TRUSTEES DERAIL GARCIA'S RAILROAD JOB; BUY TIME

By Juan Montoya
Despite a full-court press from the Texas Southmost College (read Juliet Garcia) administration to approve the partnership agreement between the college and the University of Texas System on Thursday, a majority of the trustees remained steady and extended the deliberation period for one more month.
And even after each trustee assured the audience that they were not out to dissolve the partnership but rather to modify it to get local residents a more even-handed deal, the administration's strategy soon became evident.
The administration pulled out all the stops and sent in the troops that included heavyweights like IBC president Fred Rusteberg and Chamber of Commerce diva Reba Cardenas-McNair and all the usual suspects (even a priest), plus a student whose teary performance was worthy of a drama award.
They all voiced the same message: Please don't dissolve the UTB-TSC partnership.
In fact, trustees Robert Lozano, Robert Robles, and David Oliveira went as far as to suggest that if the majority didn't approve the contract on Thursday, then they should schedule a special meeting within the next two weeks to ink the deal.
Lozano's and Robles' performances – despite a local blog's mistaken take on the subject – were especially pathetic.
"You could see that they were at the command of Garcia with their statements," said a participant. "Robles even made the motion that the board take action on Oct. 21."
The majority opted to take a month to study the proposal and put the accord before the community, who in the end will have to bear the burden of funding the agreement for the next 80 years.
TSC counsel Dan Rentfro, who is representing the college district in negotiations with the UT System, had demanded that the trustees sign on Thursday and said the UT Regents were expecting the accord on their desk in that time.
However, inquiries made by some trustees revealed that when UT Chancellor Dr. Francisco G. Cigarroa was contacted, he said that the pressure to pass the agreement with but cursory examination by the community was not coming from Austin.
"He said that it was his understanding that 'that's what you guys wanted,'" said a source close to the board. "So the pressure is not coming from Austin. It's coming from the TSC president's office. Juliet wants to be able to do whatever she wants without having to get approval from the board."
With the only public presentation of the agreement scheduled for Oct. 4, it would have meant that there would have been no public input into the agreement from the residents and taxpayers of the TSC district if it had passed Thursday.
The majority of the trustees have expressed their concerns about some aspects of the report. Some say they are troubled by the gobbling up of the community college (and all its assets including bank deposits, real estate, and buildings) by the new UTB-TSC entity. At the same time, while the UTB-TSC monster swallows up all the goodies, the only reason to maintain the college district is to be able to incur debt in the form of bond issues and property tax income.
"Our trustees have to realize that what they do with this agreement will be the legacy they leave to the community," said an observer. "Do they want to be remembered as the board that stood by and destroyed our community college? Or do they want to be remembered as the board that stood up to Juliet and her sycophants and demanded that our residents and students get a fair shake?"
Among some of the clauses found objectionable by the majority are:
"The partners contribute resources, including land, buildings, equipment, bank deposits, investments, and other assets to set up UTB/TSC, for the use and benefit of the new entity.
UTB/TSC assumes the outstanding liabilities associated with these assets and the previous operations of UTB and TSC, except that UT System and TSC remain liable for its bond debt."
Nowhere is there any clarification if this includes the more than $10 million in rent arrears that the UT System has incurred and has refused to pay the local taxpayer.
There are other parts equally objectionable such as:
* "Authority: The UT Board of Regents, as the managing partner will manage the business and affairs of UTB/TSC on behalf of the Partnership, except for (1) major organizational divisions which require consent of both partners, and
(2) day to day operational decisions, which are vested in the administration of UTB/TSC.
*The agreement calls for the president to be selected and appointed not by the local board, but by the UT Board of Regents. The TSC board will be allowed to "advise " the Regents, including discussions of the final candidates in a joint executive session. In other words, in secret.
*The president will be an employee of UTB/TSC and may be removed (only) by the Board of Regents.
*"Other Officers of UTB/TSC: The President may designate and remove other officers and assign them duties and powers as needed for the management of UTB/TSC.
In other words, TSC is being asked to turn over all its real estate, buildings, assets, bank deposits, etc., and to continue as a taxing entity with the ability to issue debt.
In return, the college has a minority voice (they can advise and discuss) in the final selection of the president (Juliet, we assume), and she will have unbridled authority to hire, promote (and fire) whoever she wants.
Nowhere is there is any mention of including the UTB/TSC under the millions generated from oil and gas leases for the Permanent University Fund that is accessible to other UT and A&M Systems schools.
There is also a continuation of the so-called "trustee scholarships" available to district residents instead of in-district tuition. During the last elections, we learned that UTB/TSC was the only community college that did not offer these in-district tuition to all its residents in the district.
As a result, local students pay higher tuition and user fees than anyone in the state.
It has become abundantly clear to everyone concerned that it is not the UT Regents that want these agreement in its present form. It is Juliet Garcia and her coterie of favorites at the college that want it and are pressuring the trustees to railroad it through over the legitimate interests of the local residents who will foot the bill.
(Note to trustees: Say no, Hell no to the agreement as it stands. We didn't elect you to represent the interest of Juliet Garcia and her lackeys. We elected you to represent us. Get on with it. We're behind you if you do what's right.)