I posted this on another page in reply to an article and several people have pmed me asking me to post it here. I wasnt planning to do so. However, a post here asked a question about what needs to be changed about the bond committee process in the future. I simply stated that they should not disregard voters and attempt to manipulate them by rolling an item that has already been rejected into a bond with essential academic funding. Apparently this wasnt the type of solution the poster was looking to hear. These are my thoughts as a property owner, tax payer, and the mother of a special needs child that attends a KISD school. It is just my opinion but I hope these people who are looking for solutions for future bond committees will read this and realize where priorities should lie and that respecting voters is a good way to start any bond they intend to present. Here was my reply: As a voter I have an issue with the basic principal of what was done here. Oh, you voted no to the stadium? Well now we will lump it in with money for education and growth of the school district so you have no choice but to approve it. A NO vote is not a vote against the students, it is a vote against being manipulated and a vote for putting education before athlectics. I think KISD should be setting the example that academics trump athletics and lumping an extravagant stadium (that voters already denied) in with necessary funds for education is irresponsible. It is the fault of this bond alone and its underhanded nature and complete disregard for the voters if the district doesnt get the funds it needs. I have a special needs child who has to wait for services and IEP meetings because the districts resources are stretched so far. I find it despicable that so many of you are so worried about playing high school football in a college level stadium that you are willing to risk the funds that help children receive the education they are entitled to get. And before you say I should vote yes so my son and other students get those services, save your breath. I voted no yesterday (10/20) and will continue to pay out of my pocket for the same services that the district provides for other students while KISD acts like the children are a priority. I feel lucky to live in KISD, but I have felt very let down recently and the willingness to risk educational funds over a football stadium tops it all. And just to be clear I believe there should be another stadium. Actually I believe they should build a few realistic high school sized stadiums rather than one other grossly over done stadium. So sorry your kid will play football on Thursday nights, but did you ever think one more stadium is not the answer to this problem? Did you ever consider the cost of upkeep and running a facility like the one proposed? Did you ever think that due to traffic they may not be able to hold games simultaneously anyway? Why not build 2 or 3 more stadiums that are comparable to Rhodes? One west of 99 one south of 10? By the time this 58 million dollar monstrosity is complete and in use there could be 2 or more new high schools. What then? You will still be playing on Thursday nights and will be begging for another stadium. I doubt many voters would have rejected a reasonable second stadium.
Posted on: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 04:16:21 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015