Thứ Hai, 6 tháng 5, 2013
Place your bets
We've been discussing how many times the TRWD incumbent promoting, TRV shilling "news" paper (Fort Worth Star-Telegram) would run fluff articles this week about TRWD. We didn't have to wait long. Though what does it say when the fluff articles seem to have better fact checkers than the "news" articles?
They just keep proving our point.
So do their employees. One keeps posting online about the TRWD candidates. Calls BNK Tea Party candidates. Oh the horror. Except again, somebody should check their facts. While the BNK candidates do have support from the Tea Party, they also have support from the Republican Party, the Democratic Party and the Libertarian Party. They know water is nonpartisan. You'd think a "news" paper writer would know that.
WHY is the paper so biased in this race? WHAT is their agenda?
We can't wait to read all about it.
Chủ Nhật, 5 tháng 5, 2013
Change "and" to "but"
And the Fort Worth Star-Telegram could have saved some ink.
The unbalanced, biased story on the Tarrant Regional Water Board election, is just further proof Tarrant County needs a real newspaper (aside from Fort Worth Weekly, they can't do it all, too much corruption, not enough reporters).
How many ST reporters does it take to write a balanced article? Two and an editor wrote the latest, so the answer has to be, at least four?
The quote comes from none other than Vic Henderson, long time water board incumbent. It's one of the first things he's said in the race. Otherwise he uses his spokespeople (Kay Granger, J.D. Granger, Bud Kennedy, Betsy Price and Marty Leonard & the ST).
The water district is responsible for 27 miles of the river, he said, and has formed partnerships to provide amenities.
If you change "and" to "but" you'll know WHY the 7th street gang doesn't want anyone else on the board. If you read the list of donors to the incumbents, you'll know exactly what partnerships he's referring to.
WHY is the water district providing amenities? Shouldn't they be providing water?
WHY is the Fort Worth Star-Telegram letting water district employees speak on the race? WHO is the new owner of ST?
Read Durango's take on the "article". As usual, it's a much better read than the paper.
Read more here:
The unbalanced, biased story on the Tarrant Regional Water Board election, is just further proof Tarrant County needs a real newspaper (aside from Fort Worth Weekly, they can't do it all, too much corruption, not enough reporters).
How many ST reporters does it take to write a balanced article? Two and an editor wrote the latest, so the answer has to be, at least four?
The quote comes from none other than Vic Henderson, long time water board incumbent. It's one of the first things he's said in the race. Otherwise he uses his spokespeople (Kay Granger, J.D. Granger, Bud Kennedy, Betsy Price and Marty Leonard & the ST).
The water district is responsible for 27 miles of the river, he said, and has formed partnerships to provide amenities.
If you change "and" to "but" you'll know WHY the 7th street gang doesn't want anyone else on the board. If you read the list of donors to the incumbents, you'll know exactly what partnerships he's referring to.
WHY is the water district providing amenities? Shouldn't they be providing water?
WHY is the Fort Worth Star-Telegram letting water district employees speak on the race? WHO is the new owner of ST?
Read Durango's take on the "article". As usual, it's a much better read than the paper.
Read more here:
What they really said...
We have received numerous complaints about the Fort Worth Star-Telegram this week. More than usual. A lot have to do with their lack of response, or fair reporting in the Tarrant Regional Water Board race. Some have to do with the editing of letters. We've heard all these complaints for years. Finally fed up? Let us know. We're working on it as fast as we can. Here's one concerning the Birdville Bond Election. For $183 million, you'd think it would get a balanced look. Who are we kidding, this is Fort Worth.
Kudos to all you Watchdogs out there. Keep them coming.
Dear Star TeleGRAPH,
Disclamer: The lead-in paragraphs submitted to the Star-Telegraph
are solely my own and do not represent the opinion of any other group or individuals.
The paper which used to offer news about Fort Worth, which was started by the civic minded Amon Carter, published their endorsement of the current BISD Bond election. Unfortunately, they had neglected to contact the organized opposition to the Bond proposal. You know get both sides of the story before making up your mind, that sort of thing.
While they are entitled to their own opinion, person's in this community wanted to offer an opposing view covering facts and serious discussion of the real needs of the students in this community. After contacting the paper regarding their oversight the Editor, Mike Norman, offer a "guest editorial" from the Citizens for a Better Bond Committee. Unlike a letter to the editor which is limited to 150 words or less this guest editorial was to be 600 words or less.GREAT! A chance to present the other side of the discussion in the public forum of the press. After much effort by members of the organization to double check all the facts presented and make sure it read well and covered the issue in a comprehensive manner it was submitted to the paper.
Keep in mind, this was with prior discussion with the paper's Editor. The members of the group waited anxiously for the publication.
Then came this reply,
" We received another column submission in opposition to the Birdville bond package and the closing of Richland Elementary. It was written by Councilman Goveas. We've decided to use his column rather than yours. I am sorry that we can't run both, but that would not be fair since we've only had one from the pro-bond side. You're still welcome to write a 150-word letter to the editor if you wish. The deadline for that is Wednesday, May 1.
Mike Norman
Editorial Director
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
While it is nice to have an equal number of opposing views submitted and published, it certainly is reasonable to expect a continuing flood of letters to be sent in, which they have. Remember this was approved prior and it was submitted early in the discussion. A number of others have been printed since.
What have we learned here? Alot! The leadership of the above unnamed paper has a real problem with foresight, decision making and following through with what they say.
Below you will find the complete un-invited "Guest Editorial"Thank you for your consideration
Sincerely yours
Ray Ecklund
The Star Telegram has offered an endorsement of the Birdville I.S.D. 2013 Bond proposal.
We must respectfully disagree with the Editorial Board’s conclusion. The realities of school finance, the school district's failing performance record and failure of the district to offer open and transparent leadership to the public were not noted in its editorial endorsement.
The BISD BOND proposal says some of our district schools are decades old and therefore must be torn down at the cost of millions of dollars. This is simply foolish logic. Great universities like Yale, Harvard, and Princeton boast buildings well over 100 years old. It is not the buildings which makes them important institutions, it is the education provided within those walls. BISD voters must not be distracted by the promise of shiny new school buildings. The BISD Trustees should be focused on the real priority, quality education for our children.
It may be economically beneficial for BISD to propose doubling the student population at select regional elementary schools, but is it in the best interest of the children? Many expert studies have established that academic performance in elementary schools declines as school size increases. We must not allow education of our children to fall victim to the ideas of cost savings.
Communities have long been centered on neighborhood schools. The quality of education and location of schools are determining factors for families choosing a home. This bond election proposes to demolish four neighborhood elementary schools and replace them with two large regional schools of 700+ students each. In addition, it proposes to demolish and rebuild two more elementary schools and one middle school. Elementary grade children will be taken away from their neighborhoods and bused miles away.
The main reasons families have moved to, or stay in, the cities that make up BISD is the perception of a high quality education. Unfortunately, in the past three years BISD has seen a substantial drop in the State of Texas overall academic progress measurement “FAST” ranking from the 76% percentile to 46% when comparing comparable Texas school districts. This catastrophic decline in district performance has nothing to do with building facilities. This Bond proposal simply is trying to solve problems we don't have, while at the same time ignoring the real problems we do have.
Superintendent Darrell G. Brown claims the district will save $15 million in operating costs over the next 10 years. His comment fails to mention that interest alone on the new proposed debt is over $73 million for the same 10 years. This $183.2 million bond proposal will actually cost district tax payers $321 million on top of the current debt of $358 million.
Voters should know this bond proposal, unlike any before it, is an “all or nothing” choice. The voters are not given a choice of how the $183million will be spent. There was no public hearing to allow BISD Trustees to answer questions from the public. Their decision was made on recommendation of a select committee appointed by the Trustees
The BISD Trustees are saying to the parents, teachers, property owners and voters, “Don’t worry, just trust us”. We are smarter than that. Voters must always hold their elected officials to the highest standard of openness and transparency. BISD has failed on both of those factors.
Voting against this Bond proposal will give BISD an opportunity to realign its priorities. Quality education for our children should be our number one priority. Responsible voters should vote against the BISD BOND proposal.
Ray Ecklund On behalf of “Citizens for a Better Bond Committee”
Kudos to all you Watchdogs out there. Keep them coming.
Dear Star TeleGRAPH,
Disclamer: The lead-in paragraphs submitted to the Star-Telegraph
are solely my own and do not represent the opinion of any other group or individuals.
The paper which used to offer news about Fort Worth, which was started by the civic minded Amon Carter, published their endorsement of the current BISD Bond election. Unfortunately, they had neglected to contact the organized opposition to the Bond proposal. You know get both sides of the story before making up your mind, that sort of thing.
While they are entitled to their own opinion, person's in this community wanted to offer an opposing view covering facts and serious discussion of the real needs of the students in this community. After contacting the paper regarding their oversight the Editor, Mike Norman, offer a "guest editorial" from the Citizens for a Better Bond Committee. Unlike a letter to the editor which is limited to 150 words or less this guest editorial was to be 600 words or less.GREAT! A chance to present the other side of the discussion in the public forum of the press. After much effort by members of the organization to double check all the facts presented and make sure it read well and covered the issue in a comprehensive manner it was submitted to the paper.
Keep in mind, this was with prior discussion with the paper's Editor. The members of the group waited anxiously for the publication.
Then came this reply,
" We received another column submission in opposition to the Birdville bond package and the closing of Richland Elementary. It was written by Councilman Goveas. We've decided to use his column rather than yours. I am sorry that we can't run both, but that would not be fair since we've only had one from the pro-bond side. You're still welcome to write a 150-word letter to the editor if you wish. The deadline for that is Wednesday, May 1.
Mike Norman
Editorial Director
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
While it is nice to have an equal number of opposing views submitted and published, it certainly is reasonable to expect a continuing flood of letters to be sent in, which they have. Remember this was approved prior and it was submitted early in the discussion. A number of others have been printed since.
What have we learned here? Alot! The leadership of the above unnamed paper has a real problem with foresight, decision making and following through with what they say.
Below you will find the complete un-invited "Guest Editorial"Thank you for your consideration
Sincerely yours
Ray Ecklund
The Star Telegram has offered an endorsement of the Birdville I.S.D. 2013 Bond proposal.
We must respectfully disagree with the Editorial Board’s conclusion. The realities of school finance, the school district's failing performance record and failure of the district to offer open and transparent leadership to the public were not noted in its editorial endorsement.
The BISD BOND proposal says some of our district schools are decades old and therefore must be torn down at the cost of millions of dollars. This is simply foolish logic. Great universities like Yale, Harvard, and Princeton boast buildings well over 100 years old. It is not the buildings which makes them important institutions, it is the education provided within those walls. BISD voters must not be distracted by the promise of shiny new school buildings. The BISD Trustees should be focused on the real priority, quality education for our children.
It may be economically beneficial for BISD to propose doubling the student population at select regional elementary schools, but is it in the best interest of the children? Many expert studies have established that academic performance in elementary schools declines as school size increases. We must not allow education of our children to fall victim to the ideas of cost savings.
Communities have long been centered on neighborhood schools. The quality of education and location of schools are determining factors for families choosing a home. This bond election proposes to demolish four neighborhood elementary schools and replace them with two large regional schools of 700+ students each. In addition, it proposes to demolish and rebuild two more elementary schools and one middle school. Elementary grade children will be taken away from their neighborhoods and bused miles away.
The main reasons families have moved to, or stay in, the cities that make up BISD is the perception of a high quality education. Unfortunately, in the past three years BISD has seen a substantial drop in the State of Texas overall academic progress measurement “FAST” ranking from the 76% percentile to 46% when comparing comparable Texas school districts. This catastrophic decline in district performance has nothing to do with building facilities. This Bond proposal simply is trying to solve problems we don't have, while at the same time ignoring the real problems we do have.
Superintendent Darrell G. Brown claims the district will save $15 million in operating costs over the next 10 years. His comment fails to mention that interest alone on the new proposed debt is over $73 million for the same 10 years. This $183.2 million bond proposal will actually cost district tax payers $321 million on top of the current debt of $358 million.
Voters should know this bond proposal, unlike any before it, is an “all or nothing” choice. The voters are not given a choice of how the $183million will be spent. There was no public hearing to allow BISD Trustees to answer questions from the public. Their decision was made on recommendation of a select committee appointed by the Trustees
The BISD Trustees are saying to the parents, teachers, property owners and voters, “Don’t worry, just trust us”. We are smarter than that. Voters must always hold their elected officials to the highest standard of openness and transparency. BISD has failed on both of those factors.
Voting against this Bond proposal will give BISD an opportunity to realign its priorities. Quality education for our children should be our number one priority. Responsible voters should vote against the BISD BOND proposal.
Ray Ecklund On behalf of “Citizens for a Better Bond Committee”
Thứ Bảy, 4 tháng 5, 2013
Voter Beware! Insider interest in the TRWD election!
The incumbents spokespeople (notice you haven't heard a peep from the incumbents themselves) are trying to make you think outside interests are controlling the water board race.
Do they mean the donations they have received from out of state?
Maybe you should be more concerned with the inside interests.
Contributions to the incumbents read like a WHO's WHO of TRWD contractors. You know, those ones they award millions of your dollars to with no bid.
Do your kids a favor, stop the Fort Worth gravy train. VOTE BNK TODAY!
To see the list of Tarrant Regional Water Board contractors and employees, go see Durango.
Voters Beware! Outside interest in the TRWD water board election!
"Voters beware" is what a campaign mailer from the water board incumbents read. Mayor Price was concerned that outside interests were trying to take over your water supply!
First of all, WHAT water supply?
Second of all, has Mayor Price seen the incumbents campaign donations? The incumbents are getting money from Dallas (GASP!) and Austin and cities all over Texas. Are these the outside interests you were warned about? Or is it the donors to the incumbents from out of state you should be concerned with? We hear there are donations from Colorado, Arizona and that state next door we are suing in Federal court to take their water, Oklahoma.
If they haven't noticed, there is no money in Fort Worth. That well ran dry. THEY spent it all. Maybe some of those campaigns donating should hang on to their money. They may need it.
Vote BNK. Today.
First of all, WHAT water supply?
Second of all, has Mayor Price seen the incumbents campaign donations? The incumbents are getting money from Dallas (GASP!) and Austin and cities all over Texas. Are these the outside interests you were warned about? Or is it the donors to the incumbents from out of state you should be concerned with? We hear there are donations from Colorado, Arizona and that state next door we are suing in Federal court to take their water, Oklahoma.
If they haven't noticed, there is no money in Fort Worth. That well ran dry. THEY spent it all. Maybe some of those campaigns donating should hang on to their money. They may need it.
Vote BNK. Today.
Thứ Sáu, 3 tháng 5, 2013
Say it again.
Below are some fun facts about the Mayor Price mailer you received.
You can see a photo of the documents at Woodard says. They were just so good we have to post them again.
Concerning the Water Board incumbents campaign mailer (from THE Don Woodard).
You shall know the facts and the facts will make you free. Here are the facts on each one of the below 4 claims.
1. None of the incumbents had anything to do with building the lakes with which we draw our water: Lake Worth; Lake Bridgeport; Eagle Mountain; Richland-Chambers; Cedar Creek. Our fathers built them. The incumbents are engrossed in building a 33-acre Casino Lake for tourists.
2. Jim Wright, dating from the 1949 flood, is whom I give credit for our levees and flood control. The Star-Telegram reported June 12, 2005 that the Army Corps of Engineers had a plan to control any realistic flooding problem for $10 million.
3. Extensive water conservation efforts. The Lawn Whisperer. Is that it?
4. Wise and conservative stewardship of our tax dollars? Like the goofy billion dollar Trinity Uptown earmark boondoggle?
At least 4 more reason to www.FlushTRWD.com right there.
Vote for John Basham, Timothy Nold and Mary Kelleher!
YOUR kids will thank you for it!
You can see a photo of the documents at Woodard says. They were just so good we have to post them again.
Concerning the Water Board incumbents campaign mailer (from THE Don Woodard).
You shall know the facts and the facts will make you free. Here are the facts on each one of the below 4 claims.
1. None of the incumbents had anything to do with building the lakes with which we draw our water: Lake Worth; Lake Bridgeport; Eagle Mountain; Richland-Chambers; Cedar Creek. Our fathers built them. The incumbents are engrossed in building a 33-acre Casino Lake for tourists.
2. Jim Wright, dating from the 1949 flood, is whom I give credit for our levees and flood control. The Star-Telegram reported June 12, 2005 that the Army Corps of Engineers had a plan to control any realistic flooding problem for $10 million.
3. Extensive water conservation efforts. The Lawn Whisperer. Is that it?
4. Wise and conservative stewardship of our tax dollars? Like the goofy billion dollar Trinity Uptown earmark boondoggle?
At least 4 more reason to www.FlushTRWD.com right there.
Vote for John Basham, Timothy Nold and Mary Kelleher!
YOUR kids will thank you for it!
Adrian says...
Need another reason to vote out the current board of the TRWD? How about 1,800,073? That's the combined salaries of the top ten highest paid staff members, as approved by the board.
Vote Basham, Nold and Kelleher and send the message that you're not an ATM.
There's a lot of folks talking about the water board race.
YOU should be.
www.BNK2013.com
Vote Basham, Nold and Kelleher and send the message that you're not an ATM.
There's a lot of folks talking about the water board race.
YOU should be.
www.BNK2013.com
Đăng ký:
Bài đăng (Atom)

