A disappointed UT alumnus \u00a0<\/p>\n
Re: “UT rejects tenure bid despite faculty backing \u2013 Border surveillance scholar must leave school after the unexplained decision,” Wednesday Metro & Business story.\u00a0<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The University of Texas Tower looms above other campus buildings. Readers are disappointed in UT’s latest tenure decision.<\/p>\n
Aaron E. Martinez\/American-State<\/p>\n
The recent tenure decision at the University of Texas at Austin is deeply concerning. As reported in this story, UT President Jim Davis \u2014 who has no teaching experience \u2014 was granted tenure, while a professor with strong faculty support was denied tenure without any public explanation.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
When a major university makes decisions that appear inconsistent or opaque, it raises serious questions about whether political pressure or fear of independent ideas is influencing the process. Academic freedom and open inquiry are foundational to any great university, and UT has long claimed to champion those values.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Moments like this make UT\u2019s motto, \u201cWhat starts here changes the world,\u201d feel uncomfortably at odds with its actions. As an alumnus, I have always been proud of the university. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Today, I find myself disappointed and hoping UT recommits to transparency, fairness and the free exchange of ideas.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Opaque tenure decisions\u00a0<\/p>\n
It’s unfortunate that despite an overwhelming positive recommendation by the tenure review committee, the University of Texas president denied tenure for Professor Iv\u00e1n Chaar L\u00f3pez, who is a stellar scholar who has achieved usual criteria for university tenure and then some. No explanation was given. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
L\u00f3pez\u2019s list of achievements is long. He’s teaching and mentoring graduate students who can continue to do research and seek truth. Apparently, studying the border is what certain Texas leaders don’t want. \u00a0<\/p>\n
It\u2019s not in anyone\u2019s interest that state law has also made tenure decisions more opaque, more difficult to challenge and more political. Among other problems, the UT regents have limited how professors can address “controversial topics” without defining what the term means. \u00a0<\/p>\n
This will bleed into other departments and will limit the work and classroom teaching at other Texas universities. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Both students and citizens are poorer now that politics has invaded education, and truth is selective. They are poorer for the loss of this professor.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Carol A. Stephenson, Mesquite\u00a0<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
Accountability is needed\u00a0<\/p>\n
Re: “Balanced news coverage,” by Janet Worthington, July 18 Letters.\u00a0<\/p>\n
This letter noted how The Dallas Morning News had not covered Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz\u2019s pardon of an undocumented immigrant convicted of sexually assaulting a little girl. It should be added that the victim, now an adult, supported clemency. Nonetheless, The News also did not cover the recent murder of a female college student in Chicago. Yet, there could be a larger issue here: The News\u2019 reliance on the Associated Press for national stories.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The AP often blurs the line between reporting and editorializing. In \u201cMullin presses states on voting,\u201d (July 18 news story), the AP wrote of \u201cthe Republican president\u2019s longstanding attempt to undermine Americans\u2019 confidence in the vote.\u201d \u00a0<\/p>\n
In \u201cTrump shifts his tone on Carter\u201d (Sunday news story), the AP wrote that the president \u201crelishes cursing publicly and offers a never-ending onslaught of falsehoods.\u201d \u00a0<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
If The News wants to bolster trust, it faces some difficult choices. \u00a0It can continue to rely on the AP\u2019s definitions of newsworthiness and impartiality. It can drop the AP for other sources of content. \u00a0Or, tapping Hearst\u2019s influence, the paper can work to pull the AP back to objective, centrist journalism.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Either way, there must be accountability. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Marvin H. Lett, Dallas\/Oak Cliff\u00a0<\/p>\n
Shock waves\u00a0<\/p>\n
The subpoena of four prominent journalists for their stories about the president\u2019s new gift jet sends shocks through my 74-year-old lawyer body. President Donald Trump says unfavorable press is the enemy. I say press unfavorable to Trump is the only reason I subscribe.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
Chuck Noteboom, Fort Worth \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
No more failures\u00a0<\/p>\n
Re: “A Flood of Confusion \u2013 Dallas City Hall owes residents answers about water billing issues,” July 9 editorial.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The editorial board is right to call out the disastrous rollout of Dallas Water Utilities\u2019 new payment system. Residents have been left confused by billing changes, unexpected processing fees and a City Hall that still cannot clearly explain what went wrong.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, this isn\u2019t an isolated mistake. It is the latest in a growing pattern under City Manager Kim Tolbert\u2019s leadership.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
The proposed alley-to-curb trash collection rollout sparked overwhelming public opposition. Her regional library proposal recommended closing heavily used neighborhood libraries, including locations that serve as polling places. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Now the water billing rollout has become another example of inadequate planning, poor communication and preventable disruption for residents.\u00a0<\/p>\n
These aren\u2019t simply policy disagreements \u2014 they are management failures. Dallas residents expect basic city services to be implemented competently and major initiatives to be planned before they affect thousands of people.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Dallas is the ninth largest city in America. It deserves leadership that executes, communicates honestly with residents and restores confidence in City Hall.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Dallas can\u2019t afford any more failures.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Natalie LeVeck, Far North Dallas\u00a0<\/p>\n
Not credible \u00a0<\/p>\n
We are told the 2020 presidential election was riddled with fraud, yet the 2024 election was apparently safe, secure and trustworthy. So, which is it?\u00a0<\/p>\n
Did someone fix all that supposed fraud between elections? Or are elections only considered fraudulent when the current administration loses them?\u00a0<\/p>\n
Perhaps election integrity now has a simpler definition: If we win, democracy works. If we lose, someone cheats.\u00a0<\/p>\n
That is certainly convenient. It is not, however, credible.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Laurie Miller, Far North Dallas\u00a0<\/p>\n
High HOA fees\u00a0<\/p>\n
I’d like to talk about affordable housing. In looking for a condo or townhouse for my children, one thing became apparent \u2014 high HOA fees. In running analysis, HOA fees were very close in dollars to a mortgage payment at the lower price points. In some cases, the fees exceeded the P & I monthly payments.\u00a0<\/p>\n