balllot costing 3-400k each election, we'd go fucking broke!

No, I think it is the actual cost. Have you seen a precinct map of Bexar County?

I don't consider the given amount an unreasonable overhead cost for an election. It's not a single-issue cost...it's the overhead for the elections process. That's why you don't see too many special elections...it costs basically the same amount to hold a single-issue election as a multiple-issue.

[MannyIsGod]

In that case it would be less either way, because there is already an electio nslated for may.

[travis2]

If that's the case, then maybe they should remove the nursing program for now.

[ cynic program start]
Of course, if that happens, the opponents of the previous issue will scream something about "ignoring the will of the people" or something like that.

If they just redo the program for a downtown site, then they will be reamed for "caving in to special interests".

If they put the issue up as it stands, see response #1.
[/cynic]

[MannyIsGod]

If that's the case, then maybe they should remove the nursing program for now.

[ cynic program start]
Of course, if that happens, the opponents of the previous issue will scream something about "ignoring the will of the people" or something like that.

If they just redo the program for a downtown site, then they will be reamed for "caving in to special interests".

If they put the issue up as it stands, see response #1.
[/cynic]

I'm so lost travis.

[travis2]

I'm so lost travis.

There's going to be major bitching no matter what ACCD does now. It's been made into a political football.

[SPARKY]

why do you think they voted along these lines? only hispanics and black aren't afraid to go to school in their communities..the rest of the city are afraid to go into these neighborhoods... wake up farmboy...

An analysis shows Hispanic and black communities voted against the Alamo Community College District bond last weekend, while the Anglo community largely favored the proposition — a tension played out from the beginning of the debate over the $450 million initiative.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA020905.1B.accd_precincts.8cc8d1c8.html



Yeah all those violent blacks and hispanics need to be kept in their place.

[MannyIsGod]

There's going to be major bitching no matter what ACCD does now. It's been made into a political football.

Very true.

[MannyIsGod]

by precient

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/images/ACCDvote_0209.jpg

[MannyIsGod]

Some Precients where NO ONE voted and there were registered voters

Prc 1030 - 125 Registered Voters
Prc 1107 - 164 Registered Voters
Prc 1123 - 214 Registered Voters
Prc 2051 - 377 RV
Prc 2109 - 72
Prc 3019 - 86
Prc 3155 - 108
Prc 4020 - 290 Registered Voters