Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Archives
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Legal Guide
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
Close
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
SD's for-profit colleges devour GI Bill bucks
Great reporting, Don! Here is a bit of further background on Ashford. I know an individual who was employed by them for a period of two years as a telephone recruiter. Interestingly enough, while the official word is that there are not numbers that must be reached in terms of signing people up for classes, unofficially, yes, there are quotas that must be reached. People are fired when those numbers are not reached within a certain time period. Of course, this is illegal. I don't know if this could be proven, as there would have to be people willing to testify to that, and there appears to be a corporate culture that discourages that sort of thing. Also, a while back when some of this negative publicity started emerging, apparently those in charge at Ashford shifted the responsibility of retaining recruited students to those who had signed them up. So, the phone recruiters added academic counselor and psychological and tactical counselor onto their list of daily responsibilities. It is bad enough that these places use up all the GI Bill funding--but then, because of the expenses, loans are encouraged. Young people who are transitioning from active duty, needing to find a safe pathway for a career should not be taken advantage of in this way. No one should be taken advantage of in this way. The cynicism of these "for profit" institutions looks blatant to me. I know that there are people who have benefitted from Ashford--but I believe the number who have been taken advantage of could be considerably larger than the number who have benefitted.— June 29, 2014 8:39 a.m.
Gandara to go on 60-day lobster fast
When is enough enough? We are far past "enough"! I keep thinking about that $500,000 that was given to Gandara when he could have been fired. Could that have been to buy his silence? Did that line of questioning ever take place?— June 29, 2014 12:04 a.m.
Gandara to go on 60-day lobster fast
Further attempt to stifle public input? Depriving us of free speech? This must mean that Ed Brand is feeling the pressure from the public and just doesn't want to deal with it. Is this legal, or just one more Ed Brand intimidation tactic? We all know he likes to make the rules up as he goes along... You would think, now that all eyes are on him, he would at least make a token effort at looking like a reasonable human being--but not Brand!!— June 28, 2014 11:01 p.m.
Gandara to go on 60-day lobster fast
By the way, can we start cancelling the $20,000 worth of memberships in all the clubs and groups that Brand has felt is so necessary--when in reality the purpose they serve is to provide more fodder for schemes? I am sure the money could be far better used on the students.— June 28, 2014 8:38 p.m.
Gandara to go on 60-day lobster fast
By the way, it would be great to see Jaime Mercado back on the board.— June 28, 2014 6:29 p.m.
None
I went to see this film thinking that it would be not that compelling, and an "old story". Yet--I found it was crisply told and very much worth watching. It is a well-told tale, and the behind the scenes views of how the music is made are always fascinating, imo.— June 28, 2014 3:21 p.m.
Gandara to go on 60-day lobster fast
I did happen to read in the Star-News today that Bertha Lopez is going to try and retain her seat on the board. Interestingly, Ed Brand was reported to have written a letter to the judge stating that Bertha should not have that opportunity. Suffice it to say, I very much doubt if he wrote that same letter for Cartmill. Why? Because Bertha Lopez is not a member of the Ed Brand Voting Block the way Cartmill is. Let us remember that there is still work to be done, and that includes getting to the bottom of all the financial and real estate messes in Sweetwater. Fast Eddy wants to reestablish control with a predictable voting block, just like the days of Ricasa, McCann and Cartmill. Now that Brand only has McCann (and those appointed members who still have insufficient knowledge or will or care to think for themselves), he evidently wants to try for further maneuvering before departing in--October, is it? Let us hope that more is accomplished, and that Ed Brand Gets What He Wants is a closed book, a dead subject, a road to nowhere, just as it deserves to be.— June 28, 2014 1:56 p.m.
Gandara to go on 60-day lobster fast
Yup, the Fast Eddy Scheme and Scam Team is still working on their fast break!!— June 28, 2014 1:17 p.m.
Gandara to go on 60-day lobster fast
Have you actually heard that Cartmill is planning on running again? This surprises me greatly, as when I have seen him around town, he does not look at all well.— June 28, 2014 11:44 a.m.
Gandara to go on 60-day lobster fast
Yes, Ms. Luzzaro, it is a very curious thing that Soccoro, TX keeps cropping up in the history of Sweetwater miscreants. I had heard that Pearl Quinones was from that area as well. And I also heard some months ago that there was a report of Trujillo working as an educational consultant. Let's hope that there will be a real search for a new superintendent, as opposed to a pretend search. Let's hope that a reputable group will be in charge of the search--and let us hope that the board is taking this task very seriously. We have had enough of incompetence and dishonesty. Time for some people who can actually do a good job. Time for some people that the students can look up to, instead of holding the Board in deep contempt. We don't need any further undermining of education here in Sweetwater. Yes, Judge Espana doesn't really mention the damage to the students, does she? Is she oblivious? Superficial? Simply part of a larger game?— June 27, 2014 11:07 p.m.