Cy-Fair ISD Wants To Drop Your 20% Homestead Exemption

[RedScare]

I've been staying out of this because I don't have a dog in this hunt, but I've got to respond to this. Having more teachers may not make kids smarter, but having fewer teachers will be detrimental to the students' learning. I don't understand why that isn't common sense.

Because the people making the argument are not concerned with education, or with common sense. They are only concerned with paying less taxes. Because stating that they do not care about the quality of public schools will harm their tax argument, they deflect it by making the claim that 'more money is not the solution, better teachers is'. Of course, they completely ignore the fact that 'better teachers' will leave teaching (or at least that school district) if they are routinely underpaid and their schools underfunded. Free marketers and anti-tax zealots do not like to apply free market principles to government and schools...unless it helps their cause.

[RCH99]

Because the people making the argument are not concerned with education, or with common sense. They are only concerned with paying less taxes. Because stating that they do not care about the quality of public schools will harm their tax argument, they deflect it by making the claim that 'more money is not the solution, better teachers is'. Of course, they completely ignore the fact that 'better teachers' will leave teaching (or at least that school district) if they are routinely underpaid and their schools underfunded. Free marketers and anti-tax zealots do not like to apply free market principles to government and schools...unless it helps their cause.

That is perfectly stated.

[caldvn]

Because the people making the argument are not concerned with education, or with common sense.

Common sense means I don't give away 1 dollar for every 1 dollar I earn.

They are only concerned with paying less taxes.

Because it's easier to just dump money to feel better about it "might" fix the problems.

Because stating that they do not care about the quality of public schools will harm their tax argument,

I don't recall saying that I didn't care about the quality of the schools. I'm more concerned of why the situation came to the point where a "bailout" was needed. But apparently that point was completely ignored.

I'm not disagreeing with the you, except you left out other parts of my argument. Someone screwed up, and the tax payers are the one that has to bail them out. Where is the line drawn? It would be great to have 1:1 teacher student ratios, that isn't realistic. How many cents off the dollar do you want to invest in education for you child that will make you happy?

Free marketers and anti-tax zealots do not like to apply free market principles to government and schools...unless it helps their cause.

That's right, I've seen government in action lately and I have not been impressed... so I'm the zealot for having people accountable for their actions yet it's okay when the anti-free-marketers and tax zealots don't complain unless it helps their cause...

I would my like my right to choose either a public or private school to take my daughter to without having to be forced to spend money on public school and pay more for private school. But since that right is not there, I should be told to shut up and pay more taxes...

I've been staying out of this because I don't have a dog in this hunt, but I've got to respond to this. Having more teachers may not make kids smarter, but having fewer teachers will be detrimental to the students' learning. I don't understand why that isn't common sense.

Most teachers neither enter nor leave the profession for salary reasons. "Qualified/skilled" teachers generally give more of themselves to their lectures and to their grading and evaluation. Increasing the already high stress level of teachers with larger class sizes is a very quick way to send your best teachers running to other professions to which they are less well suited, just to get away from the stress.

To be more specific, class enrollment is not merely a number. It may seem trivial to increase a twenty-student class to twenty-five students, for example. That kind of thing quickly leads to students of widely different abilities and behavioral maturity in the same class. This is an insurmountable no-win situation for even the best teachers. Another common effect of reduced teaching staffs is the loss of planning or off periods during the day, which are essential for parent contacts and managing paperwork.

Marmar I don't disagree with your points. However, I am more interested in determing where the problem lies and finding a solution vs just keep spending money to bandage the problem. I won't put any more effort to the discussion since it's apparent that some people can speak for other people's agenda and pretend they don't have their own.

[Jedijake]

Well, it appears as though the district is first "targeting" teachers for their budget cuts.

For the sake of taxpayers holding onto $125 a year, they have now:

(1) gone two years without a raise

(2) increased health insurance premiums for most teachers

(3) actually CUT salaries by eliminating the compensation for professional development-that is between $250 and $450 for teachers

It is astonishing that the district would turn around and, after not being able to give teachers a raise, actually PUNISHING teachers by essentially cutting their salaries. They are doing much more to teachers than they even suggested doing to taxpayers.

Money does solve some things. In every profession in the world, you get quality if you pay for quality. There are no halos or angel's wings on teachers, police officers, nurses, firefighters, etc. People still have to make a living and while those professionals mentioned may not go into their line of work for the huge salaries, they certainly do expect to be treated as high level professionals. If you want skilled workers, you have to pay for them. That's the way the entire world works unless you happen to be living in a dictator nation. What is the point in putting effort into a job where you aim to serve the same community that refuses to support you. That's an easy reason to leave a job.

And as far as the private school argument goes, those "private" schools wouldn't be very private if tax money could be used as tuition to them, would they? They too would quickly become overcrowded UNLESS they hike up tuition and open or close the doors to whoever they want. That would defeat the purpose of having private schools in the first place.

People often argue that the private and corporate sector should be running schools, but what corporation in the private sector actually has any interest in schools and how much money does any corporation actually have to support schools with the resources that are actually needed.

[caldvn]

Well, it appears as though the district is first "targeting" teachers for their budget cuts.

For the sake of taxpayers holding onto $125 a year, they have now:

(1) gone two years without a raise

(2) increased health insurance premiums for most teachers

(3) actually CUT salaries by eliminating the compensation for professional development-that is between $250 and $450 for teachers

I have a problem with it simply being the teacher. No different then a company deciding to keep the executives pay packages in play yet they're happy to lay off or paycut the rest. Does this surprise me? Nope.

It is astonishing that the district would turn around and, after not being able to give teachers a raise, actually PUNISHING teachers by essentially cutting their salaries.

What happened this year that last year they were unable to pay the bills? 9.5%+ unemployment rate, less tax received? Someone somewhere should have seen this coming and planned ahead instead of waiting for the last minute. But nope, would it surprise me if they had hired more people, spent more?

Oh, and yes, money does solve some things. In every profession in the world, you get quality if you pay for quality. There are no halos or angel's wings on teachers, police officers, nurses, firefighters, etc. People still have to make a living and while those professionals mentioned may not go into their line of work for the huge salaries, they certainly do expect to be treated as high level professionals. If you want skilled workers, you have to pay for them.

I don't disagree.

That's the way the entire world works unless you happen to be living in a dictator nation.

Off topic, but in the past in the past year, it has led me to believe otherwise.

And, to clarify what I said before, teachers are not "immune" to the economy but suffering under the wrath of a so-called failing economy is not a right of passage, particularly for work that affects ALL of society. The best and most dedicated teachers will either leave or just not care if they are not treated well. AND, if the message from the taxpayers is that they refuse to pay a little more so that their district can survive, it kills any motivation that exists. Why bother putting any effort whatsoever into a job where you are serving a community that does not support you at all.

It's easy to say pay more, spend more, bail out more. It is still a bandaid to the solution. What's going to happen next year when and IF more people lose their jobs? Less tax is received, therefore more tax will be imposed on people that can still pay taxes? For the post replies I've received, all I hear is "you don't care about education, so just shutup and pay the tax." Guilt trip works on the gullible and sensitive people. (FYI - I believe nurses work in the private and public sector, there's a shortage of nurses and some do get paid well.)

- Isn't half our Texas budget in school and medical or wasn't it 2/3rds (Sorry I only so much time to take in so much information.)? Gee who's freeloading our government systems.

- Isn't Cypress district getting less per students vs other districts.

- Aren't some school buildings more extravagant than necessary? (I would rather money be spent paying teachers then optional tile/marble floors. That's another discussion.)

I read a number of posts that points to a combination of problems to lead us to where we are. Some with valid solutions. I can accept a "temporary" tax hike, but stop turning a blind eye.

One more thing, I hate the fact that if your budget has a surplus then you get a budget cut next year. There is no incentive for many goverment run institutions to spend wisely.

[jimcas]

Frozen or dropping salaries, benefit reductions, higher health insurance premiums.

Wow - who ever heard of such a thing! Everyone is banking huge raises these days except for teachers - how unfair!!!

This will give teachers a lot to stew about over their summer breaks!

It will save me a lot more than $125, as with most people.

Also, look at the bright side. Since most Cy Fair teachers probably own their homes in Cy-Fair ISD... You may not get that extra salary, but at least you'll partially offset it with lower property taxes.

[caldvn]

Frozen or dropping salaries, benefit reductions, higher health insurance premiums.

You won't have to worry about the health insurance soon!

[Jedijake]

You won't have to worry about the health insurance soon!

Not sure about that. But, in any case, I would like to answer or respond to some of your points. People not in education need to be careful not to make judgments and assumptions about something they know very little.

(1) Schools are primarily funded by the states through taxes. We all know that. Being that Texas does not have a state income tax, there is less money to fund schools and Texas prides itself on saving money for a "rainy day". That is what has happened. That's not a bad thing, but money that was supposed to go to education did not. Such has been the case with lottery money that never went to education (despite what is said by the media about it). In Texas, workers take home a LOT more money than they do in most other states and Texas is the largest state to not have a state income tax.

(2) What exactly is the unemployment rate in the Houston area? I do not know the figures but it is not as high as in other places (New York, California, etc.). I also do not hear about tremendous unemployment rates in the Cy-Fair area. If they were high, and I will try to find out what those rates are, then I'd be more understanding about people wanting to hold onto $125-$300 a year. Eventually, the optional homestead exemption WILL disappear so people may as well get used to it and budget accordingly.

(3) People talk about wasted money and overspending in the district. I agree that there are WAY too many administrative positions, but that does not mean that people within schools should be bastardized. Supposedly, administrative costs are from a completely different budget. I'd have to see that to believe it.

(4) Buildings in Cy-Fair only look extravagant. They are all (at least the schools) cookie cutter designs and there have been MILLIONS of dollars in short cuts made. Just walk into classrooms that comfortably fit 15-20 students but house 30-35 students all day. That's not to mention how much money is "saved" by building elementary schools without walls. The truth is, the only expensive aspect of schools are the outside design in the entry and those cost pennies to build compare to what is in the bond. Companies are just not building cheap box-like schools anymore because they themselves want more money also. I suppose that's only fair. PBK architects wanted to build a more sound and accommodating structure for the new high schools but Cy-Fair would only pay for a cheapened plan. Only through state law, for example, did they have to build larger science rooms in the past 4 years that were not fire hazards like 3 or 4 previously built schools currently have.

All this said, I think we can all agree that if the district needs to cut budgets, it should NOT be cut in the classroom. That includes teachers, supplies, and of course students. Students will keep coming to school. Schools are paid for by taxes. When there are 100, 000 students in a district, money has to come from somewhere in order to pay for it. I'm all for people coming up with new inventive ways to fund public education without flushing it down the toilet altogether.

If a company does not pay its employees and does not reward good work, its product will cheapen in quality. Employees will either leave immediately or put in much less effort until they do find employment elsewhere. The company can either charge more for their product and deliver quality (hopefully) or decrease the price and quality as well. If the product quality remains low, the company will eventually be bankrupt. Cy-Fair has spoken and has chosen to cheapen its product. Employees will leave and many others will simply refuse to put in the effort they once did. The results cannot be good until the pendulum begins to swing the other way. With the homestead exemption in place, it will not swing the other way.

[marmer]

I haven't seen very many school districts which have too many administrative staff. I have seen plenty of school districts where not having enough administrative staff overworks the principals and teachers. My wife has taught in some of them.

[Jedijake]

I haven't seen very many school districts which have too many administrative staff. I have seen plenty of school districts where not having enough administrative staff overworks the principals and teachers. My wife has taught in some of them.

I just watched the infamous board meeting online again and have even more understanding of the situation. It isn't good. Texas is like a horrible nightmare I wish I could wake up from.

Every cent that the state is supposedly giving to districts is coming from stimulus money that shouldn't even be given in the first place. Texas is taking its own money and saving it in the "rainy day fund". According to the district officials, money for the district, mainly including the mandated $800 raise, is being replenished by stimulus money.

Stimulus money is for states to keep jobs. If states have money already (like Texas does) then the stimulus money is to be used to maintain employment and enhance special programs for special needs children and other initiatives that will improve performance (not exactly sure of the specifics). States must show that they are using the money properly. As it is, Dick Perry applied for this money the day of the deadline. To make it blunt, IT IS NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S JOB TO MAKE SURE SCHOOLS ARE FUNDED AND THAT TEACHERS GET RAISES!!! It is the state's responsibility to do that. The federal government only funds federal programs and Title I needs. I have no idea where the state government gets off thinking they can mandate something and turn around and say that all of the money it is required to provide will be coming from the federal government.

I really wish this state would split from the nation already so that I can finally convince my wife that it's time to leave this stinkhole of a state.

[VicMan]

Houston ISD is losing students (gentrification) and has so much money that it is or is close to being a Robin Hood state (I'm not sure which this year) - Maybe if CFISD and HISD agree to transfer the part of the City of Houston in CFISD to HISD (has three elementary schools and a middle school), it could allow HISD to gain some students, and it could allow CFISD to focus more attention on what is left.

[jimcas]

Eventually, the optional homestead exemption WILL disappear so people may as well get used to it and budget accordingly.

Budgeting accordingly - what a concept!!!