You are currently browsing the monthly archive for February 2009.
In the last issue of La Voz (Jan. 17, 2009), the TAKS scores were reviewed based on the fact that the Uvalde CISD board members, who voted to provide Superintendent Wendell Brown with a salary increase, used the scores as one of the reasons for the increase.
In the Uvalde Leader-News (Jan. 18, 2009), UCISD board president Allen Mize, one of the primary supporters of the salary increase, was quoted as saying that Brown’s evaluation was “very positive,” that it “went smooth,” and that everyone on the board supported Brown.
One has to wonder why it took from 8:30 p.m. to 1 a.m. – 4½ hours – for the board to come to agreement on the salary increase if everything “went smooth.” Furthermore, if everyone on the board was indeed supportive of the superintendent as Mize claims, then why was the vote split four to three?
If Mize was attempting to paint a positive picture on what by all appearances may have been a drawn out and bitter process that ended in a divided vote, he did not succeed. It is not difficult to read between the lines and come to a realistic conclusion.
However, what is of even greater interest is what Brown stated in an email on Sept. 2008. Through its sources, La Voz obtained a copy of an email sent to UCISD personnel by Brown shortly after the rollback election failed to pass.
The defeat of the tax increase that board members and Brown supported left the district in a financial pinch for the upcoming academic year (the current year). A facsimile of the email (at right) sent by Brown to UCISD personnel because of the failure of the rollback passage is here for LaVoz’s readers.
Note the language used by Brown in the email; in the first paragraph he refers to the rollback election and the fact that it failed. He then states that as a result the “funding for the 08-09 school year will be limited and we will not be able to provide a pay increase. Expect scrutiny with all requests.”
In the second paragraph he further states, “As a point of clarification, we began the school year with the appropriate budget so no adjustments will need to be made in pay for any team member.” Also, note at the bottom of the email that there was a copy of the email sent to the board.
In reviewing the email, it is clear that the message fell on deaf ears with respect to the board members who voted to provide Brown his salary increase. Even though Brown states that the limited funding will not allow for any pay increases, apparently the board felt this did not apply to Brown.
At least three board members took Brown’s words to heart and scrutinized the salary increase and these three board members voted against the increase.
However, beyond that, Brown himself did not serve as a leader exemplifying what he wrote, as he chose to disregard his own words and accept the pay increase. He could have refused in good conscious, but chose not to do so.
La Voz would like to commend George H. Brown (undoubtedly no relation to Dr. Wendell Brown) who in the letter to the editor in the Uvalde Leader-News of Sunday, Jan. 25, succinctly and to the point clearly expressed his opinion regarding the salary increase. His point is well taken, if the excuse to provide the superintendent a salary increase was because it would be brought in line with other districts, there is no doubt that the pay of UCISD teachers is also low when compared to other districts. What about them?
Finally, according to La Voz sources, the morale of district personnel has fallen drastically as a result of the actions of the board. It is clear that some board members are enamored with Brown, but that has only created resentment on the part of district personnel. One is left to wonder where the students are in all of this.
The Uvalde Police Department (UPD) is pleased to announce the clearance of ten separate cases of graffiti reported within the past two weeks. In these reported cases, a single juvenile offender was responsible for defacing private businesses along with state and government buildings.
Uvalde Criminal Investigators were able to develop leads that eventually led to the identification of the offender. Establishing territory in order to display “art” is alleged to be the apparent motivation for the acts of criminal mischief.
All cases have been forwarded to the Uvalde County juvenile probation office. The UPD is committed to keeping our community free from unsightly graffiti, please call (830)-278-9147 with any information that may assist us in that pursuit.
The Uvalde PD would also like to spotlight the successful clearance of a residential burglary that occurred in the 2000 block of East Main Street on Jan. 19. Uvalde PD investigators were able to collaborate with investigators with the Uvalde County Sheriff’s Office (UCSO) and successfully obtain information needed to solve this burglary and recover items taken.
Arrested in connection with this burglary were Ci Sandoval Martinez (17) of Uvalde and a male (juvenile) suspect. The clearance of this burglary was made possible due to the combined efforts of a concerned citizen, The UCSO, and the UPD.
Also, the Uvalde Police Department participated in a multi-agency initiative on Jan. 22 in order to confirm the documented whereabouts of convicted sex offenders residing in Uvalde County.
Convicted sex offenders are required to register with the UPD or the UCSO on an annual basis depending on where they reside within Uvalde County. The multi-agency initiative involved the following agencies: the UPD, UCSO, the Department of Public Safety (narcotics division/criminal intelligence division/motor vehicle theft division), Immigration Customs and Enforcement, The United States Marshals Service, and The Sabinal Police Department.
The joint task force successfully visited several residences in the Uvalde County area and confirmed the reported whereabouts of many registered sex offenders. Future operations of this nature are planned throughout the upcoming year in an effort to obtain compliance with court ordered sex offender registration.
Uvalde County Sheriff Charles Mendeke is pleased with how the UPD and the UCSO is working together with other local, state, and federal agencies in order to better serve our citizens. Anyone interested in knowing the reported whereabouts of known sex offenders is encouraged to log on to the following web site provided by the Texas Department of Public Safety: www.txdps.tx.us.
This type of community partnership and inter-agency cooperation is essential in promoting a safe and secure community.
Please contact the UPD at (830)-278-9147 with any information regarding crimes occurring in your area. Please remember, information that you provide today could prevent a member of our community from becoming a victim of crime tomorrow.
In the last issue of La Voz, information on the district’s TAKS scores was provided by virtue of the fact that Uvalde CISD board members who supported the salary increase for UCISD Supt. Wendell Brown stated that positive results were part of the reason for the raise.
In this issue of La Voz more information concerning UCISD TAKS results and other information is provided to parents and the community in order to obtain a better perspective on where the district is headed.
As was done in the previous issue tables are provided in order to fully explain the results of the state mandated tests. Elementary grades are included in Table 1 (at right) which provides similar information to that provided in the last issue.
However, no comparative state or regional data is provided. Instead, two new columns were added. These last two columns in the table reflect TAKS results for Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students and academically At Risk students. At Risk students are identified as such due to factors such as poverty, language, medical reasons, family problems, or other issues that may interfere with the student’s ability to perform their work.
These two columns were added due to the district’s bilingual education program being under scrutiny of the Texas Education Agency (TEA) for the past three years, and both LEP and At Risk students are found in the bilingual education program. How these student perform is therefore of importance to the district.
In comparing the scores of LEP students to the scores for the entire district, Hispanic, and white students, LEP students overall have lower scores. The only exceptions are third grade reading and math in 2007.
Note should also be made of the lower scores in the table when comparing 2006 to 2008. The scores for LEP students decrease in third-grade math, fourth-grade reading, fourth-grade writing, fifth-grade math, sixth-grade reading, and sixth-grade math.
Also, note the increases in 2007 followed by decreases in 2008 for third grade reading, third grade math, fourth grade reading, fourth grade math, fourth grade writing, fifth grade math, sixth grade reading, and sixth grade math. In some instances, the decreases in 2008 were extensive, such as sixth grade reading where the scores fell by 49% and sixth grade math where they fell by 27%.
Although increases can be seen in some scores of At Risk students, similar decreases between 2007 and 2008 can also be seen for At Risk students. And, decreases between 2006 and 2008 are also evident. For instance, decreases can be seen between 2006 and 2008 for third-grade reading, third-grade math, fourth-grade reading, fourth-grade writing, sixth-grade reading, and sixth-grade math.
The increase in scores from 2006 to 2007, then decreases from 2007 to 2008 can also be determined. These fluctuations can be seen in fourth-grade math, and fourth-grade writing. Although overall increases are evident, such as fifth-grade reading, fifth-grade math, and fifth grade-science, the fact remains that the increases are not consistent across grade levels and the rise and fall of scores leaves much to be desired.
Table 2 (pg. 7) is reflective of similar information for the secondary grades. In all instances, the scores for both LEP and At Risk students are lower than those for the district, Hispanic students and white students. Further, just as is the case for students at the elementary grades, some of the scores for LEP and At Risk students at the secondary level have increases in 2007, only to decrease in 2008. Just as testing scores are inconsistent across elementary grade levels so, too, are they inconsistent across secondary levels.
However, the exceedingly low scores for secondary level LEP students are clearly evident, and the contrast with the scores of both white and Hispanic students is appalling. The difference in scores between Hispanic and LEP students can range anywhere from one point in eleventh grade math to 68 points in eleventh-grade English Language Arts. The differences in scores for white and LEP students are even larger with a low of 21 points in eleventh-grade math and a high of 90 points in eighth-grade science.
Overall, in the three-year span that is covered by the table, the differences between Hispanic, white and At Risk students are lower in comparison to LEP students. In only one instance are the scores for At Risk students higher than that for Hispanic students – tenth-grade social studies.
The smallest difference between Hispanic and At Risk students is in eleventh-grade social studies at 2 points; the largest difference is eighth grade science at 35 points.
The differences for white and At Risk students are higher; the lowest point differential is in eleventh grade English Language Arts at 6 points, and the highest difference in eighth grade science at 67 points. Much as with elementary grade scores, the scores for secondary level At Risk students increase and decrease between 2006 to 2007 and 2007 to 2008.
This is evident in seventh-grade reading, math and writing, eighth-grade reading, science and social studies, ninth-grade reading, tenth-grade math and science and for eleventh-grade English Language Arts, math, science, and social studies.
In only three areas are the increases consistent over the three-year period – ninth-grade math, tenth-grade English Language Arts, and tenth-grade social studies. Again, the issue of inconsistency over grade levels is evident.
To provide a broader review of UCISD academic information, Table 3 (pg. 
reflects the College Readiness information for 2006, 2007, and 2008.
College readiness is measured based on how well students do in English Language Arts and math. When comparing white students to state and regional scores, it is only in math in 2008 in which these students score lower. Hispanic students, on the other hand, score lower than students at both state and regional levels.
The comparison of scores is much worse for LEP and At Risk students. For LEP students it is only in math in 2006 and 2007 that they score at greater than 1%. At Risk students also score lower than both white and Hispanic students in both subjects throughout the three years covered.
The inconsistency of scores is clearly evident in math for white and LEP students. The scores of white students increase from 2006 to 2007, but decrease from 2007 to 2008. The opposite is the case for LEP students, their scores decrease from 2006 to 2007, and then increase from 2007 to 2008. For At Risk students the inconsistency is in English Language Arts where their scores increase from 2006 to 2007, then decrease from 2007 to 2008.
There is consistency, however, in the increase in scores for Hispanic and white students in English Language Arts, and in math for Hispanic students. Another way to look at these scores is to view them inversely, that is, for instance, if 41% of Hispanic students in 2008 were college ready, that means that 59% were not.
For LEP students this means that nearly 100% were not college ready, and for At Risk students 69% were not college ready. It is exceedingly evident that UCISD is doing a poor job in this area.
The last table (Table 4; pg. provides the SAT and ACT test scores, these scores are not provided for LEP and At Risk students. These tests are administered as a means of providing entrance examination data to colleges and universities, thus preparing the students for entrance into higher education.
The first set of rows provides the percent of students who take the examinations. The percent of white students in the district taking the exams exceed the state and regional level, with the exception of 2005. Hispanic student percentages, on the other hand, are consistently below state and regional levels. This means that Hispanic students are less prepared to enter college because they will still require testing.
The scores on the exams is another indicator of preparedness. Once again, in comparing the scores of white students to the scores at the state and regional level, only in 2006 are the ACT score lower.
Based on the reasoning of the board members who voted for the salary increase for Superintendent Brown that the district was doing quite well, it has been shown that the opposite is true. Although there is improvement in some areas, there is lack of improvement, and even regression in other areas.
The inconsistency and the differences in scores between groups is unmistakable. The question that remains is the whether or not the decision of the four board members who voted for the salary increase was unmistakable.
KYLE – Uvalde native Bowie V. Ibarra’s third book, “Pit Fighters: Baptism by Fire” is breaking new ground in sports fiction.
A book-signing event by the Uvalde author with a live wrestling presentation is scheduled for Feb. 14 from 10a.m. to 1p.m. at El Progreso Memorial Library.
Ibarra says, “I own a lot of martial arts training books. There are also lots of martial arts movies. But I’m not sure how many Mixed Martial Arts themed fiction books are out there.”
“Pit Fighters: Baptism by Fire” follows a small and diverse stable of fighters from around the world who form a stable in the fictional south Texas town of San Uvalde.
The team competes in a fictional mixed martial arts tournament in Austin during the advent of the sport.
Ibarra believes MMA is more of a rebirth, or a kind of martial arts renaissance.
“The Greeks would have called Mixed Martial Arts “Pankration”.
“This ancient sport was a combination of punching, kicking, and submission wrestling. In the 1970’s, Bruce Lee advocated the study of all arts to avoid the limitations of one form. Today, his dream is a reality,” says Ibarra
The book is a culmination of Ibarra’s appreciation of combat sports.
“Growing up, I would join my father and uncle and watch boxing on weekends. From the matches on “Wide World of Sports” to the big Pay-Per-Views with Tyson and Chavez,” recollects Ibarra.
“Today, its Couture or Emelianenko who are making waves in the MMA fight world.”
“Pit Fighters”
is Ibarra’s third. His first two pulp-style zombie horror novels, “Down the Road: A Zombie Horror Story” and “Down the Road: On the Last Day”, have made waves in the zombie horror subculture.
His third story in the series, “Down the Road: The Fall of Austin” is completed and will be released later this year.
“Pit Fighters” is published by Swarm Press, an imprint of Permuted Press, a print-on-demand publishing house.
The publisher has been in business since 2004. Permuted’s books, including Ibarra’s first two, are available on the shelves at Borders and Waldenbooks, as well as online through Amazon and other online vendors.
Bowie Ibarra lives in Kyle and teaches at Lehman High School.
He is represented by Acclaim Talent in Austin. Bowie Ibarra has a Bachelor of Fine Arts in Acting and a Masters of Art in Theatre History.
For more information on Swarm Press or Permuted Press titles, go to http://www.swarmpress.com or http://www.permutedpress.com.
For more information on Bowie Ibarra and his other works, visit his website at: http://www.bowieibarra.com/.
La Voz has become aware of lobbying efforts on the part of Southwest Texas Water Resources LP (STWR) regarding the proposed water pipeline (at right). According to knowledgeable sources, former Governor Dolph Briscoe is in opposition to the pipeline and has provided his own lobbyist to address the matter.
According to documents obtained, STWR lobbyists are attempting to have State Representatives Carlos Uresti and Pete Gallegos sponsor a bill. At this point neither of the representatives has acquiesced to the sponsorship. According to our sources, the scenario would be as follows:
• A bill would be introduced
• Representatives Gallegos and Uristi would be asked to sponsor the bill.
• The bill will deal with:
• Only permitted water
• The water taken from the area could only be used within the EAA boundaries
The bill will be in the form of an exception to the current language in the EAA statute.
Other information pertaining to the lobbying efforts indicate that (1) the economic study was performed by Angelos Angelo, and (2) the EAA is poised to offer to the City (Uvalde) the incremental differences between the Agricultural value and the municipal value of the water. (this offer has been made before).
What must be understood, based on the lobbying efforts of STWR, is that the law itself must be changed (note third item). As it currently exists, the law does not allow for the building of a pipeline. This is the basis for the sponsorship of a bill, once a bill is introduced and passes; it changes the dynamics of the current law and allows for transfer of permitted water (which is already taking place via extraction in Bexar County). The intent behind the changes is of course to allow for the building of a pipeline.
The intent behind the economic study is to try to convince residents and officials in Uvalde County that the building and transfer of water will actually benefit the county economically.
STWR argues that the pipeline would in effect be a “significant management” tool, and that the water project “will be the largest economic development project in the history of the Uvalde area.”
STWR further argues that Uvalde’s “economy will be strengthened by the direct capital investment and jobs that will result from the Uvalde Water Project’s water company located in Uvalde County, the economic benefits to water rights owners, and the hundreds of jobs created during the construction phase.”
In effect STWR, through its lobbying efforts, and its economic studies is attempting to persuade locals and state representatives that building the pipeline will be a benefit to all. The impetus behind the effort, however, devolves to one simple factor – money. Money that is being used to push through a bill that would generate incomes for a select few who will be the final benefactors of the proposed water pipeline.
To get an idea of the amount of money currently being spent on lobbying efforts, the Ethics Commission website was accessed in order to view the list of lobbyists being used by STWR. The following are four of five known lobbyist being used by STWR.
• Robert Black
- Ethics Commission # (00065038)
919 Congress Ave, Austin, TX 78701
Type of Compensation: Prospective
Compensation range: $50,000 – $99,999.99
Client – Start: 01/01/2009 Term Date: 12/31/2009
• Marc Rodriguez - Ethics Commission # (00027635)
1122 Colorado St. Suite 2399, Austin, TX 78701
Type of Compensation: Prospective
Compensation range: $150,000 – $199,999.99
Client – Start: 01/02/2009 Term Date: 12/31/2009
• Hillery Stephens - Ethics Commission # (00065206)
1122 Colorado Suite 2399, Austin, TX 78701
Type of Compensation: Paid
Compensation range: Less Than $10,000.00
Client – Start: 01/05/2009 Term Date: 12/31/2009
• Gilbert Turieta - Ethics Commission # (00010261)
1122 Colorado St. Suite 2399, Austin, TX 78701
Type of Compensation: Paid
Compensation range: Less Than $10,000.00
Client – Start: 01/01/2009 Term Date: 12/31/2009
