Beaumont Enterprise Opinions
3/13/2010

South Park school should be saved


I don't understand how people in authority dismiss the people's wants, who most of the time pay their salaries.

We don't want such a beautiful building to be destroyed. It is not only beautiful, but it is part of our history. This is where Lamar University was started in the South Park district.

Where did the historical sign go? Do you not want people to know you are destroying a historical site?

Bobbie Hayes, Lumberton


comments:

corky2 wrote:
Sig 220, in response to your posting on the 'mercury and fund-raiser' (Wed)...perhaps you meant to post it here instead? Example of being lied to in previous bond issues: The largest high school was suppose to get an auditorium and didn't because they spent too much money covering the outside of old Hebert high school (Ozen) which now has declining enrollment. Imagine that; a 5A high school, with 2600+ students, without an Auditorium. You'd have to look far and wide to find that situation anywhere in Texas. There are other examples....Dr. Thomas' race is not the issue, but the prejudices he has exercised while in charge are. I gave an example; now can you back up your comment about race. I can't understand your comment when you've admitted not knowing the history, and theorize that personal bias is in play. Your statement is very suspect, 220.
03/18/2010 08:37 AM CDT

john q citizen wrote:
Julian Galiano, Beaumont , what moved the state toward republicanism was the Civil Rights Act. That movement applied to most of the South.
03/16/2010 07:49 PM CDT

legaleagle wrote:
Bigmikeg, The South Park building is in the state that it is in now because BISD refused to give it proper maintenance in the last 10 years. However, in 1986, they had just finished a major renovation of the school and had a ceremony at the school when it was designated a historic building by the Texas Historical Commission. And corky2 has it right, the buildings that housed French and Hebert are still there. Hell, Ozen (Hebert) even has the same colors and mascot ! But the bottom line is that in this case, BISD PROMISED, prior to the bond election, that if the bond were to pass, they would not demolish the South Park building. Do you condone lying? Also, does it matter to you that evidence in court demonstrated that the building was structurally sound, could be renovated and made state of the art for 20 million but that BISD wants to tear it down, put up a prefabricated building at a cost of 43 million dollars. When asked on the witness stand whether or not a cost savings of 23 million dollars was significant to him, Dr. Carol Thomas said, "It's a nil point" meaning that it really was not that big a deal to him.
03/16/2010 07:07 PM CDT

corky2 wrote:
Bigmikeg...French is currently Smith MS, Hebert is also intact behind a $30,000,000 facade and is currently called Ozen HS (many more millions were spent on other additions at Ozen which caused other projects to be scratched), and the enrollment is decreasing. I think (not sure) Charlton Pollard was torn down, but joined Beaumont HS to become B-CP, which is now Central HS, whose enrollment has increased slightly. You would have a valid point about 'outrage,' though, if the voters were asked to approve saving Charlton Pollard HS, and then didn't save Charlton Pollard. Did Beaumont or South Park ISDs ever promise to save CP? I don't know. They did change ALL high schools' names in 1982, ON PURPOSE, to help 'clean the slate during Federally mandatory desegregation. Fine. No schools kept their name or colors at that time. We've gone back to neighborhood schools with the option of various transfer possibilities. Fine. Those are some facts which you should know. You probably needed to give the example of more schools which have actually been torn down. Hebert and French...definitely not. Bad examples. Charlton Pollard, I am not positive...'Growing up' means try to know the facts, don't put up with being lied to, and know when to let it go and when not to. legaleagle, you should elaborate on the horse...
03/16/2010 05:52 PM CDT

bigmikeg wrote:
I wish some of you would actually take a good look at that old run down eyesore and realize it is useless. Let go! Especially those of you that no longer live here or never have. I didn't hear your outrage when French, or Hebert, or Charlton-Pollard were wiped off the map! It will be your same name with the same colors and same mascot, just a brand new building. Grow up and let go already!
03/16/2010 02:59 PM CDT

legaleagle wrote:
bc ec guy - The horse is not ready for the glue factory yet.
03/16/2010 01:22 PM CDT

bcecguy wrote:
South Park will be torn down, because any other option could make Thomas look like an even bigger fool. Can we please stop beating a dead horse and let it rest?
03/16/2010 11:45 AM CDT

fredsaid wrote:
Everyone in Southeast Texas has a legitimate interest in South Park School and it's history. As the birth place of Lamar University it is part of Texas history.
03/16/2010 08:39 AM CDT

fredsaid wrote:
"I have no idea," Thomas said. "I don't know about all of this. It is something that we didn't know about. I can't make any comments about it whatsoever when I don't know about it. So, I would rather find out about it before I made any comments about it."
03/16/2010 08:31 AM CDT

eagle14 wrote:
The issue is making people accountable. Everyone is getting tired of getting lied to.If you ask for money to build schools just do what you are asking for. If you can't figure out what needs to be done before you ask you should be fired. If the cost is 23 million difference where the money coming from or was that the plan from the beginning premeditated lying?
03/15/2010 10:39 PM CDT

legaleagle wrote:
To those that don't seem to understand why this issue will not go away -- the answer is simple. BISD promised, prior to the bond election that if the bond were passed, that they WOULD NOT TEAR DOWN SOUTH PARK. Now compound that with the fact that evidence in the case showed that the building can be renovated and made state of the art for 20 million and yet BISD wants to tear down a historically, significant, structurally sound building and put up a prefabricated structure for 43 million and you might begin to understand why this issue will not go away. Again, no one is saying that the 363 children that attend school at South Park should not have a better school. But really, should BISD taxpayers have to spend 43 million for something that can be had for 20 million????
03/15/2010 03:09 PM CDT

tuffenuff wrote:
Hey rb....are those trick questions...?
03/15/2010 12:32 PM CDT

corky2 wrote:
But the the voters passed a bond which included saving South Park....that has nothing to do with building a new middle school. How does saving SP circumvent the vote? You're ignoring that part. I have yet to hear anyone say don't give SP a new middle school; failing to do so would be as bad as tearing down the original building. Neither is acceptable. Just making an observation about the different construction types. We'll see how the various schools and additions last. A cinder block box makes a pretty good storm bunker too. I voted against the bond issue because of past shortages in previous issues where the district failed to do as they promised, or they wasted money on silly things....sound familiar. We were told this time around would be different. There's still time to honor the promises made in the bond issue, though. Change on the Board may be inevitable. Why would anyone be happy with being cheated and lied to...only a fool would be happy with this situation. I am also not sure why anyone 'deserves' a new school....has South Park middle done something exceptional. You build out of need. That seems different than deserving it. I do think they need a new facility. Whether they are deserving is different, IMO.
03/15/2010 08:16 AM CDT

sig220 wrote:
You are right, the district voted for the bond issue. Now those that disagree, many fro outside the district, want to circumvent the vote. As for West Brook, if 5 inch concrete walls with two inches of foam is typical modular, everything should be built that way. They used the "modular " addition as a shelter for the police and district officials. The real truth is that the kids deserve a new school and some people do not want " those kids" to have one. Don't like what's going on? Change the school board!
03/14/2010 11:21 AM CDT

Satosp wrote:
Corky, I have a feeling that you probably voted against the bond and nothing will make you happy.
03/14/2010 09:55 AM CDT

corky2 wrote:
sig, cities vote on bond issues, not just a neighborhood. They're not honoring the specifics of the bond issue. The racial angle aside. satosp, not sure what you mean by easier, but they are building it first simply because they want to. Marketing; to help give a suspicious public something they can see. I don't really buy that building it first saves any money (inflation was given as a reason). Seems like school construction costs and stadium cost would be affected by inflation at fairly equal rates. They're building it first because they want to. Amelia doesn't look like modular construction, but the additions at West Brook and Vincent are. Those middle school gyms went up quickly, as well. Tiny boxes on a hillside...
03/13/2010 11:09 PM CST

sig220 wrote:
If you loved it so much, why are you living in Lumberton? People moved out to"get away from those people" and now want to tell them what to do in their neighborhood.
03/13/2010 08:39 PM CST

Satosp wrote:
Perhaps it was easier to get the stadium built first. New schools are going up all over town. I hope that when things are completed the people of Beaumont will be proud of the new structures.
03/13/2010 08:31 PM CST

timwopel wrote:
if you look around, beaumont is full of old buildings. most sit empty and really should get torn down, only it seems to be cheaper to let them sit.
03/13/2010 07:28 PM CST

rbblum wrote:
The future vision of Beaumont is clear . . . The new BISD athletic complex holds more significance than the immediate need for permanant classrooms . . . much less a prominant piece of Beaumont's past history (South Park). . . . Question is: What signifiant buildings currently in the Beaumont area will there be 50 years from now? AND what is the last significant building that had been build in the Beaumont area that may be worth saving in the future?
03/13/2010 04:15 PM CST

john q citizen wrote:
Yes, it is time to move on. There are far more important issues needing to be resolved.
03/13/2010 01:06 PM CST

legaleagle wrote:
The troll returns.....
03/13/2010 12:42 PM CST

corky2 wrote:
No, the Lumberton writer probably does not pay BISD taxes (unless they still own property in Bmt), but the folks who passed the bond issue, which very clearly PROMISED to save the building, do pay taxes and elect school board members. Does that clear up your confusion? I believe the Judge also agrees with this point. If you accept this miscarriage of trust now, what's stopping them from taking away any other part of the bond items? It's a matter of principle. Do you understand? Still confused?
03/13/2010 10:23 AM CST

Satosp wrote:
I am confused???? Does the writer from Lumberton pay Beaumont school taxes???
03/13/2010 08:07 AM CST

timwopel wrote:
oh lord, please hurry and tear that eyesore down so these people will just shut up already.
03/13/2010 01:39 AM CST