Man Man Man....More PTA News!

[KFDM COOP]

Ministers Urge P.A. Parents To Keep Children Home From School

(Pastor Randy Vaughn, pictured here with microphone, says he's talked with nearly 20 ministers regarding the requested PAISD student body walk out. Pastor Vaughn says about a dozen support the request.)

A group of Port Arthur ministers is calling for students to boycott school beginning Friday. The ministers are upset about a number of problems they say are facing the district, including the expected buy out of Superintendent Willis Mackey's contract. During a special meeting Thursday night, the board is scheduled to vote on a voluntary exit agreement with Mackey, and it's scheduled to vote on hiring a temporary superintendent. Sally MacDonald reports tonight, the ministers are demonstrating their unhappiness, and they want students to do the same thing.

Pastor Randy Vaughn says, "We're not trying to grandstand."

This group of Port Arthur ministers stood inside the sanctuary of Mt. Sinai Missionary Baptist Church and urged parents not to send their children to school on Friday.

Reverend Donald Frank says, "The TEA (Texas Education Agency) and a school district get their money by the number of children who are in seats, so that's the only way to affect change."

The ministers say change is needed on the Port Arthur School Board. They're upset about the expected buy out of Superintendent Willis Mackey's contract.

Pastor Vaughn says, "It's unfortunate at this juncture of his (Mackey) career he is leaving us. And the best words we can find for that in our own vernacular is firing.

A spokesman for the Texas Education Agency says the board of trustees and Mackey made a mutual decision for Mackey to leave the district, and he says they've agreed on the buy out. Now the ministers are asking Port Arthur parents to join them in their effort to keep students from going to school until the TEA sends a management team to run the district.

Pastor Vaughn says, "Certainly we recognize this walk out launches what we consider to be a revolution, and you don't control revolutions."

Students we talked with say they haven't followed the disagreement between the board and the ministers, but they believe the call for a walk out is extreme.

Edward Lloyd, a 9th grade student, says, "I think we should stay up in school because even though they have problems we should be able to stay and learn."

Only one school board member, Gregory Flores, attended the meeting.

Gregory Flores says, "I represent the community and that's how I work. I work and listen to them, and then I act on what they have to say."

Gregory Flores didn't want to comment on the suggested walk out.

Pastor Vaughn says, "This board has not come through to respect the wishes of this community."

The ministers will have to wait until Friday to see whether parents and students support their request to help put a stop to what they call a runaway school board.

A spokesman for the Texas Education Agency says the pastors' request for the TEA to take over the district is not going to happen. Ron Rowell says the Port Arthur district doesn't meet requirements for the TEA to remove the school board and replace it with a board of managers. He told us a district must be low performing for at least two years in a row to qualify for a state takeover. Rowell says the agency plans to schedule a meeting with the pastors soon.

The pastors say they will open their churches to the children who will need adult supervision during the school day.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[SilsbeeD]

man p.a isnt doing too good right now

[stang4life]

I am sorry, but there are better ways to handle this situation than to ask the children to stay home. This is a matter concerning the children, but I think that the adults need to be the ones taking the actions. I know that this is probably a touchy issue in P.A., but education is too important.

I think that there are many things not known by "the outside world" (meaning everyone except the school board and superintendent). Complacency is not a good thing and most of the time it will bring the worst out of people. I don't know details, but I think that if Mr. Mackey has agreed to leave and chooses not to fight for his job, then that is his call and the boycott is pointless. It's a sad situation for the kids, but I don't think that at this point they should be asked to boycott school.

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

Now we're in trouble. Its only gonna get worse. :cry:

[Guest GoStangs]

So, if a student boycott is initiated, will the next story be about the round-up of truants who skip school on that day? :wink:

[SFA85]

I support the Preachers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[OrangeCountyBulldogFan]

How can any adult think that boycotting their kids education is a good move. You guys must be crazy. I agree that a form of protest may be needed, but not sending the kids to the school is just dumb.

FYI...TEA cannot take over a school district until the district is under performing for 2 consistent years in a row. PAISD has some schools not up to par but the district itself cannot be taken over by TEA. The preachers and their advisors are spitting in the wind. You know what happens when you do that.

[Guest GoStangs]

I don't see where they're boycotting their education. For example, they can be home schooled during that time, the churches can provide some of their education, or they could be just taking a day or two off, which really amounts to a symbollic statement that would not affect the students in any way.

BTW, isn't a PAISD boycott simply the same thing that has spurred the growth of the Mid-County schools, anyway?

[OrangeCountyBulldogFan]

I don't see where they're boycotting their education. For example' date=' they can be home schooled during that time, the churches can provide some of their education, or they could be just taking a day or two off, which really amounts to a symbollic statement that would not affect the students in any way.

BTW, isn't a PAISD boycott simply the same thing that has spurred the growth of the Mid-County schools, anyway? [/quote']

GO...do you really think that these churches have the capacity or the man power to teach these kids? If so, why doesn't the churches provide the education to begin with and not rely on PAISD. And how many parents are going to be able to homeschool their children and still work to make mortgages, car payments, etc.

I don't know what you are referring to with the growth of MC schools. Are you referring to white flight of the 70's and 80's? Not really the same thing here I believe.

I think the most responsible thing is to let adults figure this mess out the best way they can and continue to keep the children in school. The rest of the world is not going to stop for PAISD to work out their problems. These kids need to stay up with the rest of the world so they can compete for the good jobs and lifestyles that they deserve.

[Guest GoStangs]

I doubt either of us can answer your questions as to the manpower of churches or the number of parents who can or are able to homeschool their children. The point I was making, though, is that a boycott of a school district does not equate to forfeiting an education. There are many options available if a boycott is pursued.

[OrangeCountyBulldogFan]

Can you give some examples of the other options?

[Guest GoStangs]

The same options for education exist for them; the only difference is they wouldn't attend PAISD schools.

So, for example, they can be homeschooled, attend a private/parochial school, join a community-based education program, or move/transfer to another public school district.

[OrangeCountyBulldogFan]

The same options for education exist for them; the only difference is they wouldn't attend PAISD schools.

So' date=' for example, they can be homeschooled, attend a private/parochial school, join a community-based education program, or move/transfer to another public school district.[/quote']

So by your examples....all these kids have these options? I have to strongly disagree. Not even 25% of these kids have those types of options.

*The majority of parents are not going to move into another district. Just no room.

*The majority of parents (including myself) doe not have the capability nor the opportunity to homeschool or they would already be doing it.

*And the majority of parents cannot afford a private school which the last time I checked in BMT was more than attending an accredited University.

So these options as you call them, IMO are not options at all but a fantasy as a viable solution to the on going problem of public school system. Fix what you have. That school district has produced many many many great people and professionals. Walter Umphrey, Jimmie Johnson, most of our parents, etc.

[Guest GoStangs]

You throw around the word "majority" as if you have some type of figures to back up your beliefs. What are the numbers and where did you get them (from your statement about fantasy, I'm guessing you're using more than mere assumption to prove your point).

[OrangeCountyBulldogFan]

What...want me to run a poll? Look at the un-employment rate in PA (perhaps the worse in the state). How would a parent struggling to survive be able to pay for private school or stay at home with their kids? Then they become your problem as well as mine.

Heck my wife and I make what Democrats say is a wealthy wage and I can't afford to do it. Can you? Would you? I believe school teaches kids more than just reading, writing, and math. It also teaches social skills needed to work in an environment with others. Now if a church sponsored school would happen then perhaps your fantasy would seem a better reality. But churches cannot afford to do what the ISD's can because of the tax base.

It doesn't take Einstein to understand that very few parents can do what you are saying. I thought I was being nice by saying 25% could.

[Guest GoStangs]

This has turned a bit off course. Your initial statement is fairly basic -- children who boycott one particular school district are, in turn, boycotting their education. You've made up your mind to discount any option (even if you have to rely on mere assumption), which is fine, but still you've wrote nothing to support your position. Furthermore, you presume the boycott will last for an extended period of time, which it may not, especially considering the school and the community, in general, have an interest in keeping the students in shcool.

Given the premise that any boycott will be short-lived and that there are other options for students during the boycott (you disagree to the viability of those options, not the availability of them), do you really believe people are completely forfeiting their education potential, or is that just a slippery-slope argument?

[OrangeCountyBulldogFan]

This has turned a bit off course. Your initial statement is fairly basic -- children who boycott one particular school district are' date=' in turn, boycotting their education. You've made up your mind to discount any option (even if you have to rely on mere assumption), which is fine, but still you've wrote nothing to support your position. Furthermore, you presume the boycott will last for an extended period of time, which it may not, especially considering the school and the community, in general, have an interest in keeping the students in shcool.

Given the premise that any boycott will be short-lived and that there are other options for students during the boycott (you disagree to the viability of those options, not the availability of them), do you really believe people are completely forfeiting their education potential, or is that just a slippery-slope argument?[/quote']

Since when did the news report that the Boycott was going to be short lived? Did the pastors say only for a day or so? From what I read, they said until further notice. And I do disagee to the availabilty of those options. They cannot do it period !!! This is just a bunch of Rev. Jesse Jackson wanna-be's trying to use their pulpit for politics or political views. (Which is illegal in a not- for- profit class 501C organization.)

Just a little bit of legal for you here...Truancy begins costing parents money when a student accumulates at least three unexcused absences in a four-week period or 10 unexcused absences in a six-month period. Truancy is classified as a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $500.

Now if that is not irresponsible for so called "leaders" of the community to suggest to these parents to put themselves in legal situations for a significant boycott. Not someone I want to be leading my spiritual life and learning from for my future. And by the way, when the Bible mentions service to fellow man and God, this does not qualify or even get close to what he meant.

[Guest GoStangs]

Since when did the news report that the Boycott was going to be short lived?

It didn't. It didn't say it would be a long-term effort, either. That's why I phrased the question, which you didn't answer, the way I did.

Thank you for the legal advice and the Biblical quote. I am curious why you use the phrase, "Rev. Jesse Jackson wanna-be's." What does that mean? Could you have just wrote, "this is just a bunch of people who want to use their pulpit for politics or political views," or is there something about Jesse Jackson that separates him from a number of other preachers (Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, etc., for example) who do the same thing?

[OrangeCountyBulldogFan]

No I used that reference to the Rev because he takes up an offerning for political donations. Pat Robertson and others are extreme but they do not break the law with their "personal" donations.

This isn't a black and white thing, but rather a radical preacher in PA following what Jesse Jackson has done for years. If a Pat Robertson type of preacher would be this irresponsible, then I would call him or her out as well. Just so happens that these "leaders" appear to be from the same JJ cloth.

Lets get over with this...agreed?

[Guest GoStangs]

Agreed.