Katy Citizen Watchdog$

We’re Taxpayers. It’s Our Money.

Itemizing The Bond Initiative

 

Back To “Watchdog Archives (Commentary)”

 

Itemization of a bond initiative constitutes an old, tried and true method of bringing forward to the public in an open and above board fashion the measures that a government needs, not wants.  The itemized format  allows the public to make reasoned decisions regarding matters which will usually increase the public’s tax burden but which seemingly are issues that deserve consideration and which ostensibly benefit those served by that government.

 

Almost a year ago, the Katy Citizen Watchdog$ organized as a tax watchdog association of six Katy citizens.  We were mostly either unknown to each other or merely acquaintances.  Over time our collaborative activities have brought us to the point that we successfully defeated a bond initiative that we collectively felt was not in the best interests of Katy ISD students and taxpayers. While defeating the bond we were able to  establish a fast growing organization of like-minded citizens. 

 

When we initially heard that the school district was gearing up to float a bond initiative, the Watchdog$ began immediately to call for an itemization of that initiative.  Our pleas fell on deaf ears.  When we were ignored, we began to insist that without an itemized bond initiative, we would organize further and oppose the initiative. 

 

Our instructional leader proceeded as though we did not exist.  That same leader refused to meet with any of us or to address our concerns with what we saw as an inflated bond.

 

While spokesmen for the school district, even at this post election date, continue to suggest that the Watchdog$ “lost” the bond initiative, anyone with intelligence can see that the bond initiative was not ours to lose.  The defeat came because a majority of those voting decided that the Watchdog$ had made a clear case that the bond contained much that was unnecessary or frivolous, that the case for building five new schools had not been made, that the poll used to sway  public opinion had utilized flawed, push-poll methodology, that vested interests of those who had made the decision to float the initiative in the first place raised questions as to why they were members of the bond committee, and that items like new roofs costing huge amounts for buildings between ten and fifteen years old which should still be under warranty, constituted poor use of taxpayer dollars and called into question the maintenance capabilities of the District.

 

Since the loss of the bond initiative on May 13, 2006, the Watchdog$ have continued to suggest that the next bond should be itemized and that the School Board, as our elected representatives, be the ones to listen to the administration’s presentations and decide for themselves whether the proposal has merit. (Click here to see School Board Committees (10/18/05) in Mary’s Corner) When the Bond Committee made its presentation to the Board this past spring, and it came time to vote, the Board was woefully lacking in having the knowledge necessary to make an informed decision.  We all expect more from our elected officials, as deciding to spend $261,500,000 of taxpayer’s hard earned dollars is one of the most important decisions that they render.

 

The School Board has apparently already authorized the calling of a Bond Committee to call for a fall election.  Although the Watchdog leadership asked that some, one, any of us be allowed to participate, and some of us were nominated by a board member, none of the Watchdog leadership was given a place at the table.

 

I would suggest that such indifference to our concerns is unwise.

 

The Watchdog$ have suggested elsewhere that if the Board refuses to accept their responsibility of leadership in this matter, that the committee standing in their stead be posted publicly with names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, occupation, place of employment and position, number of children attending district schools, an indication of any previous committee memberships and which committees, and a statement for each member stating any business relationship in the past five years or prospective relationship with the District in the future regarding any outlay of bond funds. They are after all assuming the duties of an elected official which requires openness.

 

The Watchdog$ hope that someone remembers to put some current teachers on the committee.  Draw their names out a of a hat, please.  And assure them that they won’t be fired or sent to Siberia if they contribute to the discussions.  A good school district would want to know what its teachers think about the bond initiative items.  To not include them indicates to me that perhaps the District does not want them openly expressing concern about the removal of $3 million dollars from the side of the budget that funds their salaries in order to buy a new roof.

 

While the Katy school district often handles matters clandestinely, other school districts make such matters very public. Please look at this list from the Round Rock ISD web site.  (Click here) Round Rock ISD had their bond initiative defeated in March 2005, and in April 2005 the superintendent resigned. Since that time new board members have been elected, and a new bond initiative is on the table.  The committee list is posted on the district’s web site, and while obviously some on the list will have a vested interest in the outcome of the bond initiative, at least voters have the opportunity to add that information into the mix when they decide how to vote.  Recently Katy voters were not afforded that opportunity. Interestingly also posted on the web site is an invitation to citizens to volunteer for this committee!  Can you even imagine such a thing in Katy ISD?  Please see a copy of the form. (Click here). Also, a district press release was used to engage the public in a positive open way. (Click here to view). At the end of the page is the outcome of this concerted effort--an itemized bond package to present to the taxpayers.  At least Round Rock administrators learned from their mistakes in 2005 and came back with a voter friendly package.  (Click for itemized bond package). Also, (Click here to see a similar itemized bond initiative passed by Austin ISD voters in 2004).

 

It is not difficult to find other Texas school districts utilizing the bond itemization method.  Strangely they don’t find such a method “divisive, racist, or detrimental to students”!  The Watchdog$ don’t either.  Also another good idea is Austin ISD’s Bond Oversight Committee that makes sure the District spends the bond money as they said they would (Click here).

 

The next Katy bond initiative should be itemized in such a fashion that the voters may vote on separate propositions.  A proposition should exist separately for  elementary schools, the junior highs, a high school if required, renovations to existing school buildings to make them similar to other buildings, repair of deteriorating structures with limited benefit to large numbers of students, repair of roofs, purchase of supplies, and the proposed football stadium.  No separation by areas within the district should be made.  The Watchdog$ opponents seem to be concerned about “divisiveness,” but we do not believe that such a charge can be made if bond items are structured as we have been suggesting for almost a year. All of these items should be fully discussed in public, justified to the satisfaction of the public, and published as the exact item that will have bond money spent on it.  Prices of items should be accurate and not inflated.  A statement regarding a promise of NOT using bond money for anything else should be made.  It is not prudent, wise, or ethical for school districts to use money at their whim just because they can.  The Watchdog$ also reject the continued practice by the KIDS group of putting words in our mouths!  THEY are the ones who have suggested strange bond itemization methods - methods that we never thought about or even imagined.  And yes, what they are suggesting is unacceptable and quite out of the question.

 

Property for school buildings should not appear on the bond initiative. The school district should discuss openly and forcefully the matter of property for new schools being donated by the developer whose subdivision will benefit from having a school in its midst.  That school is a hook to garner home purchasers, and the rest of us should not be helping developers with their marketing schemes.  Precedent for such a practice has already been set as the land for Fielder Elementary School was donated.  On January 27, 1992, the Cinco Ranch Development Corporation donated the land for Fielder Elementary School.  The land was valued at the time at approximately $500,000.  The 100,000 square foot school building, was designed to hold 1,100 students.  The school was built by Drymalla Construction Co of Columbus, Texas for $4,951,000.  The School Superintendent Hugh Hayes and the Executive Director for Facilities and Planning, Ken Leach, negotiated this donation and contract and saved the school district half a million dollars.

 

Another approach, not original with this author, might be to assign prospective schools to land sites held by original owners thus increasing the salability of the land as well as causing the secondary purchaser to buy the land with the understanding that he/she must donate the land to the District.  Effort should be made before the taxpayers are asked to pay for land sites, to secure school land by donation.  Look sometime at original plat maps for the counties in Texas.  They were all originally platted with school sites designated before anyone arrived.  Our forefathers had better sense than we do on this matter!

 

Why the precedent of land donation in Katy ISD has not continued after the success at Fielder Elementary is anyone’s guess.  It is a sensible and worthwhile goal, and if developers want schools built, they should ante up the land.

 

The Watchdog$ hope that the media, the parents, the taxpayers and even the students will jump into this discussion.  The light of day makes every matter clearer. Only those trying to hide something like the blinds closed.  We ask that all Bond Committee documents be posted on the District’s web site in a timely fashion, that attendance be taken and posted for the committee members, and that efforts be made to truly inform the members with real numbers, real explanations and verifiable information.

 

.© 2006 by Mary McGarr. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mary McGarr, Katy Citizen Watchdog$

Date: 06/23/2006