SAN ANGELO, TX -- San Angelo Independent School District officials are already working on the next version of a bond election after the last one failed by two votes.
As we reported back in May, According to the Tom Green County elections office, a total of 6,100 votes were counted in the bond election which is less than ten percent of registered voters deciding the $149 million bond.
The results showed 3,051 votes were cast against the bond election and 3049 votes were counted for the bond election.
The San Angelo ISD released a statement on the failure:
"Thank you to everyone who took time to be informed about San Angelo ISD's bond and who exercised their right to vote in the May 5th Election. The election results are finalized and the 2018 San Angelo ISD Bond Referendum did not pass.
Fortunately, we have the privilege of participating in local decisions through an election process, and I'm pleased to see community members participating in that right and privilege. The one key takeaway for all of our community, regardless of your position on the bond proposal, is that your vote truly counts. We honor the voice of our community and the election results illustrate that there is still work and additional facility planning needed by the school district. Local elections matter, and locally is where our voices are heard and our vote makes a tremendous impact.
I would like to acknowledge the hard work of our long-range planning committee for putting together a package that truly prioritized and planned for the needs of our students and staff. Also, I want to thank our school board members for their tireless pursuit in providing our community's children with quality educational facilities and academic programs. We will continue our journey and do everything in our power to ensure our children are receiving a quality educational experience."
According to the SAISD website, the district is now soliciting feedback from residents about how to proceed to address the needs of the schools in the district.
After San Angelo ISD’s recently failed bond election in May 2018, the district has been regrouping and seeking feedback to address facilities, closely examining how best to move forward.
With that in mind, over half of the schools are over 50 years old and still remain in need of repairs, renovations and upgrades to increase safety measures and maximize their life expectancy. The district is working diligently to strengthen district facilities to increase safety, develop learning spaces for the next generation of students, and create buildings that are ADA accessible for students, parents, and staff. The SAISD cannot fund these efforts without an infusion of outside monies. The Long-Range Facilities Planning Committee (LRFPC) will reconvene to study continued needs and provide a recommendation to the Board in August.
The district has a survey on its website concerning facility needs and to help gauge voter opinion before they attempt another bond election.
The deadline to complete the survey is Sunday, July 22, 2018.
Comments
Even though it was only by 2 votes, I guess these stupid idiots on the board can't comprehend that there were still more N-O votes than yes votes. Smear some more lipstick on that pig that you're trying to pass off onto the backs of tax payers and maybe this time the voters will join together and solidly show you what the meaning of N-O is .............
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkHELL NO!!!!!!
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkSo for those of you saying no and hell no.... how would you suggest this is paid for then? I can understand if you aren't in favor of money for an athletic facility but when you have schools that are over 50 years old with roof leaks and bad inefficient air, you have to do something. Also, for anyone saying no I highly suggest you tour an old school vs. a new school before making any decisions. - I ask this question because I see people time and time again complain about taxes or the city budget, but they usually don't have any specific examples of what they would want to see cut. Can't cut police or fire or infrastructure, that's for sure.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkIn response to "How Then," the district could begin by cutting some of the many high paying administrative jobs they have recently added to their personnel infrastructure. They could also quit changing curriculum and texts every two years to the "latest greatest thing" and get back to basis. Reduce the wasted dollars spent on needless gadgets and bells and whistles in the classrooms, and tighten the belt where needed. When the district recently upgraded schools just to add them to the books to be torn down and rebuilt, that shows a severe lack of planning and a total disrespect to city taxpayers. You want my vote? Show some fiscal responsibility with the money you get already, develop a true long range construction and maintenance plan, start paying teachers what they are worth, get rid of your top heavy administration, quit wasting money and treating this city like a cash cow, and maybe you will get a bond past the electorate. None of us want to see children receive a subpar education, so stop asking for more until you do right with what you're given. Quit buying things teachers never use that sit in storage rooms across the district. Upkeep what you have already, instead of waiting until it's falling apart. The last bond spent thousands of dollars on shiny copper trim around the high school entrance that now looks like brown paint. Stop wasting our money.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkSuggests routine/normal maintenance may not have been a priority in the past. Now they look for major renovations. There are plenty of buildings in San Angelo in good repair that are older than the buildings they want to renovate.
Given the number of elementary school children being bussed in or driven by their parents I have to believe true neighborhood schools are a thing of the distant past.
Have to wonder how much money could be saved by creating a couple more middle schools and a third high school. Certainly would reduce travel costs and savings could be used to raise teacher compensation.
The “argument” of no tax increase for citizens 65 and older is not valid until SAISD sets both assessment value as well as tax rate. They can exert some validity by setting a lower “fixed” senior rate which would lead to an effective no tax increase.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkPost a comment to this article here: