The latest word in Katy with Helen Eriksen

Did the Katy ISD bond drive early voter turnout?

Posted on November 2, 2006 | By Helen Eriksen

With the general election approaching on Tuesday, voters came out in full force to vote at a polling site in a high-growth area in the Katy Independent School District.

Election officials at the University of Houston-Cinco Ranch said the turnout was likely influenced by the $269.5 million Katy ISD bond proposal on the ballot and was unusually high for a non-presidential election year. About 3,000 voters came to the polls Wednesday at that location – some as early as 7 a.m.

The area outside the polling site was littered with campaign signs for various candidates and initiatives.

Strong early voting turnout may reflect the high-profile bond campaign, which has included advertisements, mailers, television appearances, newspaper stories and messages encouraging people to support or oppose the measure.

For example, a pro-bond group — Keep Investing in District Schools — paid about $4,000 to Houston-based Campaign Strategists Inc. to send out a mailer to senior adults in the community.

For the first time in its history, the district lost a bond election in May for $261.5 million. The vote was close — 3,990 to 3,528.

In the May election, indications were that some senior adults did not support the measure because of Katy’s high tax rate at the time (capped at $2 per $100 of assessed property value).

Opposition to the bond is fueled by the Katy Citizen Watchdogs.

The tax rate was reduced in September to $1.815 per $100 of assessed property value because of changes in state funding for schools through House Bill 1. That rate will stay the same for the school year.

Approval of the bond proposal would raise the rate by 3 cents per $100 valuation for 2007-08. However, that overall tax rate would be reduced to $1.52 per $100 valuation, largely because of anticipated increases in property values and continuing effects of the state funding changes.

Do you think the Katy ISD bond will pass this time around? What happens if it doesn’t? Will it put in jeopardy the district’s plans to accommodate growth and handle existing students?　

45 Responses

PA says:

November 2, 2006 at 8:36 pm

No. If the district had not involved so many vendors and business boosters into the politics of this matter, it would have made us parents and taxpayers feel a lot safer about voting for this bond. Not to mention, they have still never stated what goes for what and that they will go for bids in order to spend less money. It looks like a back-scratching deal to me. And further, I’ve noticed that very little of the discussion has been about educating. Instead of “if you build it they will come”, why not “if you want my money, plan to put it toward educating my child”!?!?!?

PA

Jessica says:

November 3, 2006 at 10:26 am

I do feel as though the Katy ISD bond will pass this time around. The reason most people move to Katy or have moved to Katy is because of the school district reputation. I think it would be unfair if it did not pass because the district will be unable to keep up with the growth in the schools. I have three, soon to be four, kids in the Katy ISD schools and a couple of my kids have to have class in portable buildings. I feel that this is unfair and they deserve to be in the main building as much as anyone else. Especially on bad weather days, the portable buildings are considered to be unsafe. If the bond does not pass it will jeopardize the district’s plans to accomodate [sic] growth and handle existing students. Katy ISD is having a hard enough time fitting all the currently enrolled students under the same roof let alone the projected growth in the next 10 years.

LR says:

November 3, 2006 at 11:30 am

My oldest daughter graduated from Katy High and I have four children currently in KISD.

There are several items listed as improvements that are not needed in order to improve the school districts ability to TEACH our children.

For example 6 plus million dollars for a new natatorium at Mayde Creek High and then 1.2 million dollars “each” for both Katy and Taylor’s baseball facility.

Let’s invest more in our kids education and the teachers’ salaries and less on athletics.

Katy Taxes says:

November 3, 2006 at 1:10 pm

I do not think that it will pass.

Whether you moved to Katy for the schools or not, it makes no sense to keep handing the administration a blank check to let them spend on ego-boosting pet projects instead of education.

And to have the audacity to come back with an even larger bond request is beyond contempt.

I received a flier from KISD about the bond. Who paid for that? I know – you have to spend money to make money. That’s precisely why I will not vote for the bond this time either… It still appears to me to be all about ego and money.

Money for local businesses from the Chamber…

Money for the developers…

Money from the taxpayers, despite the spin.

While it appears that the board made a few changes in order to get the bond approved, they really have not changed anything meaningful. This administration will still move money around as they see fit without aligning to the original objections or any accountability to the taxpayers.

In order for me to ever support such a large amount of money to KISD beyond what I am already paying in taxes, there will have to be apologies stated and changes made; including that of personnel starting at the top and especially those responsible for the technology debacle.

Cecil says:

November 3, 2006 at 1:35 pm

The Bond Issue will pass. After the low turnout last time and the small margin of defeat, anyone who doesn’t want to see their property values decline and who wants to continue to provide the highest quality facilities and programs for their children, will vote to pass the bond.

It is really very simple. KISD has always done a top-notch job of keeping up with the demands of such a rapidly growing district, taking special efforts to make sure that we don’t over build. Let’s make sure they continue to do so.

The group that opposes the bond is just mad that they don’t have the right to vote on each item separately. I don’t see that as a reason to vote down the entire bond issue. This new KISD proposal addresses all the issues raised by the opposition group in the last proposal.

PA says:

November 3, 2006 at 5:26 pm

Thank you Katy Taxes. You can tell by the parents’ desperate requests for help getting their children out of temporary buildings, etc., that they think that voting for the bond is the answer. When I moved to Katy 10 years ago, it was because of the reputation of the district, but once I got here, then within a few short years they were asking for a bond and it was to replace temporary buildings and other things that I’ve noticed are still unrepaired or replaced. I don’t know why people can’t see that bond money is sort of like child support (in fact, it is); when you pay it, you don’t expect the receiving parent to spend it on themselves or for frivolous things, while their child goes without clothes, food and shelter; and some family law judges expect the recipient to keep records of what they do with the money. I’ve also been at meetings where teachers (current and retired) have spoken of getting very little if no salary increases after a bond was passed. Even the teachers are misled about that if they vote for the bond they will get increases. It is a shame that the district has caused us to mistrust them. I have found from research that they have not been up front and honest with taxpayers. As I heard that a speaker said at an event several months ago when asked about the bond and the fact that the district was reluctant to itemize and reluctant to answer questions–he stated, well, then maybe they deserve to have their bond defeated. I agree.

PA

jamie says:

November 3, 2006 at 6:35 pm

The bond should pass, but I do not know if it will.

It should pass because we have 9000 new students coming in the next three years to KISD and we need the new schools to accomodate them if we do not want the quality of education to suffer in KISD leading to lower property values for all. It should pass because KISD has been fiscally responsible and they upgraded bond ratings from Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s to show for it. It should pass because despite erroneous reports that continue to be circulated by the opposition, KISD actually builds its schools at or below the Houston average cost for schools.

The opposition talks about vendors and boosters, but this is a red herring that has nothing to do with the merits of the bond. We need the schools and if vendors benefit then so do we all.

This bond is all about educating. We need schools to properly educate children. KISD is only one of three districts with enrollments above 45,000 to have achieved “recognized” status.

The money for the athletic facilities is to bring facilities up to the same standards as other facilities in the district. This is only fair. As for the cost, this is mainly due to ADA requirements which are beyond the control of KISD. And besides, bond funds can’t be used to pay teachers. In sum, the costs for athletic facilities in this bond do not provide ample justification to vote against it.

The bond committee dealt with the majority of the objections voiced by the group opposing this package and yet they still continue to use false data to oppose it.

The bond should pass because it is all about preserving educational opportunities for students of KISD schools. This will, in turn, protect property values. Everyone living in KISD stands to benefit from the passage of this bond, including its opponents.

If we want to continue moving forward, then we must ignore the red herrings scattered about by the oppositiong and vote for this bond.

dw says:

November 3, 2006 at 7:55 pm

Katy Taxes

As for the larger bond package this time around. Technology was limited to the basics because that is what the bond committee heard the community wanted. The committee also heard that the community wanted more done for existing schools. This package is about $8 million more than the previous one. Classroom additions and air conditioning and heating work for various existing schools cost an additional $11 million.

The district can appropriately educate people about the bond package. I am sure that our superintendent and Board support this package so it is reasonable to expect them to do what they can legally to educate the public about the contents of the package. The future of KISD is at stake. What we decide will affect us for years after Dr. Merrell and the current members of this Board are gone.

It is totally inappropriate to put the quality of education offered in KISD in jeopardy by turning down a bond because you are upset with the leadership. If this bond is passed, it will cost the owner of a home appraised at $165,000 an additional 12 cents a day.

The long and the short of the technology situation is that in 2002 KISD realized that its technology department needed help fast. It hired a company that did an excellent job in bringing the technology in KISD to where it is today. Good technology expertise is not cheap, but it was worth it. [Note that this technology department was fired by Alton Frailey within a year of his arrival.]

“this is not the first rodeo (sic) for them and they should have learned from the past bonds that taxpayers want specifics.”

The taxpayers were specific. They said more for existing facilities and less for technology and that is exactly what the bond committee gave them in this bond package.

“Also, KISD isn’t taking into consideration those of us who are planning to get the ___ out of here as soon as we can because of their one-sided governing.”

If you want to move, then there will be someone who is more than happy to buy your property because of KISD’s excellent reputation. You should be pleased that you can sell your property so easily and for such a nice price. That will not be the case if we run down our school system by failing to adequately fund it.

The evidence supports that we have an educationally sound and fiscally responsible school district. School property taxes will be going down by about 25% with or without the passage of the bond. The bond will raise taxes on the average homeowner by about 12 cents a day. The bond committee did virtually everything the Watchdogs wanted with the exception of putting 50 items on the ballot.

Why do the Watchdogs continue to oppose this bond? Why have the Watchdogs continued to fail to correct the misinformation that they have published on school construction costs? KISD school construction costs are actually at or below the Houston average. Don’t you think we should expect more of a so-called watchdog group?

Do the responsible thing. Ignore the diversions of the opposition and vote FOR the KISD bond.

just a taxpayer says:

November 5, 2006 at 8:15 pm

Many school districts around the country receive FREE land from developers to build schools in THEIR subdivisions. Has anyone ever thought why Katy ISD continues to have to spend our tax money to purchase this land?

I agree with Katy Taxes…there is still a big ego working in our school district. Here is my prediction about the future. This bond will NOT pass and you will see the people with the BIG EGOS leave.

And yes….WE the taxpayers will still be left to pay off the bond debt that BIG EGOS left for us.

Katy Taxes says:

November 6, 2006 at 8:58 am

Helen,

To directly addresses you question, I have a theory:

There are a certain number of people that vote consistently. Generally speaking, when there is an elevated number of voters, it’s because change is desired.

If this election turns out to be a referendum on the current political landscape, then voting will swing away from Republicans, which tend to position themselves as fiscal conservatives. As such, I think that a large Republican vote would tend to not support the bond.

A large turnout for the Democrats might prove to support the bond, since they like to think of themselves as socially conscious.

Since early turnout seems to be at high levels outside of KISD, I am thinking that it may be the latter, and if my theory is correct, then it may help KISD get their new blank check.

Does ANYONE agree with that notion? My spouse does not, thinking that I am generalizing voters into stereotypes.

bob says:

November 6, 2006 at 9:56 am

The school bond is not a Democrat vs. Republican issue. It is fundamentally a question of what the voters want for the future of KISD. Do we want to see a continuation of the excellent work that has been done or do we want the district to deteriorate? You get what you pay for. This is something that Democrats and Republicans understand. Even fiscal conservatives are willing to pay more if it means that they will have a better system than if they refused to pay.

This argument is buttressed by the fact that Bill Callegari, Glenn Hegar, Andy Meyers and Dr. John Zerwas; all Republican officeholders and/or candidates have supported this bond on the grounds that it is the best thing for our community. It is fiscally responsible.

just a taxpayer says:

November 6, 2006 at 1:01 pm

bob,

You are correct in saying that the bond committee did itemize in their calculations. The fact of the matter the school district STILL RECEIVES A BLANK CHECK from us – the taxpayers! Did you know that there are school districts in Texas that actual itemize their bonds?

It sounds to me that you are ok with giving someone free will with moving money from one project to another. I can tell you that I have personal experience in this area and know this has been going on for years.

This is definitely a very interesting discussion! See yah at the Polls!!

Katy Taxes says:

November 6, 2006 at 1:05 pm

Many of those “items” are unnecessary for education or maintenace [sic] of needed facilities.

KISD history using bonds with the current administration has proven it to be a blank check and it will be again until there are viable controls in place to enforce the “itemization”.

The KISD board has proven itself to be ineffectual as a whole when it comes to checks and balances. Creating an oversight board from your supporters is also not a viable control, as the bond committees have proven.

We are educated. We understand business and are professionals from the public and private sectors. We can spot corruption and waste. We understand politics and fear-spinning. We are caring parents and grandparents. We are voters.

Unlike the Supt and the technology head who live out of district, WE are the taxpayers.

KISD (admin & board), YOU work for US, and you are forcing our hand. This hand is once again voting NO.

jamie says:

November 6, 2006 at 2:10 pm

Just a Taxpayer,

You wrote that “Many school districts around the country receive FREE land from developers to build schools in THEIR subdivisions. Has anyone ever thought why Katy ISD continues to have to spend our tax money to purchase this land?”

Yes, I have thought about it and taken the time to research it. The reason is that KISD has no way to force developers to donate land. While this may be the practice in other parts of the country, there is no legal framework in Texas that allows school districts to force people to donate land for schools. KISD has no control over this. Take it up with the state legislature.

You wrote that “there is still a big ego working in our school district. Here is my prediction about the future. This bond will NOT pass and you will see the people with the BIG EGOS leave.”

I do not know whether the bond will pass. I agree with the construction of your statement, but I would change it as follows: We have an outstanding staff working in our school district. It costs money to support their excellent work in maintaining the standards that we have all come to expect of KISD. If the bond fails, they will likely leave and we will be left with a very mediocre district.

We voted for the bond proposals in the past that have enabled KISD to maintain the standards that we want under the direction of the outstanding staff. The result has been a district with outstanding educational opportunities for KISD students. We will pay for the debt incurred for these benefits and we should.

Vote FOR the bond. It is the best course available to us.

concerned katy parent' says:

November 6, 2006 at 2:22 pm

This bond is not about the administration. It is about where we want to go as a community. Many of the people in our KISD administration are near retirement age. They will be gone soon whether or not this bond passes.

What kind of message do we want to send to prospective KISD administrators? What kind of applicants do we want to attract? What kind of teachers do we want to attract?

Think about it.

Katy Taxes says:

November 6, 2006 at 3:17 pm

It is absolutely about this administration. They are the ones that spend the money!!

Once they are gone (hopefully soon), perhaps the next administration will want to work WITH the taxpayers. Perhaps the next administration will *BE* KISD taxpayers themselves as they all should be.

The teachers that I have spoken to privately are not happy with the current administration. They are fearful of them and felt intimidated to vote for the bond last time.

Perhaps with a new administration, teachers will feel more valued and we can keep and attract the best!

Perhaps the next administration will not act like they think that they are more intelligent than the people that they work for (the taxpayers, NOT the Chamber).

concerned citizen says:

November 6, 2006 at 3:40 pm

No matter how much $ you give them they will always “need” more. When it is not their money it is easy for them to spend it.

They have plenty of money now. KISD needs to live within their means and quit asking the hard working tax payers to keep forking out more and more for facilities that are extreme already.

I think they will pass, because most people don’t realize how much it is costing them each year. And who doesn’t want the best for their kids. I know I do, but I think we are already paying enough for what we are getting. Throwing more money at it will not do anything except give them more projects to develop to spend the money on that will need another bond and more money for later on.

Stop the insanity and VOTE NO on the bonds and make the KISD live within their means. Just like all the rest of us have to do.

Think about it, when I need more money because of poor management I don’t get to ask the tax payers to send me a bag of money so I can build myself a Taj Mahal.

dw says:

November 6, 2006 at 4:59 pm

The Taj Mahal slogan is a myth, pure and simple. Contrary to the misinformation spread by the opposition, KISD school construction costs are at or below the average cost of schools in Houston.

The bond is not itemized into all 50 odd projects on the ballot. Itemization would divide the community to the detriment of the educational opportunities available to KISD students. A listing of all the projects is available. This KISD administration has built what it said it would build in previous bonds.

This bond will cost the average homeowner of a $165,000 home an additional 12 cents per day in taxes.

If the taxpayers want to skimp on education funding and are willing to live in a mediocre district, then that is what they will get.

We need five new schools to accomodate [sic] the growth coming. We expect to have 9000 additional students in the next 3 years. This is no “pet project”. It is a reality that sensible taxpayers should face if they want to maintain the value of the district and their property.

Voting against this bond will not hurt the administration. It will hurt the quality of education offered in KISD.

lisa says:

November 6, 2006 at 5:39 pm

Several of these comments refer to teachers – trying to use us as examples to support the anti-bond people. Have you been to a KISD teacher fair lately? For every opening, there are at least 3 teachers wanting to fill the position. I work at a KISD school, my children attend two different KISD schools. I have yet to hear ANY teachers say that they don’t like the current administration. I have yet to hear ANY teachers say that they are intimidated in any way – how would anyone know if or how we vote? I have yet to hear ANY teachers say that they are against the bond. I am a taxpayer, parent, teacher, and ultraconservative Republican. Sure I want to make sure my money is spent wisely. I feel that an investment in KISD schools gives me a guaranteed return on my money. Not only do I get to teach in a great district, my children will continue to receive a great education, and my property value will continue to rise.

I will be out tomorrow and I will vote YES. I will also vote for Kinky!

Katy Taxes says:

November 6, 2006 at 7:54 pm

The Taj Mahal analogy is reality and the “Grand Opening” of the Seven Lakes High School proved it to me. Compare it to the brand new Travis High School in FBISD. Tell me that there isn’t waste!!

As a matter of fact, I have a few local teachers in my family. I happen to be married to one. They do not feel free to contradict the administration, especially with co-workers for fear of reprisal.

As I have stated before, I am intimately aware of the waste at KISD and it is time to stop it.

wayne says:

November 6, 2006 at 10:01 pm

If you have such a deep dislike of the school board, vote to replace them, but seperate that from the needs of the facilities. I would challenge anyone to give specifics of large scale waste in the district or how bond money has been misspent. I’m not saying that the district is perfect, but it does a good job overall. How many have gone to the bond websites and really researched what you are talking about? If the administration is really sooo bad as some of you describe then why is the district so highly ranked in just about every catagory? If this bond fails we could start a downward spiral that will be bad for all of us, starting with the kids.

Katy Mom says:

November 6, 2006 at 11:52 pm

This is pretty sad. I am reading alot [sic] about taxes, not alot [sic] about education. I read alot [sic] about not liking administrators, not alot about what the kids of this district need. I read alot [sic] of false comments about bond money paying for teacher salary increases. I read alot [sic] of generalizations that teachers are intimidated by the Katy administrators. That’s not what I hear from my kids’ school teachers. And I’m still not reading alot [sic] about the fact that we are getting thousands of new students every year and that our existing facilities need repairs and renovations.

With the Watchdogs, we hear alot [sic] of complaints, and no solutions. We hear alot [sic] of accusations, and no proof. We hear alot [sic] of hot air about taxes, and no concern for the kids of Katy.

I voted for the bond–why? Because of the 2 kids I call my son and my daughter, so they will have the best education that this area has to offer. Because of the 50,000 other kids just like them whose parents enrolled them in a Katy school hoping to give them the best education they could. Because I believe that providing children with an education is the best gift and the best insurance for a healthy, economically vibrant future.

Voting against the bond because you have a personal grudge against someone or because you are mad about one issue is shooting yourself in the foot. Worse, it’s going to cripple a school district that is overwhelmingly supported by this community, has world-wide acclaim, has been rated as financially responsible by industry experts, and continues to graduate students who are prepared to meet the world in whatever field or major they choose.

The Dogs can spin it all they want, voting against this bond is voting against the children of Katy ISD. Period. All their empty rhetoric and their exaggerations and misinformation are nothing but a smoke screen. One can only imagine their true motives.

Vote for the future–vote for the kids–vote for this bond.

HelenE says:

November 6, 2006 at 11:56 pm

Hi Katy Taxes,

From what I’ve read, minorities and do [sic] Democrats favor school bonds overwhelmingly but I don’t think this bond will pass without a strong Republican showing because the majority of registered voters in Katy are – well -Republicans.

Passage or failure of a bond may also be seen as a reflection of voters confidence in public officials.

It would be nice to have a scientific poll to fall back on to predict the way the election will turnout today But without the benefit of any empirical data — we can look at the rhetoric expressed on both sides of the debate in the InsideKaty blog and elsewhere and expect that there will be a high turnout with the side that resonated most with voters prevailing.

If the bond doesn’t pass — we will have to come together to determine how to deal with inevitable growth in the Katy ISD.

grace says:

November 7, 2006 at 9:09 am

The opposition to this bond is wrong.

1. People should take a look at Travis High School that is touted by Katy Taxes. It is right off the Grand Parkway near the prison. Take a look at the schools in Sealy. I do not know about Sealy, but I know that Fort Bend is not a “recognized” district like Katy ISD. Don’t buy into the rhetoric that buildings do not matter or that students can learn under trees. Buildings do make a difference.

3. The Watchdogs may be educated and they may be professionals, but they have shown that they have little, if any, understanding of what it takes to plan to build a school. In their cost estimates they have failed to take inflation costs, furniture costs, computer costs and the cost of roadways into account resulting in a gross underestimation of the future cost to build these schools.

4. Even the Watchdogs have admitted that they have found no evidence of corruption. It is just a difference of opinion. They think that they can run the district better than the current administration, but they have yet to tell any of us exactly or even vaguely how they would run the district.

5. Voting against this bond because you are upset with the current administration would be counterproductive. You would deprive the district of needed funds to build schools because you have personal problems with the administration? There are better ways to manage your problems.

6. How are teachers supposed to feel more valued if they do not have the needed facilities in which to teach?

7. Why do the Watchdogs think that they are more intelligent than the current administration and other taxpayers?

8. Why do some people think our schools should be able to function without additional money? It is our money and the administration is spending it on our behalf. If we do not value the KISD education, then we can dumb it down by failing to adequately fund it. Lower property values, here we come.

9. KISD is operating within their means with schools costing at or below the Houston average. The district has a debt to income ratio of 17%.

10. The district has managed the money well by putting together a reasonable maintenance plan and building cost-effective schools. It needs more money because it has been the second-fastest growing district in the state for the last five years.

11. If the community fails this bond, then it will have no one to blame but itself for the consequences.

ser182 says:

November 7, 2006 at 9:54 am

There is nothing in this bond that shows the support for new teachers(or higher pay) or for new books. Why?? Put money towards education. Pay our teachers. I have friends that work as teachers in KISD that I have been trying to get them quite because I hate seeing them struggle. Pay them. I will never support a bond till it is made clear that this going after the best teachers and the best books. The new football field they built last year is a waste of money. It is always empty. Stop putting sports in front of education. i want to hear this bond is for is to pay for new teachers and higher pay for them. New books and computer for our children. they just spend spend. I heard that the seven lakes high school has italian [sic] tile on the floor. Are you for real!!!!!!! Was that the right way to spend our tax money. This is why no one supports the bond elections every time they have them. Spend it on good teacher and new books. That is when I will support. Support our teachers.

Katy Taxes says:

November 7, 2006 at 10:16 am

Helen,

Agreed. I am just thinking that if there is a larger Democratic showing, then the chances for the bond passage are probably greater. But given the demographics of the district, it will require a significant amount of Republican support as well. Outside of the Chamber members and those that stand to directly benefit from the bond (such as the insiders), those Republican votes are questionable as I see it.

I guess we will find out tonight or tomorrow morning!

Whichever way the vote goes, the “losing” side will need to understand that this is a democracy and the will of the majority of the voters must be carried out.

That applies to the Watchdogs if the bond passes. They can then focus less on elections and more on oversight and accountability. The board has tuned out the Watchdog on the board, so the bond election appears to me the only way left to have the taxpayer voice heard.

It also applies the administration the bond is rejected a 2nd time in the same year. They should then make the changes that the Watchdogs and others have stated in detail, despite the false information on this blog and elsewhere that state otherwise.

Pride and egos will have to be bypassed either way to move forward. Schools will need to be built and maintained regardless, that’s never been questioned.

Katy has excellent teachers (I know!!) and the education that they provide will continue either way, despite the hysterical comments to the contrary.

PA says:

November 7, 2006 at 11:36 am

Replacing the school board is the probably the answer-if it’s possible. For now, though, you forgot to take into account Republicans who are voting Democratic this time, AND against the bond! It isn’t about having a poor district-they already have the money, it’s about accountability. With or without the bond, do we need so much fluff? I believe it is best for it to fail, and then they will have to appeal to taxpayers for ideas and permission-simply that!

PA

Katy Taxes says:

November 7, 2006 at 12:52 pm

PA,

I believe that change is what motivates occasional voters to vote.

Republicans voting for Democrats and against the bond are both votes for change.

Maybe that will be the answer to Helen’s question. We’ll know shortly.

grace says:

November 7, 2006 at 1:42 pm

This bond shows support for new teachers by building new facilities and maintaining current facilities so that they can have a place to teach. It funds classroom additions. Bond money cannot be used to pay teacher’s salaries or buy textbooks. What good is it to pay a teacher $100,000 if the teacher does not have a building or proper technology support (included in this bond) to teach students?

As a supporter of the bond I fully agree with sentiments expressed regarding the outcome of the election. However it turns out we will all have to live with the result. If the community fails yet another bond to settle gripes that the Watchdogs have with the administration, then it will be time for the community to accept its decision for mediocrity. The Watchdogs would have us believe that we can spend less on our schools and achieve the same or better results. This is false.

Vote for quality schools and quality communities. Vote FOR the KISD bond.

bob says:

November 7, 2006 at 2:01 pm

If this bond does not pass, then there will be no new schools built in Katy. We will need three new elementary schools and two new junior high schools in the next three years to accomodate the arrival of 9000 new students to KISD.

This is not the time to focus on petty disagreements with the district or administration.

The overwhelming part of the bond is to maintain existing facilities and build new ones.

If the community rejects this bond it will sacrificing the quality education offered in KISD. We have great teachers in KISD, but even the greatest teachers will have serious difficulty maintaining standards in an environment in which they are not properly supported by the community.

Katy Taxes says:

November 7, 2006 at 3:14 pm

There is a reason that bonds like this go before voters and the voters will speak at about 7pm.

Histrionics aside, the world will not come to an end either way: Katy will still be a nice place to live and learn either way.

The arguments on both sides are tired and repetitive, but the dire consequence predictions (from both sides) are truly extreme and subjective.

In the end, we will still be neighbors, shoppers, teachers, professionals, etc. and will adapt to the results of the election.

Have a nice day, all. I am off to vote (NO) to the bond. And on the position races, too.

TheUmpire says:

November 7, 2006 at 3:52 pm

Helen,

In answer to your questions:

1. Do you think the Katy ISD bond will pass this time around? — I think it will be close again, but I would give the edge in favor of the bond passing. The only thing that might cause its defeat is the fact that it is more than the previous bond which was defeated. Whoever decided that this bond should be more than the defeated bond wasn’t thinking very clearly. If it were, say, $25MM less than the defeated bond, it would be a lot easier for the taxpayers to swallow.

2. What happens if it doesn’t? — If it doesn’t, they’ll go back to the drawing board and try to get another bond passed in May. And hopefully, they’ll figure out how to make the total bond amount lower…

3. Will it put in jeopardy the district’s plans to accommodate growth and handle existing students? — You betcha, which is why I give the edge to the pro-bond forces. Taxpayers may not like it, but everyone knows that the people/students are coming and we need to be ready with facilities to accomodate [sic] them. Therefore, as much as they might not like voting in favor, they recognize that the perfect (a smaller bond focused only on key priorities) can’t be the enemy of the good (the current bond which is a little bloated but funds key priorities). As such, they will hold their nose and vote in favor… which is exactly what I think I will do.

Oh, and one last point — the legislative fix which enabled KISD to lower their tax rate also helped save this bond from certain (as opposed to ‘unlikely’) defeat. The shell game they were having to pull off prior to the legislature’s actions didn’t pass the smell test.

Are we having fun, yet?!?

HelenE says:

November 7, 2006 at 5:19 pm

Hi there Umpire,

I take the high turnout we are seeing at polls today as a very positive sign — that people really care and therefore will make an informed decision on the bond. I did notice that the pro-bond presence is very high at Katy area polls today. I don’t know how that will or will not influence the vote…

It’s still too early to call!!!

Katy Taxes says:

November 8, 2006 at 7:47 am

WOW – almost 36,000 votes!

The bond passed with a clear majority, so KISD Inc. can now settle back into business.

Congrats to the district, the Chamber, the developers and other interested parties! You worked hard to get your point of view heard and your significant inve$tments paid off!

And the Watchdogs will hopefully remain active to challenge the percevied [sic] lack of accountability within the district, without the distraction of campaining [sic] and elections. Good job to those folks as well.

It’s great to live in America and in Katy, Taxes.

Harry Herzog says:

November 8, 2006 at 7:53 am

Now that the bond has passed, I hope that everyone who opposed it will come to the meetings of the bond review committee set-up at the Watchdogs request. There they will get the truth – no “spin” about how the money is spent. There they will learn, with their own eyes and ears, whether their opposition was based on facts, or whether they were spun into believing things that are not true.

I think they will be suprised [sic] at how much of the money goes into what they want money spent on, how hard everyone works to spend as little as possible, and how accountable the KISD folks are. They will see for themselves that there never was, and is not now, a blank check bond.

If they will just come and watch and listen, they will not be so antaganistic [sic] to the KISD efforts to give our kids the best education they can, at the best price, whil [sic] keeping tax rates as low as they can.