I love threads like this.

To me bond elections are one of the great things about America/states/counties/districts. It's pretty much as purely democratic as you can get.

"Let's ask the tax payers if they want to pay some more taxes". If yes? Boom…let's go. If no? Fair enough…a majority didn't want it. We'll adjust, edit, and ask you guys again later. All those "palaces" that people are bi****** about in Frisco and Prosper ISD were voter approved….the voting majority said "yes please".

I'm the one *****ing about the palaces and I completely understand how it works. As ChoppinD's said this stuff will pass. I'm guessing at around 78-80%.

I am in the "no" part of your post - we do need schools, buses, infrastructure overhauls but I am voting no to ask them to rebudget/retool and bring it in line with something more reasonable. The bond that funded the current stadium was in 2007 and wasn't open until 2019. these bonds will be exhausted much sooner but it still will apply to the many waves of future residents/taxpayers.

at least the board voted to lower the tax rate which will save me $900 this year but will be gone next year when valuations continue to climb.

That's totally fair and I respect that.

I just get cracked up at people making comments like "these schools are out of control building this stuff" and "the districts are shoving this stuff down our throats", or "the boards are just scamming tax payers with the finishes on these buildings". All while the boards/schools/districts can't do any of this stuff without voter approval. To those people I say "Yell at your neighbor…the board asked, more neighbors than not approved…they proceeded."

It's typically a ridiculously transparent process.

I have great neighbors but a majority are in the dont care camp rather than the yes or no camp. I'm definitely in a losing battle.

Unfortunately a majority of people are stupid and easily swayed by low effort, emotional arguments. They get convinced that unless you vote for the bond that represents a proposal with buildings far more expensive than is necessary you must hate the children.

Fenrir said:

---

Unfortunately a majority of people are stupid and easily swayed by low effort, emotional arguments. They get convinced that unless you vote for the bond that represents a proposal with buildings far more expensive than is necessary you must hate the children.

---

And yet their vote counts equal to yours. Welcome to freedom/democracy.

I told some anti-bond people in our area that they're free to use the same tactics and appeal to low effort, emotional votes going the other way, but predictably they didn't. They were too lazy compared to the pro-bond people and mainly just wanted to gripe about it without working hard against it.

Do you have an example of a low effort, emotion based argument against a bond for being too expensive? You hate the kids unless you make them go to school in portables? I'm not sure your current argument stands up to scrutiny.

I don't disagree that a lot of people just want to complain without putting in real effort but overcoming the laziness of people that accept emotional arguments is an uphill climb.

Fenrir said:

---

Do you have an example of a low effort, emotion based argument against a bond for being too expensive? You hate the kids unless you make them go to school in portables? I'm not sure your current argument stands up to scrutiny.

I don't disagree that a lot of people just want to complain without putting in real effort but overcoming the laziness of people that accept emotional arguments is an uphill climb.

---

Absolutely: every business owner in the district (rent house owner included), from a math stand point, would likely push back heavily on school taxes if they understand how they disproportionally carry the load and since homesteading limits aren't applicable to them. Bond packages typically pass because of the time of year the election is held, due to low turn outs other than those that are fully vested. Those tied to education are vested in multiple ways, those not tied to it are typically unaware of even when the election is being held. The anti-tax crowd has the single easiest platform from which to scream: they're adding 2.5 billion of debt here locally and your taxes are going to go up!!! That is easy to say, tends to generate conservative and financial emotion, and angers people that would rather spend money on something else.

Those are the easy stances.

Got get 'em tiger!

I just wish bonds were discussed with honesty - statements like, taxes will not go up or this bond means you go to the coffee store one fewer time per month are mind numbing.

taxes don't go up for the district unless they up the rate... they only set the rate... it's the county that assesses the value.. that goes up and I think that's going up regardless of a bond election.

Stive said:

---

Fenrir said:

---

Do you have an example of a low effort, emotion based argument against a bond for being too expensive? You hate the kids unless you make them go to school in portables? I'm not sure your current argument stands up to scrutiny.

I don't disagree that a lot of people just want to complain without putting in real effort but overcoming the laziness of people that accept emotional arguments is an uphill climb.

---

Absolutely: every business owner in the district (rent house owner included), from a math stand point, would likely push back heavily on school taxes if they understand how they disproportionally carry the load and since homesteading limits aren't applicable to them. Bond packages typically pass because of the time of year the election is held, due to low turn outs other than those that are fully vested. Those tied to education are vested in multiple ways, those not tied to it are typically unaware of even when the election is being held. The anti-tax crowd has the single easiest platform from which to scream: they're adding 2.5 billion of debt here locally and your taxes are going to go up!!! That is easy to say, tends to generate conservative and financial emotion, and angers people that would rather spend money on something else.

Those are the easy stances.

Got get 'em tiger!

---

Hard disagree with this being the easiest argument. This really only sells well in more rural areas where there isn't a ton of money. The argument that buildings are overly extravagant simply doesn't hit home in places where the population is made up of people who focus their lives on keeping up with the Jones'.

Fenrir said:

---

Stive said:

---

Fenrir said:

---

Do you have an example of a low effort, emotion based argument against a bond for being too expensive? You hate the kids unless you make them go to school in portables? I'm not sure your current argument stands up to scrutiny.

I don't disagree that a lot of people just want to complain without putting in real effort but overcoming the laziness of people that accept emotional arguments is an uphill climb.

---

Absolutely: every business owner in the district (rent house owner included), from a math stand point, would likely push back heavily on school taxes if they understand how they disproportionally carry the load and since homesteading limits aren't applicable to them. Bond packages typically pass because of the time of year the election is held, due to low turn outs other than those that are fully vested. Those tied to education are vested in multiple ways, those not tied to it are typically unaware of even when the election is being held. The anti-tax crowd has the single easiest platform from which to scream: they're adding 2.5 billion of debt here locally and your taxes are going to go up!!! That is easy to say, tends to generate conservative and financial emotion, and angers people that would rather spend money on something else.

Those are the easy stances.

Got get 'em tiger!

---

Hard disagree with this being the easiest argument. This really only sells well in more rural areas where there isn't a ton of money. The argument that buildings are overly extravagant simply doesn't hit home in places where the population is made up of people who focus their lives on keeping up with the Jones'.

---

Them not agreeing with you doesn't mean it's not an easy emotional argument to make. If more homeowners in your area have kids than don't, and those homeowners don't care about the tax hikes, that's one thing. It simply means there are more of them that buy the other emotional argument more than the one you're making. Doesn't mean it's not an easy argument.

For every family under 65 that doesn't have kids, for every business owner that owns a building/land in the area, it's a simple and direct pitch. Doesn't necessarily mean they'll listen to it (lots of people I know don't fall for the emotional pitch from the pro bond people) but you typically don't have to stir up that many people to defeat a bond since there's usually such a small percentage of the people that vote

I'm not aware of any palaces in Frisco. The schools are nice, but outside of a nice open foyer area, the two newest high schools are pretty vanilla. Also, Frisco had a failed bond probably about 6 years ago. The superintendent left and the new guy retooled it and got it passed.

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

taxes don't go up for the district unless they up the rate... they only set the rate... it's the county that assesses the value.. that goes up and I think that's going up regardless of a bond election.

---

Semantics. The ISD is the taxing authority - they can reduce rates to hold taxes flat.

The Collective said:

---

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

taxes don't go up for the district unless they up the rate... they only set the rate... it's the county that assesses the value.. that goes up and I think that's going up regardless of a bond election.

---

Semantics. The ISD is the taxing authority - they can reduce rates to hold taxes flat.

---

They reduced rates by 13.5%. Not bad.

The stadium (prop C) didn't pass according to early results. I just received this email. Oh, and I didn't finance my golf cart, and I don't judge my neighbors….

Voters approve $2.7 Billion for new schools, safety and security, and a performing arts center

The Prosper ISD community overwhelmingly approved a $2.7 billion investment for new schools, safety and security, and a performing arts center on November 7, 2023.

Prosper ISD Superintendent Dr. Holly Ferguson stated, "We are profoundly grateful for the overwhelming support shown by our community. The 2023 Bond isn't just an investment in the present; it is a commitment that will resonate positively within our community for generations to come."

While the preliminary results from Collin County and Denton County affirm the passing of Propositions A, B, and D, it's important to note that these results are pending official canvassing. Texas law mandates this process to ensure the accuracy and inclusion of every valid vote. The Board of Trustees has tentatively scheduled the canvass of votes for Monday, November 13, 2023, at the regularly scheduled board meeting. The agenda for this meeting will be posted by 5 pm on Friday, November 10, 2023.

Now that the people's voice has been heard, Prosper ISD is prepared to embark on the meticulous planning of construction timelines and project schedules. Proposition C, the second districtwide stadium, was not approved by voters. The Board of Trustees will determine next steps for that facility.

Board of Trustees President Bill Beavers conveyed gratitude, stating, "The overwhelming support for this community-driven Bond proposal is truly heartening. We are enthusiastic about prudently managing these bond resources for essential projects that will benefit our children and the community at large."

The journey towards this monumental decision started earlier in the year when a Long Range Planning Committee, consisting of parents, educators, staff, and community leaders, meticulously analyzed the district's current and future needs. Their extensive work led to a comprehensive bond recommendation that the Prosper ISD Board of Trustees endorsed.

Approving three bond propositions is poised to be a transformative step without any increase in the tax rate. It will maintain a tax rate lower than that of 2021 and notably $0.41 lower than in 2014.

Prosper ISD, one of the fastest-growing school districts in Texas, enrolls approximately 3,400 new students annually. From a mere 1,000 students and three campuses in 2002, the district has grown exponentially to nearly 28,000 students across 25 campuses in 2023.

UNOFFICIAL RESULTS
Proposition A
For 66%, Against 34%

Proposition B
For 65%, Against 35%

Proposition C
For 46%, Against 54%

Proposition D
For 57%, Against 43%

Gonna be some pissed off sports parents. Youth leagues are going to take a huge hit from PropC not passing. No more Friday night lights.

Saturday varsity games and Thursday varsity games.

It was also going to have a track, since the existing stadium doesn't have one.

Oh I know. This is a big blow for prospers desire to be a premiere sports community.

The fact the performing arts center passed pretty easily shows the type of transplants moving in. Sad.

Sports are the front porch of the school.

I don't agree w that entirely. My daughter is in dance and we voted yes due to the fact that Prosper has nothing to offer for all the dance/cheer shows. We have to go over to McKinney for theirs every year. This would allow a venue for dance/theatre/cheer.

For the stadium, I just don't think people were able to look past the price tag. When Prosper is up to 4 6A high schools in 2-3 years, another stadium is going to be needed.

Short sighted by the community. We need a stadium by the time the 4th high school is opened... Fall of 2025. They should've been breaking ground on it pretty soon. Starting another bond raising process in 2 years is dumb - duplicative cost on marketing, advertising, and outreach. The district spent a lot of resources on this bond getting through.

This will lead to big issues with youth sports, band practice, drill team, etc. It isn't just football. People also forget that Children's has a state of the art sports broadcasting production facility for kids wanting to get into that line of work - it isn't just about playing football - Texas communities often revolve around football.

Having four 6A schools in < 2 years is going to be a huge problem. People scoff and go "gee golly, well Frisco only has 1 stadium"... they get to use the Star, for free. And they play tons of varsity games on weekdays.

Big time programs (which PHS has been for some time now), don't play on Saturdays or Thursdays, IMO. Black eye for PISD athletics.

transplants are just one of many factors.

how about 14% voter turnout in Collin county? probably a little higher for PISD voters but still if people have an opinion they need to show up.

I've lived in prosper for 5 years and have never heard of this desire to be a sports community. unspoken desires don't do any good. I'd be happy to listen.

$94m stadium? how about Melissa's $35-40m stadium that has been talked about on this board. why can't we do that or another $42M stadium? even at double the cost its $84M

they can try again next time with a better number. of the people i know that voted "no" on the stadium it is purely for the cost and not the need/desire. I am for the stadium but not the cost.

shrug, I've lived here for 37 years. I can tell you the 2008 championship put us on the map and we've invested heavily (coaching, facilities, etc.) in remaining extremely competitive across the board.

No one thought PHS would do anything once going up against the like of Allen, Guyer, Ryan, Plano, etc. but we've held our own and won district this year with hopefully another deep playoff run in front of us.

Either way... I'm not sure everyone is informed on what it costs to build a state of the art stadium with 10+% inflation down the road.

We can't do what Melissa did - our land costs more money and we expect it to be a bigger stadium. This thing is supposed to be at 380/Teel... at a main thoroughfare.

Additionally, the soil of that location is awful (where new Richland high school is going) and requires extensive concrete pier drilling. I've heard that it is costing at least an additional 30mm for the high school.

I appreciate your insight - you certainly have more knowledge than me given your history with the area and the ties to education.

of course not everyone understands - i don't even understand - i am not in education, construction, real estate, or government. but the fact is there is no information available to the public about the stadium other than a few generic FAQ's on the bond website and maybe what was asked at the town halls which most people could not attend (myself included) because they are held at daytime hours or at 5pm before the work day is over. And I am the most informed on my neighborhoods street.

I emailed my questions to the bond website and some of those responses they said they would post online but guess what that never happened. they want more support, they need more transparency. I understand inflation, I understand groundbreaking may not happen this year and have to plan for the future. but the land is already owned for the stadium as you said at Richland.

Also the excessive robocalls from principals, mailers, never ending emails - all at the cost of PISD taxpayers. give me one of each - the more you send the more you tick me off.

$30mm for piers for a high school is simply not believable. Denton's newest high school was $17mm for the entire concrete package.

As for the stadium, $94mm is just a dumb number but considering that Prosper has a history of letting their architect and GC run wild with costs that probably shouldn't be surprising I suppose. Arlington ISD is about to start a new stadium with larger capacity and same size track (and also includes a softball field) for half of the construction cost that the Prosper stadium would need to be to get an all-in cost of $94mm.

I've also never seen an ISD make it as hard to find information about the costs of a capital project as I have Prosper. I can't find where the board approved any GMP.

I understand frustration but let's not act like these bids to build projects are closed. It's open bidding and every GC/architect gets a shot at it.

CORE is trying their hardest to get into Prosper (they build most, if not all Frisco schools). The fact is.. walk into Walnut Grove or Rock Hill and then walk into any new Frisco school. The difference is noticeable.

Do we NEED that? certainly not. Do people WANT that? Absolutely and this is why A-D passed.

I think everyone just got butthurt about spending money on a football stadium when "it doesn't do much for the community". Walnut Grove cost something like $300mm to build. If you've seen that school, and the plot of land it sits on (rolling hill down into flood plan - the east side of prosper is terrible for building - not flat at all), you'll know why it costs that.

We're accustomed to building Taj Mahals here after PHS was deemed the nicest high school in the state over 10 years ago. Build it and they will come, and they did. Can't make the others crappy.

A second stadium will need to "rival" Childrens because no one would dare have their own blood go to a 2nd run facility vs. PHS.

Watkins, for the visionary he was, created this perceived problem. But hey, who doesn't like nice things?

FTAG 2000 said:

---

ChoppinDs40 said:

---

I understand frustration but let's not act like these bids to build projects are closed. It's open bidding and every GC/architect gets a shot at it.

CORE is trying their hardest to get into Prosper (they build most, if not all Frisco schools). The fact is.. walk into Walnut Grove or Rock Hill and then walk into any new Frisco school. The difference is noticeable.

Do we NEED that? certainly not. Do people WANT that? Absolutely and this is why A-D passed.

I think everyone just got butthurt about spending money on a football stadium when "it doesn't do much for the community". Walnut Grove cost something like $300mm to build. If you've seen that school, and the plot of land it sits on (rolling hill down into flood plan - the east side of prosper is terrible for building - not flat at all), you'll know why it costs that.

We're accustomed to building Taj Mahals here after PHS was deemed the nicest high school in the state over 10 years ago. Build it and they will come, and they did. Can't make the others crappy.

A second stadium will need to "rival" Childrens because no one would dare have their own blood go to a 2nd run facility vs. PHS.

Watkins, for the visionary he was, created this perceived problem. But hey, who doesn't like nice things?

---

A lot of this is what's so frustrating though.

We don't need marbled out entry ways at the schools. Just completely out of touch parents, who then turn around and wonder why little johnny or janie are spoiled brats who never listen.

$210 of that $300 mil for WG went to Pogue. I'm sorry, but even with land challenges, etc., I have to call BS on construction costs. Prosper ISD isn't doing jack to audit or control costs.

A local attorney tried to get at the WG construction costs, and they sent her all the POs from all the contractors and said figure it out yourself. Hard to trust administration when that's their response to someone in the community inquiring about costs, all that was missing was a giant middle finger on the cover sheet.


It's jus as maddening that the fine arts center passed. That has a bigger price tag than the stadium, is likely a high margin deal for Pogue, and won't get near the ROI that the district says it will.

---

These attorneys and advocates usually come across as angry, name-calling, lunatics that want to smear the district's name on WFAA. Hell, that one ultra "conservative" journalist, Erin Anderson (spelling?) doesn't even live in the district and still shows up the school board meetings to take things that are said out of context and blast it all over facebook for misinformed SAHM's to spread.

There's one attorney "advocate", in particular, that is constantly requesting open records requests and hearings... almost purposefully trying to waste people's time like mucking up a court system.

The school's financials are audited and a report of the findings are presented at a board meeting, annually, to the public. This year's happened around August/September, I believe (I was there).

Pogue and Huckabee are making money, yes - but other people are chasing that business and can't seem to build these schools for less or want to build them for less.

The problem is the district has to have a "come to jesus moment" and lower the specs/design thresholds to start the bidding process.

At least we can all feel better about the nearly $700m in Bonds that passed to improve the prisons and roads right. I liked that they asked for 380m for just roads so they can waste it all building the 380 loop disaster straight into my ****ing back yard.

"Blue" route?

I voted against the stadium. Maybe I voted on the side of the Indian migration to this part of town, but 90+ million is too much.

Nothing wrong with the school district having one larger, fancier stadium and building another 2 out of aluminum bleachers like they all were 40 years ago. Surely we could do that for 50% of the cost. Everyone could play half of their home games at the taj mahal, and the rest at a "normal" football stadium.

Each of the high schools already has nicer practice facilities than most colleges do.

OldArmy07 said:

---

I voted against the stadium. Maybe I voted on the side of the Indian migration to this part of town, but 90+ million is too much.

Nothing wrong with the school district having one larger, fancier stadium and building another 2 out of aluminum bleachers like they all were 40 years ago. Surely we could do that for 50% of the cost. Everyone could play half of their home games at the taj mahal, and the rest at a "normal" football stadium.

Each of the high schools already has nicer practice facilities than most colleges do.

---

lol Indian migration.

Building a bigger house sucks because they just want to pile 3 families in next to you.

I think they could renovate the old stadium in downtown (Reynolds) and have exactly what you're talking about. Bigger stands, it's a nice turf field. Locker rooms can work. Parking may be an issue but they can figure that out along side the admin building getting re-done.