Voters are going to the polls this Saturday to decide several important elections including whether Clarendon CISD should be allowed to issue $11.7 million in bonds. Every voter should be interested in these elections, and Clarendon school taxpayers in particular should pay attention and understand what’s being put before them. Voters should also understand one important fact. It’s okay to vote “No” on the bonds. Being against the bonds doesn’t mean you’re against the school and certainly not against our kids. You can be against the bond and still be for our kids… all our kids.
& Editor
For three years, I’ve attended a variety of school functions in the Clarendon High School Auditorium. Maybe it’s the old electrician in me, but something that always catches my eye is the fact the covers are missing on the electrical outlets on the front of the stage. Less than $2 and a screwdriver would fix that, but it remained undone the last time I was there a few weeks ago.
Some of the stage lights don’t work in the CHS Auditorium, the sound system doesn’t work, several chairs are either broken or have been removed entirely, and overall, the place looks like it hasn’t had any care or touch-ups since it was built in 1990. But the auditorium isn’t on the list of improvements the school wants to make.
In fact, the only specific facilities mentioned by the school are the entrance of the high school, the ag building, and the football stadium. So elementary and junior high students won’t see anything specific from the bonds (other than perhaps some undefined repairs and ADA improvements); and more broadly speaking, the only students who will really get a tangible benefit from the bonds are football players and ag students. Other students might occasionally get to ride on a fancy new activity bus.
Of the $11.7 million the school is asking for, only the $3 million ag proposition will actually go to improving education. The ag program has made great strides under the current teachers; but if you attended any board meetings earlier this year, it was clear that some parents are not sold on the need for a new ag building.
Let’s consider some facts that haven’t been put before you by the out-of-town marketing machine which is pushing for approval of the bonds and which is funded by those who stand to benefit from passage of the bonds.
The school and those in favor of the bond are working hard to tell voters this $11.7 million loan will likely cost many people very little or nothing at all. They point to senior citizens having their taxes frozen and homesteads with a $100,000 school tax exemption as reasons to vote for the bond. The fact is that taxes will go up for somebody. The school tax rate will increase from about 83 cents per $100 valuation to $1.15, wiping out a good chuck of the tax savings the Legislature has created in the last few years.
In a breakdown of who pays school taxes in CCISD, the finance company supporting the bond likes to say that homeowners and landowners will pay less than half the cost of the bond. The rest will be paid for by utility companies and by “commercial and industrial” taxpayers they say are “from out of town.” But all of our local businesses are considered “commercial and industrial” and even a business that is owned elsewhere employs local people and contributes to our community.
Another fact, even if you’re not paying tax now because your homestead isn’t worth $100,000, you soon could be. Citizens have started getting updated valuations from the Donley Appraisal District, and it sure would have been nice to have had those before early voting started. One particular three-bedroom rent house has gone up in value this year by $16,467 and has increased in value 66 percent since 2019 to a total of $98,802. If you’re using the school’s tax calculator to figure out how much this bond will cost you, remember that’s just the current value. Appraised values will continue to go up.
The 32-cent tax rate to pay the bond is built on current evaluations with farmers paying a good chunk of it. The problem is that our ag values are bolstered by irrigated farmland and the groundwater levels are dropping. The highest valued irrigated crop land is $879 per acre. Dry crop land of the category used as an example by the bond company is worth $150 per acre. If a significant portion of irrigated farmland converts to dryland in the next ten or 15 years, that will have a real impact on the tax base and the result will be a higher tax rate to make the bond payment.
The bond backers say a “Yes” vote will help recruit new employees to the school and new families to the community. No one really moves to a community because the school has a nice bus or new bleachers. People and businesses do make decisions about relocating though by looking at the quality of education available and what tax rates are.
Clarendon CISD needs some improvements to be sure. The problem with this bond request is very much like the health care reform bill in 2010 when Nancy Pelosi said, “We have to pass the bill before you can see what’s in it.” CCISD is long on wants, shorter on needs, and vague on details. The taxpayers don’t know for sure what will be built or what it will look like exactly. Are there any renderings of what a “secure vestibule” will look like on the front of the high school? Are we building a new field house or renovating or expanding the old one? Are we going to tear down the old ag building if it’s in such bad shape, and are there any drawings of what a new ag building will feature? What exactly will the school do with $11.7 million? They will get back to us on the details after the bond is passed. No, voters should know up front.
Voters should turn down the bond propositions and give the school time to get community feedback and determine what exactly is needed and how we can do the most to improve education. The kids and the taxpayers deserve that much respect.
Reader Comments