These are your conservative candidates: Bennett, Alpe, and Perez.

Lots of odd things going on with the board and not in the best interest of the students or schools. These individuals are helping to push back and hold the line for parents. SBISD will soon decline like HISD if changes are not made. The students are doing more (despite the districts actions) to maintain the perceived good school district reputation.

From what people have said, Breed is just sitting on the board. Suppose to be conservative, but just goes with the flow to not make any enemies (hurt business).

More info on them: pipelinesbisd.com or savesbisd.org

I will tell you, that parents should get heavily involved in their school boards. The Boards are not representing the parents and the behind the scenes activities and personal agendas are scary to hear about. This includes the SBISD Foundation as well. Get involved.

I would put David Slattery in the conservative camp as well. He doesn't seem to have as many signs as the others though. But he's also similar to CB (no current students).

Ducks4brkfast said:

---

ChipFTAC01 said:

---

Scuttlebutt on our neighborhood group is that Carter Breed has no kids in the district and is just interested in name recognition

---

Similar to far left progressive Eliz Markowitz running for in Katy ISD board. No kids, never been married, lives at home with her parents. She's just shopping for an election to win to keep her name in the spotlight.

---

That chubby hobbit seems nuttier than squirrel turds.

You really need to dig into the two websites posted above. There is definitely some sensationalizing done in the commentary, but the bottom line is that they show how the SBISD Board is/was putting up a less-than-enthusiastic defense of the current at-large Board structure in the lawsuit that seeks to implement a single-member-district model, similar to HISD's. Under that model, you only get to vote for the board position assigned to your part of the school district whereas under the current model, you can vote for every position on the Board.

The SMD model is how you get SJW activists on the Board to start tearing down a strong district in the name of "equity". As with anything else in today's world, their claim is that since they can't get their candidates elected, the system must be racist.

Last year, I dropped off a few Chris Earnest signs to members on TX Ags. If any of you would like to have an Alpe, Perez or Bennett sign, LMK and will get them to you. Likewise, happy to host an Aggie Meet and Greet in the area for any interested Ags here! :-)

stroodles said:

---

I would put David Slattery in the conservative camp as well. He doesn't seem to have as many signs as the others though. But he's also similar to CB (no current students).

---

David Slattery is a very good man.

Both Breed and Slattery have been endorsed by the SB Democrats...not conservatives. Just FYI and yes, Breed has no kids attending SBISD schools anymore and is just a seat so the current board has the numbers to continue pushing the lawsuit to make us a SMD (single member district). If you want change, vote Alpe, Bennet, Perez to fight for ALL kids!

I can tell you the ONLY active conservative candidates are Alpe, Perez, and Bennett. I have read every court document in the case and the current board had no intention to fight this bogus lawsuit. Read www.SaveSBISD.org for updates as well as court documents.

Willy Wonka said:

---

stroodles said:

---

I would put David Slattery in the conservative camp as well. He doesn't seem to have as many signs as the others though. But he's also similar to CB (no current students).

---

David Slattery is a very good man.

---

Agreed and is definitely in the conservative camp. Know the family well and they are good people.

YellAg2004 said:

---

You really need to dig into the two websites posted above. There is definitely some sensationalizing done in the commentary, but the bottom line is that they show how the SBISD Board is/was putting up a less-than-enthusiastic defense of the current at-large Board structure in the lawsuit that seeks to implement a single-member-district model, similar to HISD's. Under that model, you only get to vote for the board position assigned to your part of the school district whereas under the current model, you can vote for every position on the Board.

The SMD model is how you get SJW activists on the Board to start tearing down a strong district in the name of "equity". As with anything else in today's world, their claim is that since they can't get their candidates elected, the system must be racist.

---

This person is 100% spot on about the single member districts, what they do to the district, and who opposes them.

Do you know the current board (who majority support single member districts) actually agreed to try and postpone the election until the judge in the lawsuit told them they couldnt?

Imagine an elected government body deciding on their own that they can just postpone an election. F that!

Carter Breed, super nice gentleman. However, no longer has kids that are students in the district. He's seeking a third re-election if not mistaken.

He told my husband and me he wasn't sure if he was going to run or not, and certainly wasn't going to pay for it if he did. He was undecided and seemed like he didn't have his heart in it vs. someone passionately committed to running like his opponent Lisa Alpe.

It was later learned that he was not transparent. There isn't much transparency on the board anymore IMO.

Lisa Alpe is an attorney and a force to be reckoned with...she's represented children and troubled teens and fought for their justice, so she understands the importance of a marginalized population who desperately wants to be seen and heard. She'll fight for the same in our district. She has two kids that are currently SBISD students (one in college). IMO she will transfer her expertise from the courthouse onto the board and is sure to provide the accountability and oversight that is much needed.

John Perez is a shining star. Hispanic who is also determined to bridge the unfortunate divide in our community. Equally driven and up to the task of providing leadership. As an engineer who's accustomed to doing projects, he's ensure fiscal integrity for this upcoming Bond election. As a businessman, he'll provide proper oversight on the board as well.

Caroline Harsh Bennett is an impressive product of our schools and has much experience from being an educator as well as volunteer for many years. She is well versed in the issues affecting schools, understands what works and what doesn't and how the political climate is detrimental to the classroom. Her insight will bring tremendous value as a trustee as well.

Carter has sadly:

• endorsed the person suing our district, who was backed by unions and endorsed by libs
• known about the proposed form of governance (single member district) BEFORE his campaign, but never disclosed whether he supported SMDs when asked. The argument that he couldn't because of the lawsuit is bogus. Another trustee, Chris Earnest, was transparent and disclosed his position and no repercussions.
• done things in lockstep like the rest of the board (sans Chris Earnest)...have done things in lockstep.
• claims to be a conservative, yet he's aligned himself with the other pro-SMD candidates and was just endorsed by the Spring Branch Dems. This begs the question: what's the quid pro quo here?

We need APB on the board to help remove the dysfunction and GroupThink. Slattery is also being endorsed by the dems and has been spotted in close contact with their camp.

All three candidates understand that we're at a critical juncture, and how the lawsuit is a distraction from the progressive agenda at play. They will provide principled leadership vs. a "Yes Man" under the influence of activist attorneys driving the lawsuit and whoever he publicly claimed as "the Powers that Be."

Marvin Zindler here....bringing needed conversation to the tine board.

guilanl said:

---

Carter Breed, super nice gentleman. However, no longer has kids that are students in the district. He's seeking a third re-election if not mistaken.

He told my husband and me he wasn't sure if he was going to run or not, and certainly wasn't going to pay for it if he did. He was undecided and seemed like he didn't have his heart in it vs. someone passionately committed to running like his opponent Lisa Alpe.

It was later learned that he was not transparent. There isn't much transparency on the board anymore IMO.

Lisa Alpe is an attorney and a force to be reckoned with...she's represented children and troubled teens and fought for their justice, so she understands the importance of a marginalized population who desperately wants to be seen and heard. She'll fight for the same in our district. She has two kids that are currently SBISD students (one in college). IMO she will transfer her expertise from the courthouse onto the board and is sure to provide the accountability and oversight that is much needed.

John Perez is a shining star. Hispanic who is also determined to bridge the unfortunate divide in our community. Equally driven and up to the task of providing leadership. As an engineer who's accustomed to doing projects, he's ensure fiscal integrity for this upcoming Bond election. As a businessman, he'll provide proper oversight on the board as well.

Caroline Harsh Bennett is an impressive product of our schools and has much experience from being an educator as well as volunteer for many years. She is well versed in the issues affecting schools, understands what works and what doesn't and how the political climate is detrimental to the classroom. Her insight will bring tremendous value as a trustee as well.

Carter has sadly:

• endorsed the person suing our district, who was backed by unions and endorsed by libs
• known about the proposed form of governance (single member district) BEFORE his campaign, but never disclosed whether he supported SMDs when asked. The argument that he couldn't because of the lawsuit is bogus. Another trustee, Chris Earnest, was transparent and disclosed his position and no repercussions.
• done things in lockstep like the rest of the board (sans Chris Earnest)...have done things in lockstep.
• claims to be a conservative, yet he's aligned himself with the other pro-SMD candidates and was just endorsed by the Spring Branch Dems. This begs the question: what's the quid pro quo here?

We need APB on the board to help remove the dysfunction and GroupThink. Slattery is also being endorsed by the dems and has been spotted in close contact with their camp.

All three candidates understand that we're at a critical juncture, and how the lawsuit is a distraction from the progressive agenda at play. They will provide principled leadership vs. a "Yes Man" under the influence of activist attorneys driving the lawsuit and whoever he publicly claimed as "the Powers that Be."

---

I'd argue the lawsuit is an outright play on a progressive agenda.....not a distraction. The hope is that some people will simply not pay attention.

Lp2001 said:

---

Both Breed and Slattery have been endorsed by the SB Democrats...not conservatives. Just FYI and yes, Breed has no kids attending SBISD schools anymore and is just a seat so the current board has the numbers to continue pushing the lawsuit to make us a SMD (single member district). If you want change, vote Alpe, Bennet, Perez to fight for ALL kids!

---

Do you have a source that CB and DS have been endorsed by SB democrats? Your account was created yesterday and only has one post. Consider me skeptical. Even if SB Democrats endorsed both I would be shocked if either actually accepted and/or promoted the endorsement.

I don't know that Slattery is on the conservative camp. If you go to pupelinesbisd's Instagram (in highlights) you'll see that he went on the record as favoring SMDs at a previous board meeting.

He's also been spotted kanoodling at a board meeting with a guy named Shaddix, who has been very actively involved and endorsed Virginia Elizondo. #followthemoney

He mentioned on his website that he did make a statement as pro SMD, but has changed his position after "discussion with trusted friends".

https://www.slatteryforsbisd.com/faq

And "kanoodling" (very interesting choice of word) with someone does not mean he agrees with their position. David has been involved with SBISD as a resident, parent, spouse of a SBISD teacher, and through two bond programs. He probably knows many people in and around the district.

I have met David on several occasions through both personal and business connections, and would be shocked if he reversed his position on SMDs if elected.

Personally I do not want SMDs for the district, and want to see the district fight the lawsuit. But I find it very interesting that there are three rookies posting on this thread (all with the same position) that do not have any other posts except on threads about SBISD.

While I have a ton of respect for people who will actually step up and own their mistakes/poor decisions, especially in this day and age, I really have to wonder how someone could pull a 180 on something that significant. That's seemingly like the school board equivalent of someone going from hardcore democrat to hardcore republican. Yes it does occasionally happen, but I'm usually a little wary of those people and at the very least, their judgement and decision-making ability.

Lp2001 said:

---

Thanks for the warm welcome as a new Ag to the board! It was my first time to vote in a trustee election last election and I'm thankful they didn't tell me I couldn't vote bc I haven't voted in a board election in the past! It's always a good time to get involved and help others be informed...bc we weren't! Definitely get out and meet the candidates!!!

---

A new ag to the board and the Houston board and an sbisd election thread is the first one you picked. Dubious.