|
Post by BRAVOBRAVO on Mar 8, 2010 21:58:13 GMT -7
Yet again teachers are required to come before school to hear a bond rah rah presentation. Is this legal? I mean why not have all the candidates the administration supports have mandatory attendance from EPISD employees? This reeks of corruption and just plain bad judgement. Additionally why is EPISD allowed to have special elections like this? They intentionally have elections like this as stand alone so it discourages turnout. They should be REQUIRED to hold any of it's elections on GENERAL ELECTION day.
Another shining example of why this place is a cesspool of corruption.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 9, 2010 5:11:57 GMT -7
Good question. I never really asked why these bonds always seem to be held in special elections. Given the bloated "leadership" in the districts, were I able to vote on the EPISD bond mine would be no
|
|
|
Post by BRAVOBRAVO on Mar 9, 2010 11:57:47 GMT -7
Good question. I never really asked why these bonds always seem to be held in special elections. Given the bloated "leadership" in the districts, were I able to vote on the EPISD bond mine would be no How do you feel about mandatory attendance (unpaid) for a pro bond presentation? Is that legal?
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 9, 2010 15:50:08 GMT -7
Don't know if it is legal or not, but in the private sector if a major initiative was coming down the road we would have mandatory meetings. Now directing them how to vote...?
|
|
|
Post by matthew on Mar 15, 2010 13:56:26 GMT -7
*It's not a bond issue; it's a tax increase. *The second Saturday in May is a uniform election date. *School district resources cannot legally be used to advocate passage of the TRE.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 15, 2010 14:45:00 GMT -7
*It's not a bond issue; it's a tax increase. *The second Saturday in May is a uniform election date. *School district resources cannot legally be used to advocate passage of the TRE. Can School District resources be used to educate the employees on the need for and purpose of the TRE, if there is no explicit advocacy?
|
|
|
Post by matthew on Mar 15, 2010 15:16:16 GMT -7
Election Code §255.003 specifically allows "communication that factually describes the purposes of a measure if the communication does not advocate passage or defeat of the measure."
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 15, 2010 15:25:57 GMT -7
Thanks Loop hole big enough for a greyhound bus
|
|
|
Post by bravobravo on Mar 15, 2010 16:25:23 GMT -7
Does that allow for EPISD to take attendance of employees to make sure they attended? Can EPISD mandate employees show up to hear a political presentation without compensation?
I am sure the answer to both is yes...which explains why we are the ethically challenged cesspool we are.
|
|
|
Post by matthew on Mar 15, 2010 18:08:52 GMT -7
It may be legal, but I don't think it's smart. Teachers don't like meetings in general, and they surely aren't going to like hearing that teacher salaries and health insurance aren't priorities for the district.
|
|
|
Post by bravobravo on Mar 29, 2010 13:17:37 GMT -7
Do you think that if this TAX INCREASE is passed that Dr. Garcia can lure Miss. Venezuela to work for EPISD as his concubine? What is one more six figure cutie on the payroll who does nothing? I guess we now know why Austin passed on him.
|
|