Suggestions for the new EPISD board

May 13, 2015

Now that we have an elected El Paso Independent School District board, allow me to offer a few suggestions.

Stop the new central office

The city wants EPISD to move away from the land they have been leasing to the district.  I hope that the new board works to convince the city to let the district stay.  The estimates that have been shared with us are that the move will cost forty to fifty million dollars.

The school district pays for the land.  Many of us guess that the city wants to use the land to build another airport hotel.  If things proceed as they have been this hotel will receive tax subsidies from the city.  How can the taxpayers benefit from a situation like this when the move will put us forty to fifty million dollars in the hole before they even break ground on a new hotel and the city already has a paying customer.

Stop the one million dollar architectural contract the district has signed to design the new central office.  If it turns out that the city will not budge, then the district should find an unused building and move there.  There is talk of closing some schools because of declining enrollment.  Make do with one of those buildings.

Pay as you go

The district has it’s hands tied here in many ways.  State laws control much of the ways schools are financed.  The board should do what it can to avoid assuming debt.  Some of us might understand taking on debt if the district was growing and more capacity was needed.  In our case district enrollment is declining and there is talk of floating bonds to build more buildings.

If some new debt is unavoidable, seek approval from the voters in smaller amounts.  Come to us with plans to solve some of the district’s problems over the next three or four years.  Prove to us that the board and district staff can use our money wisely and for the things that we approved, then if necessary ask for more money to handle the following three or four years.  Don’t come to us with a $600 million bond issue all at once.  The voters in the Ysleta district just turned down a $451 million bond issue and Ysleta has not been involved in the scandals that your prior boards have.

Get rid of the incompetents

I know and have dealt with many central office employees who are competent and hard working.  There are some really fine people there.  We also have some that are not competent and should be terminated.  It actually would not be difficult to find out which is which.  The teachers know who these people are.

Teachers are a different matter because of their contracts.  Once a teacher has been with the district for a while it is far more difficult to get rid of an underperforming one.  The contracts need to be changed.

Physical education

The district must follow state rules relating to  academic testing.  Many of us feel that the issue is handled poorly and that the district and the teachers should be allowed more flexibility.

Physical education is another matter.  While there are good coaches and schools with good programs just asking the students would tell us where we are not getting the job done.

Change your attitude

The prior school boards and the board of managers have done damage to the district’s relationship with it’s citizens.  Eliminate the parliamentary tricks that are being used to restrict public input.  Stop scheduling meetings when you know the public and district employees will not be able to attend.

Start listening to your citizens.

I feel certain that our readers will come forward with their thoughts.

We deserve better

Brutus

 


City ignores state requirements

May 6, 2015

This came in from Helen Marshall yesterday:

The Times reports today that the city election candidates’ financial reports earlier said to be filed late were in fact filed on time electronically; BUT only four of them went on the city clerk’s website on Friday, the day they were supposed to be viewed by the public.  BECAUSE – wait for it – the city clerk’s office is closed on Friday!  And of course, no one could be assigned to come in to work to perform an important electoral function.   One candidate used a committee to raise funds and the city has no way for that committee to file a report electronically – gee, they only had two months to figure that out – and so when the committee went to the clerk’s office on Friday with its paper report to file, they found a closed office.  OK, let’s say they should have realized that no duty would get in the way of Friday closing.   The Deputy City Clerk said that “even though committee reports cannot be submitted electronically at this time, and the city clerk’s office was closed on Friday,technically the committee’s report is still considered late.”   Translation – whoever is to blame for this, it is not the City Clerk’s office, we aren’t giving up our Fridays for anything, get that?

 
 

Brutus

 


They lied

April 15, 2015

The chart we posted the other day in Try to get a home mortgage like this one has been on my mind and I  finally figured out why.

Let’s go back to the ball park financing issue as it rolled out to the taxpayers.

  1. We were told that the ball park was going to be built whether we wanted it or not.  The election was not about whether to build the ball park but how it would be paid for.
  2. We were told that if we voted yes in the election the hotel occupancy tax would pay for the costs of building the ball park.
  3. We were told that state law forbid the use of property tax receipts to pay for the ball park because of the statute they chose to use to create the funding.

Yet the chart that the city came up with after the election  shows that the city did not intend to pay any of the principal due on the debt for the first ten years of financing.

Why?  There was not enough money projected to come in from the hotel occupancy taxes (HOT).  They admitted right there and then that HOT money would not be adequate to pay for the ball park.  In fact HOT money is not even sufficient to pay the interest on the debt.  They are using general fund money to make up the shortfall.  The general fund gets revenue from property taxes, sales taxes, and fines and fees.

They knew

If the chart showed the city paying both principal and interest starting in year one and HOT money proved to be insufficient then we might be convinced to believe that someone just missed a number.  In this case however they planned to skip principal payments for the first ten years.  Why?  Because they knew HOT money would not be sufficient to pay for the ball park and lying to the bond buyers could land them in jail.

Lying to us was a choice they made because they did not expect repercussions.

We deserve better

Brutus


Try to get a home mortgage like this one

April 14, 2015

Back in 2013 we were told that our debt costs relating to the ball park were going to be $17 million more than the numbers we had when the election was held.

The reason?  Bond buyers thought our deal was too risky and they wanted more money in return for their risk.

Well as it turns out the real number was $27.5 million.

According to the Times the Downtown Development Corporation (city council in sheep’s clothing) was never told about the extra $10.5 million.

How convenient.  Those bad former city employees did this to us.  Never mind council’s responsibility to see to it that our money is managed well.

Now we are being told that general fund money will be necessary until 2023.

That isn’t the half of it. The city’s chart printed below shows that we are not even going to make principal payments until 2023.  Then we will have to make a $17.6 million dollar payment against the principal. Where will that money come from?  If they take it from the general fund they will be using property tax money and Texas law does not allow that.  Will some future council have to levy some new fee?  Will there be a bond election to issue debt to pay debt?

2013aTaxExemptBonds

 

Will the perpetrators ever be punished?

We deserve better

Brutus

 


Roosters coming home

April 13, 2015

It should not surprise us that the numbers recently released by the city show that their previous revenue projections relating to the ballpark were wrong.

Hotel occupancy taxes, sales taxes, and parking revenue were all over estimated.  Even the “crazies” might see how one number was missed, but all three?

One number came in better than expected–ticket sales.  More people attended games than they projected.  That is good.

Why then were parking revenues below expectations?  Did someone game that revenue source or was the original number miscomputed?  A city official promised to look into that.

The net effect is that the city had to take almost one million dollars out of the general fund to pay interest on the bonds that we were told would be self sustaining.

The general fund is made up of property and sales taxes as well as fees and fines.  Last year city council had to levy a multi-million dollar fee against water bills to cover a shortfall in the city budget.

Texas state law does not allow the city to pay for the ballpark with property taxes because of the way the election was held.  Yet the city is using general fund money to do it.

Some will try to argue that the specific part of the general fund they are using does not come from property taxes.  That is like trying to argue that your spouse’s paycheck does not contribute to your mortgage payment.

The facts are in.  There should be consequences for the people that did this to us.   If laws have not been violated then maybe at the least we should publicly shun the former city employees that did this to us.

What will the city council do about this?

We deserve better

Brutus