As I recall, there was a sense of urgency attached to asking the legislture for the money--"If we don't ask this time around, we may not have another chance..."
It's the same theme that certain members of the City Council employ.
'What justifies the spending of $75-100 million on a campus' << where is this number from ?
and wouldn't u of h or tt be paying for the bulk of a new campus ?
as for developers making money, that's the point of being in business and winning contracts, making money.
Mr. RoberTX, the better question is what makes you so sure there are going to be 5k-8k butts-in-seats? Where are you getting your numbers from?
If I were to come to you and say, gimme 10,000 dollars, and at some point, I'll turn it into a million, would you do it, or would you have some questions about how?
That's what I thought.
i think she is basing that assessment on the projected growth of the athome company for which she is the ceo. :)
some think that there is no time like the present. as with most everything, it's only going to cost more in the future.
you can call me an optimist because i think that the student body will continue to grow and there will be a need for a larger campus with more room for expansion.
i do, however, think that it's way too early to consider a split with UH. we just started the first semester for freshmen and sophomores for crying out loud. let's get a few years under our belt before we start making threats.
ceo, why couldn't this campus ever grow in your opinion ?
Mr. RoberTx, no I don't ever see 5k-8k "butt-in-seat" students in Victoria. As it is now, they only have about 300+ "butt-in-seat" students, according to comments on this site.
If San Angelo only saw a 7 percent increase in their enrollment after their switch, do you know how long it would take to get to 5k?
This switch idea is a total waste of time.
a business / university is constantly looking at avenues of growth and ways to increase market share, these discussions are non-stop, during all economic conditions
I can tell! Excellent job on those ambiguous questions!
i write surveys in my spare time, great and rewarding hobby
You should be writing questions for surveys.
I think we can all agree that every campus has the potential to expand. I don't think that is in disagreement here.
The issue is a timing issue. Huge shortfall in the State budget. Where is the funding for all this supposed to come from?
To continue to discuss whether we should or should not do this is silly. If we have to continue discussing this, the subject must be why are we trying to accomplish this in reverse?
And back to the very beginning---why should this city commit to a road and infrastructure when the potential recipient hasn't even committed to the project? $9 million out of a budget that had to be pared down is a chunk of change.
i'd like to ask this question, does anyone see uh-v / tt-v having the potential to become a campus of 5k to 8k students (butts in seats, not telecommuters) with expanded curriculum and facilities ? is that type of higher learning campus worth an investment in infrastructure from the city and county ?
off the top of my head, the universities that i would compare uh-v to would be west texas a&m, texas a&m-kingsville, tarlton, texas a&m international, ut-brownsville/edinburgh. all those campuses seemed to go through growth after some investment from the parent systems. when a&m and ut went through their last rounds of expansion, they invested heavily in the new campuses. im guessing uh-v doesn't see that kind of expansion / growth plans coming from the u of h system ?
i could see tt's interest in the campus, it's already established and has a high potential for future growth, with the right programs in place.
The San Angelo situation bears NO resemblance to the UH-V scenario, so anything that follows in the article is a moot point. You cannot compare apples to oranges.
Angelo State University was a stand-alone entity, never affiliated with a larger University, as is UH-V. Just because a little school could not make it on its own and had to latch onto a larger school does not mean UH-V should shift loyalties to Texas Tech.
Texas Tech? Are you kidding me? What a downgrade that would be.
Geanie Morrison says "at the end of day, I'll do what's best for my constituents and my community". How would Morrison even have a clue what is best if she cannot see past the bias that is the Crossroads Commission on Education, a monster of her own making?
Does anyone have a better map of the location of the land donated? The one I found on VicAd shows the land being adjacent to Loop 463.
Dragenrider - ???
There is no UH Woodlands campus.
What are you talking about?
justataxpayer and others of similiar sentiment on here are right on track. I certainly hope that people are reading these comments. The public needs to realize what is happening.
A road and utilities crossing the loop to the airport would greatly enhance the value and development potential of all the property owned by the donor. It's my understanding that the property in question or a portion of it has been donated before unsuccessfully because of the road and utility issues. This time, the donation and it's intended purpose is significant enough, that the city may just build the infastructure required to make this property of significantly increased value.
Back in the '70's a similiar situation occured within the UH system that resulted in Victoria losing the Engineering programs as well as others. Money was shifted from Victoria to advance the Woodlands campus where real estate investments, greed and profit were the name of the game. In this case, it's not the UH system causing the problem, it's the landowner and others who are way too accomodating. UH doesn't want to play along in this nasty local political game, so they are getting a bad rap and being asked to step aside.
Victoria, listen up or we will all be paying to make the greedy even more wealthy.
I think we have a three-way tie there.
No Mr. RoberTX, the land was given to UHV. The people that stand to get rich quick are all the developers who will "win" the bid from their buddies in high places.
Mr. WriteIn, I agree with you. I have been watching the city council meetings online and have found what he has said at those meetings to be just common sence. It's horrible the way those people up there just shut him down because he has ideas they have never thought of before.
so some think this whole deal is coming about to develop a piece of land on the east side of town, in turn making that land owner very wealthy ?
I hate to say this and my gut will when I say this. MATT OCKER MUST BE the next COUNTY JUDGE. I have a deep dislike for the man, but he is the only one to stop this foolishness from Geane Morrison and the Mayor.
im sure murf is simply impressed with paved roads and such, having lived in a poor african village all his life
what brings you to victoria murf ?
no ceo, i made some more gang / drug user comments, you haven't found them yet.
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
You are offended on another thread because I called you out for being a troll.
Look at your comments on this thread alone.
What does the realignment of the University of Houston Victoria with Texas Tech have to do with repairing streets in Victoria?
What debt will the city incur in the realignment?
This is NOT about education. This is about real estate development and profit at taxpayer expense.
BTW: The VHS campus is not available. VISD is using our VISA to continue to build "special event" buildings that will be abandon in less than ten years in favor of having separate facilities at each East and West High Schools.
Tech has no business down this way, and I assume by their lack of comment, know so.
I agree with most of your comment. But we cannot fix red river and Ben wilson streets until we get rid of the massive debt piling up! We should wait till we can pay cash for these repairs. This debt will obliterate the taxpayers for many many generations.
Mr. JustATaxPayer, I think the term "Hit the nail on the head" doesn't do justice to your comments! Way to go!
As a former member of UofH-V president's advisory council, I am opposed to leaving the UofH system.
First, the city is out of its jurisdiction here. Second, the city needs to fix Red River and Ben Wilson streets and, third, improve the crossing at Houston Hwy. where the new UofH-V students' dorms are located.
UofH-V has been a great partner in the educational opportunities offered to Victoria and surrounding region for over 25 years. In the last 10 years, we have seen dramatic expansions of athletic and degree programs. UofH-V has received many nationally recognized awards, lower division expansion, new buildings, and a steady but moderate growth of students.
But a few local folks are not satisfied with the UofH system. I question these folks rationale and most of all the location of the new proposed campus. There are special interests at work here and we should be concern and skeptical.
Also, I find absolutely no parallels to San Angelo. More importantly, while I respect the Crossroads Commission's work on a long-term plan for UofH-V, the plan is premature in its timing and it is irresponsbile to make threats and suggest we find another system to take over UofH-V.
While there have been prominent voices speak in favor of this threat to seek a different system. I cannot support or condone this behavior or resonably argue for this plan in light of the economy, the need or justification for expansion, or support the self-serving development interests involved.
For example, why did the propety owner, donating the 100 acres, not donate highway fronatage but instead offered land deep within the larger tract of property? Why did the city offer to pay over $8 million in street improvements, but has had to cut its budget for FY 2010-11 and increase the tax rate? Where were all these threatening voices 10, 20, even 30 years ago when UofH-V was busy developing and growing into a first class university?
The fact that TT San Angelo can only attract 6700 students should be a wakeup call for thsoe of us opposed to the UHV expansion at the airport. Considering the two towns,San Angelo appears to have a lock on4 year universities for at least 85 miles(distance to Abeline) and that's all they can get? Within 125 miles of Victoria are a lot of really good schools even if you include University of Texas at College Station!lolNo amount of smoke and mirrors is going to convinve me that we need to expand more that the current area of the campus.Patrick T. Barnes
Someone educate me as to why the University of Houston system would allow the Victoria campus to leave the system? Wouldn't there be a pretty big struggle trying to get the UH system to relinquish a growing campus with that much economic potential? Just asking?
I agree with you. Just think of all the debt the city would have to be involved in to make this happen.
Who in their right mind would ever want to be associated with Texas Tech.
This is the same school that gave Al Gonzales a job because he couldn't find work, nobody would hire him. (Al Gonzales was the Attorney General under Bush)
All that work and all that time and all those tax dollars spent for a lousy 7 percent? That does not sound like a good return on that large of an investment. Maybe the our mayor should not gamble with our time and money.
"The letter became public only because of a Texas Public Information Act request filed by this newspaper"
Gosh, Willie....did you want to keep your letter a secret from the people of Victoria????
very interesting article. i could see TT wanting to get a foothold in this part of the state.
sounds like uh-v wants to grow and grow now. i could see TT dumping more money in this campus / future campus than u of h. u of h is going to worry more about the houston area campuses first and fore most.
texas tech - victoria, has a different ring to it