OPINION — In these modern times, the two political parties have become so at odds and politics so polarized that it is no wonder that many refuse to even pay attention any more. We have upcoming an election for school board that some have attempted to make a partisan matter. As Chair of the dominant political party in Tom Green County I am often asked whether a particular candidate is a Republican. While partisan politics is not supposed to enter into our school board elections, the simple fact is that many want to judge the person by who they support politically in partisan races. In the race between incumbent Lanny Layman and Chris Giroux for an at-large position on the San Angelo ISD school board, such considerations will not help the voter as both support the same political party.
Years ago, when the Republican Party was first starting to have some success in statewide races a man largely unknown to voters ran for the Texas Supreme Court and won as a Republican. While he may have been a Republican as an attorney and a Judge he was simply not qualified for the job. He was voted out at the next election. Yet in the meantime, we Republicans spent a fair amount of time apologizing. In our most recent midterm election dozens of excellent truly gifted Republican jurists were defeated by Democrats also wholly unequipped for their new jobs. While we can hope they rise to the occasion it is a tragedy for this State that partisanship has undermined our 3rd Court of Appeals Courts here in Texas. I mention this so that I can point out that while political party affiliation may be helpful in understanding a persons belief system or ideals, the very first consideration must always be the person’s qualifications and demeanor.
While I have been impressed with Mr. Giroux’s progress as a candidate and obvious energy and drive, it is undeniable that Mr. Layman is by far the more qualified candidate for School Board for the San Angelo ISD. This school district is a multi-million dollar enterprise with thousands of people relying upon its professionalism and conduct. I need not repeat platitudes about the children or the importance of teachers to the majority of voters but when one considers that in addition to its primary mission San Angelo ISD is one of San Angelo’s largest employers spending in excess of $147 million a year, clearly those managing the operation must be able to exercise a degree of skill and professionalism not generally found among the rank and file.
It is in these qualifications that voters will likely find their reason to support Mr. Layman over Mr. Giroux.
In recent years any number of folks claiming to be ‘conservative’ have put themselves forward as being able to solve the problems facing our citizens. In reality, these ‘conservatives’ are just a new group of politicians supported by a different group of wealthy donors seeking to wrest control of State government from the rank and file Republicans who have been in charge since they took control from the Democrats a while back. As things stand, a conservative Republican congressman, a conservative Republican state representative, four conservative Republican county commissioners and a conservative Republican county judge represent you here in Tom Green County. We, and who we send to represent us, are not the problem. The problems come from other parts of this state and from other states who think that no amount of taxes is too much to ‘fix’ whatever problem they think is important, from racism to school lunches to ‘climate change.’
Its not that Republicans don’t realize there are problems out there its just that we know that there is a limit to how much of our money the government can take with taxes before it just becomes ludicrous to get up and go to work in the morning. So, all this being said, frustration is not a political ideology and Lanny Layman is not our problem.I hope Mr. Giroux will continue to remain active and I have no doubt he would be a good steward of our taxes, but I just can’t see how Lanny Layman or our School Board is the problem we need to be working on. After all, we the voters told them no to their school bonds. If they want extra taxes they know they are going to have to craft something more modest directed only at real educational needs or we just won’t approve it.
As a Republican and citizen who raised his kids here in San Angelo and sent them to San Angelo ISD schools, I am proud to say that the voters cannot go far wrong supporting either candidate. Both bring a real desire to improve and correct weaknesses. Each voter must make their own decision and I do not think my belief likely to sway too many voters, but it would be nothing but cowardice to refuse to make my opinion known when asked. I wish both candidates well going forward knowing each will do their best for citizens of San Angelo.
Comments
I have met Lanny and I like him. However, I think the school board is in need of new blood. The district is a bloated, overrated monopoly that is now scared of competition. The teachers are underpaid and under undue pressure, while the administration building is a bunch of overpaid, lazy pencil pushers that have forgotten what is like in the trenches. I want to see new blood and change.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkThe board of trustees for SAISD are supposed to be "trustees of public funds", not enablers of teachers associations and the SAISD cabal. Half of the SAISD employees are 'administrators' and 'support staff', a ratio of one to one, even if you count teachers aids as teachers.
When Lanny and the SAISD ended the homestead exemption, Mr. Layman himself stated it was "for the children", and I countered that the estimated $3 million extra tax income for the school would be spent on teachers -- which it was two years later with a 'healthcare benifit" increases and raises matching the exact total of taxes brought in from the end of the exemption.
Lanny is good for the teachers. He is supposed to be good for the taxpayers, ensuring that our funds are being spend wisely to better educate our students. He, instead, is paying our teachers and 'administrators' well, but our students are not being taught what they need to succeed. Just look at the most offered classes at ASU -- Remedial English, and Remedial Math. Our students graduate without the basic skills to enter the workforce, much less college. This, while our superintendent makes six times the median incomes of his fellow San Angeloans.
School board trustees are supposed to be trusted to carefully spend that money seized from the population to educate our children. Instead, he is the head RUBBER STAMP of the local SAISD RUBBER STAMP BOARD.
Mr. Giroux will get this libertarian's vote.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkI'm aware that the rift between left and right wing, conservative and liberal, democrat and republican has become more pronounced and volatile in recent years, but I'm surprised to see it rear it's ugly head in the domain of what I consider to be the political equivalent of an election for custodian. I can't think of an elected position that is more ineffective, inconsequential and frankly... trivial than that of a school board member.
Keep your partisan politics out of primary education and just make sound decisions that benefit the kiddos....
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkMr. Layman is supposed to be a trustee of public funds, meaning his responsibility is to the taxpayers that elected him to ensure that the government agency known as the San Angelo Independent School District was RESPONSIBLY FUNDED and was carefully spending those funds in educating the children given to their care.
Instead, Mr. Layman is a RUBBER STAMP for the administrators and teachers, going so far as to take additional funds from the taxpayer and transferring those funds directly to the employees of the SAISD for their individual benefit (Homestead exemption funds went directly to employees for medical benifits while the rest of us were screwed under OBAMACARE).
The board of trustees are being trusted with public funds seized from the local population. They are supposed to be looking out for us, not the teachers. It is the board's job and sole purpose to ensure the public funds are well spent to educate our children. Nothing more, and nothing less.
What we have gotten from Mr. Layman is something less. And this libertarian will be voting for Mr. Giroux.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkHe speaks as though it is he who anoints. Then tells a story about qualifications, while supporting the current fool in the white house. Throws the word "conservative" around as if his head has been stuck in the sand for the last few years. All those conservatives we send to "represent" us, they have one agenda, the donors agenda, screw the rest of us.
What ever happened to the Tea'd Party!! State government is why we are in this mess to begin with. They dropped the ball. Then the new funding bill, outcomes- based, will make things worst. This from the WAPO, "Texas has a problem. After years of inadequately and inequitably funding its public schools, the chickens have come home to roost. Texas now ranks 46th in the country in fourth-grade National Assessment of Educational Progress reading proficiency, dropping from its previous dismal rank of 41 in 2015." Shooting ourselves in the foot is not a solution.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkPost a comment to this article here: