EPISD bonds–no cosmic view

July 25, 2016

There has been a good deal of talk locally and nationally about the need to emphasize STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) in our local schools.

The new EPISD administration has suggested that the effort be expanded to include arts, making the acronym STEAM.

The changes being considered by the district’s facilities advisory committee don’t do much for STEM.  They do include a possible $30 million for various fine arts, theater, and music production studios.

Noticeably absent is any potential bond money for the sciences.

Particularly troubling is the lack of any mention of replacing the district’s planetarium.  The current one is housed in the district’s current central office complex and will be lost if the district is forced to move out by the landlord, our city government.

They don’t seem to be putting our money where their mouth is.

We deserve better

Brutus


EPISD bond issue–valueless property

July 22, 2016

As A DOSE OF REALITY pointed out the other day the district is not asking its facilities advisory committee to consider the cost of closing schools.

The EPISD school board has not made final decisions but it is considering asking the voters for a $500-700 million bond program that among other things would allow them to consolidate schools that they feel don’t have enough students.

Thirteen elementary schools are being considered for closure.

Those thirteen properties have value.  The presentations that have been given to their facilities advisory committee do not address what the district will do with the closed schools.  Mothballing the schools will cost money.  No mention is made of mothballing.  Tearing down the schools will cost money.  No mention is made of demolition costs.

They could sell the schools to developers.  They could sell the schools to charter schools.  They could place central office functions in some of the facilities.  Many possibilities exist.

Those properties are worth money.  No mention is made in the district’s plans of using the proceeds of the sale of the closed schools to lower the bond.

Evidently that’s extra money that they don’t want us to think about.

We deserve better

Brutus


EPISD bonds–she’s at it again

July 20, 2016

Look at this chart from the June 29, 2016 presentation to the EPISD facilities advisory committee:

EPISD-tax base assumptions

We can all understand that forecasting is more difficult when looking out long periods than short.

Why then could the district’s new deputy superintendent of finance and operations tell us what she thinks the taxable value of properties in the district will be in 2046 but not what enrollment will be?

The chart shows a steady decline in average daily attendance at the district up through 2022.  Average daily attendance is important because it is the primary source of revenue for the district.

How can she tell us with a straight face that attendance will magically stabilize six years from now in 2022 and that we will see no further declines?

Her numbers show a further 10% decline in attendance in the next 10 years.

Maybe we should be saving our money instead of buying luxuries.

We deserve better

Brutus


EPISD bond–transportation costs

July 19, 2016

The June 29, 2016 presentation to the facilities advisory committee at EPISD contained this slide:

episdconsolidation

They are considering the closure of these elementary schools:

Alta Vista

Beall

Bond

Bonham

Burnet

Collins

Crosby

Fannin

Jefferson

Kohlberg

Rivera

Roberts

Schuster

That’s thirteen elementary schools by my count.  Let’s assume that the consultants are right and that the schools need to be closed.

In that case a lot of students are going to have to travel further to get to school.

As I recall Texas requires the district to provide bus transportation for all children that live two miles or more from their assigned school.

We see nothing in the financial workups that show the increased cost in busses, drivers, and fuel.

We deserve better

Brutus

 


EPISD bonds–leaked out

July 18, 2016

We got taken to task recently for language that we used in Rubber stamp?, an article about the facilities advisory committee at EPISD and their work on the upcoming bond issue.

One of the criticisms was over the use of the term “leak out”.

We wrote:

“Worse yet committee members were supposedly told that they should not let word of the $600 million leak out to the public.”

The slide below was one of the last slides in a presentation that was made to the facilities advisory committee at their  June 29, 2016 meeting:

EPISDBondleakout

Proprietary

Many of us would consider the phrase “Keep your work proprietary to the committee” to mean don’t share with people outside of the committee.

We make our share of mistakes writing this blog but rest assured that we exert extra effort to confirm the facts as we know them.

We deserve better

Brutus