You realize how voting no is literally "punishing the kids," right? Do you want them to have adequate locker room-athletic training space or not?
Asking a 3rd time? CSISD School Board Approves A Third Attempt To...
55,761 Views |
524 Replies |
Last: 19 days ago by welborn
It seems most citizens want our students to have better facilities/opportunities/whatever the case may be. Most are fed up with perceived frivolous spending by the powers that be. Why can we not use some of our existing tax base/budget to begin these upgrades? Texans are fed up with property tax and increases in said taxes.
I ask this without admittingly reading any of the bond proposal.
I ask this without admittingly reading any of the bond proposal.
"Why can we not use some of our existing tax base/budget to begin these upgrades?"
Because, outside of voter approver bonds, school districts can only increase tax revenue up to 2.5% per year by state law. If inflation and raises are more than that the school district is SOL. Almost 85% of CSISD's budget is salaries.
Because, outside of voter approver bonds, school districts can only increase tax revenue up to 2.5% per year by state law. If inflation and raises are more than that the school district is SOL. Almost 85% of CSISD's budget is salaries.
George Costanza said:
"Why can we not use some of our existing tax base/budget to begin these upgrades?"
Because, outside of voter approver bonds, school districts can only increase tax revenue up to 2.5% per year by state law. If inflation and raises are more than that the school district is SOL. Almost 85% of CSISD's budget is salaries.
Are you really trying to to say the only possible way for CSISD to maintain (and even upgrade) facilities is through additional loans?
And despite the growth in number of students, households etc., you are saying the revenue hasn't been managed effectively to maintain and upgrade facilities?
I guess in a city with a Taj Firehall, and a Taj City Hall, it isn't surprising some would argue for a Taj Schoolhall.
How do I explain this to you in a way you can easily understand?
This ain't gunna build nuttin fancy.
This ain't gunna build nuttin fancy.
nought said:George Costanza said:
"Why can we not use some of our existing tax base/budget to begin these upgrades?"
Because, outside of voter approver bonds, school districts can only increase tax revenue up to 2.5% per year by state law. If inflation and raises are more than that the school district is SOL. Almost 85% of CSISD's budget is salaries.
Are you really trying to to say the only possible way for CSISD to maintain (and even upgrade) facilities is through additional loans?
And despite the growth in number of students, households etc., you are saying the revenue hasn't been managed effectively to maintain and upgrade facilities?
I guess in a city with a Taj Firehall, and a Taj City Hall, it isn't surprising some would argue for a Taj Schoolhall.
Yes. Things like making sure that female athletes have a separate space from male athletes, making sure the weight room is safe, ensuring athletes aren't injured on the field and having running water for concessions is 100% asking for a Taj Schoolhall. Totally.
4lilmonkeys said:
Yes. Things like making sure that female athletes have a separate space from male athletes, making sure the weight room is safe, ensuring athletes aren't injured on the field and having running water for concessions is 100% asking for a Taj Schoolhall. Totally.
Gosh, those are all really important things! I completely agree that they are needed. My question is why they haven't been planned for over the years given the current (ever-growing) budget and revenue? Why are things in such a state that female athletes don't already have a separate space, the weight room apparently isn't safe, the field is such that athletes might get injured, and concessions apparently don't have running water?
If I were running a business, and employees might get injured, male and female employees didn't have separate facilities, people might get injured in the hallways, and there wasn't running water in the break room, I would probably be fired as the manager of that business. If I were running a business, I would be really hesitant to go to shareholders to ask for money for things I hadn't been taking care of given the amount of money that has already been flowing into the system.
nought said:George Costanza said:
"Why can we not use some of our existing tax base/budget to begin these upgrades?"
Because, outside of voter approver bonds, school districts can only increase tax revenue up to 2.5% per year by state law. If inflation and raises are more than that the school district is SOL. Almost 85% of CSISD's budget is salaries.
Are you really trying to to say the only possible way for CSISD to maintain (and even upgrade) facilities is through additional loans?
And despite the growth in number of students, households etc., you are saying the revenue hasn't been managed effectively to maintain and upgrade facilities?
I guess in a city with a Taj Firehall, and a Taj City Hall, it isn't surprising some would argue for a Taj Schoolhall.
That is how the legislative divides school funding. If you bring too much in per student, you pay it back to the state instead of getting to save it. If you need to fund projects, the district has to go back to the voters to pass a bond. The state has chipped away significantly at what districts are allowed to hold onto. I'm sure every district in the state would prefer to tax an extra $1/$100 of value to ensure they had money in the bank for maintenance, operations, etc.
Bonds itself are not the enemy. It just comes down to whether the bonds are appropriate for appropriate school items.
One example that my tired brain comes up with now is CSHS' baseball field. Supposedly, it has major drainage and erosion issues that have existed since construction. If that is true, then the engineers or contractor should be on the hook for making it right, not the taxpayer.Tailgate88 said:You're throwing out some pretty huge general accusations that seem to imply the entire construction of CSHS was botched or something. As pointed out above, this is a nearly fifteen year old school and it was a massive project. Besides the drainage issues, what else are you referring to? If you have information about other botched construction issues at CSHS please share.CS78 said:I agree with your sarcasm of not holding the kids responsible. But then that falls back on the admin to show the voters what was done so that it doesn't happen again.Tailgate88 said:Great idea! Let's punish students with woefully inadequate facilities who can't even get treatment and can't even practice for 1/3 of the season because the facilities are so bad at Consol because one part of a multi-multi-million dollar construction project across town didn't go perfectly. It's definitely those kids' fault.CS78 said:
Read it. All I see in there is a bunch of marketing. And no one addresses the issue of why the original construction at CSHS wasn't done right. They dont get to just spend a ton of money and then expect more when they waste what was given them.
Who inspected the construction?
Was the construction company compensated for the bad work?
Who signed off on paying them?
If they were paid, what legal actions were taken to regain the taxpayers money?
What CSISD employees were fired as a result of millions of dollars being wasted?
If not, are those people still employed in the same role and likely to make the same mistakes again?
Overall, what steps have been taken so that money is not wasted again and again?
It's up to the school district to put those questions to rest if they want people's trust. It would go a lot further than trying to play people's emotions with the "wont you think of the children" card.
What "millions of dollars" were wasted? Please give us some examples of money being "wasted again and again". This is an honest question, I fully admit I may not be aware of these issues of which you speak.
Ok, that's a good example and while I was aware there were issues that needed to be repaired, I didn't know that they have been there since the beginning. As a taxpayer, I would love to know what happened there and if the situation was addressed with the construction company or not. Hopefully we can get some answers on that.chickencoupe16 said:
One example that my tired brain comes up with now is CSHS' baseball field. Supposedly, it has major drainage and erosion issues that have existed since construction. If that is true, then the engineers or contractor should be on the hook for making it right, not the taxpayer.
However, let's say I buy my son a truck when he turns 16 so he can drive to school. It turns out the truck is a lemon, and I sue the dealer. We go to court for who knows how long before the case gets decided. It may take years for the case to play out. In the mean time, my son needs a way to get to school. It's not his fault the truck was a lemon. He can't wait months or years for the court case to play out - he needs a truck to drive now. If I have the means to, I'm going to buy him another vehicle because he needs one now.
Our student athletes need and deserve adequate facilities now. They can't wait years for the school district to litigate a construction issue across town to wait for a possible judgement to come in from the construction company to pay it. In fact, I'm not even sure the school could use those funds to pay for another construction project - I don't understand the intricacies of what funds can and cannot be used for what.
Quote:
Our student athletes need and deserve adequate facilities now.
Then volunteer your money for it, instead of mine.
CSHS opened in 2012. They've had 11 years to litigate it. So either the issues haven't been a day 1 thing or they think the can have the tax payer fund yet another project that will not be built properly.
The press box at the CSHS football field supposedly has a roof leak so bad that it's better to rebuild it entirely. Why was the leak allowed to exist for so long that it ruined the entire press box? Is this another day 1 issue?
The press box at the CSHS football field supposedly has a roof leak so bad that it's better to rebuild it entirely. Why was the leak allowed to exist for so long that it ruined the entire press box? Is this another day 1 issue?
turf baseball and softball fields are "fancy".Independence H-D said:
How do I explain this to you in a way you can easily understand?
This ain't gunna build nuttin fancy.
They will also save roughly 250k/year in maintenance and rental fees.victory said:turf baseball and softball fields are "fancy".Independence H-D said:
How do I explain this to you in a way you can easily understand?
This ain't gunna build nuttin fancy.
You do understand that you won't actually be paying more in taxes. The tax rate will not change to cover the debt incurred on this bond.
The bond structure is beneficial as it allows voters to have control over expenditures. Such oversight would not be feasible with a "tax and save" approach. Without the necessity of a bond for this type of expense, numerous lower priority projects could be approved, resulting in even higher taxes.
Well aware of the cost analysis of turf fields. Just responding to the "nuttin fancy". There is a reason that not all districts have turf fields. It is a luxury, not a necessity no matter how you slice it.Stucco said:They will also save roughly 250k/year in maintenance and rental fees.victory said:turf baseball and softball fields are "fancy".Independence H-D said:
How do I explain this to you in a way you can easily understand?
This ain't gunna build nuttin fancy.
oh the ole tax rate not changing argument. throw in some safety and its for the children and we'll be good i guess, LOL. Money and fairness for all!Independence H-D said:
You do understand that you won't actually be paying more in taxes. The tax rate will not change to cover the debt incurred on this bond.
[Make your post again without being insulting and it will stay on the thread. -Staff]
If that is true it is an incredibly bad way to fund things over time. Instead of saving & growing money through a CD or other interest bearing account you are borrowing money constantly to upgrade/upkeep your properties.Stucco said:
The bond structure is beneficial as it allows voters to have control over expenditures. Such oversight would not be feasible with a "tax and save" approach. Without the necessity of a bond for this type of expense, numerous lower priority projects could be approved, resulting in even higher taxes.
I know they claim the bond will not change the current tax rate but someone is still going to be making money from the loan. Thus making any projects funded through a bond more expensive than they would be otherwise.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Vote however you like. Voice your support. Don't spread misinformation.
Independence H-D said:
Vote however you like. Voice your support. Don't spread misinformation.
Where is his misinformation? On the other hand, you're telling people that the tax rate won't change which is uninformed at best and malicious at worst.
chickencoupe16 said:Independence H-D said:
Vote however you like. Voice your support. Don't spread misinformation.
Where is his misinformation? On the other hand, you're telling people that the tax rate won't change which is uninformed at best and malicious at worst.
Incorrect....
https://www.csisd.org/board/past_bond___v_a_t_r_e_elections/2024_bond_information/
Just to be clear. you are accusing CSISD of posting a bald-faced lie on their website?chickencoupe16 said:Independence H-D said:
Vote however you like. Voice your support. Don't spread misinformation.
Where is his misinformation? On the other hand, you're telling people that the tax rate won't change which is uninformed at best and malicious at worst.
https://www.csisd.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=1301524&pageId=100057141
Please explain how they are wrong for us uninformed and malicious types.Quote:
Q: HOW MUCH WILL THE TAX RATE INCREASE FROM THIS BOND?
A: CSISD can fund all of the projects in Bond 2024 while maintaining a stable tax rate. The 2023 Bond package had an estimated two-cent increase to the current CSISD Interest and Sinking Tax Rate of $0.2630 per $100 valuation. The estimated increase from the 2023 Bond will remain stable for the 2024 Bond projects.
The way I understand that statement is that there is a bond that is ending it's term so this new bond will just take the place of that payment.Tailgate88 said:Just to be clear. you are accusing CSISD of posting a bald-faced lie on their website?chickencoupe16 said:Independence H-D said:
Vote however you like. Voice your support. Don't spread misinformation.
Where is his misinformation? On the other hand, you're telling people that the tax rate won't change which is uninformed at best and malicious at worst.
https://www.csisd.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=1301524&pageId=100057141Please explain how they are wrong for us uniformed and malicious types.Quote:
Q: HOW MUCH WILL THE TAX RATE INCREASE FROM THIS BOND?
A: CSISD can fund all of the projects in Bond 2024 while maintaining a stable tax rate. The 2023 Bond package had an estimated two-cent increase to the current CSISD Interest and Sinking Tax Rate of $0.2630 per $100 valuation. The estimated increase from the 2023 Bond will remain stable for the 2024 Bond projects.
Is that correct?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
NOBODY is asking for that.nought said:George Costanza said:
"Why can we not use some of our existing tax base/budget to begin these upgrades?"
Because, outside of voter approver bonds, school districts can only increase tax revenue up to 2.5% per year by state law. If inflation and raises are more than that the school district is SOL. Almost 85% of CSISD's budget is salaries.
Are you really trying to to say the only possible way for CSISD to maintain (and even upgrade) facilities is through additional loans?
And despite the growth in number of students, households etc., you are saying the revenue hasn't been managed effectively to maintain and upgrade facilities?
I guess in a city with a Taj Firehall, and a Taj City Hall, it isn't surprising some would argue for a Taj Schoolhall.
People using that statement are speaking out of ignorance.
Because of the staff edit: I'm saying "ignorance" as a lack of knowledge about facts. I'm not talking about the intelligence of the people making the statement.
KidDoc said:The way I understand that statement is that there is a bond that is ending it's term so this new bond will just take the place of that payment.Tailgate88 said:Just to be clear. you are accusing CSISD of posting a bald-faced lie on their website?chickencoupe16 said:Independence H-D said:
Vote however you like. Voice your support. Don't spread misinformation.
Where is his misinformation? On the other hand, you're telling people that the tax rate won't change which is uninformed at best and malicious at worst.
https://www.csisd.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=1301524&pageId=100057141Please explain how they are wrong for us uniformed and malicious types.Quote:
Q: HOW MUCH WILL THE TAX RATE INCREASE FROM THIS BOND?
A: CSISD can fund all of the projects in Bond 2024 while maintaining a stable tax rate. The 2023 Bond package had an estimated two-cent increase to the current CSISD Interest and Sinking Tax Rate of $0.2630 per $100 valuation. The estimated increase from the 2023 Bond will remain stable for the 2024 Bond projects.
Is that correct?
Not exactly...
Bonds end periodically and in fact there will be multiple conclusions in the next 10 years. From what I understand there is roughly 325 million dollars in debt for the district. Over half (55+%) of that will be paid off in the next 10 years. That could be sooner as opportunities present themselves to refinance the debt which could save millions.
I believe our school district has been a pretty good steward of the funds they have been blessed to receive.
Do you honestly believe that these items have never, ever, once been brought to the voters attention before? This is what happens when voters continue to say no- you've kicked the can down the road, and here we are. And you can continue to kick that can down the road, but don't be shocked when it shows up again with an even higher price tag. The vote may not go your way then.nought said:4lilmonkeys said:
Yes. Things like making sure that female athletes have a separate space from male athletes, making sure the weight room is safe, ensuring athletes aren't injured on the field and having running water for concessions is 100% asking for a Taj Schoolhall. Totally.
Gosh, those are all really important things! I completely agree that they are needed. My question is why they haven't been planned for over the years given the current (ever-growing) budget and revenue? Why are things in such a state that female athletes don't already have a separate space, the weight room apparently isn't safe, the field is such that athletes might get injured, and concessions apparently don't have running water?
If I were running a business, and employees might get injured, male and female employees didn't have separate facilities, people might get injured in the hallways, and there wasn't running water in the break room, I would probably be fired as the manager of that business. If I were running a business, I would be really hesitant to go to shareholders to ask for money for things I hadn't been taking care of given the amount of money that has already been flowing into the system.
There is a huge difference between running a business, with revenue you generate yourself and money that comes directly TO YOU via sales, etc. and school district funding with money that comes from the state AND from taxpayers. This has been explained to you, and others, multiple times on this thread and in other threads- so either you are ignoring it or you just like throwing out sarcastic answers to things you don't agree with.
Asking for basic needs to be met, safety features and space that allows for future growth is a Taj Nothing. You can keep throwing that fun little term around, but it's just not true. The district, parents, and students have all laid out all of the information needed to make an informed decision. Just because you don't like that information doesn't mean it hasn't been provided.
I don't personally care how you vote- regardless of how this plays out, I'll still be giving my time and money to CSISD well after my kids have graduated. Their success long-term protects this community long-term and that's more important to me than saving what amounts to the cost of a DQ dipped cone every month (if even that).
Because money is not free and there is no scenario where you take out a loan and do not have to repay it (unless Biden has his way, but that's another issue). If this bond passes, the tax rate may not change from what it is currently but it will not decrease as it will if the bond does not pass. Currently may tax rate is 2X and will drop to 1X on 1/1/25 (BS date used as an example). If the bond passes, it will not drop to 1X on 1/1/25 but will remain at 2X. So no, it won't raise is from what it is now but it will raise it from what it should be.Tailgate88 said:Just to be clear. you are accusing CSISD of posting a bald-faced lie on their website?chickencoupe16 said:Independence H-D said:
Vote however you like. Voice your support. Don't spread misinformation.
Where is his misinformation? On the other hand, you're telling people that the tax rate won't change which is uninformed at best and malicious at worst.
https://www.csisd.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=1301524&pageId=100057141Please explain how they are wrong for us uninformed and malicious types.Quote:
Q: HOW MUCH WILL THE TAX RATE INCREASE FROM THIS BOND?
A: CSISD can fund all of the projects in Bond 2024 while maintaining a stable tax rate. The 2023 Bond package had an estimated two-cent increase to the current CSISD Interest and Sinking Tax Rate of $0.2630 per $100 valuation. The estimated increase from the 2023 Bond will remain stable for the 2024 Bond projects.
Saying that your taxes won't go up is disingenuous because it makes taxpayers think voting yes is a no brainer because it's free money. The motivation and knowledge behind the statement is where the range from uninformed to malicious is. Do I think CSISD has posted a bald-faced lie on their website? No. Are they playing loose with their words to confuse the issue for voters? Absolutely.
You wanted them to be more informative. They put it all out there for you. Take it as you like it. Enjoy your spin cycle.
That's not more informative as it's a talking point they've been using since the last bond proposal.Independence H-D said:
You wanted them to be more informative. They put it all out there for you. Take it as you like it. Enjoy your spin cycle.
And even if it was new, how is misleading people more informative?
chickencoupe16 said:That's not more informative as it's a talking point they've been using since the last bond proposal.Independence H-D said:
You wanted them to be more informative. They put it all out there for you. Take it as you like it. Enjoy your spin cycle.
They've built a website to share all of this information. They have printed information for distribution. They've done a fantastic job of disseminating information. That's being more informative.
Pretty far down in the weeds now with the argument of what is informative and what is not.
But none of this information answers many people's questions of: 1) why have these issues existed for so long without maintenance 2) why have some of these issues existed literally since construction without a contractor or engineer being held accountable?Independence H-D said:chickencoupe16 said:That's not more informative as it's a talking point they've been using since the last bond proposal.Independence H-D said:
You wanted them to be more informative. They put it all out there for you. Take it as you like it. Enjoy your spin cycle.
They've built a website to share all of this information. They have printed information for distribution. They've done a fantastic job of disseminating information. That's being more informative.
Pretty far down in the weeds now with the argument of what is informative and what is not.
Vote how you want but stop misleading people to think that voting yes will not make them pay more money in taxes than voting no will.
I think those questions have been answered. It's apparent now that they can't be answered to your satisfaction.
Enjoy your extra dairy Queen dipped cone a month (even though that wasn't really a true statement).
What's that compared to kids health and safety anyway.....
Enjoy your extra dairy Queen dipped cone a month (even though that wasn't really a true statement).
What's that compared to kids health and safety anyway.....
[You have already been warned about being rude on this thread and now you are on a break. Be respectful or do not post on this board. -Staff]