«
»
 

Episode 231: DTV and the debate over splitting up APS

We covered a lot on this week’s show, but our primary focus was the DTV and the new proposal to split APS into two districts. In case you missed any of the show, not to worry, you can watch it all, or rewatch part, by clicking play on the player below:

Also, I just noticed today at the Taylor Ranch Community Center that you can sign up to have someone come install your converter box for free. I don’t know much more about it at this time, but I wil lmake a phone call on Monday to get more details. My hope is that other community centers are doing the same.

We are also still getting questions about where to get the converter boxes. Most electronics stores should have the boxes. Check your local Best Buy, Circuit City, or even Wal-Mart of Sam’s club.

And, as a special treat this week, and for those of you missing Margaret Montoya. She managed to make it on N.Y. TV within her first few weeks in the Big Apple! Way to go Profesora!

This entry was posted on Saturday, January 31st, 2009 at 5:29 pm and is filed under nmif. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

4 Responses to “Episode 231: DTV and the debate over splitting up APS”

  1. Jeremy Toulouse Says:
    January 31st, 2009 at 6:33 pm

    As a west-sider, with 3 children, one in a APS school currently, less bureaucracy and more representation can only be better for our children, but…..will a new school district encourage parental responsibility which is truly the most important issue facing our children’s future, as well as our own for that matter. Crime and illiteracy, among many other social issues often involve individuals that did not receive proper support during their childhood. Also, what will the true administrative cost of creating a new school district be? Just changing a name one letterhead costs a pretty penny? Should this issue wait until the economy is more stable?

  2. David Armour Says:
    February 1st, 2009 at 2:49 am

    School District Stakeholders

    There are valid points brought fortyh by the West side in ternms of representation. Howevwetr, as a NM taxpayer, an Albuquerque native and former student in the APS system, let me bring forth the salient points from the Focus broadcast on APS splitoff for the West side.

    Regardless of the question on acheiving fewer students per teacher ratio on the West side, (I attended HS at Sandia in 1969 to 1972 and the average pop at SHS in this period was 2650 with three grades, avg class size at 30 students. This era at SHS included two governers, Gary Johnson and Janet Neopolitano and numerous current business leaders such as the Maloof brothers, and many other successful citizens and business people. As such, it is my experience that class size is NOT the defacto benchamark for success or lack thereof) this initiative will certainly impact the tax base. Taxes at the State level must go up. I do not even understand the “tax base” point made, as ALL OF US NM citizens pay for anything beyond what goes to the coffers at the State level. We are talking about supporting a school disrict that would be the third largest ion the state. It is ludicrous to contemplate that it could cost less. Won’t happen. No way, no how. (We’ll do it more efficiently??? An entire seperate school district administration?? Hogwash!!!!)

    1. An extermely valid point was made re. the building of West side stadiums for WAPS athletics, bus services, etc. Who foots the bill for these neccesary sevices, as they do represent additional tax impacts for all State taxpayers.
    2. A point exists fro West siders in that there is definitely not adequate representtion from the Wes side on the school board. 2 to 3 of 7 would be a better ratio.
    3. I have an office in Chicago, where there is a single enormous school district that is yet to support students with the third highest public school scores in the nation. Hence, large district versus small district as a determinant for what is best for the students just doesnt have evidentiary merit in my opinion.

    So fix the ratio and begone with seperate West side district talk.

    D Armour
    Native son.

  3. Steven Renderos Says:
    February 2nd, 2009 at 8:46 am

    As a public television viewer I was shocked to see the type of racist and classist commentary provided in the roundtable discussion regarding DTV. I’m supportive of the idea of multiple opinions being heard but not at the expense of hate-based mockery. In particular, TJ Trout made references to people who are not ready for DTV as “criminals who just got out” or people who are too busy “cooking meth”. Those comments were made shortly after being asked about the lack of preparedness on the part of spanish speaking households. First and foremost, that type of discussion doesn’t belong in public television and I’m outraged that your program would allow that to happen.

    Secondly, on the issue of the DTV delay, it is not ok that right now the groups that are still not ready are communities of color, elderly folks and people with disabilities. It is not ok to say “enough is enough let them catch up later.” Within those same demographic groups there already exists a technological divide with many of those communities lacking the resources for internet connection. My question is how much more do we want to push the digital divide between people in our communities with the monetary resources to access new technology versus those folks in our communities who can’t even afford the price of a new converter box? When is enough, enough? There was no mention of the fact that right now the coupon program has run out of money and part of the 2million people currently on the waiting list are those folks who can’t afford the $60 to $120 to pay for a new converter box. Many of them from New Mexico.

    I would like to see Gene Grant apologize for the way the roundtable discussion was moderated for allowing these inappropriate comments to be made and that in the future more be done to provide a fair and balanced perspective on issues relating to race and class.

  4. Gene Grant Says:
    February 3rd, 2009 at 5:41 pm

    Steve:

    I’m honestly not sure what further I could have done to not allow the comment made. I asked questions without any idea at all what the answers will be. By that time, what’s there to do? It’s the man’s opinion.

    I’ll remind you that, once TJ’s comments were made, i went to the next panelist with the same question regarding Spanish speaking households. I did that because the question was not answered and felt it deserved consideration.

    Gene

Leave a Reply