Well, tonight's meeting continues to show the public that the board is made up of a gang of 5 who are of the "do as I say, not as I do" mentality.

Dale Kaiser got it right: How hypocritical of them to go after teachers for violating rules, when they can just "waive" them for the top few!

And they wonder why we won't vote for the bond issue? READ THIS GARZA, FLORES, MEDRANO, ELLIS, BINGHAM AND LOWE----BECAUSE WE CANNOT TRUST YOU OR THE TOP LEVELS OF LEADERSHIP IN DISD.

This Gang of 5 (sometimes 7) swallow more than a ---well, I can't go there. Anyway, wait until some of them come up for election in the coming year or two. All their votes will be publicized in time for someone to oppose them. (too late for this election, sadly)

They consistently vote against the interests of teachers. They ignore increased vocal public demands. They don't question the obvious during briefings: What part of "LIVE IN DISD" did the person NOT understand when they moved here?

It is one thing to have a house in Garland and then get hired. It is another to KNOWINGLY COME from THE USAF OR FROM PENNSYLVANIA. They knew they would be working for DISD. They CHOSE to buy somewhere else.

You know what? FIRE THEM. Let 'em go. They won't be here after the Spring of 2011 anyway---wanna bet? After we buy-- I mean WIN the Broad Prize, they are all off to other districts or the lecture circuit. (Wanna bet, Allen?) Meanwhile, the teachers will still be here. The kids will still be here.

And so will the problems.

[Ed Note: You are probably right on some of this. However, I don't think this is an "election issue" as you do. There are some people who voted for the waiver because they think the policy is bad--and needs to be rescinded. Regardless of agreement or disagreement, there is validity to this point-of-view.

Again, I propose, why not tie residency to bonuses--or benefits?]