Time for a LOT of changes, Kevin. What a mess and not headed in a nice
direction
at all.
mike
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 10:34 AM, kevin.rocap@liu.edu <Kevin.Rocap@liu.edu>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry to interject this off any current topic...but it is timely and
> hopefully of interest/concern.
>
> In Peace,
> K.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>>
>>
> Dear all,
>> The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) planned to build a fence along
>> and through our university campus which lies at the Mexico-Texas border. Our
>> university and the university of Texas system filed a suit to halt this
>> action. An agreement was made which was much more reasonable. However, the
>> DHS is now ignoring this agreement and forcing its way onto our campus.
>> Below is the letter from our president, Dr. Juliet García, to the campus
>> community outlining the events. It makes one wonder about our democratic
>> system.
>> Yvonne
>>
>> Yvonne S. Freeman, Ph.D,
>> Professor, Bilingual Education
>> Department of Curriculum and Instruction
>> School of Education
>> The University of Texas at Brownsville
>> 80 Fort Brown, Brownsville, TX 78520
>> tel 956 882 5725
>> yvonne.freeman@utb.edu
>> web page UTB
>> http://soe.utb.edu/ci_faculty_yfreeman.php
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: UTB FACULTY on behalf of News And Information
>> Sent: Thu 6/19/2008 6:46 PM
>> To: UTBFACULTY@LISTSERV.UTB.EDU
>> Subject: A Message from the President
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> June 19, 2008
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Friends,
>>
>> At the beginning of this year, the federal government filed a lawsuit
>> against UTB/TSC seeking a right of entry that would allow federal agencies
>> to survey land for the proposed U.S.-Mexico border fence. Just prior to the
>> hearing on that suit, scheduled for March 19th, the University and the
>> Department of Justice entered into an agreed order that allowed limited
>> access to campus, but required investigations to study alternatives to a
>> border fence and the impact of additional security measures.
>>
>> The agreed order was significant for a number of reasons. While the
>> original request for entry by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had
>> asked for 18 months of unlimited access into the very heart of our campus
>> and absolved DHS from any damages that might result from its work on our
>> campus, the agreed order limited access to 6 months on a much smaller area
>> restricted to the land adjacent to the levees and required DHS to either
>> repair the damage or make an appropriate settlement. The order also
>> specified that DHS would not be allowed to clear land or otherwise alter the
>> physical landscape of the university, required DHS to give Campus Police
>> prior notice of all activities on the property, and take all reasonable
>> action to promote safety and minimize any impact on our educational
>> activities.
>>
>> By entering into the agreement, DHS consented to consider our unique
>> status as an institution of higher education, to jointly assess alternatives
>> to a physical barrier, and to conduct investigations in order to minimize
>> the impact of any tactical infrastructure on the environment, culture,
>> commerce and quality of life for the communities and residents located near
>> the University.
>>
>> Finally, the agreed court order was also significant because the judge
>> recommended that DHS consider using the process set out as a template for
>> dealing with other landowners regarding the border fence.
>>
>> Therefore, in good faith we agreed to allow DHS access to our campus under
>> the terms of the agreed order, and we have been attempting to collaborate
>> fully with representatives from DHS, Customs and Border Patrol, and the U.S.
>> Army Corps of Engineers. However, continuous attempts to try to work
>> together with DHS have been futile. Instead, contrary to its earlier
>> agreement, DHS has bluntly stated that it is not interested in seeking
>> alternatives.
>>
>> We, on the other hand, have proceeded to comply with the court order,
>> investing hundreds of hours of time and engaged the services of experts at
>> our own expense to seek alternative mechanisms for providing a secure border
>> and safety for our students and university community.
>>
>> Our attempts to work responsibly and transparently and to engage DHS in
>> the joint assessment process have been summarily dismissed. Instead, DHS has
>> unilaterally proceeded on its original plans for constructing a fence.
>>
>> The land on which they seek to build the fence would effectively slice off
>> up to 180 acres of university property from the rest of the campus, severely
>> curtailing critical and valuable expansion land for the university's future
>> growth and relegating the property to a "no-man's land."
>>
>> DHS has decided to renege on their March 19th agreement to work with us
>> and instead is attempting to force upon us a fence that it knows to be
>> poorly sited. DHS explains this lesser choice as a consequence of needing
>> to satisfy a deadline set in the Secure Fence Act. While it should be
>> demanding the means to offer the best solution, it instead seems willing to
>> rush into a less effective, more expedient one.
>>
>> Many, both inside and outside DHS, worry that the fence will actually have
>> negative unintended consequences. We have good reason to worry that the
>> proposed fence will, in fact, reduce the security of students and the
>> community and believe that the local community and the nation at large would
>> be better served by a more deliberate approach to this urgent need.
>>
>> Today, we filed a Motion for Relief in federal court. The filing was in
>> reaction to a notice we received from the Department of the Army informing
>> us that they intend to seize 2.11 acres of university land on which to
>> construct the border fence. The motion asks the court to enforce the
>> provisions of the Order of Dismissal agreed upon in March. Federal Judge
>> Andrew S. Hanen immediately took note of our motion and has set a hearing
>> for June 30th.
>>
>> The University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College share
>> the commitment that Congress and our nation has to protecting our homeland.
>> We know that America's security is a national responsibility. However, we
>> also know that what is needed is authentic security, which can only be
>> achieved when it deploys all of our assets, including fully resourced
>> enforcement, a stable economy, trustworthy and open governance, and an
>> educated citizenry.
>>
>> Further, we are duty bound to preserve the safety and security of our
>> students, faculty and staff. We believe in protecting our borders. But we
>> also believe that the rule of law and the principles that guide our
>> democracy must also be protected. These include open and fair government
>> processes and the property rights of individuals and state institutions. We
>> deserve to be treated fairly and given the due process afforded by our laws.
>> No more, but certainly not less.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Juliet V. García, Ph.D.
>>
>> President
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> About this e-mail: If you do not wish to receive future e-mail messages on
>> this subject, you may unsubscribe <mailto:unsubscribe@utb.edu?subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20mailing%20list>
>> or email your request to newsandinfo@utb.edu
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Fri Jun 20 14:04 PDT 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Oct 14 2008 - 10:29:05 PDT