School Board Candidates – Ready for prime time?
Published - Brownsville Herald October 22, 2006
October 11, I witnessed the best of America in action. The South Texans for Good Government provided a forum for six candidates who want to work hard and incur personal abuse to help guide the Brownsville Independent School District.
I believe that candidates are community heroes for serving the community either for identifying ideas that need to be heard or for securing the confidence of the electorate and allowed to serve the community in the public position, often at very low or non-existent remuneration and nearly always criticized by all sides of an issue. Five heroes were there to face the scrutiny of their neighbors.
The incumbent Dr. Enrique Escobedo was present and was challenged by Moises Gonzalez and Michael Rodriguez for place 1.
Dr. Escobedo defended his position very well in face of a number of very pointed questions relating to long held criticisms of the BISD Board, on the part of several very passionate constituents.
Michael Rodriguez, an attorney with the United States attorney’s office and Moises Gonzalez a Special Agent with Immigration and Customs Enforcement brought freshness to the fray with a perspective from outside “in crowd politics” and with the studied observation only learned in a law enforcement atmosphere. All three of the presentations demonstrated very competent folks that would be an asset to the community however Mr. Gonzalez expressed an interest in reviewing the Strayhorn Report in the context of the changes that have taken place.
To date the only apparent action taken was that a committee of very competent community leaders was convened; no report was ever allowed to reach the real bosses (the public). The issue should be dealt with to substantiate or discredit issues raised. In this round, I have to give Mr. Gonzalez 5 out of 5 points and Mr. Rodriguez gets 3 points. Dr. Escobedo gets 3 points as well but also gets a 1 point bonus for fielding really the difficult questions so well especially in the face of preformed opinions.
Place 2 incumbent Eliseo Munoz defended his position against Dr. Christina Savaadera. Ruben Cortez Jr. sent his apologies and a representative to speak in his behalf.
Place 2 incumbent Eliseo Munoz defended his position against Dr. Christina Savaadera. Ruben Cortez Jr. sent his apologies and a representative to speak in his behalf.
In the presentation, Mr. Munoz responded professionally and responsibly to some very focused questions, generally meant for the whole board. His usual smooth demeanor wore thin with frustration and a passion to clarify a touchy issue, when he abruptly asked a questioner to sit down.
For this round, I have to give Mr. Munoz 4 points plus a 1 point bonus for the excellent responses to the extraordinary questions, but must also subtract 1 point for not keeping the usual cool.
Mr. Ruben Cortez Jr. was most ably represented by a speaker whose career is involved with preparing and training leaders in education. The presentation showed the speaker to be exceptionally well studied in the issues; however, it did not do much for Mr. Cortez’s credentials, except to demonstrate that his campaign has deep pockets or that he will be obligated in some way in the future. The presentation raised more questions than they answered.
I can not give any points to Mr. Cortez and must subtract 2 points for the unanswered questions.
Dr. Savaadera demonstrated herself to be the consummate educational manager. She demonstrated an in-depth knowledge of all the latest programs and state requirements, except that she kept referring to the Federal Government “raising the bar” and raising federal standards. To my knowledge the Federal Government requires that there be standards; and that they apply to every one equally. The fed then asks the state to set those standards and report on them in order to get “Title 1” federal money.
The presentation also caused me to wonder if Dr. Savaadera will be as interested in watching out for us everyday folks or her colleagues in the education bureaucracy.
For her presentation I must award a score of 4 out of 5 but must subtract 1 point for the way federal standards were represented; either inaccurate or inadequately described.
The bottom line is “what to do, now”.
We must go vote! It tells what you want done and in today’s world of very close races is very important. Much of politics is getting the folks to the polls, that are thought to be sympathetic to a particular point of view and discouraging those from voting who might disagree.
Here in the Valley it is an even bigger problem as the turnout is usually as low as 10% of the registered voters, unless there is a very controversial election. It is often made worse because as a group, Hispanics vote in much less numbers than the national averages. The result is that issues affecting the Valley and Hispanics in particular, might not be given a very high priority. Just look at Immigration Issues!
The candidates for the BISD Board are all competent and more than qualified to serve. The thing is to select the ones that will be the best for this time and set of circumstances.
The University candidate introduction programs and especially the hard work at the South Texans for Good Government are doing a great job to give you the information you need to make the right choices, in the end it is still your vote that is counted.
Most importantly by not voting, we are giving our freedoms and rights to a very few usually less than 10 percent of those of us eligible to vote, and letting them tell the rest of us what our children will learn, how it will be done, and how much we will pay for it.
It is crucial that each one of us votes for someone, not the least worst, even if you must write it in, that represents what we want. Our children deserve it!