Comments

  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 14, 2011 at 12:46 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 14, 2011 at 12:38 p.m.
  • Lampost.

    The 60% is from a Victoria Adovcate story from last year, so don't blame me. If you are seeking war with me Lamp, then you came to the right place. But I warn you.....you want go to bed happy.

    May 14, 2011 at 4:04 a.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 13, 2011 at 11:08 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 11, 2011 at 9:46 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 11, 2011 at 7:54 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 11, 2011 at 7:35 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 11, 2011 at 7:07 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 11, 2011 at 7:02 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 11, 2011 at 6:12 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 11, 2011 at 1:21 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 11, 2011 at 12:06 p.m.
  • bighorn,

    Please try to stay on topic.

    I never said I had a problem with your adjectives. I just pointed one out.

    Being anti-UHV or pro-UHV has nothing to do with it any comment I have made.

    I never said I attended any meetings, and never offered this attendance as proof of anything.

    I never expressed that I was trying to take credit for anything. I gave credit to the local community and UHV employees.

    I never commented on whether or not UHV is a commuter school.

    I never said the enrollment numbers were wrong. I only said that it was false to say that they are "inflated."

    I will not find a citation proving you wrong for the same reason that you will not find a New York Times article saying that the smurfs did not invade the Empire State building. The New York times does not write articles on non-stories that never happened. Neither does the Advocate.

    You said you read these things in the Advocate.

    Please show the article that says that enrollment is inflated.

    Please show that article that says that UH artifically jacked up the Victoria branch.

    These are your claims, not mine. It is your responsibility to substantiate them if you want to be taken seriously.

    May 11, 2011 at 10:32 a.m.
  • Well Lamppost, if you knew about all this maybe you should have clued in Morrison.

    Believe me, I know the timeline, I could probably recite it event-for-event by heart. UH has wanted Sugar Land for many years...Morrison, Armstrong, and the rest of the group just gave them a good reason and excuse to finally do something about it.

    May 11, 2011 at 7:04 a.m.
  • Hey Willie, Yes you Mayor Willie. That Nuclear bomb you have is actually a fire cracker. I have a strong feeling that this foolishness will end Geanie Morrison's political career.

    -J. Williams

    May 11, 2011 at 2:52 a.m.
  • Give evidence that my statement regarding enrollment figures are not true. I have read them in the Advocate. So you are stating that they print non-facts? Is that correct?

    In Fact, the majority of anti-UHV folks refuse to cite figures of enrollment at each campus. Care to share your numbers?

    To clarify, all non-endowed Texas state schools have to lobby and justify their funding every two years.

    UHV IS a commuter school. Not a destination university. Again, add your knoweledge with enrollment numbers, and from which county the student originates from, please.

    Also, I will allow you taking credit for forcing UH to down-ward expanded , and forcing them to add college athletics. Were you also responsible for buying the old Holiday Inn, and then tearing 1/4 of the rooms down due to mold? Where was Tim Hudson when that purchase and non-inspection done? A tax payer would like to know.

    You offer examples of attendance at a meetings as proof, but no concrete numbers. Only emotional Opinions.

    Since you "care less" about my opinions and suggestions, I suggest you ignore such to your own health.

    You are anti-UHV. I am pro-UHV.

    Sorry you don't approve of my use of adjectives either.

    Have a blessed and joyful day!

    May 10, 2011 at 11:01 p.m.
  • bighorn, you completely missed the point once again. My comments have nothing to do with attitude and everything to do with facts. Everything I have said here is factually correct. I have been very blunt, but also very honest.

    You, on the other hand, have made statements like:

    "The truth is the UH system artificially jacked up their Victoria branch status by placing the Sugarland and Cinco Branch locations under the Victoria jurisdiction." This statement is not true.

    You also said:

    "Inflated enrollment numbers allowed UH to lobby the state for increased funding every two years for it's Victoria campus." This statement is not true.

    You also said:

    "Remove Sugarland and Cinco Ranch numbers from Victoria's, and the Legislature would, and possibly should, close the Victoria campus." This statement isn't even based in reality. Removing these numbers equates to kicking these students out of school without their consent. I never suggested it was your position to close UHV. I just addressed the logistics of removing the SL and CR numbers.

    You also said:

    "UHV is not a destination university. It is a commuter college. To squander tax payer funds to attempt to change it's dynamics is wasteful and destined only for failure." Remind me one more time. Who is being negative again?

    You also said:

    "UH has done it's best for Victoria..." This statement may be debatable. But while I provide concrete examples as to why I don't believe this to be true, you provided nothing, whined about how these forums are a "collection of opinions," and then told me to have a "gay" day.

    May 10, 2011 at 9:40 p.m.
  • And just how is it that you supposed "pro" folks think TAMUV is "pro", and the people who support UHV are "negative"?

    Ever bother to think that YOUR negative attitude and actions against UH are jeopardizing the very existance of the availability of a 4 year degree in the Victoria area?

    May 10, 2011 at 9:07 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 10, 2011 at 8:43 p.m.
  • Lamppost,

    What exactly is your 'deal'?

    You continually label certain individuals as negative, yet many of these same folks have come on here to point out some good things that the city has done. You must be having some issue with the fact that most folks on here aren't as unreasonable as you'd like to believe, and are, in fact, concerned with the well-being of the citizens of this town rather than just being 'downers'.

    It's amazing (and a little troubling) to me how blindly loyal you are to the city leaders and elected officials, refusing to acknowledge when they make mistakes. It's our duty as citizens to let those who represent us know when they do something that negatively impacts us.

    You aren't concerned with the fact that Morrison didn't know this was going to happen? She is either lying when she says she knew nothing about this, or she actually didn't know about this (in which case she wasn't doing HER JOB to find this stuff out). No blame for Morrison, Armstrong or the rest of the CCE at all? It's all UH's fault for guarding a against a 'nuclear war', right?

    May 10, 2011 at 4:53 p.m.
  • To respond to a couple items:
    Walking trail-big hit in the beginning but rarely see it used anymore and is turned into a traffic hazzard for those crossing the street.
    Construction: I know we have to reconstruct the streets, but all at once? And for 3-4 years each? Tell you one thing, start holding the construction companies accountable for how much time they spend doing nothing...which seems to be most of the time. I almost need a new map of Victoria to know how to drive it with all of the one way construction.

    May 10, 2011 at 3:59 p.m.
  • Perspective is an amazing thing.

    May 10, 2011 at 2:39 p.m.
  • bighorn,

    After reading your post, I'm willing to admit that you're right on one thing. I absolutely MUST need reading comprehension lessons, because that made no sense.

    My posts had nothing to do with your opinions or your position on matters. I never said you were for UHV closing.

    I never commented about UHV and VC merging, and I'm not going to read your opinion on it, because I don't care about it. My comments had nothing to do with your opinion and everything to do with false statements you were making. I just didn't want anything else to make the mistake of thinking that you knew what you were talking about when you spewed your ignorance.

    May 10, 2011 at 6:36 a.m.
  • Thanks for your interpretation, Stu. Again, even prior to downward expansion, UHV offered local students the opportuntity to achieve a four year degree program while stilling living in the local area (at home for the majority; after years of being away from school for others).

    And you need a lesson in reading comprehension. I am NOT in favor of closing UHV. Only that the Legislature i including deep EDUCATION BUDGET CUTS (perhaps you've heard of such), including funding for COLLEGES and UNIVERSITIES. As such, no doubt enrollment figures willl lay mightly in those consideration-to the point of actual closure of some campuses.

    Since you are the unofficial historian around here, please explain the under 50% current utilization number I've read about the current campus.

    As for UHV and VC mergering to become one, you can read my opinion on that subject in earlier posts, many going back over a year.

    Again, you assume Facts based on your point of view. I relate my Opinion has an interpretation of events and happenings. That is what these forums are-a collection of opinions on various subjects.

    Have a gay day!

    May 10, 2011 at 6:03 a.m.
  • You say that UH has done its best for Victoria.

    Was it doings its best for Victoria when their "master planning committee" drew up a growth plan that included buying VC Land without talking to VC (who, by the way, was completely uninterested in selling their land)? That was just plain embarrassing.

    Or maybe it was doing its best for Victoria when the UHV president was pulled out from under the university at a critital time of growth and development? Whether you like Hudson or not, you would have a difficult time convincing anyone that this was good for Victoria.

    Maybe it was doing it's best for Victoria when the system opposed downward expansion. I still remember Welcome Wilson standing up in front of everyone and saying "Folks, just because you build it does not mean they will come." A member of the community answered: "Mr. Wilson, if we don't build it, they can't come." Guess what, Mr. Wilson. We built it. They're here.

    One more thing. You say that if UHV was left on its own, there would be no 4 year degree plans for local students. As far as the system was concerned, UHV absolutely WAS left on its own in this regard. There was opposition from the board and there was opposition from the chancellor. It was only the overwhelming support of the local community for a four year university that convinced the system give it the go ahead. The public forum was held, and the system board was in attendence, along with the VC president. Citizen after citizen after citizen stood up advocating downward expansion for hours. Victoria was on it's own, and we achieved downward expansion despite opposition from the system, not because of its support.

    bighorn, I hope this history lesson has given you the perspective you need to stop spreading misinformation. Go grind your ax somewhere else.

    Have a great day.

    May 9, 2011 at 10:42 p.m.
  • bighorn,

    Where do you get your information from? And how tall do you have to be to ride the rides there?

    Sugar Land and Cinco Ranch are not under UHV's jurisdiction, as you claim. The center in Sugar Land is a MITC (Multi-Institutional Teaching Center). This means that multiple institutions use the center. There was a short time that UHV managed the facility in SL, but the chancellor changed that. By the way, this management change had a zero precent effect on the number of UHV students attending in the SL area.

    You say that if you remove the SL and CR numbers from UHV, then UHV should be closed. You can't remove the Sugar Land and Cinco Ranch numbers from Victoria for one simple reason: these are UHV students. They were recruited by UHV employees. They are in UHV-born programs. They are taught by UHV faculty. They attend UHV classes, and the ones that finish graduate with UHV degrees.

    How do you remove the numbers for the SL and CR sites? Kick them out of UHV and auto-enroll them in another school in the system? This is assuming that every single credit from every single UHV student will transfer. This is also assuming that every single student can pick up in a similar program at the new site where they left off at UHV, and that tution at the new school will not increase. As all the different sites have different programs, this is impossible. These are not students attending another school in SL that UHV magically claims for UHV enrollment. They are UHV students, plain and simple. End of story.

    And how exactly do you inflate enrollment numbers? Make up student names and pretend that they are taking classes? These numbers can be easily verified, and are verified on a regular basis. Like so many other things you say, this is simply not true.

    May 9, 2011 at 10:42 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 9, 2011 at 10:37 p.m.
  • 1. CAT
    2. Rebuilt streets
    3. Skate park
    4. Downtown sidewalks (we'll see where this leads)
    5. ACADEMY came to town!
    lol

    May 9, 2011 at 6:20 p.m.
  • Sure thing holein1:

    *Red River and Sam Houston Reconstruction

    *Mockingbird sidewalk project

    *Automated garbage collection

    *Sewer plant go-ahead (although not a popular topic I think they made the right decision)

    *I love the hike & bike trail, as I said they just didn't think it through...close the crossing, open the crossing, put down speed strips, take up speed strips, put up signs that look like heirglyphics at 40 mph, etc. etc.

    *Skate park

    That's just off the top of my head and echoing what others have already said. Don't get me wrong. The normal day-to-day routine maintenance stuff they generally do a pretty good job on. It's all these 'extracurricular' projects that they go into all willy-nilly that they usually end up falling flat on their face with.

    May 9, 2011 at 5:31 p.m.
  • vox, points taken. Can you do me favor? Give me a few examples of things you think have gone right in the past year or 2.

    May 9, 2011 at 3:38 p.m.
  • HoleIn1,

    The problem is that people try to initiate change around here without ever thinking anything through and considering all the possible consequences and outcomes. i.e.:

    *Hike and Bike Trail--great idea, poor planning.

    *RiverWalk--great idea, but according to the illustrations I've seen from 25-30 years ago it looks like the design was to make the riverwalk go UPHILL. Brilliant.

    I don't have a problem with change, but you've got to have a plan to go with it. For example, threatening the UH system when you don't have a clue how legislation (or politics outside of Victoria) works is not a very good plan. It's clear no one considered the possibilities of what UH may do based on the reactions of Morrison.

    Sorry, I lost all faith in Armstrong when he, on the record, started calling citizens names and stating that he wanted to create a legacy for himself. I expect my tax dollars to go to improving the community for the benefit of myself, my children, my neighbors, and the citizens of Victoria...not to preserve the ego of one person. Unfortunately he isn't the only that makes decisions for personal reasons.

    May 9, 2011 at 2:57 p.m.
  • Actually, you may be surprised to know that when downward expansion was first being talked about a possible VC/UHV merger was discussed. I believe it would have been the best thing to do and the timing couldn't have been better. The president of VC was about to retire and that would have made it even easier. There were more than a few on the VC board of regents that did not want to merge, for whatever reason. There wasn't enough support so it was scrapped.

    It's funny that the same people that are so sure that Victoria will never be able to support a 4 year school, are also the same people that are calling the idea of a riverwalk style area downtown a pipedream, are also the same people against the recent changes to the downtown infrastructure projects, are also the same people that thought CAT would never break ground, are also the same people that are constantly saying that there is nothing to do in this "little backwater town". Seeing a pattern? You're the people that bitch about nothing ever changing in Victoria, but as soon as someone tries to initiate some change you all attack it.

    May 9, 2011 at 1:50 p.m.
  • Vox: I've been suggesting mergering VC and UHV for months now, if to do nothing more than eliminate the duplication of administration and better utilization of the facilities.

    Certainly no such proposal will be forth coming from Victoria's leadership. It would only make fiscal sense and build a sense of joint problem-solving between Victoria and the UH folks.

    Oh wait! It makes more sense to declare "nuclear war" against our ally in advanced education! Way to go, Morrison, et al...

    May 9, 2011 at 11:58 a.m.
  • Just combine VC and UHV already. That's really the best way to create a 'destination' university here. Get rid of UH, A&M or any other system and let them do their own thing. Get rid of the big parking lot that sits in the middle of VC and build some new buildings or a nice 'mall' area. Build a parking garage or two on the outskirts.

    That would make for a pretty nice school with thousands of face-to-face students, plus thousands more online students, dorm facilities, state funding, great staff/faculty, a diverse range of programs, plus all kinds of athletics. The infrastructure is already there.

    May 9, 2011 at 11:47 a.m.
  • I'm afraid it's about to get real bad for my beloved university.......If I were in chgarge at UHV I would get with VC and piggy back on everything they do. VC has gotten right for almost 100 years. They have all the land, all the buildings, all the programs, and all the sports facilities. I think UHV needs to reach out to them like never before. VC is a wonderful institution that has basically kept UHV afloat for many many years now. I hate to say it, but I hope little brother bails us out!

    May 9, 2011 at 11:33 a.m.
  • Looks like it backfired for Victoria. Now you'll be left with nothing.

    May 9, 2011 at 9:50 a.m.
  • One of my orginal questions is A&M even interested in UHV if it did not come with the Sugarland branch? Being that Morrison is so upset makes me think not.

    May 9, 2011 at 9:12 a.m.
  • Brady and bighorn, I agree completely with your posts.

    I was very impressed when we moved to this area from, yes, Houston. I was most impressed that this small rural area had not one, but TWO institutions of higher learning, The Victoria College and UH-V. I went to VC and trained in the field that I am still working in after 24 years. VC gave me my life's work, so to speak, and I received an EXCELLENT education there. I also went to UH-V and received an excellent eduation there as well. I am grateful for both places. Does this sound negative to anyone? It is not. What I mean to say is that Victoria is extremely lucky to have what they have in the way of opportunity for education. I did attend a couple of universities in Houston, but did not come close to learning what I did at VC and UH-V. I don't want to see either entity diminished in any way. My heart resides in both places and always will.

    What I don't appreciate, nor support, is the Crossroads Commission on Education, the City Council, and the mayor himself thinking that they know what is best for this University, its students and its faculty. I don't appreciate an elected representative acting like a spoiled brat because she doesn't get her way. I suggest they step aside and let the University run itself as it sees fit. That has worked for over 35 years, no thanks to Armstrong, Morrison, and their cronies. Why all of a sudden this push to change systems? Because UH-V wouldn't take their "offer" of land......very sad. Retaliation and Karma are a b!t@h, mayor et al. Right?

    Leave UH-V alone and let them, along with demand by the students, steer their own course into the future. Don't presume to tell the public what YOU think they need.

    And mayor Will, don't bring a knife to a nuclear war. You will lose everytime.

    May 9, 2011 at 9:05 a.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 9, 2011 at 8:48 a.m.
  • I think Senator Hegar has been the only honest broker in this entire fiasco. He has said from day one that he would be happy to support the efforts of Victoria leaders to make the switch from the U of H to TAMU as long as the Sugarland and Cinco Ranch campuses remained in the U of H system. He has been honest and up front about his position from day one and told Geannie Morrison and Mayor Armstrong that long before Morrison filed her bill. When Morrison's bill became public and included the other two campuses, Hegar was a NO vote. As usual, Geannie and Armstrong over reached and they lost Hegar's support for the entire bill, just as he promised he would.

    May 9, 2011 at 1:25 a.m.
  • Just how is it that a tiny branch two hours SW of a metro area built a branch of in the same metro area as the parent without the parent's support?

    The truth is the UH system artificially jacked up their Victoria branch status by placing the Sugarland and Cinco Branch locations under the Victoria jurisdiction. Inflated enrollment numbers allowed UH to lobby the state for increased funding every two years for it's Victoria campus. Left on it's own, Victoria would have no 4 year degree program for area students.

    Remove Sugarland and Cinco Ranch numbers from Victoria's, and the Legislature would, and possibly should, close the Victoria campus.

    UH has done it's best for Victoria, despite severe limitations related to population of the small region it serves. They should be congradulated, not shuned by the local leadership.

    UHV is not a destination university. It is a commuter college. To squander tax payer funds to attempt to change it's dynamics is wasteful and destined only for failure.

    Thanks to the leadership of Victoria, affordable advanced education for young people in this area is in jeopardy.

    May 8, 2011 at 11:01 p.m.
  • Longgone - UH did not want to invest or even build a campus in Sugarland, so UHV came in and said that they would and then they did. Now that it is doing well, UH wants it. The students in Sugarland are also mostlly online. Yes, Sugarland, like Victoria wants their own University, I can understand that. It just needs to be done so that UHV is not effected in a negative way. Just as UHV did with VC when UHV downward expanded.
    There is always away to work togather.
    Some of you are so negative about Victoria in general, it is sad. Maybe you should move to Houston, since according to you they have so much more to offer!

    May 8, 2011 at 9:42 p.m.
  • there are many towns out there, much smaller than victoria, offering multiple advanced degrees. with the right programs in place victoria could absolutely become a destination university for advanced degrees.

    May 8, 2011 at 9:31 p.m.
  • It is difficult to fathom why (or how) Victoria "leaders" can't comprehend that the number of students who actually take classes on the UHV campus is far too small to justify its existence now, much less an expanded campus. The students are in Sugarland, for goodness sakes--not Victoria. Why shouldn't Sugarland be part of the UH System? It's IN Houston! The students in Sugarland are divided among various entities in order to justify more administrators and staff of various entities, and the waste of State money on this absurdity is outrageous during these times--or at any time. There will never be enough actual students in Victoria attending UHV (or an A&M) to justify a full-fledged campus and all of the expenses that entails. The duplication of effort in terms of Victoria College is absurd; VC is much more academically rigorous and cost-effective. This is all about politics and "pride," rather than about quality education. No one fails at UHV; if the Aggies came in and maintained their academic standards, no one would graduate.

    May 8, 2011 at 9:22 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    May 8, 2011 at 8:16 p.m.
  • Unfortunately some folks are too busy trying to pad their resumes and build legacies (ahem...Mr. Mayor) than to actually consider the consequences of their actions.

    The UH system just needed an excuse to transfer Sugar Land to UH. Armstrong, Morrison, and the rest of our 'why do we need to plan anything?' city leaders gave them one, and TAMU is just the bargaining chip UH needed. UH keeps Sugar Land and they agree to let TAMU have UHV. Win/win for UH--they get the results they want:

    1. Keep A&M out of Houston and
    2. Get rid of UHV and all the people who don't really have anything to do with the university but think they know how it should be run.

    Both of these while looking like they are doing us a favor by giving us to TAMU.

    May 8, 2011 at 6:45 p.m.
  • ...into the ground.

    May 8, 2011 at 4:29 p.m.
  • My point is that UHV-Victoria is expanding enrollment, the current buildings are not fully utilized, they have planned for additional housing needs...

    The UH System Housing Master Plan is to eventually go to 9,000 beds on the University of
    Houston campus; 683 beds at the University of Houston-Clear Lake; and 1,200 beds at the
    University of Houston-Victoria.

    http://www.uhsa.uh.edu/regents/board_...

    Enrollment is up, more students are expected next fall, eventually the campus will expand or build additional buildings at another location. Heck, look across the street from the UHV administration building, there is already the UHV small business development building, a one story building, there and a empty lot next to it.

    The UH system does have plans to expand the Victoria campus when the need arises.

    None of any of this talk of separating the UHV system and dropping athletics would even be discussed if people would have just let the natural growth of UHV-Victoria happen without sticking their noses into UHV operations and planning.

    Don't you think a University system knows what it is doing?
    Or do you prefer a city council and business owners to run the University?

    Perhaps that might happen, let the movers and shakers pony up the $, then they could have the University of Victoria and run it they way they want.

    May 8, 2011 at 3:56 p.m.
  • JLordTree - "say goodbye to upper level education in Victoria" - I don't know that we could have ever said "hello". Truthfully, be it UH or A&M, would Victoria EVER really be the place people would flock to to get their PhDs? Or were you not speaking about THAT upper level? UH-V HAS grown, and now offers more degrees than ever before in their history. One can now come in as a freshman and go all the way through graduate school and obtain a Master. I know you are aware of this, and for a little backwater town, I believe that this is darned good.

    UH-V has for over 35 years offered "higher education" in the Crossroads area. Doctorates? No. I doubt they ever will. The demand in this little area is just not there. If I were planning to get a doctorate, I would go to a big city, not Victoria. That's just the way it is. The way I see it, Victoria has not lost something because they never had it in the first place, nor would they ever have it, unless the population grows exponentially, which I don't see happening here. Sugar Land has vision. Victoria doesn't. Sugar Land is in very close proximity to Houston. Victoria isn't. Those are just the cold, hard facts.

    May 8, 2011 at 3:32 p.m.
  • Sugar, cant be that many, it is just now getting around 200 total votes, so cant imagine it being "Many" more at 5am....nice try.

    May 8, 2011 at 3:27 p.m.
  • JLordTree - hate to burst your bubble there, but there were many more votes than what you assume, even at that early hour. The percentages showed exactly 67% (UH) and 33%(A&M). I was just stating percentages. Of course, numbers and percentages change throughout the hours, as all polls do.

    May 8, 2011 at 3:22 p.m.
  • Downward expansion has been successful, even with the lack of things to do for college kids in the city. A larger than expected first undergraduate class looks to be followed by an even larger one...of course housing could be fun. While utilization has been small, with the addition of all the undergraduate enrollment...the actual creation of a student life (athletics..which was sorely missing when I was there) of course the campus needs to be expanded...at least if you have any type of long range planning. More student housing, probably at least one more academic builing, student center, recreation facilities (gym, track, ball field) on campus, etc...more than what is available in land at the current location. So I am not understanding how you are claiming it is the cause of all of this? That or I am not completely understanding your post. And I will not blame the people who supported the switch because in the end it is the immaturity of the chancellor who is finding a way to retaliate against the people and students of a city because she can. The blame if the nuclear option is done will lie with her and Sen Hegar (whom I will still not vote for ever again). If she goes through with it...good luck having many in person classes, possibly good bye many degree programs, see you later athletics.

    May 8, 2011 at 2:55 p.m.
  • That very well could happen JLordtree, consider who put in motion the plan to switch University systems. It wasn't the UH system or the TAMU system.

    It wasn't that long ago that every organization and person that supports the switch of systems, where so very happy with the downward expansion of UHV.

    The "in the seats" enrollment increased more than it has in years with the downward expansion, enrollment IS up and the UH system is in fact looking to expand UHV, that is after the 47% utilization of the current buildings at the Victoria campus increase.

    If this means the end of upper level education in Victoria, look not at the UH system as the cause, look at who put the plan that lead to the end in motion.

    May 8, 2011 at 2:42 p.m.
  • Hey SugarMagnolia....where do you get the 2 to 1 at? Looks 50 50...oh yeah you wrote your post at 5am when the poll just got posted...what was it 2 votes to 1?

    May 8, 2011 at 1:36 p.m.
  • Kind of funny...Hegar and all of his cronies on here complained about all the "hard work" UH did in building UHV up and now Victoria wanting to dump the UH system like a bad habit, yet now the UH system plans to do the same in Sugar Land, after they neglected that area and UHV esentially built the area...hypocritical? Yeah. What is even more disturbing is seeing all the "Victorians" on here celebrating the idea of Sugar Land and Cinco leaving which could effectively cripple the university here. You may be against the system switch, but popping your champagne corks on a very real and serious threat (Your beloved Sen. Hegar has shown multiple times he does not care about Victoria if it conflicts with his home). Yeah it makes sense from an UH standpoint to an extent...but is very much bad for UHV and is a very hypocritical amount of cheering by some posters on here, but go ahead I can tell you dont really care about higher education in Victoria, just winning the battle by any means necessary....and for those of you who are dim enough to believe this is just a shot across the bow threat....think again...the chancellor is deadly serious and will follow through. Say goodbye to upper level education in Victoria...then again to some of you, I know you will be celebrating.

    May 8, 2011 at 1:07 p.m.
  • Booger - You have a great point!

    May 8, 2011 at 12:50 p.m.
  • It would be very interesting to find out what the faculty, staff, and students of UHV think about all of these proposed changes. I wonder if it's possible that local politicians on both sides of the questions are too busy playing power games to consider the opinions of those with whose lives and careers they're interfering.

    May 8, 2011 at 11:43 a.m.
  • this moves makes great sense from their perspective. jeanie must be furious at being outsmarted.

    May 8, 2011 at 10:31 a.m.
  • Well at best it looks like UHV will be a satelitte campus for the Cinco Sugarland operation. I can't see A&M wanting to pickup just Victoria as it wouldn't pad there overall budget enough for the trouble.

    Big Ducks in a Small Pond flexing their muscles don't have much standing it appears.

    May 8, 2011 at 10:15 a.m.
  • No matter which side of this debate you are on ....
    You have to give credit to Khator. She knows how to fight a "nuclear war".

    May 8, 2011 at 9:39 a.m.
  • Morrison and her Aggie cronies set about to steal UHV and you think Dr. Khator and the UH system are just going to stand by and let it happen? Think again!

    May 8, 2011 at 9:04 a.m.
  • So UH ignores Fort Bend County, Katy, Sugar Land and makes no effort to build a student base there. UHV steps up and grows Sugar Land into a viable extension. Some local Victoria politicians run wild, and UH is now considering punishing the entire UHV faculty and student body by stealing away everything UHV has accomplished in Sugar Land?

    May 8, 2011 at 8:31 a.m.
  • Get used to it Victoria. The UH system out manuevered and out "politicaled" the group behind the A&M switch.

    The UH system opposed downward expansion. When they saw they lost that fight, the dismantling of UHV began with the firing of Dr. Tim Hudson. The story is right, UH does not have the same vision for Victoria as many others do.

    The dismantling is continuing already with departments being told that things will be changing. Be watching. It's my best guess you will see athletics leave. You will see the nursing program leave. You will see the literary program leave. You will see Jaguar Hall become a shell or a home for the poor.

    Chancellor Khator has no respect for Victoria or its desires in furthering higher education. Don Smith is her puppet and Smith will do everything that Khator tells him to do. Really, how could you believe anything any different? Khator continues to snub Victoria and has not been in the city since before she fired, excuse me, re-assigned Tim Hudson. Rumor is she will be here for commencement at UHV. Watch how fast she will be in and out of here and how she avoid telling Victoria the truth. She has begun the dismantling already and Geanie Morrison's footstomping will do nothing to help. Geanie was late jumping in the game as it was.

    Dr. Tom Butler should be ecstatic now. Victoria College remains untouched and welding classes should be at a maximum level in future semesters.

    Say good bye to any higher education in south Texas. Victoria had a small window of opportunity with A&M and Texas Tech. That window appears to be shut and locked now.

    May 8, 2011 at 8:13 a.m.
  • Is anyone thinking about the employees at UHV. You all seem to have big "I told you so" smile on your face. It does effect real people!

    These talks about Sugarland have been going on for years, which is why UHV and Victoria were trying to come up with other solutions on ways to grow. One being downward expansion.

    Emmet, maybe you need to move to Houston if you are not even concerned! This will effect Victoria and if you live here you should care!

    UH DID NOT want to build a campus in Sugar Land, so UHV came in and said they would do it and they did. UHV wanted to grow and that was a way to increase numbers and offer an education to students in that area. Now that it is successfull, UH wants to come in and take it over. What kind of leadership is that?

    May 8, 2011 at 7:58 a.m.
  • Looks like Will's "nuclear war" is back on.

    Can't really blame the UH system. When the mayor of Victoria makes asinine statements like that, what did he expect? That it would be a one-sided war?

    May 8, 2011 at 6:33 a.m.
  • Thanks for the well-written story,Gabe.
    What of Cinco Ranch? I have read in previous stories that they aren't too keen on the idea of changing systems either.
    Patrick Barnes

    May 8, 2011 at 6:22 a.m.
  • Ooooops....revElation.

    Not enough coffee yet....

    May 8, 2011 at 5:09 a.m.
  • So now we see the "real" Morrison and her cohorts once they find out they won't get their way. What a revalation!

    And funny, unscientific as it is, that the VicAd's own current poll shows 2-to-1 that us peons who bother to respond when asked if we prefer UH or A&M taking the reigns of UH-V say "UH".

    How about them apples!

    May 8, 2011 at 5:07 a.m.
  • Once again, These are the enrollment figures for UH-V (from a previous VicAd article)

    total UH-V emrollment ... 4188

    on-line only ... 2015
    Sugar Land & Cinco Ranch ... 1375
    in person & on-line in Victoria ... 400
    in person in Victoria ... 334
    other ... 64
    From these numbers, draw your own conclusions about where this university belongs.

    Mr. Semenza, one more time ... this has been an excellent series of articles! Very informative.

    (Aside: I wonder what a "furious" Geanie Morrison looks like?)

    May 8, 2011 at 4:20 a.m.
  • Thank you, Vic Ad - much appreciated.

    May 8, 2011 at 12:47 a.m.
  • Again, a question mark at the end of "Changing Hands" in the graphic seems even more appropriate now.

    May 8, 2011 at 12:09 a.m.
  • How can we see the emails?

    May 7, 2011 at 11:14 p.m.
  • This is amusing.

    The righteous indignation must be huge!

    How dare they!

    May 7, 2011 at 10:58 p.m.