COMMENTS:
GREENIE 1969 wrote:
The building is eligible for a lot of grants,etc. But until BISD gives up the building it cannot happen. Why should we buy it? BISD has never wanted the building because it reminds them that SPISD saved them years ago. Just stating facts
09/09/2009 10:14 AM CDT
timwopel wrote:
being that so many of their alumni find this a worthy cause, they won't mind pitching in and privately funding it.
09/08/2009 08:50 PM CDT
timwopel wrote:
great idea. why don't the greenies join together and buy the school from bisd? then they can do whatever they want with it and the taxpayers won't have to pay for their sentiment. just a thought.
09/08/2009 08:48 PM CDT
GREENIE 1969 wrote:
Texas Historical Commission has been called and they know all about plaque. I know where it is.BISD did take it down. Be sure and keep lookout for news about South Park.Some will like the news other want.
09/08/2009 11:10 AM CDT
HillebrandtHoney wrote:
Did you know that SPHS is a historic landmark? It also had the plaque to prove it until BISD took it down a few months ago! Lamar University got it's start there as as junior college (on the third floor). Look at the architecture of the building! It's beautiful masonry. Something we should preserve.
09/08/2009 06:36 AM CDT
bluedog23 wrote:
On South Park-Why doesn't the Texas Historical Commision look into the "disappearance" of the plaque? Maybe not, but just taking it down doesn't sound right.
09/07/2009 12:00 PM CDT
GREENIE 1969 wrote:
Here are a few facts about South Park. Marker Number from Texas Historical Commission 10566.Dated 1988. Housed South Park Junior College then name changed to Lamar University.The marker was on the front of building until BISD took it down which is a NO NO.Watch out BISD you will pay for this.
09/07/2009 09:52 AM CDT
GREENIE 1969 wrote:
People like Mr. Pete gets my "goat" as my granny would say.Some peolpe are so ignorant and don't have the facts.GREENIES have made sure of the facts about South Park and you are one the ones that don't know the real facts.
09/07/2009 08:26 AM CDT
bmtbrd wrote:
Mr. Pete, As Mamagistra indicated to you, your comments are far more misleading in their incompleteness than what you are accusing those who are trying to save the building of doing. If you're truly concerned about misinformation, let's go through a few things you may or may not know. Quite frankly, a lot of people don't understand this.
For our purposes with this building, there are three pertinent designations of historical markers:
1. State historical designation - the building DOES bear the Historical Marker No. 10566 issued by the Texas Historical Commission in 1988. That is to say by legal rights it bears that Historical Marker, though physically it does not at the present time because BISD took it upon themselves to remove the plaque -- without going through proper channels to do so, I might add. The fact that BISD ignored this designation and was proceeding with demolition without going through proper channels is what helped the TRO (Temporary Restraining Order) be granted in the first place. BISD is clearly trying to hide the fact that the building even has a Historic Marker.
2. National Register of Historic Places -- an honorary award (covered in Mamagistra's comment)
3. RTHL, Recorded Texas Historic Landmark - the building does not bear this designation. Nobody said it does. Nobody claimed it does. Nobody has tried to pass it off that it does. We checked into getting it. But it would have to be applied for by the owner, BISD - and that ain't gonna happen because, as Mamagistra points out, even if it was to their advantage, which it would be, they're determined to destroy the building at all costs -- figuratively and literally. References to (lower case) "historical landmark" generically might have been made by reporters or in casual speech by some; but that is not to be confused with (capitalized) RTHL official designation. Now, there's your information. So, who's the one trying to put out the misinformation? It ain't us!
09/06/2009 02:53 AM CDT
Mamagistra wrote:
Hm...the South Park building IS an historic structure. Oh, and it IS a landmark in the community. Neither of those statements is misleading, Mr. Pete. Your letter, however, IS deceptive, for it fails to mention the fact that the building is eligible for inclusion on the *National* Register of Historic Places. Only the bumbling district stands in the way of giving national recognition to one of its schools (and with it, tax breaks for BISD as well as technical advisory on restoration of the landmark building). Normally the district bends over backwards for the almighty dollar, but in this case, the desire to both do the right thing for Beaumont *and* save money are overshadowed by a bloated administrative machine that will stop at nothing to see this lovely building destroyed. Quibble over the nuances, sir, but make no mistake: Beaumont citizens from all walks will continue to stand for Beaumont history by fighting for historic South Park. LET HER STAND!
09/05/2009 10:27 PM CDT