ACCD Bond - Better Late than never

[MannyIsGod]

They should have done this to begin with, but at least they are doing it now. We vote again in November after May. I think.

Anyhow.

ACCD to work with foes of bond

Web Posted: 02/23/2005 12:00 AM CST

Karen Adler
Express-News Staff Writer

At the Alamo Community College District's first board meeting since the defeat of its $450 million bond issue, Chairman Charlie Conner said board members will sit down with opponents in an effort to make the bond passable.

He also reiterated that a revised package will be brought back to voters.

"It is not going to happen between now and May," Conner said Tuesday. "We will come back as soon as we possibly can."

Almost 53 percent of voters said no to the Feb. 5 referendum that would have funded renovations and expansions at Northwest Vista, Palo Alto, St. Philip's and San Antonio colleges. The vote also halted construction of a fifth college on the Northeast Side and a new nursing and allied health campus in the South Texas Medical Center on the Northwest Side.

The location selected for the nursing and allied health campus enraged many inner city advocates, who mounted an aggressive campaign against the bond issue.

Conner said he and other board members will continue to meet with community groups in the coming months to find a consensus among voters.

The board members are under considerable political pressure. The City Council will consider a resolution Thursday to support construction of the nursing and allied health campus on the near East Side in the inner city. And earlier this month, Bexar County commissioners signed a letter urging ACCD trustees to consider a site downtown or at St. Philip's.

On Tuesday, members of the city's largest grass-roots organizations, Communities Organized for Public Service and Metro Alliance, called for ACCD to build the health campus at St. Philip's College on the East Side.

"Locate the facility at St. Philip's and the community will be behind you," Joseph Oubre said. "Let's work together to get this bond passed."

Other bond opponents are pushing for a downtown site. And the League of United Latin American Citizens is pushing for a May election date, even though ACCD officials said it's not possible because of time constraints and requirements made by the Justice Department.

"We're not happy with what Mr. Conner had to say," Ramon Pena, president of LULAC Council 4317, said Tuesday. "If they delay this project too long, it will create a lot of controversy in the community."

[travis2]

I truly don't see how you say that, Manny. Even you yourself say you haven't seen "these three other reports".

What I've seen says the downtown site is unsuitable. What evidence do you have to the contrary?

[Clandestino]

i hate how she writes, "Almost 53 percent of voters said no to the Feb. 5." she should've written about how only 40,000 people voted total...

[Duff McCartney]

When are people going to learn..

Democracy doesn't work.

[Hook Dem]

When are people going to learn..

Democracy doesn't work.
Words of wisdom from Einstein himself!

[MannyIsGod]

What I've seen says the downtown site is unsuitable. What evidence do you have to the contrary?

Travis,

More information has come out recently. The reports they touted were hardly reports at all. And people on the boards that worked on the first studies showing downtown was at the very least, an equal option.

I'll post some more stuff in a bit.

[travis2]

Travis,

More information has come out recently. The reports they touted were hardly reports at all. And people on the boards that worked on the first studies showing downtown was at the very least, an equal option.

I'll post some more stuff in a bit.

I'll be waiting...

[MannyIsGod]

haha, I posted some stuff in the other thread on it, did you read that?

[travis2]

I don't recall seeing anything that (IMHO) rose above opinion and anecdotal evidence, but I could be mistaken...

[MannyIsGod]

Well, untill anyone here has the actual reports in hand, the only evidence we'll have is anecdotal.

Either way, I"ll get all that stuff together and post a summary in a bit.

[travis2]

Well, untill anyone here has the actual reports in hand, the only evidence we'll have is anecdotal.

Either way, I"ll get all that stuff together and post a summary in a bit.

oh-bee-kay-bee...

[MannyIsGod]

This goes back to September.

I'm goint to be using mostly Ranger articles, because they have the best coverage out of all the papers. The Express News didn't have nearly as many details in it's articles as The Ranger. The Current also had some stuff. Oh, and I'm just going to try to pull the important stuff from the articles, but I'll post the links so anyone can go back and read them in thier entirety.

http://www.theranger.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/09/22/415379721d722


The district hired DM Associates in May as a consultant on the project. DM Associates is an economic development consulting firm that specializes in community development strategies and implementation programs.
-------
DM Associates found out that there is “almost unanimous approval of the proposed concept” and a need for collaboration and partnerships.

Also, his firm found out the majority of local university presidents and community leaders prefer the medical center area as the location of the proposed campus “because it supports (the) growth of (the) medical center as residential and professional center.”

However, more than two-thirds of nursing faculty and administrators from this college and St. Philip’s College support the idea of having the campus in the downtown area,

I hate that we get such vague facts, but whatever. Basicaly, the people in the upper administration of the Universtities think the Med Center would be better. The motivation? Because it helps the MEDICAL CENTER. I think that's important to keep in mind.

The people who actually work in the programs overwhelmingly support it staying in the same areas.

However, these are just early opinions before anything was even forumlated.


About a month later....
http://www.theranger.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/10/22/4165de9cea32d


At a capital improvement plan meeting on Sept. 29, Chancellor J. Terence Kelly met with this college’s faculty to discuss the possible location. All of the about 16 speakers preferred a central location to provide better access for students. Students will have to take their prerequisites at one of the district’s colleges.

Kelly said he would prefer a location in the medical center area because it would provide a partnership with the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.

More background on why the feel the way they do.

Then in November, more support for downtown. It's simply more opinion however.


Senators addressed the issue of rewriting a formal letter, which states the senate’s stance on a downtown location for the campus. The letter will be addressed to Alan Miller, chair of the Citizens Bond Committee subcommittee studying allied health options.

The senate formed a committee of Chair Vernell Walker and four other members to discuss the expenses of the proposed allied health campus and work on the letter, among other items.

“President Zeigler asked us to take a stance supporting the downtown location, but we needed more information,” Walkr said.

“The committee was formed to investigate the SAC budget, how the district is budgeted, how much money is going to certain areas and just to get a better understanding of the how and why.”
--------------------
“This letter is a work in progress,” Bernal said. “All of us disagree with the UT Health Science Center location.”


Now, all the way to right before the election in February..
http://www.theranger.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/02/04/4202a7a524af5


The letter states the foundation is willing to provide “a below fair market value lease with inflation adjustors for the approximately 10 acres required.”

Vera questioned why district officials only looked for 10 acres with the medical foundation, when they have repeatedly stated they wanted to have a 15- to 20-acre site for a campus.

Arguments against a downtown site were the lack of land at possible sites.
---------

http://www.theranger.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/02/04/4202c9ade4d22


Carlos Orozco, M.D., a pulmonary specialist who practices at the Christus Santa Rosa Hospital and brother to English Professor Ignacio “Nacho” Orozco, said he was convinced the board would vote for a downtown or St. Philip’s location and was upset when he found out the board ignored the community.

Orozco said the committee has received documents from the district regarding the proposed campus that had not been public previously.

“I felt like I was Tom Cruise in ‘The Firm,’” he said. He found out things, the board never said to the public, he said.
-------
Zeigler spoke at a public hearing Nov. 9 in favor of a freestanding campus downtown.

“The wish of Dr. Zeigler got into the sauce-making machine,” Hinton said. “Dr. Zeigler and Dr. (Angie) Runnels (president of St. Philip’s College) have eventually been silenced, they were told they could never, ever talk about a site anymore.”

http://www.theranger.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/01/28/41f97b2e4af29


“We did two studies that say we should go the medical center,” Zarate said. “It’s a no-brainer,” he said.

Jimenez was not impressed. “We tried to obtain the so-called studies but were told it was secret — privileged information that was not released to the public, to us, nor the news media. We are going to have to file a lawsuit to find out what the no-brainer (is) this gentleman is talking about.”

Jimenez also said that modern medical care is moving away from the concept of the super medical center.

Jimenez added that University Health Systems was never consulted.

The board of managers of the system unanimously passed a motion Dec. 21 that requests the college district board reconsider determining the location for the proposed nursing and allied health careers campus until after the bond election and to consider the empowerment zone as the logical site for the health careers campus.


Actually, just go here and read the articles, there's too damn many for me to keep going through.

http://www.theranger.org/vnews/display.v/SEC/Bond+Issue

[travis2]

I need to take some time to read these, so my response probably won't be until tomorrow.

In the interest of full disclosure, I will say that in the grand scheme of things, I place junior-college newspapers and independent pubs (such as the Current) below a large city newspaper, in general. Not that I think the E-N is the cat's meow, or that I'm automatically dismissing the above articles. I'm just letting you know where my predjudices lie. It's another source, and I'll evaluate it, but the bar may be a little higher in their case, that's all.

[MannyIsGod]

I think that's a fair assesment.

[travis2]

Some very interesting articles, Manny.

Nothing I read, however, caused me to change my mind...except maybe hold some particular people in contempt.

For damn sure the charge can be made on both sides that nobody gives a flying f*ck about the students.

My special contempt is reserved for LULAC and the CBB. They played the race and class warfare cards any chance they got, and there were occasions in the articles where they spread untrue information. Did they care? Of course not. It's the politics that matter, not the students.



Right now I think the right thing to do is to pull the health careers portion out of the bond and resubmit.

[1369]

While I wouldn't doubt that there may be other incentives for ACCD to locate at the Medical Center, wouldn't it make more practical sense to locate a nursing program there near medical facilities where actual applications that the program is trying to teach could be witnessed and worked on?

[MannyIsGod]

1369, thats debateable. There is a better environment for clincal (nurse etc) training downtown according to some people in the know. The Med Center was ideal for a supposed partnership with the UTHSC.

Travis, I wish they would do that. The rest of the bond is really nessecary. And no one has a problem with that.

The real sad part here is that they actually got support for a HUGE bond, but they fucked it up with this one issue. Getting support for a bond that large is NOT easy.

[Clandestino]

blame the 20,000 minorities who voted against it because of the simple issue of where the school was being built... i think it is more important for san antonio to grow educationally then for some 20,000 people to be pissed off the school wasn't being built in their district..

[travis2]

Travis, I wish they would do that. The rest of the bond is really nessecary. And no one has a problem with that.

Manny, for the most part I agree with you. But I'll be honest...after reading some of those articles, the tactics, outright lies and half-truths spread by LULAC and CBB really pissed me off. Frankly, their own words and releases not only placed them against a MedCtr campus, but against the NVC improvements and the NE campus build.

I think most people agree that NVC and the NE campus are necessary. I'm not convinced about some of the loudest voices in the articles.