From PISD: Board of Trustees Call May 4 Bond Election

For our look at local sources of revenue.

- Click here for the notice. 

The Pearland Independent School District Board of Trustees called for a May 4 bond election to address infrastructure and district-wide technology needs.

After considering recommendations from the Bond Advisory Committee comprised of community members, business leaders, and parents, trustees called for a $30 million technology and a $75 million infrastructure bond election during their February 13 regular meeting.

Determining the need for technology and facility infrastructure bonds within Pearland ISD was comprehensive and rooted in careful analysis and planning.

The district started by thoroughly assessing its current technology and infrastructure assets. This involved evaluating the condition of existing facilities, finding any shortcomings or areas needing improvement, and checking if the technology resources were enough to support modern educational needs. After gathering assessment data, analyzing it, and taking input from stakeholders and consulting experts, the district formulated a detailed long-term plan for facilities and technology. These plans laid out strategic goals, priorities, and recommendations to address identified needs and ensure that facilities and technology infrastructure align with educational objectives.

The bond package, which seeks to address facility issues identified as top priorities by the committee, includes. . .

Infrastructure Proposition

Electrical: district-wide upgrades to lighting for cost efficiency and added security, including replacement of old lamps for LED indoor and outdoor and addition/replacement of deteriorated light poles; wiring and extension of circuits of existing generators at multiple locations; and replacement of aging electrical components.

HVAC: Replacement and rebuild of HVAC deteriorated system/components, including chiller, boiler, heating and domestic boilers, air handler, and more, at several campuses, district stadium, and Transportation East facility, as well as district-wide replacement of pipe insulation.

Plumbing: Replacement of aging roofing components, including roof drain “cow tongues” (Turner/PJH South), water lines (PJH West), and drainage improvements (Carleston drive).

Roofing: Replacement of existing roofs at PJH East, Rogers, Jamison, East Transportation, PACE Center, Shadycrest, Old ESC, PJH West, and Athletic buildings at PHS.

Life Safety: Upgrades to existing fire alarm systems at PACE Center, Rogers, Challenger, Rustic Oak, Silverlake, CJ Harris, PJH West Weight Room, East Transportation, PHS (Searcy) and Dawson (partial), elevator rebuilds at PHS, district stadium, Turner (2) and PJH South, district-wide fire sprinkler upgrades, campus handheld radio replacement and first responder radio coverage testing equipment.

Parking and Traffic: Parking lot replacement (Carleston and ESC), additional parking (Challenger) and re-painting of fire lanes (district-wide)

Interior Scope: Interior painting, sound system upgrades, Clock System upgrades, gym ceilings and floor refinish/repair, carpet replacement and slab repair/leveling.

Technology Proposition

The technology bond's total amount covers five years of expenses, which includes replacing teacher and student computers on a one-to-one basis, upgrading classroom technology, and investing in staff, teachers, and shared computers, labs, servers, storage, networking, and a data center.

If the proposed technology and infrastructure bonds are approved, most of the planned expenses for technology and infrastructure will be covered until 2032, allowing capital funds to become available for addressing transportation, program, and other operational needs.

If either or both bond propositions pass, the tax rates will stay consistent at the approved rate of $1.1373, which was established during the fall of 2023 through the passage of Pearland ISD’s Voter-Approval Tax Rate Election (VATRE). This stability is facilitated by Pearland ISD’s current capacity within the Interest and Sinking budget (I&S), which will cover the bond projects, alleviating the need for adjustments to the operating or Maintenance and Operations (M&O) budget.

A standout among local and state school districts, Pearland ISD has a history of excellence and innovation in fiscal management, having earned state recognition for its cost-effective operations, paired with high academic achievement and overall student success. According to Niche, the district was recently ranked No. 4 in the Houston area out of 53 and No. 30 out of 1,052 school districts in Texas.

“If the technology and facility infrastructure bonds passed, Pearland ISD would maximize available funding without increasing taxes, allowing us to enhance our educational resources and facilities and support creating a sustainable and strong financial future,” Superintendent Larry Berger said.

To vote in the May 4 election, individuals must be registered Brazoria County voters living in Pearland ISD before April 4. A list of polling places will be available closer to the election date.

For information about registering to vote and voting locations, please visit www.votetexas.gov.

If you have questions about the May 4 bond election, visit www.pearlandisd.org/bond or contact Pearland ISD at 281-485-3203.

From the Texas Tribune: A ballot box found weeks after Election Day has flipped a $569 million school bond vote in Midland

Wow

For our look at how elections are actually run.

- Click here for the article.

County officials found the missing box in early December. Taking into account those 836 votes, plus one stray ticket found separately from the box that had also been misplaced, the results flipped again. The new version of final results, which Land said should finally lay the issue to rest, was 11,800 votes in favor of the bond and 11,826 against. The result means that Midland ISD will not receive the authority to build two new high schools.

For those scoring at home, the bond passed, then failed, then passed and then failed again. Political groups on both sides of the bond vote will now ask the Midland County judge to cement the most recent results so all sides can “go forward,” Land said.

"Though this is not the result that supporters of the 2019 school bond worked for, it was what we expected and were prepared for," We Choose Our Future, the group in favor of the bond, wrote in a statement on Facebook. "Today’s exercise was an opportunity to build trust in the process for future elections and bring closure to this election so that the work on another bond plan can begin."

Cities, School Districts and Special Districts in Brazoria County

I copied these from the Brazoria County Elections Page. They all has elections last week on May 4. The links take you to the ballots presented to the voters.

School Districts
- Alvin ISD
- Angleton ISD
- Brazosport ISD
- Columbia-Brazoria ISD
- Danbury ISD
- Pearland ISD
- Sweeny ISD

Municipalities
- Alvin (City)
- Angleton (City)
- Brazoria
- Brookside Village
- Clute
- Freeport
- Iowa Colony
- Jones Creek
- Oyster Creek
- Pearland (City)
- Richwood
- Surfside Beach
- Sweeny (City)

Other Districts
- Sweeny Hospital
- Brazoria County Emergency Services District No. 6

From The Texas Tribune: Renewable energy proponents brace for last-minute attack on tax breaks for wind and solar

Tax breaks for wind and solar energy are discussed in the policy chapters of 2306.

- Click here for the article.

In the waning days of the 86th legislative session, as House and Senate lawmakers spend hours debating and voting on bills, wind and solar groups are watching for any last-minute attempt to make renewable projects ineligible for a local tax abatement program that benefits all types of industrial and commercial developments.

They have good reason to be on high alert.

Ahead of the legislative session, the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation — the Austin-based policy institute that is an ideological beacon for many Republicans — launched a crusade against renewable energy subsidies at all levels of government. Locally, the foundation has zeroed in on property tax abatements granted under chapters 312 and 313 of the state tax code that cities, counties, school districts and other taxing entities have wielded for almost two decades to lure oil refineries and — more recently — wind farms alike.

The crux of the foundation’s argument against renewable energy subsidies is that they distort the electric market, leading to artificially low prices.

The billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies that have been awarded to renewable projects at the local, state and federal level — $16 billion, according to the foundation — “has allowed renewable energy generators ... to sell their electricity at whatever price they need to get it onto the market, which drives prices low, into negative territory,” Bill Peacock, the foundation’s vice president for research, said in an interview earlier this year.

Still, lawmakers are moving to renew both programs; Chapter 312 would otherwise expire this year, followed by 313 in 2022.

No legislation has been filed that would strip renewables from the abatement programs. But lawmakers always have the option of proposing last-minute amendments to bills just before the House or Senate vote on them.

And that’s what Jeffrey Clark, president of the pro-renewables Advanced Power Alliance, is expecting.
Mentioned in the article:

- 86th legislative session.
- property tax.
- tax abatements
- Texas Public Policy Foundation.
- state tax code.
- subsidies.
- Advanced Power Alliance.
- last-minute amendments to bills.
- University of Texas at Austin’s Energy Institute.
- corporate welfare.
- school districts.
- Todd Staples.
- Texas Oil and Gas Association.

From CityLab: The Stadiums That Ate Texas Why are these Dallas suburbs funding the most expensive high school football stadiums ever built?

Good question.

For 2306 - mostly.

- Click here for the article.

In Texas, the old hands say there are only two seasons: spring football and fall football. But lately there’s a year-round game getting played as well: the competition to build the most expensive high school football stadium in the world.

Why would relatively small exurban school districts like McKinney build enormous football stadiums that will sit empty most of the year (and are often less than half-full even on game day)?

Part of the answer involves the area’s projected future growth. The town’s population has tripled over the past fifteen years. In the 2000 Census, McKinney had 54,369 residents. The most recent estimate (July 1, 2015) put the population at 162,898. Rick McDaniel, superintendent of the McKinney ISD and a former high school football coach, seems to be confident that the spectacular new McKinney stadium will soon fill up. “We’re visionaries,” he told the Dallas Morning News, and said that the stadium was part of “a vision for McKinney ISD that will propel us forward for a long time.” (His office did not respond to requests for comment for this story.)

The structure of the Texas school system also seems to encourage such infrastructure spending. By law, each ISD board has the power to call referendums when they choose to raise bond money. They act and can raise funds separately from their local municipal governments. But the bond money can go only toward construction and renovation of facilities, acquisition of land, and purchase of equipment, not toward expanding education opportunities for students or paying for teachers. (Texas ranks 38th out of 50 states in per-pupil education spending; in McKinney, per-pupil expenditures totaled $7,345 in 2013, compared to a national average of $11,841, according to an Education Week analysis of federal data.)

Curtis Rath, a McKinney community activist and blogger on city politics, has been an aggressive critic of this arrangement on his site, Texas Transparency; there, fans and foes of the McKinney stadium project hotly debate the issue in the comments. Rath argues that firms that stood to benefit from construction projects joined forces with local landowners, contractors, boosters, and school officials to market the benefits of high-profile school structures to McKinney voters. “They sold it by overstating the need for the new stadium,” he says.

Along with the political and business forces pushing to build new facilities for which there may be questionable need, there’s also the “wow” factor. Like many fast-growth Sun Belt communities, the burgeoning municipalities north of Dallas span vast landscapes interlaced by highways, office parks, and new housing developments. With all of these towns scrambling for residents and businesses to move into their new neighborhoods and shopping centers, splashy sports facilities serve as branding tools.

McKinney City Manager Paul Grimes says that the new stadium will help him better market the town as it competes with Allen, Frisco, Plano and beyond. “While it is a significant investment,” he says via email, “the stadium will…help to attract visitors and families to our rapidly growing community.”

From the Texas Tribune: Analysis: Rising local school property taxes ease state budget woes

This is good news, I guess.

- Click here for the story.

It would not be completely accurate to say billions in local school tax money is being used for general state spending.

But it wouldn’t exactly be wrong, either.

Property-rich school districts in Texas hate sending money to the state to help property-poor school districts. But the state has little incentive to change that system: Every dollar the rich districts send in is a dollar the state itself doesn’t have to spend.

The money coming in from those property-rich districts is quite a pile, too. For lawmakers writing the 2018-19 budget, that “recapture” money will increase by an estimated $1.44 billion, freeing that much state money for other general spending.

The richer school districts (“richer” here refers to the value of their real estate and not to the incomes of the residents) are sending $3.69 billion to the state in the 2016-17 budget period. The state has to use that money on public education; it’s an effort to level out the differences in how much money is available to educate kids from different parts of the state.

That said, any money that comes in from the rich districts allows the state to spend the dollars it would have spent on education on other programs and services. The numbers are rising, too. The Texas Education Agency estimates it will “recapture” $5.13 billion during the next budget period, up from $3.69 billion in the current budget.

At the same time the agency’s official budget request to state lawmakers would require the state to spend 8.4 percent less from general revenue than the current budget a drop that’s partly attributable to the increase in recapture money available to the state.

Intentionally or not, it’s a great political deal for state lawmakers. They can squawk at local school districts for high property tax rates at the same time they’re using some of that money to lower the state’s expenses for public education.

The locally raised taxes recaptured from property-wealthy districts lower the amount of state-raised money — sales taxes and so on — that have to be spent on schools. Local taxpayers, in this case, are saving state taxpayers some money.

Intentionally or not, it’s a great political deal for state lawmakers. They can squawk at local school districts for high property tax rates at the same time they’re using some of that money to lower the state’s expenses for public education. The state budget is easier to balance because of the local tax money marbled into school spending.

Not so tough on crime

One way to reduce crime is to not define every problem as a criminal act subject to law enforcement. Two Texas Tribune stories touch on this idea.

- Most embrace some reforms in Court of Criminal Appeals races.

Regardless of party, most of the candidates for the state's highest criminal court say they want to see more cases involving drug addiction and mental illness moved out of the criminal justice system.

. . . Keasler and Meyers – a conservative and progressive, respectively, and two of the longest-serving judges on the court – said people dealing with drug addiction and mental illness don't belong in the criminal justice system. Walker said he's faced the issue with his clients.

"I see people all the time – I've had several cases recently where my clients are competent to stand trial, but they're not really capable of keeping up with probation. They honestly can't," Walker said. "And they need a very intensive type of probation with a whole lot of help. The system can't just put those kind of people out on the street and expect them to show up when they're supposed to show up and do all the programs they're supposed to do without some very intensive help."

Burns, who has presided over a diversion program for more than four years, said helping these offenders instead of punishing them works out in the long run.

"When it comes to drug offenses, I'm a big believer in diversionary programs," Burns said. "I really think that treatment works much better than incarceration because if you don't treat people who have drug problems, they're going to fail on probation and then they're going to end up in prison. It really starts a cycle of failure and criminality."

- Two school districts accused of violating new truancy law.

Two Texas school districts are not following a new law designed to reduce the number of students who end up in truancy courts, an alliance of advocacy groups claimed on Monday.

In complaints filed with the Texas Education Agency, Disability Rights Texas, Texas Appleseed and the National Center for Youth Law accused the El Paso and Mesquite independent school districts of violating provisions of House Bill 2398, a measure designed to decriminalize multiple absences and encourage schools to intervene before court action is taken.

Under the new law, school districts are no longer able to send students with three unexcused absences within a four-week period to truancy courts. School officials must instead notify parents of the absences and warn them of the penalties, which include a fine or loss of driving privileges if the student acquires more absences. A criminal complaint against the parents may eventually be filed as well.

The bill also requires public schools to implement truancy prevention programs and develop new methods of punishing students are punished after multiple absences. It also mandates that parents and educators have face-to-face meetings, and that students be enrolled in a truancy prevention program.

From Off The Kuff: Two point of view on the HISD ballot proposal.

Yes - Interview with Jay Aiyer.
No - Interview with David Thompson.

From the Houston Chronicle: Robbing HISD - Voters should say 'no' to putting district under the Robin Hood recapture plan.

Voters who live in the boundaries of HISD have the chance to approve or disapprove subjecting itself to recapture - otherwise known as the Robin Hood plan.

The paper argues that voters should vote against the referendum.

- Click here for the article.

Voters will face a test on Election Day, and whether they answer correctly will determine the future of the Houston Independent School District. It should be a simple question, but it's written in the obtuse vernacular of lawmakers who really don't want voters to understand it.

The ballot provision will ask voters to authorize the board of trustees of HISD to purchase attendance credits from the state with local tax revenue. That sounds like a good, progressive measure, but be warned - it is a trick question.

The ballot is really asking whether HISD should submit itself to state recapture and send $162  million in local property tax dollars to Austin. The correct answer is "NO," or "AGAINST."

If this misleading ballot provision passes, HISD will not only be required to send $162 million in local property tax dollars to the state next year. The district will also likely face higher annual payments for the foreseeable future under the state's broken school finance system.

The mandate comes about because rising property values have made HISD subject to "Robin Hood" provisions under the Texas Education Code. All those skyscrapers and rapidly appreciating homes have apparently pushed HISD over the top.

As Texas schools are financed through property taxes, the recapture provisions (what we know as Robin Hood) were supposed to provide a way to equalize school funding across the state - for poor and wealthy schools alike.

In May, the Texas Supreme Court held that this system of school finance is marginally constitutional. Consider that assessment a D-minus grade. The fact of the matter is that the state's school funding formula fails to accomplish its intended goals of helping poor school districts.

Technically these recaptured funds are supposed to help schools that need the resources. If the provision worked like a true Robin Hood, it would "rob" from the rich and "give" to the poor. But in reality, the system robs from the poor and gives to legislators so that they don't have to raise state taxes. There's no guarantee that poor schools will receive a single extra dime if HISD pays up.

How does this work? Simply put, the state keeps two bank accounts: one for general revenue and one for the recaptured Robin Hood sums. Every dollar that the state pays from Robin Hood frees up general revenue money that the state otherwise would have to spend to help poor schools. So instead of giving extra money to needy districts, any HISD money will essentially be spent on highways, border security or some other appropriation besides education.

If this passes, then HISD is projected to send more than $1 billion of our local property taxes to the state over the next four years. Not only does that hurt HISD, but it looks an awful lot like a state property tax - which is prohibited in the Texas Constitution.

For the relevant statutes: TEA: Chapter 41: Wealth Equalization.

And there's this:

- Wikipedia: Robin Hood Plan.

From the Texas Tribune: Analysis: A Game of Chicken Between Texas, Its Biggest School District

More on the purpose of the proposition that will be offered to HISD voters related to capture - and some useful commentary on the problems posed by confusing ballot language.

- Click here for the article.

Voters in Texas’ biggest school district in Texas might do what the nine Republicans on the state’s Supreme Court wouldn’t do: Force the Legislature to overhaul the way it pays for public education.

Such a move would require some daring. Voters in the Houston Independent School District will have a choice in November to approve spending $165 million raised locally from school property taxes on other, poorer school districts in the state.

The ballot language is opaque, and a pretty good argument for improving the writing skills of the people in charge of state and local governments: “Authorizing the board of trustees of Houston Independent School District to purchase attendance credits from the state with local tax revenues.”

The actual choice presented by that ballot measure? Vote “for” spending $165 million of the district’s money in other districts, or vote “against” spending that money and risk taking $18 billion of the district’s commercial properties from the tax rolls and assigning them to the tax rolls of another district.

A “No” vote in November — urged by many of the HISD’s trustees, the city’s mayor, and others — would spark some political drama.

About one Texas school district in four spends some of its locally raised money to help educate students in districts that can’t raise enough money from their own tax bases. It’s called recapture by the policy wonks, but because it takes from “property rich” districts and gives to “property poor” districts, it’s more commonly called the Robin Hood system.

When a district’s voters refuse to go along — something that hasn’t happened — the Texas Education Agency is required to move part of that district’s property tax base to another, poorer district.

The agency obviously doesn’t move the real estate, but it would assign some of one district’s biggest commercial property taxpayers to pay taxes in another district. The law gives a preference to closer districts.

In HISD’s case, a “no” vote would mean taking an estimated $18 billion in property from that district’s rolls. The TEA would start with the most valuable properties and work its way down until it has taken away enough property to cover the $165 million or so that HISD owes under the Robin Hood system.

An opinion piece from the Houston Chronicle: Robbing HISD - Voters should say 'no' to putting district under the Robin Hood recapture plan.

For 2306 mostly - this touched on single purpose governments, education policy, and referendum elections.

- Click here for it.

Voters will face a test on Election Day, and whether they answer correctly will determine the future of the Houston Independent School District. It should be a simple question, but it's written in the obtuse vernacular of lawmakers who really don't want voters to understand it.

The ballot provision will ask voters to authorize the board of trustees of HISD to purchase attendance credits from the state with local tax revenue. That sounds like a good, progressive measure, but be warned - it is a trick question.

The ballot is really asking whether HISD should submit itself to state recapture and send $162  million in local property tax dollars to Austin. The correct answer is "NO."

If this misleading ballot provision passes, HISD will not only be required to send $162 million in local property tax dollars to the state next year. The district will also likely face higher annual payments for the foreseeable future under the state's broken school finance system.

The mandate comes about because rising property values have made HISD subject to "Robin Hood" provisions under the Texas Education Code. All those skyscrapers and rapidly appreciating homes have apparently pushed HISD over the top.

As Texas schools are financed through property taxes, the recapture provisions (what we know as Robin Hood) were supposed to provide a way to equalize school funding across the state - for poor and wealthy schools alike.

In May, the Texas Supreme Court held that this system of school finance is marginally constitutional. Consider that assessment a D-minus grade. The fact of the matter is that the state's school funding formula fails to accomplish its intended goals of helping poor school districts.

Technically these recaptured funds are supposed to help schools that need the resources. If the provision worked like a true Robin Hood, it would "rob" from the rich and "give" to the poor. But in reality, the system robs from the poor and gives to legislators so that they don't have to raise state taxes. There's no guarantee that poor schools will receive a single extra dime if HISD pays up.

How does this work? Simply put, the state keeps two bank accounts: one for general revenue and one for the recaptured Robin Hood sums. Every dollar that the state pays from Robin Hood frees up general revenue money that the state otherwise would have to spend to help poor schools. So instead of giving extra money to needy districts, any HISD money will essentially be spent on highways, border security or some other appropriation besides education.

If this passes, then HISD is projected to send more than $1 billion of our local property taxes to the state over the next four years. Not only does that hurt HISD, but it looks an awful lot like a state property tax - which is prohibited in the Texas Constitution.
Houston's economy is strong and diverse, but to maintain that edge Houston needs well-educated students. If HISD has to pay recapture, it will face a $95 million budget deficit in the next budget cycle.

In an ironic twist, that budget deficit will end up hurting the very students that Robin Hood is supposed to help. More than 75 percent of HISD students are disadvantaged. It is a sign of our bizarre and busted school finance system that the district with the largest number of poor families will have to give away critically needed resources.

Voters can block this preposterous outcome. By voting no, Houstonians will keep their money and instead authorize the commissioner of education to detach $18 billion worth of commercial property from HISD and assign it to other school districts. This has never happened before, and such a radical move would give the Legislature an opportunity to rectify the situation.

A "no" vote won't end the problem. However, it will give the Legislature the entire 2017 session to fix school finance in Texas and keep local taxpayer dollars in our HISD schools.

It is a tricky question, but the answer is simple. Vote "No" on attendance credits.

From the Fort Worth Start-Telegram: Texas comptroller gives Tarrant County school districts a grace period

A bit on conflict over funding K-12 in Texas.

- Click here for the article.

As bad as things appear with the loss of millions of dollars in local property taxes for schools, the financial problems could have been worse if the Texas comptroller’s office had not stepped in to avert a potential double whammy.

The threat of state cuts occurred because of a mismatch between the property value estimates reported by the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts and the Tarrant Appraisal District. State law requires a difference of several percentage points, and fixing the difference can lead to a process in which local entities could lose substantial revenue.

The school districts dodged the potential financial disaster when the state comptroller declared a two-year grace period and used the local appraisal district’s lower property value estimate, instead of its own, to calculate state aid.

“I was sick to my stomach and sweating BBs at the time,” said Jim Schiele, chief financial officer of the Eagle Mountain-Saginaw school district.

Now school CFOs like Schiele are hoping that TAD appraisals will be in line with the comptroller’s estimates in 2016. After next year, the comptroller may not give school districts a pass if TAD’s appraisals don’t appear realistic.

“I don’t have any more get-out-of-jail free cards,” Fort Worth district CFO Elsie Schiro said. “God forbid that something goes wrong.”

The problems were created by the software conversion of more than 1.6 million property tax records at the Tarrant Appraisal District, which resulted in some incomplete appraisals and slowed down appraisal activities for several months.

From the Texas Tribune: Cheerleader Case Can Proceed, State Supreme Court Rules

This smells like a potential US Supreme Court case.

It concerns whether the breakaway banners cheerleaders in Kountze High School created for football players to crash though violated the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution.They were in the habit of painting biblical verses on them. Since it is a public high school, such actions can be seen to be a governmental endorse of a particular religious views over others. To avoid lawsuits, the ISD ruled that they could not paint religious messages on the banners, but the cheerleaders sued.

The ISD countered that they could not do so, but the decision by the Texas Supreme Court was simply that a lawsuit filed by the cheerleaders could go forward. There has yet to be a substantive ruling on the merits of the case - that is the actual constitutional question posed by the dispute. Now the process is in place to figure that out.

- Click here for the article.

The East Texas students have been fighting for the ability to cite Bible verses as part of their cheerleading routines since 2012, when the Kountze Independent School District told the squad they could not paint Christian messages on the banners football players ran through before their games.

The district instituted the ban after the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which advocates for the separation of church and state, threatened to sue. Foundation members argued that because the Bible-quoting signs were held by cheerleaders wearing official school uniforms, and at official school events, they were tantamount to school-sponsored religious activities.

The ban didn’t put an end to the district’s legal woes — because the cheerleaders’ parents promptly filed a lawsuit of their own, claiming the ban violated their children’s right to free speech. The squad members came up with the banner ideas on their own, and bought the supplies with their own money, making it clear they were acting as individuals, the cheerleaders’ parents said.

The case has been making its way through the legal system ever since. In 2013, the Kountze district independently overturned its “no Bible messages” ban, but families of several cheerleaders kept pursuing the lawsuit anyway. Eventually, the 9th Texas Court of Appeals threw the case out, ruling that because the policy was no longer in effect, the lawsuit was moot.

On Friday, the Texas Supreme Court overruled the lower court's decision, writing that the lawsuit should be allowed to continue because the ban could “reasonably be expected” to be reinstated.

“The District no longer prohibits the cheerleaders from displaying religious signs or messages on banners at school-sponsored events,” Justice John Devine wrote in the opinion. “But that change hardly makes ‘absolutely clear’ that the District will not reverse itself after this litigation is concluded.”

For the actual decision by the court click here.

Bonds, Bonds and more Bonds!

Texas Watchdog has a couple items on the assortment of bonds that will be on the ballot in the upcoming election. The first takes a critical look at the one that will be on our ballot, the one asking AISD voters to approve over $250 million in spending on several new campuses.

- Small town wants to build 5 of the costliest schools in Texas history. The author takes issue with the amount of money spent on school construction in the state. He also points to a potentially cozy relationship between something called the Fast School Growth Coalition - which hopes to eliminate caps on property taxes - and the Texas House Public Education Committee. It seems that the daughter of the chair of the committee lobbies for the group.

- Light turnouts, low information hike local debt in Texas. Here the author looks at the dynamic of bond elections and points out that many pass - he claims a 75% passage rate - largely because proponents of the bonds are able to take advantage of low turnout and low information and persuade a sufficient number of voters that the expenditures are in the best interests of their communities. He also points out that while the governing entities that are proposing the bonds cannot advertise for them, the interest groups that will benefit from them can and do.

The author also points to a handy page on the comptroller's website that lists all of the bonds on the various ballots throughout the state this November.

- Texas Transparency: Upcoming Bond Election Roundup.

From the Texas State Historical Association: This Day in History #1

Edgewood v. Kirby filed:

On this day in 1984, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) filed a landmark suit against Texas education commissioner William Kirby in Travis County. In Edgewood ISD v. Kirby, filed on behalf of the Edgewood Independent School District, MALDEF charged that the state's methods of funding public education violated at least four principles of the state constitution, which obligate the state legislature to provide an efficient and free public school system. Initially, eight school districts and twenty-one parents were represented in the suit; eventually, sixty-seven other school districts and many other parents and students joined the original plaintiffs. The plaintiffs in Edgewood contested the state's reliance on local property taxes to finance public education on the grounds that property values vary greatly from district to district, thus creating inequality in education funds. The case took years to work its way through the courts, but in 1990 the Texas Supreme Court delivered a unanimous decision siding with the plaintiffs. In 1993, after several earlier attempts were declared unconstitutional, the legislature passed a school finance reform plan comprising several options for equalizing funding. In 1995 the Texas Supreme Court found the plan constitutional but ruled that the legislature still needed to work on equalizing and improving school facilities throughout the state.

Federalism, local control and school closures

I think the slow, plodding, piece meal decisions to close schools yesterday - one by one - due to the suspicion that the weather might be bad today is an example of the disadvantage of local control.

I can be convinced otherwise though.

Regardless - try to be safe out there on those mean frozen streets.

The entire CSCOPE lesson plan

Courtesy of the Texas Tribune.

We should click through the section on government at some point to see what the fuss is about.

The CSCOPE debate

CSCOPE, a K-12 educational curriculum support system designed to assist the smaller ISD's in Texas to prepare it students for the STARR tests (State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness) has been controversial for a variety of reasons.

Teachers complain it imposes limits on what they do in the classroom and parent complain about a lack of transparency - they can't see the lesson plans.

But the most heated area has to do - no big surprise - with content. How do students cover certain subjects, most social studies?

A month back - while we were discussing the importance of education in maintaining republics - a debate was held between a member of the State Board of Education - Thomas Ratliff - and the chair of the State Senate's Education Committee - Dan Patrick. While both men are Republicans, Patrick is affiliated with the Tea Party wing of the party. Ratliff sides with the moderates.

The Tea Party maintains the curriculum is liberal, Anti-American and pro-Islamic.

For further background:

- Ratliff, Patrick Exchange Words over CSCOPE Lessons.
- Debate again thrusts CSCOPE into Texas spotlight.
- Sen. CSCOPE announce sweeping changes.

The curriculum was designed by the Texas Education Service Center Curriculum Collaborative and overseen by the Texas Curriculum Management Program.

From the Chronicle: State orders North Forest ISD to close

Some material for our eventual look at public education in the state.

State officials on Thursday once again recommended pulling the plug on the troubled North Forest Independent School district.

Texas Education Commissioner Michael Williams recommended that the district of 6,900 students be annexed into the mammoth Houston ISD effective July 1. His statement came just two days after the district said it would seek a partnership with Texas A&M University to assume day-to-day operations of its 10 schools.

. . . North Forest ISD's enrollment is down more than 40 percent in 10 years. The district has garnered the state's lowest performance rating for three years and has also struggled financially, amassing an $8 million debt and nearing bankruptcy.

North Forest High School, where the Class of 2011's dropout rate was slightly more than 30 percent, has been deemed "academically unacceptable" by TEA for six years straight. In spring 2012, ninth-graders' HISD.

Do Bible verses on football "run-through" signs violated the establishment clause?

Looks like we will find out sometime in the near future.

This seems to be an interesting look at how schools struggle with student led attempts to promote a religious point of view in a public setting where there is a requirement that the institution itself be neutral.

Cheerleaders at Kountze High School have been using Bible quotes on signs at football games, but have been prevented from doing so by the KISD's superintendent on the legal advice of the Texas Association of School Boards. Past court decisions have maintained that school sponsored groups can be taken as sending a message that the public school - meaning the state - is endorsing a specific religious point of view at the expense of others.

Some of the cheerleader's parents filed suits and obtained a restraining order from a judge. The order mandates "the Kountze Independent School District to "cease and desist" from preventing high school cheerleaders from displaying the large paper banners, through which football players ran at the start of games." The Texas Attorney General argues that the signs do not violate First Amendment rights and has offered to help the cheerleaders.

A hearing is scheduled October 4th, so we'll keep up with this story. It could be with us a while.

Related links, stories, interested groups:
- Kountze High School Cheerleaders Fight to Use Bible Verses as Signs at Football Games.
- Judge Allows Kountze High School Cheerleaders to Use Bible Banners.
- Texas AG offers to help school district in battle over religious banners.
- First Amendment Center
- American United for the Separation of Church and State
- Liberty Institute
- Freedom from Religion Foundation.
- Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe
- Texas Association of School Boards.