Asking a 3rd time? CSISD School Board Approves A Third Attempt To...

60,272 Views | 528 Replies | Last: 22 days ago by George Costanza
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not certain. May have the number off, but I don't think so. Also, unsure if this included the addition travel costs. I can tell you this, the district will be happy to provide you the number. Simply email or call them.

Update: I did have the number wrong. It was approx. $60,000
t-rex
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Independence H-D said:

Yeah, it's a horrible thing for community to invest in their best natural resources. Our children should not be invested in at all.

Keep this up and eventually our school system will be as beautiful and successful as Hearne.
Its not an investment in children, it is to pay for athletic facilities
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
t-rex said:

Independence H-D said:

Yeah, it's a horrible thing for community to invest in their best natural resources. Our children should not be invested in at all.

Keep this up and eventually our school system will be as beautiful and successful as Hearne.
Its not an investment in children, it is to pay for athletic facilities


The fact that you can't recognize that those are the same thing.....
foo00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think people -can- see it as the same thing and be unable to separate the pieces.

However, I also believe it's completely reasonable for people to -not- see nicer athletic fields, expedited training facilities, etc as core to the true purpose of schools which is educating our children (my opinion). It's "nice to have" less wait for PT or a rubdown, turf fields that drain in an hour or the like.. but is it -required-? No. It's not. No one is going to die, not graduate or get lower grades without those things.

More importantly, though, don't conflate the opinion of what can reasonably considered "optional" as "against investment in the children". Everyone is ignoring the bonds that -DID- pass last time. Security enhancements in an age of school shootings (and specifically post-Uvalde), additional learning tracks, technology investments, curriculum improvements. ALL of those things passed by overwhelming numbers (70/30). So, clearly at least 70% of us are "investing in the children".

But when 1 in 3 (-ish) of even -those- folks drew the line at unscrewing someone else's shoddy construction job.. or installing turf where grass will do.. or being OK to have to wait a little longer to get PT in an -OPTIONAL- sport? If it was a few kooks and you wanted to bang the "unreasonable" drum, fine. But that's a significant percentage.. maybe it is reasonable after all; even if you disagree.
TAMU1990
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
chickencoupe16 said:

Independence H-D said:

If I'm not mistaken CSISD spent $36,000 last year having to play on area fields other than their own. That'll add up quick.
After a quick Google search, construction of a turf field costs on average $780k. Grass costs $610k. Knowing that the current grass field requires repairs, let's budget half of the new construction costs ($305k) for that to repairs. So the difference is $475k. If College Station spent $36k on field rentals every year, it would take a little over 13 years to see a return on investment.

But another Google search tells us that the average field lasts 8-10 years. Let's call it 9 years. Over 9 years, turf field installation costs $151k more than rentals. At this number, I'm actually ok with voting yes on the bond BUT...

The amount of repairs to the existing field should be closer to ZERO if, as claimed, the erosion issues have existed from the beginning as the contractor or engineer should be on the hook for it. Now we need 22 years of rental costs to pay off the field which will need replacement ever 9 years.

But we can't pretend we don't need a new field and the cost is not zero, you say. I agree. But that is the fault of the district and I will not vote to give money to an organization that could not adequately manage the first construction just so they can bungle an even more expensive second project which will then lock us into to replacements every decade.








This is from today. You see the dirt? The dirt alone should be leveled and replaced every year to prevent different levels from the infield to the outfield (the dip you see between the infield and the grass). This is not happening. At a minimum the infield should be rebuilt every other year. The last time it happened was when the booster club paid for it before COVID. The kids lose practice time every single time it rains. It's not an expense a booster club should be paying for every year, or can necessary afford to do so.

This was the conditions after tarp pull today. Consol has a full sized infield tarp that goes into the outfield.
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You obviously haven't done any real investigation into the seriousness of the facility issues.
Hornbeck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just because folks don't want to spend on athletics, doesn't mean they won't say yes to academics.
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hornbeck said:

Just because folks don't want to send on athletics, doesn't mean they won't say yes to academics.


The student experience is holistic. It involves athletics and academics. They are intertwined. This is not just an "athletics" bond. This affects the VAST majority of students.
t-rex
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Independence H-D said:

t-rex said:

Independence H-D said:

Yeah, it's a horrible thing for community to invest in their best natural resources. Our children should not be invested in at all.

Keep this up and eventually our school system will be as beautiful and successful as Hearne.
Its not an investment in children, it is to pay for athletic facilities


The fact that you can't recognize that those are the same thing.....


I forgot this is Texags, if I don't agree with you it's because I don't get 'it'.

My reluctance the first time this was on the ballot was there were things like scoreboards, press boxes etc lumped into the spend and being described as critical for the students. Those are not critical for students or an investment in our kids. They aren't bad things but the marketing was disingenuous. If it had passed then so be it, no big deal.

At this point after the request has been declined twice already by voters is offensive. Add on to throat what must be material amounts of incremental costs for the two subsequent marketing pushes and goodwill with borderline voters like me is burned.
MelvinUdall
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Combining facility (sport) upgrades with genuine school/learning upgrades is disingenuous…do a bond for what you need for schools on its own…then comeback next year and do a bond for sports upgrades…they won't because it wouldn't pass.
chickencoupe16
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TAMU1990 said:

chickencoupe16 said:

Independence H-D said:

If I'm not mistaken CSISD spent $36,000 last year having to play on area fields other than their own. That'll add up quick.
After a quick Google search, construction of a turf field costs on average $780k. Grass costs $610k. Knowing that the current grass field requires repairs, let's budget half of the new construction costs ($305k) for that to repairs. So the difference is $475k. If College Station spent $36k on field rentals every year, it would take a little over 13 years to see a return on investment.

But another Google search tells us that the average field lasts 8-10 years. Let's call it 9 years. Over 9 years, turf field installation costs $151k more than rentals. At this number, I'm actually ok with voting yes on the bond BUT...

The amount of repairs to the existing field should be closer to ZERO if, as claimed, the erosion issues have existed from the beginning as the contractor or engineer should be on the hook for it. Now we need 22 years of rental costs to pay off the field which will need replacement ever 9 years.

But we can't pretend we don't need a new field and the cost is not zero, you say. I agree. But that is the fault of the district and I will not vote to give money to an organization that could not adequately manage the first construction just so they can bungle an even more expensive second project which will then lock us into to replacements every decade.








This is from today. You see the dirt? The dirt alone should be leveled and replaced every year to prevent different levels from the infield to the outfield (the dip you see between the infield and the grass). This is not happening. At a minimum the infield should be rebuilt every other year. The last time it happened was when the booster club paid for it before COVID. The kids lose practice time every single time it rains. It's not an expense a booster club should be paying for every year, or can necessary afford to do so.

This was the conditions after tarp pull today. Consol has a full sized infield tarp that goes into the
You know how often my high school rebuilt the infield? Not once in the 4 years I played, and our infield was just fine. I'm not saying Consol's field doesn't need work but I don't believe that an entire rebuild is necessary every other year. Even if it is, provide some actual numbers for your point if you want anyone to believe you. My post has numbers and I can provide a source if you really want but without numbers attached, your post is just more hand wringing over not getting your way.
doubledog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Independence H-D said:

Hornbeck said:

Just because folks don't want to send on athletics, doesn't mean they won't say yes to academics.


The student experience is holistic. It involves athletics and academics. They are intertwined. This is not just an "athletics" bond. This affects the VAST majority of students.
This is not true in many cases. There are many High Schools that do not have any athletic programs (at least not a football program) and they are doing just fine, in fact you could say many of these schools are much better academically

https://kicks105.com/the-ten-largest-texas-high-schools-without-a-football-program/.
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It is true in our case.
JP76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
City was spending 16 mil for 4 fields from scratch including all infrastructure.

And the cost is 13.2 to remodel 4 fields ?

turfman80
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"This is from today. You see the dirt? The dirt alone should be leveled and replaced every year to prevent different levels from the infield to the outfield (the dip you see between the infield and the grass). This is not happening. At a minimum the infield should be rebuilt every other year. The last time it happened was when the booster club paid for it before COVID. The kids lose practice time every single time it rains. It's not an expense a booster club should be paying for every year, or can necessary afford to do so."

Infield dirt can be added as needed, but there is no need to replace every year. Proper care during the season, including proper dragging to avoid pulling soil to high places and making the low areas worse, are very important. Pre season work to minimize or reduce the back lip to facilitate flow to the outfield, plus the added soil and proper dragging, will prevent major problems. One local high school has not had to rebuild any part of their baseball since construction over 20 years ago.
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.
MelvinUdall
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Independence H-D said:

Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.


As someone that had 3 kids active in sports through HS, this concern is the least of it…again, the role of the district is to educate kids, yes, sports play a part, but facility upgrades for sports should absolutely be the least of it all.
Mr.Short-termMemory
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MelvinUdall said:

Independence H-D said:

Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.


As someone that had 3 kids active in sports through HS, this concern is the least of it…again, the role of the district is to educate kids, yes, sports play a part, but facility upgrades for sports should absolutely be the least of it all.


Even the least needs to be updated at times.
4lilmonkeys
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MelvinUdall said:

Independence H-D said:

Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.


As someone that had 3 kids active in sports through HS, this concern is the least of it…again, the role of the district is to educate kids, yes, sports play a part, but facility upgrades for sports should absolutely be the least of it all.


You're right. I was totally fine with my kid sitting out in the hall covered in blood waiting to see the trainer after he was injured this morning during practice. Something a little extra space could easily solve, but I understand… it's just not necessary.
MelvinUdall
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4lilmonkeys said:

MelvinUdall said:

Independence H-D said:

Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.


As someone that had 3 kids active in sports through HS, this concern is the least of it…again, the role of the district is to educate kids, yes, sports play a part, but facility upgrades for sports should absolutely be the least of it all.


You're right. I was totally fine with my kid sitting out in the hall covered in blood waiting to see the trainer after he was injured this morning during practice. Something a little extra space could easily solve, but I understand… it's just not necessary.


Siggghhhh…ok…again, I have had all 3 of my kids go through varsity athletics, and recently, sorry I see this differently than you.
chickencoupe16
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
4lilmonkeys said:

MelvinUdall said:

Independence H-D said:

Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.


As someone that had 3 kids active in sports through HS, this concern is the least of it…again, the role of the district is to educate kids, yes, sports play a part, but facility upgrades for sports should absolutely be the least of it all.


You're right. I was totally fine with my kid sitting out in the hall covered in blood waiting to see the trainer after he was injured this morning during practice. Something a little extra space could easily solve, but I understand… it's just not necessary.
If this was actually an issue, why wasn't an ambulance called? If this was actually an issue, why aren't the trainers triaging cases appropriately? You present this like your kid nearly bled out but I'm guessing that's not the case.
JaxDad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If Consol is of age (it is) and we need to "enhance the student experience" why is it that only athletics is being targeted? Why not start with the band hall or maybe the woodshop? The non athletes deserve more too.
4lilmonkeys
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MelvinUdall said:

4lilmonkeys said:

MelvinUdall said:

Independence H-D said:

Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.


As someone that had 3 kids active in sports through HS, this concern is the least of it…again, the role of the district is to educate kids, yes, sports play a part, but facility upgrades for sports should absolutely be the least of it all.


You're right. I was totally fine with my kid sitting out in the hall covered in blood waiting to see the trainer after he was injured this morning during practice. Something a little extra space could easily solve, but I understand… it's just not necessary.


Siggghhhh…ok…again, I have had all 3 of my kids go through varsity athletics, and recently, sorry I see this differently than you.


It's the flippant "it's not necessary." And then when someone says "actually it is," there's yet another dumb reason to say "no, my kids did it and it wasn't an issue so it shouldn't be for anyone else" or "when I was their age I walked to football uphill both ways."

It's 2024. My kids won't even really benefit, but someone else's will. I have given thousands to CSISD in dollars and in time and I'll continue to do so after mine graduate. It's silly to me that we have to squabble over this but hand over millions in "technology" that will be obsolete in two years. But okay.
4lilmonkeys
How long do you want to ignore this user?
chickencoupe16 said:

4lilmonkeys said:

MelvinUdall said:

Independence H-D said:

Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.


As someone that had 3 kids active in sports through HS, this concern is the least of it…again, the role of the district is to educate kids, yes, sports play a part, but facility upgrades for sports should absolutely be the least of it all.


You're right. I was totally fine with my kid sitting out in the hall covered in blood waiting to see the trainer after he was injured this morning during practice. Something a little extra space could easily solve, but I understand… it's just not necessary.
If this was actually an issue, why wasn't an ambulance called? If this was actually an issue, why aren't the trainers triaging cases appropriately? You present this like your kid nearly bled out but I'm guessing that's not the case.


I cannot roll my eyes hard enough over this response.

The point was that we could easily add space and I don't know, maybe some chairs so kids aren't sitting on the floor waiting to see their trainer. If you translated that to "bleeding out, call an ambulance" that's on you.
MelvinUdall
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4lilmonkeys said:

MelvinUdall said:

4lilmonkeys said:

MelvinUdall said:

Independence H-D said:

Fields aren't the only issue. Baseball locker room is woefully inadequate. I believe there are 7 shower heads, 5 of which work on the regular, for over 50 kids. They practice during the day and have to try and get all those kids clean and back to classes.....

But, I guess being hygienic has no effect on learning.


As someone that had 3 kids active in sports through HS, this concern is the least of it…again, the role of the district is to educate kids, yes, sports play a part, but facility upgrades for sports should absolutely be the least of it all.


You're right. I was totally fine with my kid sitting out in the hall covered in blood waiting to see the trainer after he was injured this morning during practice. Something a little extra space could easily solve, but I understand… it's just not necessary.


Siggghhhh…ok…again, I have had all 3 of my kids go through varsity athletics, and recently, sorry I see this differently than you.


It's the flippant "it's not necessary." And then when someone says "actually it is," there's yet another dumb reason to say "no, my kids did it and it wasn't an issue so it shouldn't be for anyone else" or "when I was their age I walked to football uphill both ways."

It's 2024. My kids won't even really benefit, but someone else's will. I have given thousands to CSISD in dollars and in time and I'll continue to do so after mine graduate. It's silly to me that we have to squabble over this but hand over millions in "technology" that will be obsolete in two years. But okay.



We get it, you're all in…you are using you're "real" world examples as to why this bond needs to be approved, I totally get it…my last kid is exactly one year removed from what you're describing, and still, I wouldn't vote for this bond…to each their own…call me flippant, whatever…but I have just as recent experience as you do…so your response to me is just a flippant…
George Costanza
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Why not start with the band hall or maybe the woodshop?"

Both those things were taken care of in the past two bond elections with fine arts renovations and Phases 1 & 2 of the new CTE center.
doubledog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Independence H-D said:

It is true in our case.
Are you saying that our school academics is tied to our athletic programs? That should not be the case at any high school.
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
doubledog said:

Independence H-D said:

It is true in our case.
Are you saying that our school academics is tied to our athletic programs? That should not be the case at any high school.


That is the case in every high school. Students who participate in extracurricular activities tend to do much better academically. The percentage of kids that participate in athletics and tertiary programs such as band, athletic training, video production, etc is almost 80%.
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Also, there's a certain percentage of students that simply would not be in school without athletics and the structure it provides. All of the teachers that I've ever had and that I currently know just want a chance to reach a kid. They've got to be there for them to reach him. That's just the way it is.
foo00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not to exceed the scope of the discussion, but a) 80% seems high for athletics even including band but b) even if true, you should look up the definition of correlation vs causation and consider which this claim is. I don't think it's the one you think it is.
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't know how I can explain it any simpler. Vote for it or don't. I'm tired.
doubledog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Independence H-D said:

doubledog said:

Independence H-D said:

It is true in our case.
Are you saying that our school academics is tied to our athletic programs? That should not be the case at any high school.


That is the case in every high school. Students who participate in extracurricular activities tend to do much better academically. The percentage of kids that participate in athletics and tertiary programs such as band, athletic training, video production, etc is almost 80%.
Extracurricular activities like chess club, yes.. Sports not so much.
Independence H-D
How long do you want to ignore this user?
doubledog said:

Independence H-D said:

doubledog said:

Independence H-D said:

It is true in our case.
Are you saying that our school academics is tied to our athletic programs? That should not be the case at any high school.


That is the case in every high school. Students who participate in extracurricular activities tend to do much better academically. The percentage of kids that participate in athletics and tertiary programs such as band, athletic training, video production, etc is almost 80%.
Extracurricular activities like chess club, yes.. Sports not so much.



Well.......

I would agree with you.
But, then we would both be wrong
Tailgate88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Independence H-D said:

I don't know how I can explain it any simpler. Vote for it or don't. I'm tired.
That's where I was at a few days ago.
claydeezy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Shout out to both CSHS and Consol softball teams on advancing past the area round of the playoffs tonight! Really exciting for those kids from College Station, TX to play their playoff home games in Navasota and Caldwell respectively.

Let that sink in, pun intended.

These bond threads, much like our local softball and baseball fields after 2 days of rain, are overrun with muck.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.