Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why don't you just bust out a couple of kids and call it even?
That sure seems like the easy way out...Even if we changed our minds about having kids I think they would be attending private schools. I certainly enjoyed private school and think that is the environment I would want for my make believe kids.
I've outlined them in my previous posts. My family's bill will arrive along with yours. And we're eagerly pay...as I said before.
You do mean your parents will be getting their bill and paying it right? I bet you actually went to a school that your parents are paying school taxes for and are happy to pay into a system that they got a direct benefit from.
That's your choice, but it doesn't (and shouldn't) relieve any property owners from their obligation to pay school taxes. It is clear that in Texas if you want to own property, you will be paying school taxes on it. It is not the sole source of funding for the public education system in this state (the lottery is another) but it is an important one. Some people may have opinions about that arrangement, but the majority of Texans agree with it. Otherwise, the laws would be changed.
And we aren't just talking about "your kids" here, we are talking about all current and future students in NISD and I for one will be more than happy to contiue paying school taxes well beyond my kids' enrollments in NISD schools. I understand the need to educate these kids, the ones that will be the adults making decisions in our old age. If people prefer them to be uneducated and ignorant when they make those choices; or any others that directly affect our lives, that is their mistake...
If you don't pay property taxes-so no school taxes, how it is that you can tell me that I can't complain about them? I really find it interesting that you have a dog in this fight when your money isn't even involved.
Very interesting indeed.
1. I'd encourage you not to be so mean-spirited with the folks on here whom you disagree with. Civility is a good thing!
2. In Texas, the majority of our costs for public education are paid for by ad valorem property taxes. It's pretty clear you don't like it, but it's the system we have (and it prevents us from paying state income taxes). This money has to come from somewhere, right?
3. Just because someone doesn't own property doesn't mean they don't pay property taxes. For instance, a tenant in an apartment building pays rent, and their landlord pays property taxes. But the tenant's rent is used by the landlord to pay those taxes. The same is true for commercial properties. So the idea that property owners are the only folks who pay property taxes simply isn't correct.
4. School districts DO assess new homes & subdivisions (which tend to have a disproportionate number of children who use & benefit from the district). But that money is paid over time, and infrastructure is needed now. This is why bond issues are passed: to pay for infrastructure using debt that will be repaid as the area grows. Think of it as a mortgage (which most people use to buy property).
The real debate (to use the mortgage analogy) would be for NISD not to 'buy more house than they can afford'. But the district has a really good track record when it comes to that sort of thing. And until they prove otherwise, I think they deserve the benefit of the doubt.
5. Consider that a good public school district is one of the most important characteristics of desirable neighborhoods...meaning that a good school district creates higher property values...and who wouldn't want that?
I have to chuckle at people who can't grasp that good education = better society for all. I'm a child-free homeowner who pays a hefty property tax bill every year and view education as one of many social services (such as libraries, police and fire service, prisons, roads/infrastructure, etc) that benefits me both directly and indirectly.
Better education leads to higher % of kids attending college = typically higher paying jobs, which leads to lower crime rates, less people depending on welfare and other social services, etc. That's a society I want to be a member of, but it doesn't come free.
Incidentally, Texas has one of the lowest effective state & local tax rates in the nation. I'll keep my property taxes (which I can control by not spending a fortune on a house) over a state income tax any day.
That sure seems like the easy way out...Even if we changed our minds about having kids I think they would be attending private schools. I certainly enjoyed private school and think that is the environment I would want for my make believe kids.
Having kids is DEFINITELY not the easy way out.......pfffft
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have"
This is a very interesting thread to say the least. There are some points of consideration that need to be examined.
Since 1998, NISD has received approval for almost $2 billion dollars in school bonds. NISD has conveniently taken the path of least resistance in getting ALL of their bond elections approved over the past decade. For example, the most recent bond election in 2007 was deliberately scheduled in May 2007 which would all but guarantee the lowest possible voter turn out. This generally favors the school district as those most interested in approving a bond election are most most motivated to turn out in superior numbers versus those that might be against. In the 2007 bond election, NISD received overwhelming voter approval by a margin greater than 2-to-1 and the majority of those voters had a significant direct interest in the outcome. The 2-to-1 vote ratio coincidentally resembles the percentage of households with and without children respectively.
As one can see now, the same strategy will be applied for the 2010 election. In all likelihood, barring a further SIGNIFICANT downturn in the economy, such a bond election 2010 will probably pass. Moreover, NISD most likely possesses research that demonstrates a strong likelihood of passage as well. The Federal Reserve has already signaled its intent to keep interest rates low through the end of 2010 which is translated bureaucratese for 2011 or even later. In theory, now is a great time to pursue a BOND election. It wouldn't surprise me to see the amount near a billion dollars but more likely a token amount slightly below the shock value of that threshold such as $974 million, etc. the last bond election was for $693 billion which translates in their original desire for $700 million or more.
The main theme in this thread seems to be that most are convinced that if we pour millions or even billions of dollars into the school system that somehow all of the children affected will receive an even greater quality education and the dropout rates will also improve or even become non-existent. I, and perhaps many others, have yet to see any evidence of this materializing. A child graduating from school today needs to attend college or some other higher learning in order to just have their resume noticed when they eventually pursue a career. In that order, secondary schools today either cannot or will not prepare children for a successful career after graduation since they are all fully expected to attend college in order to FULLY qualify themselves for a positive future. For many, even after successfully completing college, there is no guarantee that they will be successful. The bottom line is that an education today is of a far less quality than the education one would have received 30, 40, 50, or even 60 years ago. Then, there were parameters that were starkly different. One, a secondary education was designed to prepare you for the world that existed at that time. College was desired only by a few and usually it was for the purpose of pursuing a professional career. Two, there wasn't anything like the profligate spending we see now on school infrastructure, mainly because school districts had to serve as wise stewards in the way they spent taxpayer money entrusted to them.
It is obvious that many here think something must be sorely lacking with the education system since they are very adamant about giving the schools whatever money they are asking for, under the guise of improving the education for the children, without having any real expectations in return. There seems to be a prevalent fear that, if the school system does NOT receive the money requested, this would somehow seriously affect their children's quality of education. If everyone is so sure that more money is the answer, then why not DEMAND that NISD make the BOND election request for $5 billion dollars? Everyone's property taxes would skyrocket close to or more than $1,000 a year BUT we would then have even GREATER schools that are even GREATER for learning. After all of the posts I have read in this thread, this amount of money would seem to be the least amount needed to achieve the outcome desired.
Just down the road from San Antonio are many smaller schools that seem to do just fine with less money and decent but not extravagantly overpriced buildings and infrastructure. One of my favorite facilities in NISD is Stevens High School off of Potranco. That school cost around $70 million dollars to build and has a capacity of only 3500 students. That's about $20,000 of infrastructure per student and this is the full capacity of the school? Stevens High School will easily survive 75% of the average or even substandard built homes in its service area. Why shoot for multiple schools when we could erect one mammoth-like super school structure that would rest on 100 acres or more in size and have facilities that can easily handle a capacity of 30,000 or more students? The problem is that these bonds will not go very far when you are building high schools that cost $20,000 per pupil in infrastructure alone.
Presuming that Northside ISD builds out to the county line and has the student population increase by just 100,000 students, the district will NEED $2 billion in today's dollars to build enough schools to house these students under current NISD standards. The important element of ANY money provided to the NISD is that they act as wise stewards of that money and thrive to give the taxpayer the best bang for the buck. As it is now, about 10% of NISD's 2009-2010 budget of $1,088,458,957, somewhat more than $100 million, goes toward DEBT service. That's almost 10% of all dollars they receive being flushed down the toilet on debt service which equates to roughly 10 cents out of every dollar that you pay going to some level of finance costs. I know that some will gleefully approve of the enormous debt service fund and may even go so far as to suggest it is normal. Please keep in mind that the $104,481,225.00 that NISD spends on debt service this year alone could have gone to build a complete high school and other facilities. It's practically worth the extra taxes knowing that we could 'pay as we go' and forgo the DEBT SERVICE. Couple this with the costs of the extraordinary facilities, and you can see room for savings that would allow for even greater improvements in the school system for lower cost in the long run.
Lastly, numbers that may be of more value is NISD's costs per student of $8,166 for 2009-2010. Down the road in Medina county is the Medina Valley ISD and their costs per student is almost half at slightly under $4,100 per pupil. What is wrong with this picture? Medina Valley ISD has the same high ratings and state awards for their schools PLUS they have an active 4H club and they can do it all for half of the price.
It is incredible that our society cannot see that the school districts seemingly have a higher interest in growing their bureaucracies while using the children they are paid to serve as pawns. These school districts have easily convinced parents that more money is the answer to all of the ills in our school system. Something is seriously wrong with all of this and I can guarantee you that NONE of these problems will be solved by giving the school districts a blank check as the problems will continue to exist 20 years from now just as they did 20 years ago. You heard it here first.
NEISD had nearly $500 million bond election approved in 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowie
NISD residents can look across I-10 at the upcoming layoffs and schedule changes in the North East ISD to get a preview of the kind of unpopular changes that will happen without a tax increase.
I don't understand how NEISD is having financial problems because the voters approved a nearly half billion dollar bond election in 2007, the same year that NISD had their last bond election approved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have"
