Can we revisit the CSISD Bond Discussion (signs are up, voting day approaches) - Page 8

Stupe

8:14p, 10/26/23

In reply to cypress-ag

Quote:
Petty differences among the families of two high schools shouldn't stop these bonds.

There is nothing accurate about that statement.

cslifer

8:27p, 10/26/23

In reply to Stupe

So you think petty differences SHOULD stop the bonds?

Stupe

8:53p, 10/26/23

In reply to cslifer

I'm not going to play the "twist my words" game.

Go back and read the the thread.

atp2007

8:55p, 10/26/23

Bond issues are supposed to me for capital expenditures not operational ones. C is an operational issue. The only one that is a yes is A and it should be half of what is proposed. Much of A are deferred maintenance items that should have been part of the normal operating budget each year.

cslifer

9:04p, 10/26/23

In reply to Stupe

He said petty issues shouldn't hold up bond issues (which I agree with). You said that no part of his statement was accurate. If one was to believe that his statement is inaccurate then you logically believe that petty differences should hold up bonds. It's your opinion, and I respect you for putting it out for all to see even though I disagree with it.

oldag76

5:12p, 10/27/23

In reply to SARATOGA

I believe the Navasota school boundry is NORTH of Millican /159

Stupe

6:21p, 10/27/23

In reply to Tailgate88

Quote:
This is an inaccurate characterization. CSHS Parents have been more than supportive of the bond issues to provide funds for AMCHS. There was a time in the years following the opening of CSHS a decade ago where there was some friction between the fanbases, but for the most part those have been resolved. "Two Cats, One Pride" has been embraced by both schools and we cheer for each other (EXCEPT when we play each other like this coming Friday night).

Yep.

"Purple parents" have been some of the most vocal supporters of improvements at Consol. Including the board members of the Cougar Club asking parents to support the bonds.
I go to a lot of sporting events from both schools because of my kids and the kids of my friends. Everyone that we talk to wants the improvements to Consol to get done.
Outside of a few people that continue to push it, there is no "us vs them" attitude.

That narrative has mostly come from the different versions of the school board acting on something that isn't there. The issue with the scoreboard wasn't even an issue until the school board made it one. There weren't a bunch of parents complaining because CSHS has raised money for a scoreboard. It was the board members that caused the problem because they had to insert themselves into it.

Quote:
There was a time in the years following the opening of CSHS a decade ago where there was some friction between the fanbases, but for the most part those have been resolved.

Most of that was whether or not the new high school was going to get an on campus stadium. And they kept calling it a "football" stadium and not "multi purpose". Ignoring the fact that soccer and track also use it. And that the middle school could use it if the weather made those fields unplayable.

There has been no concerted effort by CSHS parents to block the the improvements. It's the exact opposite.
The narrative that "purple" parents don't want improvements at Consol and are voting against it is a pile of garbage.

George Costanza

3:59p, 10/29/23

In reply to UmustBKidding

"I can't wait to vote for useless crap once my taxes are frozen. JK its still a drag on humanity. I do believe that if you are elected to a position that is involved in setting the tax rate your rate lock should be permanently deleted."

Haven't looked too deeply, but other than maybe McAdams it doesn't look like any of the board members are even close to being old enough for their taxes to be frozen. They all look 30s and 40s.

UmustBKidding

4:38p, 10/29/23

In reply to George Costanza

Locally this would affect council and commissioner court primarily but we had members of the school board here locally that were past the freeze age.

doubledog

7:52p, 10/29/23

In reply to Tibbers

Tibbers said:
Why don't they set traps? Hire pest control? Maintain the property? Doesn't cost 350 million to do simple maintenance.

This is one reason why we should put a pause on this whole issue and return to it when all of the alternatives have been exhausted.

TAMU1990

8:13p, 10/30/23

In reply to doubledog

doubledog said:
Tibbers said:
Why don't they set traps? Hire pest control? Maintain the property? Doesn't cost 350 million to do simple maintenance.
This is one reason why we should put a pause on this whole issue and return to it when all of the alternatives have been exhausted.

They aren't spending $350M on maintenance. They are adding space and knocking out walls.

The options have been exhausted when kids are laying on floors, don't have lockers in the main field house with their teams, can't lift as a team, and are utilizing hallways to work out due to overcrowding. Playing time is lost in baseball because the infield floods with typical rainfall (not heavy rainfall). Everything associated with softball is old - just drive by it and look at it for yourself.

The sheer number of students in the schools means the options have been exhausted. Consol was built as a 4A school and they are knocking on the doorstep of 6A. They have added to the main building over the years but the facilities/extra curricular areas haven't been touched. The size of the cafeteria and library are too small. The auditorium needs to be updated. Fine Arts areas need more space.

I will never vote for a 3rd HS due to the incompetence of the district when expanding from 1 to 2 high schools. Somebody will have to be assigned to Consol - that's one way to have your tax burden lowered - and the kids who are assigned will be in a dump if nothing is done.

cslifer

7:03a, 10/31/23

In reply to TAMU1990

You will "never vote for a 3rd high school"? What do you propose is to be done down the road as the city continues to grow? At some point it will be needed.

TAMU1990

8:41p, 11/1/23

In reply to cslifer

cslifer said:
You will "never vote for a 3rd high school"? What do you propose is to be done down the road as the city continues to grow? At some point it will be needed.

At this moment the district is in a trust deficit. They have to do right by Consol first before they get another chance for me to consider any 3rd HS proposal. It will be unacceptable to leave Consol as the dump while they have two newer schools. If a 3rd HS makes it to a ballot, the zoning patterns for all three schools would have to be completed before the election for voters to vote upon.

Stupe

8:33a, 11/2/23

In reply to TAMU1990

I don't see eye-to-eye with TAMU1990 on a lot of subjects when it comes to Consol / CSHS.

Everything in that post is bull's-eye accurate.

SARATOGA

9:07a, 11/2/23

what if doing right by Consol means putting it out of its misery ? (repurposing into Admin buildings + YMCA type of thing).

Then you aren't voting for 3rd high school, you're voting for a 2nd high school.

North of WDF goes to CSHS

South of WDF goes to Southside High School.

I will probably vote for the bonds, but if it doesn't pass its a clear message that 350 million shouldn't go into revitalizing old things when new things could be built for less. My kids are too old for this to actually effect them, but it is the right (common sense) thing to do.

Stupe

9:10a, 11/2/23

In reply to SARATOGA

Kicking the can down the road.

A 3rd high school is going to be needed.

Tailgate88

9:39a, 11/2/23

In reply to Stupe

Stupe said:
Kicking the can down the road.

A 3rd high school is going to be needed.

You and I agree 99% of the time. I agree a 3rd High School is going to be needed but that is at least a decade away based on current projections.

From this video: (start at the 1:50 mark)

Current capacity:
Consol: 2350
CSHS: 1950

If the bond is approved, the projects would increase the capacity of both high schools to 2700 and delay the need for a 3rd high school for the forseeable future.

(Now, at some point that means either or both are going to bump up to 6A. If I had a magic money tree I'd rather have three 5A high schools in the district because all would be more competitive in athletics and fine arts. BUT, sadly, I do not have such a tree.)

Stupe

9:49a, 11/2/23

In reply to Tailgate88

We are agreeing on this.

I was disagreeing with Saratoga about doing away with Consol and building a new second high school right now instead of investing in the improvements.

Tailgate88

10:12a, 11/2/23

In reply to Stupe

Stupe said:
We are agreeing on this.

I was disagreeing with Saratoga about doing away with Consol and building a new second high school right now instead of investing in the improvements.

10-4. I misunderstood.

woodiewood1

6:43a, 11/3/23

For those who attend football games, is the home side stands full for each game?

Russell Bradleys Toupee

7:25a, 11/3/23

Hard no on all increases in government school spending. The free market will find a solutions to all the "problems" the administrators try to scare taxpayers with. I have a dream of a day when the government loses it's control over the "education" of our youth and hundreds of private academies fill their place.

CS78

9:13a, 11/3/23

In reply to Tailgate88

Tailgate88 said:
Stupe said:
Kicking the can down the road.

A 3rd high school is going to be needed.

If the bond is approved, the projects would increase the capacity of both high schools to 2700 and delay the need for a 3rd high school for the forseeable future.

(Now, at some point that means either or both are going to bump up to 6A. If I had a magic money tree I'd rather have three 5A high schools in the district because all would be more competitive in athletics and fine arts. BUT, sadly, I do not have such a tree.)

As far as Im concerned, nothing good comes from oversized 6A schools. They lose their sense of community, and MANY kids get lost in the system. Keeping school sizes reasonable should be a number one priority. Enough so that it should be reason enough alone to vote no on this to encourage the 3rd high school to be built as soon as possible.

CS78

9:21a, 11/3/23

In reply to woodiewood1

woodiewood1 said:
For those who attend football games, is the home side stands full for each game?

CSHS is never full, from what I've seen. The big push is to spend tax money so they can make money from other schools using the stadium. As a taxpayer, I have no desire to be in the for-profit sporting venue business. I also dont trust our administrators to manage a for profit business when they know they can just tap into the taxpayer pockets with more bonds. Are they going to set aside any proceeds for future maintenance and repairs of the now larger and more expensive venue? Or will they just hit us up again next time they want an upgrade? I think the answer to that is obvious. Who will be held responsible when the numbers don't work out? It won't be the people that made the decisions, itll be the taxpayers. A huge problem any time a publicly funded entity ventures into for profit business. A huge no from me.

skeetboy3

10:46p, 11/3/23

In reply to SARATOGA

SARATOGA said:
2nd high school would be somewhere SOUTH of 159.

You do realize Navasota ISD boundaries are well north of 159 right?

ukbb2003

12:16a, 11/4/23

In reply to Tailgate88

Tailgate88 said:
Stupe said:
Kicking the can down the road.

A 3rd high school is going to be needed.
You and I agree 99% of the time. I agree a 3rd High School is going to be needed but that is at least a decade away based on current projections.

From this video: (start at the 1:50 mark)

Current capacity:
Consol: 2350
CSHS: 1950

If the bond is approved, the projects would increase the capacity of both high schools to 2700 and delay the need for a 3rd high school for the forseeable future.

(Now, at some point that means either or both are going to bump up to 6A. If I had a magic money tree I'd rather have three 5A high schools in the district because all would be more competitive in athletics and fine arts. BUT, sadly, I do not have such a tree.)

How would adding a 3rd high school make all three more competitive in athletics?

George Costanza

1:42a, 11/4/23

In reply to CS78

"Enough so that it should be reason enough alone to vote no on this to encourage the 3rd high school to be built as soon as possible."

Assuming people would vote to build a third high school, where would the money come from to staff, maintain and operate a third high school?

doubledog

6:34a, 11/4/23

In reply to phillytex24

phillytex24 said:
I'm voting no on any spending bills.

We must ask... Have our elected officials and their administrators, been good stewards of the peoples money in the past? If you answer yes than vote for all four, if the answer is no (or maybe) vote no on all four.

woodiewood1

7:04a, 11/4/23

In reply to George Costanza

George Costanza said:
"I can't wait to vote for useless crap once my taxes are frozen. JK its still a drag on humanity. I do believe that if you are elected to a position that is involved in setting the tax rate your rate lock should be permanently deleted."

Haven't looked too deeply, but other than maybe McAdams it doesn't look like any of the board members are even close to being old enough for their taxes to be frozen. They all look 30s and 40s.

Was thinking city not school.

Tailgate88

7:32a, 11/4/23

In reply to ukbb2003

ukbb2003 said:
Tailgate88 said:
Stupe said:
Kicking the can down the road.

A 3rd high school is going to be needed.
You and I agree 99% of the time. I agree a 3rd High School is going to be needed but that is at least a decade away based on current projections.

From this video: (start at the 1:50 mark)

Current capacity:
Consol: 2350
CSHS: 1950

If the bond is approved, the projects would increase the capacity of both high schools to 2700 and delay the need for a 3rd high school for the forseeable future.

(Now, at some point that means either or both are going to bump up to 6A. If I had a magic money tree I'd rather have three 5A high schools in the district because all would be more competitive in athletics and fine arts. BUT, sadly, I do not have such a tree.)

How would adding a 3rd high school make all three more competitive in athletics?

The third high school would not be a direct cause. My comment was that we will be more competitive as a large 5a than a small 6a.

CS78

2:28p, 11/4/23

In reply to George Costanza

George Costanza said:
Assuming people would vote to build a third high school, where would the money come from to staff, maintain and operate a third high school?

The same place it all comes from.

Keeping schools a reasonable size is something worth paying for. Unlike half of the 350 million currently being pushed.

George Costanza

1:26p, 11/5/23

In reply to CS78

"The same place it all comes from."

Seriously … where is that? Taxes are already high in most folks' opinions, school districts are limited to a 2.5% increase in total revenue each year anyway, and it costs millions of dollars to staff, operate and maintain a 5A high school each year. Where is the money gonna come from? They can't "bond" for salaries, utilities, etc.

woodiewood1

6:14p, 11/5/23

I will vote for A and B and not C and D. They can come back with a bare minimum sports budget to serve the needs of the citizens.

A lot of families in CS are being squeezed on their family budgets and have to watch every penny and CISD should do the same.

Before CS builds a new press box, I would loke to see if lack of materials quality and maintenance caused the issues. The press box should last way more than 11 years.

Also, I would like to see a breakdown of the cost of building a new press box at Consol where it is used maybe 25 times a year.

woodiewood1

6:31p, 11/5/23

In reply to skeetboy3

skeetboy3 said:
SARATOGA said:
2nd high school would be somewhere SOUTH of 159.

You do realize Navasota ISD boundaries are well north of 159 right?

Navasota ISD goes into MIllican Reserve a distance and also takes in some of Peach Creek Estates.

You could actually live in CSISD and have friends that live northeast of you and be in Nav ISD.

Hornbeck

7:08p, 11/5/23

In reply to woodiewood1

Because CSISD buried their heads in the sand long ago.

SARATOGA

10:19a, 11/6/23

In reply to woodiewood1

woodiewood1 said:
skeetboy3 said:
SARATOGA said:
2nd high school would be somewhere SOUTH of 159.

You do realize Navasota ISD boundaries are well north of 159 right?
Navasota ISD goes into MIllican Reserve a distance and also takes in some of Peach Creek Estates.

You could actually live in CSISD and have friends that live northeast of you and be in Nav ISD.

So we just accept this and move on ? It was a blatant land grab by Navasota ISD. Time to push them back across the river.