So what do you think about Castros proposal to raise the sales tax for pre-K educatio

[RandomGuy]

Easy.

At least 2200 parents neglected to enroll their kids in a free pre-k program that was available to them.

I thought even a dumb like you could figure that one out.

There are approximately 5,700 four-year-old children living in San Antonio who are eligible for State funded Pre-K but currently are not enrolled in a full day Pre-K program.

The only data we have is that they are eligible, but not enrolled.

There is abosulutely nothing about the why.

You have assumed that it was the choice, conscious or otherwise of the parent.

I will ask again, what can you show me about the actual reasons they are or might be eligible, but not enrolled?

[TeyshaBlue]

The only data we have is that they are eligible, but not enrolled.

There is abosulutely nothing about the why.

You have assumed that it was the choice, conscious or otherwise of the parent.

I will ask again, what can you show me about the actual reasons they are or might be eligible, but not enrolled?

By the same token, can you show me how the city addresses these reasons (which remained undefined) with their new plan?
Additionally, how are the schools failing to address these reasons?
The data set of unreached students is not a reason unto itself for action.

[CosmicCowboy]

I noted that there is actually a slight expansion of the people that the programs were to be offered, beyond the bare minimium.

A part you neglected to mention, for whatever reason.

Tuition based pre-k programs for kids that don't qualify for free pre-k is hardly a novel concept.

The conversation has been about the kids that already don't use the existing free programs.

[TeyshaBlue]

Going to lunch now. Until then:

[Blake]

Wrong again.

I care far more about getting to enough information to make a decent decision. Please stop making unproven or incorrect assumptions about my motivations.

To be clear:

I do not care about proving you right or wrong. I have actually agreed with you mildly on a couple of points, but have been too busy being a to emphasize or expand on that.

You only care about getting to the truth?

wtf is wrong with you

[CosmicCowboy]

The only data we have is that they are eligible, but not enrolled.

There is abosulutely nothing about the why.

You have assumed that it was the choice, conscious or otherwise of the parent.

I will ask again, what can you show me about the actual reasons they are or might be eligible, but not enrolled?

God, how stupid can you be?

The prek4 programs are already available for qualified kids and is FREE. All the parent has to do is sign their kid up and then get them there.

Allegedly there are 2300 kids whose parents are not taking advantage of the ALREADY FREE PROGRAMS BEING OFFERED.

WHY these parents choose not to take advantage of the program is irrelevant.

These 2300 kids are being used as the justification for a new expansive educational bureaucracy in city government.

A NEW free prek4 does NOTHING to address the unwillingness of these parents to take advantage of a free prek4 program.

Those 2300 kids that are currently unserved by the existing program will still be unserved by the new program as long as prek4 is not mandatory and these parents choose not to participate.

[RandomGuy]

The fact that some parents are too ing selfish and lazy to take advantage of [the pre-K program we currently have is one of my main stated reasons for opposing it].

You have stated this is a fact.

To support this we have so far:

There are approximately 5,700 four-year-old children living in San Antonio who are eligible for State funded Pre-K but currently are not enrolled in a full day Pre-K program. An estimated 2,300 eligible four-year-old children currently are not enrolled in any Pre-K program while 3,400 are enrolled in half-day programs in the City of San Antonio.

If it is there, but there are some lazy s who can't get their kids into it, then that is one thing.

If it is there, but there are peope who want to get their kids in, but can't, then that is something else entirely.

Did I miss something you posted to provide some reasonable basis to think you are correct about your "fact"?

[RandomGuy]

God, how stupid can you be?

The prek4 programs are already available for qualified kids and is FREE. All the parent has to do is sign their kid up and then get them there.

Allegedly there are 2300 kids whose parents are not taking advantage of the ALREADY FREE PROGRAMS BEING OFFERED.

WHY these parents choose not to take advantage of the program is irrelevant.

These 2300 kids are being used as the justification for a new expansive educational bureaucracy in city government.

A NEW free prek4 does NOTHING to address the unwillingness of these parents to take advantage of a free prek4 program.

Those 2300 kids that are currently unserved by the existing program will still be unserved by the new program as long as prek4 is not mandatory and these parents choose not to participate.

So you have nothing to support your thoery after having been asked repeatedly about it.

Gotcha.

FWIW, I just got off the phone with the lady responsible for the Summary. Nice gal.

Shockingly enough, there is an issue with access, as well as a few other things that seem kind of important to make a decision.

Lunch is up. Gotta get going.

[CosmicCowboy]

If you could ing read you would already have seen it has been posted.

If you want to claim all these ing parents are pounding on the ing door trying to get their kids in pre-k4 and can't then the burden of proof is on you...

you can't because IT ISN'T TRUE!

[TeyshaBlue]

Did the nice gal address the city's plan for access?

[RandomGuy]

You only care about getting to the truth?

wtf is wrong with you

Honestly, if he really is right about the majority of those people just too lazy or refusing, then I would pretty much agree with him. An increase in awareness of existing programs would be warranted.

The truth, as usual, turns out to be a bit less than black and white oversimplification.

argh.... laters.

[TeyshaBlue]

Did the nice gal address the city's plan for access?

[coyotes_geek]

So you have nothing to support your thoery after having been asked repeatedly about it.

Gotcha.

FWIW, I just got off the phone with the lady responsible for the Summary. Nice gal.

Shockingly enough, there is an issue with access, as well as a few other things that seem kind of important to make a decision.

Lunch is up. Gotta get going.

Thanks in advance for relaying the specifics of these access issues and how this proposed program will address them. Feel free to pitch in with an opinion as to why whatever measures taken to address the access issue must be performed by the city and can not be left to the school districts.

[CosmicCowboy]

Did the nice gal address the city's plan for access?

Of course we are supposed to blindly accept that it will easier to get to access one of only FOUR centers in the whole ing city instead of getting access at the local neighborhood elementary school around the corner.

[TeyshaBlue]

Thanks in advance for relaying the specifics of these access issues and how this proposed program will address them. Feel free to pitch in with an opinion as to why whatever measures taken to address the access issue must be performed by the city and can not be left to the school districts.

I swear...it was like I was wearing a bbs stealth suit.

[Drachen]

Hey....

Has anyone seen TB?

I haven't seen him post for a while.

[coyotes_geek]

Has anyone seen Teysha lately? Seems like this would be a thread he'd have some good insight into.

[TeyshaBlue]

Hey....

Has anyone seen TB?

I haven't seen him post for a while.

[coyotes_geek]

Hey....

Has anyone seen TB?

I haven't seen him post for a while.

Damn you and your superior typing skills.

[TeyshaBlue]

Oh, I figured it out. I put myself on ignore.

[CosmicCowboy]

RG just wants to blindly argue with ME Teysha.

Butthurt he is.

[xrayzebra]

CC, Julian is just feathering his nest for a run for statewide office. We need another layer of government in education like we need a hole in our head.

If the citizens of our fair city vote for this then they better get ready for a dedicated school tax at the city level in a few years. You can bet your sweet ass it will be coming down the pike. And then every city councilman in our fair city can legitimately stick his nose into the school politics. Which we are so famous for.

[CosmicCowboy]

CC, Julian is just feathering his nest for a run for statewide office. We need another layer of government in education like we need a hole in our head.

If the citizens of our fair city vote for this then they better get ready for a dedicated school tax at the city level in a few years. You can bet your sweet ass it will be coming down the pike. And then every city councilman in our fair city can legitimately stick his nose into the school politics. Which we are so famous for.

Considering just how bad our city council is that is truly a scary thought.

[Drachen]

Butthurt he is.

?

[coyotes_geek]

CC, Julian is just feathering his nest for a run for statewide office. We need another layer of government in education like we need a hole in our head.

Statewide office could be tough for him. He's likeable and articulate, but he's also a democrat in a state where republicans hold every statewide office there is.

If the citizens of our fair city vote for this then they better get ready for a dedicated school tax at the city level in a few years. You can bet your sweet ass it will be coming down the pike. And then every city councilman in our fair city can legitimately stick his nose into the school politics. Which we are so famous for.

If voters pass this, that's it, the city will be capped out on it's sales tax rate. That's the most compelling reason to be against this plan IMHO. There's one bullet left in the sales tax gun and Castro is proposing to use it on a program that would be redundant to what school districts are for.