Willis City Council Meeting - Sept. 15, 2009

Why can’t all government be like this? The Council and Mayor are unpaid elected public servants meeting on their own time to take care of city business. They are businesslike, friendly, and treat each other, the public, and city staff with respect and courtesy. There is no grandstanding and disagreements are handled with diplomacy and compromise.

Therefore the council meetings are dull models of efficiency and decorum. If we could clone this local process at the county, state, and federal levels we’d have the most efficient government in the world!

Mayor Leonard Reed and council members Josey Billnoske, John Lovelady, Anna Ross, Bill Van Alstyne, and Tamara Young and City Manager Hector Forester considered the following items:

1. Heard a citizen’s inquiry relating to traffic problems with a school on County Line Road. The Willis Police Chief, school personnel, and the local constable’s office are working together to solve the problem.
2. Approved the minutes of the preceding meeting.
3. Declared an structure within the city unsafe and referred it to the Building Commission.
4. Designated John Lovelady as the Willis representative to the Houston-Galveston Area General Council with Anna Ross as the alternate. Appointed Ethan Lang, Don Ryan, Taylor Robinson, and Thomas Billnoski to the Building Standards Commission.
5. Had the first reading of an ordinance to regulate animal control with 5 pets allowed per residence. Breeders would be required to sign paperwork and pay an annual fee. A councilman expressed concern about hamsters and gerbils being included in the count and the council asked city staff to consider that in its second reading.
6. Had the second reading of an ordinance to regulate solicitation in the city. The ordinance was passed unanimously.
7. Voted for Ron Crabtree, City Manager of Deer Park, as its representative to the Texas Municipal League pool.
8. Approved a city auditor for a fee of $10,500.
9. Changed the date of the October meeting to October 13 at 6:30 pm because of a conflict with the Texas Municipal League Convention.
10. Approved the closure of a section of Thomason street on Oct. 17th from 9am-4pm for the First United Methodist Church.
11. Discussed council inputs to city public business. Mention was made of the Willis Homecoming Parade on October 21, coordination with the county through County Commission Meador of use of a new landfill, the movement of $30,000 in unused public works funds to buy a new backhoe, and concern about solicitation at the intersection of I-45 and SH-1097. City Manager Forester promised to attempt to get an article in the local papers about bulk trash pickup being provided every Friday for items placed near the curb. Most important, the City Manager provided a map of Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction showing that Conroe was annexing areas south of Conroe. He said that Willis needed to consider annexing areas along the I-45 corridor. The obvious implication is that Willis needs to protect its future tax base from City of Conroe encroachment.

Compared to the dog and pony “town halls” put on by our federal representative earlier this month, this meeting was a welcome breath of fresh air.

Barbara Cargill goes national, embarrasses the 8th District

Right-wing zealot and State Board of Education District 8 Member Barbara Cargill (R-The Woodlands) took to the national stage this week in an interview with NPR. Unsurprisingly, she effectively made Texas and the people who voted for her look stupid. How can someone who embodies the politicization of the classroom have such a problem with it? Someone abolish the SBOE already.

NPR lets Texas education official throw stones at Obama, doesn't mention her glass house

Montgomery County school districts should listen to students

The recent flap over the President's address on education has been especially apparent here in Montgomery County where 4/6 school districts chose to completely censor it. The other two only showed it to those who had parental permission.

A small but loud minority of parents combined with reactionary school administrators caused these school districts to take these unprecedented steps. At no other time in history, have they taken this sort of action in preparation of an elected official speaking to children. While the school administrators were obviously feeling some pressure from some parents, this sort of mob rule cannot drive all decisions. At some point, common sense and dedication to the mission must weigh into the decision-making process.

While some districts may have seen offering an opt-out option as a compromise, it only compromised their credibility with more sensible parents, students, and the greater community. It encouraged too many parents to treat this opt out form as another opportunity to vote in the 2008 election, rather than an opportunity to make a good education decision. That's why school districts must lead, rather than be led around at knife point. These districts could have easily cited precedent, stating that their longstanding policy has been to allow community leaders into the classroom without permission due to the benign nature of their message. After all, they are charged with advancing the education of their students and cannot be expected to have parents weigh in on every decision. It is their duty to stand up for these principles and provide educational leadership. Yet, they took the easy and less courageous route in this case.

We can learn a lot from the high school students who are sadly, more mature than the parents and school administrators who sought to censor the message.

Magnolia High School Junior Matt Korman:

“I am just one of the many who feel like this is not right and unfair to the student body of not only MHS, but to all kids of MISD,” Korman said. “I do not understand why we are not allowed to watch a presidential address to the students of America, that is, after all, about us and how to set educational goals and to take action in our learning.” Korman read the advance script of the president’s remarks released Monday and said it was not “overreaching in trying to indoctrinate young, impressionable minds.” “We have brains of our own,” Korman said. “We form our own opinions. … I believe your actions were premature and more politically driven and I am extremely disappointed as a student.”

Oak Ridge High School Senior Dani Myers:

“President Obama delivered an important message,” “We need to listen to what the president says. He cares about our future.”

Montgomery, Willis, New Caney, and Splendora ISD should do the right thing and show the President's address in the classroom to all students, without restriction. Otherwise, their credibility as a objective, fact-based, education-oriented institution is greatly at risk.

Source: The Courier 9/9/09

Congressman Brady, where are you now?

In recent article of The Courier, Congressman Kevin Brady said this of the President's Address on Education that airs tomorrow:

"U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands, agrees with schools not airing the speech. He said he and his wife are opting their fifth-grader out of viewing the broadcast “unless we can preview it ahead of time and determine if it’s appropriate.”

Now the text of that speech has been released by the White House. Congressman Brady is a leader of this community and his statement has undoubtedly influenced many parents in their decision whether or not to expose their children to the President of the United States. Now that the speech can be previewed, we call on Congressman Brady to announce whether or not he feels the president's message is something he considers "appropriate."

Read the text of the speech.

UPDATE:
In an interview with CNN, Former First Lady Laura Bush has become the first major Republican to take a stand on the side of common sense, rather than fear-mongering lunacy. Said Laura, "I think it's also really important for everyone to respect the President of the United States." Hats off to Laura Bush having the courage to say what is right. Hopefully, Congressman Kevin Brady can summon similar courage.

Conroe ISD Censoring the President

In an email obtained by MoCo Report, it is clear that some CISD schools are giving parents the option to "opt out" their child from watching President Obama's upcoming speech to children on persisting and succeeding in school. In a letter, to school districts, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan encouarged school leaders to play the speech, which will be broadcast live via the White House website on September 8th. In the letter, Secretary Duncan says, "The president will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning."

CISD has not yet returned our inquiry and we are in the progress of reaching out to other school districts to understand what their plans are.

However, Bush Elementary in The Woodlands, is going forward with the "Opt Out" program:

> Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 17:00:14 -0700
> From: jmills@conroeisd.net
> To:
> Subject: President's Address
>
> Bush Parents,
> You should have received a letter today about the President's address to the students in America.
> Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has requested that all students in the nation watch as the President delivers a national address on the importance of education. CISD students will watch the address which will be delivered Tuesday, September 8, 2009. It will be broadcast live on the White House website www.whitehouse.gov at 12:00 noon eastern standard time and 11:00 a.m. CST.
>
> If you request that your child not participate in watching this message, please return the note to your child's teacher or write a note indicating your choice. Your child will be allowed to participate in another activity, such as reading in the library. If you do wish for your child to participate in watching the President’s message, you do not need to return the note.
>
> Thank you,
> Judy Mills
> Principal

We respect the rights of school districts to decide whether or not a Presidential Address fits into their planned curriculum and to act accordingly. However, to allow an "opt out" program sends the message to the public as well as young children at a formative age that something is potentially wrong with what the President will say. That inference is absolutely unfounded as the Department of Education has made it clear what the intentions of the Address are and they have even provided suggested lesson material to possibly accompany the speech. Review of the material reveals the same thing, that this effort is obviously benign in nature. This type of address is not unprecedented, as former President George H.W. Bush gave a similar school speech in 1989. When I was in school, we watched Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush at in-class televisions at various important times in history.

We have asked CISD if they have implemented similar "opt out" options for past Presidential Addresses. It's important to note that a Republican political figure, then First Lady Laura Bush visited this very elementary school in 2008 with her daughter to read to students and no similar opt-out option was offerred. I would contend that Barack Obama talking about the importance of perserverance in school is just as harmless as Laura Bush reading a children's book that she wrote.

Regardless of policy differences we may have, I think we can agree that children should learn to have respect for the office of the President of the United States.

See: Houston Chronicle 9/2/2009 , Politico.com 9/2/2009

Kevin Brady Town Hall 9/2/2009

Well, I attended my first Kevin Brady "Dog and Pony Show" at 8am this morning at the United Methodist Church in The Woodlands. My experience was not unlike many of the the others that we've heard about on this blog. Brady starts out with his 30 minute presentation with that ridiculous chart in the background. Then he takes questions. The usual nuts stand up and proceed to make incoherent and inaccurate statements rather than questions. Brady nods a lot, doesn't correct any of their garbage and then when giving an answer, takes the opportunity to steer the discussion to some point that he wants to make.

The first guy wanted to know where in the "Declaration of Independence" it said that the government could operate a health insurance. The next "question" was a woman who said she had lost a child from a vaccine-preventable disease so she had dedicated her life's work to this cause. She was against the "socialized" medicine and I couldn't make sense out of much that she was saying, but I commend her on the work she's doing for kids. She concluded with a comment about mandatory end of life counseling.

Now, I was planning on asking a question about my plight as a soon-to-be poor college student and how I am going back to school at the risk of not having access to health insurance. However, after Brady failed to correct her on the end of life counseling bit, I decided to focus on that.

I said, "Congressman Brady, thank you for holding this town hall meeting. It's important that we all debate this important topic but that debate has no value if it's based on misinformation. As a member of Congress who has read this bill, I was hoping you could clear something up for us. Section 1233 provides that Medicare will pay for an optional advance directive consultation with your physician, however many claim that this is mandatory. Can you clear this up and do you think advance medical directives are a good idea?"

Brady something to the effect that it was mandatory in the bill that Medicare pays for it, but that it would be optional for Medicare recipients. He said advance medical directives were good because we should make our wishes known. So far, I was happy with his response. In his response, he emphasized that it was mandatory that Medicare pay for it and then slipped the "yeah, it's optional" in there real quick. Well, duh, that's the point. How else could this be made available as an option if the funding wasn't provided by law? However, he wrapped up his answer with a sound byte that was designed to eclipse all of the accurate information he had just said. He said something to the effect that he didn't think the government should be getting involved in those types of decisions. And of course, all of the nuts started clapping.

Well, the government is not involved in the advance medical directive (i.e. a living will). The government is involved to the extent that Medicare, the health insurer in this case, pays for the visit with your physician. The physician can tell you whatever they want, they'll just be getting their check from Medicare like they do every other time you come to see them.

It convinced me that Mr. Brady has no intention of an honest debate. His only interest is in propagating more misinformation to keep his mobs fired up.

Brady can't show up at these Town Halls and say that there is nothing wrong with our healthcare system, because everyone has had to deal with some problem on a personal level. Even some of the opponents of reform in the crowd told stories of problems they had in the same breath that they opposed reform. So Brady plays the angle of wanting to fix the system, just not with this "Obamacare". He's been in Congress since 1996 and all of the sudden he has an interest in fixing a system that has been broken for decades. What does he propose as an alternative? A four letter acronym (C.A.R.E) and a 50 point flyer.

The Question I didn't get to ask

I attended the Aug 26^th Kevin Brady town hall meeting on health care. Twice now, I’ve heard Rep. Brady quote the Lewin Group, and cite it as an independent source.

Obviously, Rep. Brady is misinformed about the Lewin Group, which is funded by United Healthcare, one of our nation’s largest health insurance companies.

If I had been given the chance at the town hall meeting, I would have asked, “ Isn’t quoting the Lewin Group as an unbiased source on healthcare, like quoting Colonel Sanders as an advocate for chickens?”

Anne Sermons Gillis, The Woodlands