<p>Not to argue about meaningless things, but the school had no auditorium. So they went overboard and built a grand one. I see they connect it to the culinary arts program and probably to a bunch of other things. My guess is they use it mostly for class assemblies, like the junior class, because the whole school won’t fit, and for city meetings that require space. The “civic auditorium” seats under 300 so this fills that need. </p>
<p>But the main point is the people voted for the bond by 2/3 to 1/3.</p>
<p>That is true. Just as it is true that the beauty of most bond elections is that they are scheduled when few voters will care enough to go cast a vote. Schools boards are experts are counting on the apathy of their citizens to pass the measures. </p>
<p>In this case, there were exactly 2,363 votes in favor and 3,742 total votes. In contrast, the bond election that corresponded to the 2008 presidential election attracted more than 28,000 votes. </p>
<p>I see plenty of failed votes. If people choose not to vote they don’t care that much one way or the other. Are many Texas districts in $$$ trouble like cities in Cali? Answer is no and they have a system to fix those that are.</p>
<p>There’s a thread over on the Parent’s Forum on this topic that has included the rather dismal teacher salaries offered by this school district…A link to the salary scale is included. I believe these figures are right—over a period of more than 30 years teachers get a salary increase of only about $500 per year. How do they get good people to go into the field of education with such limits? Might this have something to do with the low SAT scores in the Great State?</p>
<p>I posted on that thread. I am not a sports fan. I could count on one hand number of live games I have been to and most of them were tennis games. On the other hand I could understand why a town would want to have a stadium if high school football is the town’s source of entertainment. It doesn’t matter how many people voted, but 66%+ people voted yes. They clearly stated what the money was going to be used for, they didn’t try to deceive anyone.</p>
<p>Few years back when our town wanted to build a state of the art football field (not a stadium) because the old field was falling apart. Our kids didn’t go to the public school and we have been to a football game in town, but we voted yes even if it meant increase of our property taxes. </p>
<p>Our kids’ school football team was pretty sad, no one ever showed up for games. The football field was nothing to speak of, but the soccer field(s) were world class and many top teams have trained there. They raised private money to build a performing arts center, complete with an auditorium, sound proof music rooms and dance studio. This community decided on what was important to its school.</p>
<p>I don’t know what this town’s school system is like and if it could have used that money to improve its school system, but it seems to be a fairly wealthy town. If they think it is a good way to spend their money then why not. If it was that big of a deal then maybe more people should have voted to let their opinion by known.</p>
<p>OF, it is good to remember that you only need two hands to count the games this high school football team will play annually in this stadium. </p>
<p>It is a matter of priorities. While it is true that this community approved the sale of the bonds needed to build the stadium, the PAC, and the bus barn, it also remains that could do this because of a the system used to pay our education expenses. In light of these extravagant expenses and the constant claims of budget deficits in education, one could advance that the Robin Hood plans used in Texas are stopping way short of what they could be. If this community has the ability and willingness to raise 119 millions, why not seek to recapture a good portion of that windfall by further reducing their education budget (yes, the budget that pays for their teachers) and redistribute to the districts that are facing population exodus and reduced tax bases. </p>
<p>The funding of public education is built on principles of equality. All students are supposed to have access to an equal and comparable system of education. It is clear that as long as the wealth of schools will be directly derived from their property taxes, the system will always be grossly divided among have and have-not. </p>
<p>The problem is not that a few thousands of people in Allen, Texas approved this funding and this construction; the real problem is that a system developed in different times did ALLOW them to do so. A system that allows the suburban Shangri-Las to build a stadium that rivals one that colleges would dream off and performing arts center that would make many cities envious, and at the same time leave other districts to struggle to finance the most basic necessities. </p>
<p>Reduced to its basic essence, the question to be answered is why have such expenses become justifiable in the world of education. </p>
<p>As I wrote in my original post several days ago … Who says we have a funding crisis in education!</p>
<p>Is it even possible in Texas to float bonds to fund teacher salaries? If not, there doesn’t seem to be much point in bringing up teacher salaries when discussing this. If there were buyers for the bonds, then the analysts must have figured it was a valid project.</p>
<p>xiggi - US decided that public education should be funded by each municipal, right or wrong. At the same time, money is not always the answer to have better education either. Just look at NJ Essex county. It includes Newark and Short Hills/Millburn. Millburn spends 15K per pupil and Newark spends 22K per pupil, yet Millburn is one of the best high schools in NJ, and we know where Newark is ranked. We decided early on that this wasn’t a battle we weren’t going to win and we voted with our feet.</p>
<p>I’m also not a football fan while I also like tennis.</p>
<p>I had a look at their district. Their HS graduation rate is over 98% and they offer 22 APs and the IB program. It doesn’t sound like they are skimping on academics - consistent with a high median household income district.</p>
<p>BTW, the game on August 31 was sold out so it does seem that the football stadium is a revenue source.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Don’t consider it education if you don’t want to look at it that way.</p>
<p>We have youth sports leagues in our town that are funded by the town; not the school and these include facilities. In general there are fees but they can be waived for parents that can’t afford them. We’re paying for these programs with our property taxes - but the bucket amount isn’t from the school district. The local YMCA also provides many programs and they have a nice piece of property that the town has provided funds for and they don’t pay property taxes on it. If someone wants to drive a nice car and they can afford it, isn’t that okay? Or should we donate part of our car budget so that lots of other people can buy cars?</p>
<p>By the way, as an FYI, the Allen ISD is now 440,000,000 in debt. With interest, the district will have to repay close to $800,000,000. The district will probably plateau at 95,000 inhabitants, and between 20 to 25,000 students. </p>
<p>Most projections to support such debt are based on very rosy projections of increased tax bases and raising property values. Throughout the nation, most municipalities are finding out that the present, and especially the future will hardly deliver those rosy projections. </p>
<p>Some day, all those bills will come due. And there are plenty of public entities that are now understanding that there is no way to kick the can further down the road and find easy solutions to their wasteful spending. </p>
<p>I am a football fan too. And a huge one to boot. I am from that region and I know all about King Football and Friday Nights under the Lights. Loved and love it. But that is not the point. </p>
<p>Since you are a number guy, you might want to revisit the economics of this “revenue source” in a few years, especially when the novelty of an opening game against Southlake-Carroll disappears. This stadium will only attract similar crowds a couple of time a year. This is not Jerry Jones’ Stadium. It is a high school stadium in a suburban of Dallas. There is a limited potantial use of a high school stadium. When all will be added, the net revenues of operating this stadium will be very small or … inexistant. Considering how well schools manage their operating and maintenance expenses, it will more than probably represent a substantial loss, unless you expect janitors and crews to stop costing a LOT of money. This is a BIG stadium!</p>
<p>The source of repayment of the 60 MM will be from taxpayers. From Allen, or from other places! And, it is good to remember that all taxpayers in Allen are not homeowners. There are large corporate “residents” that are not above moving to the next town, city, or … country when the costs become too high.</p>
<p>The stadium also has a wrestling area, weightroom, and indoor golf simulator underneath so that has to be factored into the cost as well. They also have 5,000 students including a 700 member band so I don’t doubt they will get a lot of use out of it though. So far this year (as of August 24th) they’ve sold 8,200 season tickets and I don’t think filling up the stadium will really be a problem. Apparently, before this they had to rent temporary seating and add portable toilets which cost them $250,000 per year. That said, it is an incredibly expensive stadium that probably isn’t necessary.</p>
<p>“Our intention is not to recoup the money it cost to build the stadium,” Carroll said. “It’s not practical to say we’ll get that money back. (But) the revenue we receive from the stadium will far exceed the cost of operating it.”</p>
<p>And, if things are done as they were in our district, it will be used as a “classroom” for students in the Technical Theater class - where they learn to handle lighting and sound systems and learn to handle everything else needed to run the backstage portion of any major production. Oh - and these students were also the ones who handled the lighting and sound systems for EVERY event in the PAC.</p>
<p>I do remember when BC doubled their stadium capacity to 45K back in the 1990s but I understand that BC’s football program is net revenue positive. Are the fans in Allen as fanatic as they are at BC?</p>
<p>In addition, it will certainly be used for a variety of band competitions (UIL/BOA) and I would not be surprised to see a summer DCI (Drum Corps International) show in the next year or so.</p>
<p>I particularly like that the facility has training facilities that can be used by all school athletes and provides facilities for sports (wresting and golf) that generally don’t get a lot of attention.</p>
<p>Stephen Reed also thought his projects in Harrisburg would make money. The community might even have believed that there was a pot of (well-hidden) gold in the museum, the baseball team, and the sports hall of fame. </p>
<p>Harrisburg’s problems come from trying to act like a business. They were persuaded that building an incinerator - using bonds - would attract a tremendous amount of business from communities whose landfills were closing or becoming too costly, etc. Problem is that a business can go under but a city can’t; it still has to exist and provide services. A judge only a few days ago ordered Harrisburg to stop paying on the bonds. It’s a cautionary tale for those who think government can be just like private business. It can’t because a business can go away, move away, go under, be sold, etc. A government’s mistakes stay with the taxpayers. Compared to the incinerator, the museum stuff is small beer.</p>
<p>As for Allen, ticket prices are $6-10 and over 5k of the seats are for students and the like so the full number isn’t sold. Parking is free. They can’t generate the money to pay the bonds from that. They did not anticipate being able to do that. Not an issue.</p>