Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Katy ISD: Got Debt?

There are many issues that we encounter and deal with as a community on a local, city, state, and a national level.  Some are more controversial than others, obviously.  There is one issue that can tear apart an education community or school district faster than any of these other issues; a school bond proposal.  Want to make it even more divisive?  Throw in a new football stadium proposal in the bond proposal.  Look. Out.


The Katy ISD bond is no different.  And sadly, it's a statewide epidemic.

However, even the folks that support the bond are coming up short on their logic, seemingly failing to consider what the passage of this bond would do to the local and state economies.  The debt of Texas' cities is comparable to California's cities, even to that of bankrupt Detroit.  Even Breitbart has picked up on it in this article titled, Texas Cities Should Learn from Bankrupt, Spendthrift Detroit.  Jess Fields said, "Texans must work to ensure that our localities do not rack up enormous debt and waste money on pet projects we cannot afford. Taxpayers should demand that local governments spend money on priorities, like good public safety and sound infrastructure."

On the other side, the Katy LiberTea group led the fight in 2013 and helped defeat an earlier bond.  Their desire to see the bond voted down is no different this time around.  Cyndi Lawrence, president of Katy LiberTea has this to say about the state of affairs in the Katy Independent School District: "We acknowledge the fact that Katy ISD is a highly desired community. We need to look at a package that addresses classroom space for our kids and that is fiscally responsible. This community has expanded so much because it is a great area to live, but we want it to remain that way. We do not want our community to be in such a large amount of debt.  This bond reminds me of Bills that come through the U.S. House, the INTENTION is always good, but somehow tons of pork gets added and then the intention of the Bill ends up lost.  We need to be more transparent and fiscally responsible when preparing a bond.  There has been way to much “fluff” money added to this current bond package. This bond should only be addressing growth while respecting the community’s hard earned tax payer dollars. According to debt at a glance, for school districts of similar size in Texas, Katy ISD ranks the 5th highest in debt with the amount of $1,234,844,928.  The cost per student is $19,172."

Cyndi continues: "The community has already voted down the 2013 $99,000,000 bond because most felt like the school district was proposing to spend too much money on things that are not necessities. Here we are a year later, and not only did they NOT listen to the community’s concerns, but they added 700 MILLION more dollars to the bond and MORE “fluff.” This is not representative of what the community wants and what is best for our children. They need to consider our concerns and address the growth needs in a fiscally responsible manner. Our community and our children will be paying this debt off for years to come."

Most people think that conservative groups are always railing against any sort of bond referendum or proposal.  That's simply not true!  To back that up, I thought it would be interesting  to include some quotes from some folks who would like to remain anonymous.  The first person comments concerning the stadium that has been injected into the bond:
"Why is the stadium being forced into a bond that is primarily for education and facilities pertaining to education? Why is it not on its own ticket?"
"The stadium did not make the vote last year and there has been a whole year to prepare for a better solution. Why has Katy ISD not researched and secured corporate sponsors, stadium naming rights, and etc… They could sell seat options, raise ticket prices, and paid parking. There are many ways that this could have been sold to the voters without shoving it down our throats in a bond that includes mass much needed educational components. That's just dirty and unethical no matter what side your on."
"Sometimes you have to pay to play!"
Some people are not even talking about the stadium.  Here's one taxpayer who is concerned about whether or not Katy ISD already has the money on hand to spend without passing the bond: 
"On the KISD Bond issue, I have a house that last year was valued at $92,500 - KISD taxes $1415. This year the same house value was upped to $149,000 - KISD taxes $2279. This appears to me to be a little more than $10-$20 per year. And it's a rental with no exemptions. So, if my KISD taxes are going up $864 per year, I guess that I am accounting for the $10 increase for 86 houses. They should not need any bonds approved inasmuch as the increase in valuations more than makes up for the bonds they want to issue."
Here's more from another concerned citizen about the tax rate:
"KISD tax rate is 1.5266% (1.1266 M&O and 0.400 I&S). This is before the planned tax rate increase in the proposed bond. This current rate is already higher than over 93% of all other school districts in TX and even higher than CFISD. Not sure how that is possible with the behemoth of a Berry Center cost already included in CFISD M&O and I&S rates. Good news is it is still lower than Allen ISD but they already have their 60MM stadium. Well it's really even more than the 60MM when you add the costs they are currently incurring to repair all the cracked concrete in it."

Unfortunately, as is always the case with school bond debates, those presenting rationale, financial reasons to oppose the bond will be labeled “anti-children.” 
These are real concerns from real people.  They are legitimate concerns, too.  None that can just be explained away by the pro-bond side as 'ignorant' or uneducated.  If you live in Katy ISD, please consider a 'no' vote on this bond.  It's time that we stop loving our children to debt. 

17 comments:

  1. Nice, factual synopsis of a very emotional issue. ISDs in Texas have license to commit grand larceny. Thanks for addressing this.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Most High Schools across America field football teams. Friday night lights are as apple pie and Chevrolet as Baseball used to be. Most High Schools across America buy extra land at their individual campuses, no matter how expensive that land might be, and build high school football stadiums of varying degrees of quality for the football team and the band and the dance troop and the cheerleaders and the various other student organizations. In Texas and in Katy, we do things smarter!! We do things BETTER!! Before it was Tea Party fashionable to be fiscally conservative and have four high schools build their own stadiums, WE decided why not share 1 stadium, nicer AND cheaper than the four high schools can build their own! Unfortunately, when Katy decided to pursue this fiscally responsible path, Cyndi Lawrence wasn't around to take credit for it! So, now for the expense of her political aspirations, she has to work against students getting the necessary facilities that they require to participate in the student activities that the schools encourage and have been empirically proven to improve performance in the classroom. What she won't do, which is cowardly, is declare the programs themselves as "nice to have" instead of "need to have"! She won't say Marching Band is "nice to have", not "need to have" and so on down the line. I'd respect that! Wouldn't agree with it, but, hey if you don't want to spend the resource on the facility let's get to the heart of the matter and eliminate the programs that are requiring the facility! Instead she counts on the "low information" voter, who will just knee jerk to any hint or suggestion of wasteful spending, but, won't consider the consequence of their vote and what alternative there is to provide for activities that they actually do support, but, just can't seem to tie together because they are not informed!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why not share one or two natatoriums? The are a big drag on the M and O budget. Ft. Bend ISD has one and the M and O runs $500,000 per year. We will now have eight. some have already been redone and I believe the bond is going to fix others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Run that up the flag pole...I'd salute it. That's what a problem solver would propose, instead of a political hack. Why not build on the good ideas that those who came before us had about sharing facility costs amongst the high schools. One Stadium and One Natatorium for every four schools. Along with stadium two build a shared aquatic center.

      Delete
  4. Only a guy that must have visions of re-living the big game vicariously via watching HS in a grandiose stadium could come up with such narrow minded point of view on how to manage HS extracurricular activity venues. Of course he throws the mindset out there that you don't care about the kids if you don't build a 60MM stadium. Plus he then claims that it is more economical to build one 60MM stadium then I guess four 60MM stadiums at individual HS? Really that is the extent of his brainstorming problem solving capability? How about just adding the necessary extra seating at the new HS that is planned and play there? I can’t imagine that costing anywhere near 60MM. Doug, take out the "Friday Night Lights" DVD out of the player and get some fresh air. Thank you Cyndi for allowing residents to see "the rest of the story"!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh my…one of those tax and spend liberals hiding behind Anonymous, probably from back east!? moved down here because they destroyed the economy up there, but, can’t figure that out so want to do the same down here!? To be compliant FIRST, with all government codes and regulations and SECOND to conform to the standards set by the Texas governing board for athletics and fine arts competitions, the UIL: it would cost between $15MM and $20MM per school to build individual stadiums. Further, at this spend, the stadiums would not meet the current needs of half the schools in the district! Now I know you’re probably one of those Common Core Yankees, but, down in fiscally conservative Texas $60MM for a nice shared facility makes more math sense than $80MM for inadequate stadiums. But, I’m sure a liberal Democrat such as yourself will figure out how somebody’s civil rights have been violated if their school doesn't have it's own stadium, no matter the cost. Again, Texans were way ahead of the curve on fiscal conservatism, didn’t need any RINOs, Tea Party wanna be Texans to come in and show us how the cow ate the cabbage! One stadium CHEAPER and NICER for every four schools, that's the solution a problem solver like Ronald Reagan would be proud of!

      Delete
    2. Raise the ticket prices on all football games to help pay for the stadium cost that we all ready have. I would like to know what is the real cost for each football game; power, lawn care, police, EMS, buses, cleaning crew ect.

      Delete
  5. KISD is making the teachers attend mandatory meetings on the bond. The Wi-Fi login for students is almost identical to the Pro-Bond PAC. KISD should not use the students and teachers as political pawns.
    Also, Baghdad Bob must have identified the $200,000 home price point in order to say the bond will cost only $10. The current median listing price of all homes for sale in the city limits of Katy is $386.637. Most of the signs of the developers that I have seen south of I-10 say homes from the$300.000s to One Million.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have you ever tried to figure out why the KatyISD board elections are not held with the general elections? I heard it was because they hope for a low turn out. I know in the past KatyISD has gotten into hot water because they use to tell the staff that if they didn't vote for the bonds then they could be let go because they would not have the money to pay them. I think that was in 2004.

      Delete
  6. Here is the answer to my debt question to the district:
    As presented in the Comptroller’s recommended format the dollar amount is $3.5B. However, that is not likely a true number as interest is either estimated, subject to refunding’s, or subject to change because of bond defeasances (paying off bonds early – which the district has done). The schedule below is more appropriate/realistic. For example, when filling out a credit application, it asks for the principal balance of the mortgage or car payment. Below illustrates that— considering the district will not “instantly” issue the entire authorization. Remember, districts sell bonds when they need the cash. This allows the value growth to keep up with the new debt which has basically allowed Katy ISD to maintain a $0.400 tax rate.
    I would trust the Texas Comptroller rather than the political speak that I received from KISD.

    ReplyDelete
  7. A bond is debt, and debt is a burden. The more Katy ISD places a burden on its constituents for their political expediency, the more likely they will not want to be under that burden and find somewhere else to live and work.

    It's like no one in Katy ISD or the political elite have ever read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.

    Thank you Katy LiberTea and Cyndi Lawrence for protecting the future of Katy!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Is this commitment to debt a Machiavellian scheme to drive the lower classes out of Katy? As Katy ISD takes on this great debt, taxes will necessarily be assessed. For those of us who make more than the average, the higher assessment will just mean that we will have to spend additional time proving a lower assessment. However, for those who are not skilled in contesting property taxes or willing to pay for help, this additional tax may drive them out of the district. Additionally, people who might have moved to the district may be kept out by these draconian tax rates.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am new to this ISD, in fact new to the state. I have never paid such high public education taxes as I do now (approx 6,000.00 p.a.) While trying to research the pros/cons of voting for/against this bond issue (I voted no last year for the new stadium build), I continue to note the very high administrative costs within Katy ISD. Have these costs been agreed to by taxpayers? The Katy ISD superintendent's salary is north of $300,000.00 p.a., and I am sure many of his senior staff make sizable 6-figure salaries. These salaries are too high for public school administrators. Remember, there is only so much tax any one taxpayer will pay before said tax payer says enough is enough. The 2014 bond issue will increase our local taxes, and therefore I will vote no.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We have five football couches making $125,000+ Most kids don't play football and maybe we should make that a pay to play sport in KatyISD.

      Delete
  10. Thank you Cindy Lawrence for re-affirming again why most of us voted this bond down last year! I will vote NO again and will continue to hold this bond comittee acountable for their inability to listen & wasteful spending of our tax dollars!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I have lived in the KatyISD area for 13 years. I have seen at less 7 bond request in that amount of time. KatyISD always say the bonds are for the kids but that is not the cases. These bonds are gifts to the home builders by the property owners. KatyISD bonds have always been backed by the home builders. They have gone above and beyond in making people think that KatyISD needs more money in order to run it's yearly operations. This is simply not the case because KatyISD gets more and more money each year as the property goes up and more things are being built. If you vote for the bonds you are wanting more growth and more new schools to be added to the outer areas of KatyISD. With that comes more apartments and people. In order to get more people to vote for the bonds KatyISD always says most schools need some kind of repair and that if you don't vote for the bond then your school will loss out. Did you know that under law KatyISD does not have to spend bond money on the items that are telling you they are going to spend the money on? I still don't understand why they want to build a new stadium next to the other one when they don't even own the land yet? I would like to know who owns that land and how much is KatyISD wanting to pay for it? It seems like putting to stadiums next to each other would be a huge security risk, bring lots more traffic to the area and make it so that noise is a big factor to the homes in that area. I'M VOTING NO!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Well, I hope everyone enjoys the stadiums, the trailers at Wood Creek, the BS at Obra, the elevated taxes, and the rest of the idiotic ideas that place most ideas in front of basic education for our children. Need not wonder why we have fallen so far academically in the world rankings. I personally have had enough and will be moving. Good luck.

    ReplyDelete