WOW!!! Maybe no HS Football in 06

[reed35]

Texas Supreme Court rules property tax unconstitutional
By April Castro
Associated Press
Nov 22, 2005 - 7:56 p.m.

AUSTIN - Texas school districts illegally tax property owners to pay for public education and the state must find a new way to fund schools by June 1 or classrooms will remain closed in the fall, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.

Texas' highest civil court ruled that the property taxes for schools have become an unconstitutional statewide property tax and charged lawmakers with repairing the $30 billion funding system. State funding would be stopped if the deadline isn't met.

The nine-member Republican panel agreed 7-1 with one of three arguments in a lawsuit brought against the state by hundreds of school districts, but found the system meets constitutional requirements for "adequate education" and equitable facilities funding. Justice Scott Brister dissented and Justice Don Willett did not participate.

June 1 is an extension of an earlier court deadline set in the long-running case, and one lawmaker said it this one is much more serious.

"This time the Supreme Court has ruled. There is no back door," said Texas Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, a member of the House Public Education Committee. "This deadline is a real, hard, firm deadline. At that point, you can't finance schools the same way, you have to make the system constitutional, otherwise you run the risk of not being able to open schools in August."

The court declined to offer its own solution, pushing the issue back to lawmakers.

Republican Gov. Rick Perry praised the ruling and said he plans to call lawmakers back to Austin to take up the issue in a special legislative session "at an appropriate time before that deadline."

The Legislature has failed to remedy the system during the last two regular sessions and three 30-day special sessions called by Perry.

"I'm also pleased to see that the court agreed with a position that I have long advocated: simply pouring more money into the same system will not alleviate the property tax problem," Perry said. "Our entire tax system needs substantial reform to make it fair, more modern and that will ensure schools have a reliable stream of revenue."

The court has been considering the case for months on appeal from a district court in Austin. Property-rich and poor districts sued, claiming the method for funding education did not meet requirements set in the state constitution.

State District Judge John Dietz in September 2004 agreed. He ordered that the three problems get repaired or the state would have to halt funding for schools Oct. 1. That deadline was suspended pending the high court ruling.

The state appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that changes to the system should be made by the Legislature, not the courts.

"The court recognized — as all Texans recognize — that we can and should do a better job of educating students in Texas," said Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, whose office represented the state in the case. "But, just because we can do a better job does not mean that the job being done now is unconstitutional."

The Supreme Court agreed with the plaintiffs' argument that the system is unconstitutional because so many school districts are forced to tax property owners at the maximum limit of $1.50 per $100 in property value. That amounts to a statewide property tax because districts don't have room to set their own rates, the high court ruled.

Districts argued that to fund all state and federal education mandates — such as the 22-student per class limit and minimum teacher salaries — they must tax at the legal limit. The property tax cap, they said, had become both a minimum and a maximum rate.

Money for the Texas school system comes primarily from property taxes and a loophole-ridden franchise tax. The business tax probably will be overhauled to make more entities pay.

While the court said that state spending on education satisfies the constitutional requirements of an "adequate" education, the ruling cast doubt on the future of the system if there is not "increased funding, improved efficiencies, or better methods of education."

"The court is obviously worried about the future of the system," said Scott McCown, a retired state judge whose decisions helped shape Texas' school funding system.

Still four months away from the March primary, the ruling already offered political fodder for the upcoming gubernatorial race. Comptroller and Perry challenger Carole Keeton Strayhorn attacked the governor for his "inaction" and urged him to call an immediate special session. Perry aides pressed Strayhorn to offer her own school funding plan rather than more political attacks.

Perry has appointed former comptroller John Sharp, a Democrat and former political rival, to head a commission that will recommend how to restructure the tax system that pays for schools. It met for the first time Monday.

[lonny23]

Here's the Dallas Morning News version of the article.

School tax repairs ordered
High court instructs state to fix property-levy system by June

09:37 PM CST on Tuesday, November 22, 2005
By TERRENCE STUTZ / The Dallas Morning News

AUSTIN – The Legislature must fix the state's unconstitutional property tax system for public schools, the Texas Supreme Court ordered Tuesday, but lawmakers are off the hook for a big tax hike to pour billions more into education funding.

The latest decision in the state's long-running school finance litigation was a partial victory for hundreds of school districts that filed the lawsuit because it will force lawmakers to pass a new education funding system before the 2006-07 school year.

DallasNews.com/extra

Districts wanted more from court

Decision puts Legislature on hook

Texas Supreme Court's ruling (.pdf)

Timeline of events

Full background on case (.pdf)
But state leaders also claimed vindication because the ruling stopped short of requiring a massive infusion of new money into public education as school districts had sought. Still, the court cautioned that current funding levels for schools are barely adequate.

In its 7-1 ruling, which does not alter the state's "Robin Hood" wealth-sharing system, the court gave lawmakers until June 1 to fix the property tax problem. Gov. Rick Perry is expected to call lawmakers into a special session to tackle the issue after primary elections in March.

The deadline came with a warning from the justices: "There is substantial evidence that the public education system has reached the point where continued improvement will not be possible absent significant change, whether that change take the form of increased funding, improved efficiencies or better methods of education."

Gov. Rick Perry applauded the court's ruling that current funding levels meet constitutional standards.

"I am pleased to see that the court agreed with a position I have long advocated, and that is that simply pouring more money into the same system will not alleviate the property tax problem," Mr. Perry said.

The governor reaffirmed his support for "substantial reform" of the tax system, noting that his blue-ribbon committee on taxes began work Monday on recommendations for the Legislature.

House Speaker Tom Craddick said he was committed to crafting a better school finance system, while Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, leader of the Senate, said he will direct a special Senate committee to begin working on a plan to address the Supreme Court order. "Putting new money into the classroom" will be a priority, Mr. Dewhurst added.

In their regular session and two special sessions this year, lawmakers deadlocked on far-reaching proposals that would have lowered school property taxes, raised state taxes on consumers and businesses, and provided slight funding increases for districts. The plans encountered fierce opposition from school districts, who objected to the modest funding boost and mandates sought by lawmakers, and from key business groups who lobbied against new taxes.

But the Legislature was under no mandate from the Supreme Court during those sessions. Next time, legislative leaders said, the deadline will force their hand, lest funding for schools be cut off.

Written for the majority by Justice Nathan Hecht, Tuesday's 117-page decision said that so many districts have reached the maximum school property tax rate of $1.50 per $100 valuation – set by the Legislature – that it is tantamount to a state property tax forbidden by the Texas Constitution. Two-thirds of the state's 1,037 districts are either at or within a nickel of the limit.

"The constitutional violation cannot be corrected without raising the cap on local tax rates or changing the system," Justice Hecht wrote.

Justice Scott Brister cast the only dissenting vote, chiding the majority for repeatedly pressuring lawmakers to change the school finance system or face a shutdown of public schools. The ninth justice, Don Willett, was not on the court when the case was argued this summer. All the justices are Republicans.

Legislative leaders have pledged that they will not raise the tax rate cap and in fact want to reduce the property taxes that homeowners and businesses now pay. Doing so would require billions in new revenue from other sources.

While the court rejected for now the argument that Texas schools are not adequately funded, attorneys for the school districts that sued were quick to note the decision's warning that a "drift toward constitutional inadequacy" could put the state back in court in the near future.

"The court reaffirmed that the Legislature has a constitutional duty to provide an adequate level of funding for our public education system, and this duty is enforceable in court," said Dallas lawyer George Bramblett, who added that the plaintiff school districts will closely watch how the Legislature responds to the ruling.

On another issue, the high court found there was not enough evidence yet to indicate that poor school districts are being shortchanged on their facility needs under the current funding system.

Texas spends about $33 billion a year on public education, with most of the funds generated by local property taxes and state aid. Texas spends more than $7,000 per pupil, ranking in the bottom third of the states.

Attorneys for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which represents a group of poor school districts in the case, criticized the court for "failing to address the gross inequities" that have left poor districts with substandard facilities and other disadvantages.

"Despite the glaring disparities between the haves and have-nots, the court refused to confront the issues head-on," said the fund's David Hinojosa.

A "saving grace" in the decision, he said, is that the court did not call for elimination of the "Robin Hood" provisions in the current funding law that require wealthy school districts to share their property tax revenues with other districts. There are about 134 such wealthy districts.

Justices did say that the amount of revenue taken from wealthy districts – which has tripled in the last decade to more than $1 billion a year – contributed to their finding that the state is levying an unconstitutional state property tax.

Attorney General Greg Abbott, whose office represents the state in the case, said the ruling was a "victory for democracy because it ensures that decisions about education policymaking will remain in the elected Legislature rather than the courts."

But the attorney general lost the legal argument about school property taxes, along with the state's contention that the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction in the lawsuit because school finance is the sole responsibility of the Legislature.

The plaintiff school districts, including Dallas and Houston, won the first round last year before state District Judge John Dietz of Austin.

Testimony in a six-week trial last year indicated an additional $1,100 a student per year would be needed to comply with various state and federal requirements, such as minimum passing rates on standardized tests. That added up to more than $4.5 billion a year, four times what the Legislature proposed in its failed special sessions on school finance.

Scott McCown, a retired state district judge who presided over school finance litigation from 1990 to 2002, said state leaders should remember that the constitution sets "minimum standards, the least we must do" for funding of schools.

"The governor and the Legislature should make sure we make the maximum effort, the most we can do for our children," said Mr. McCown, director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities, a nonprofit group that advocates for low- and moderate-income Texans.

Staff writer Pete Slover contributed to this report.

E-mail tstutz@dallasnews.com

KEY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

What happens next?
A special session of the Legislature, probably after primary elections in March.

If lawmakers don't act by June 1, state spending for schools must cease.

What does this mean for local schools?
Nothing will change this school year, but a new tax system must be in place before 2006-07. Districts probably won't get any large boost in funding, and lawmakers will consider education initiatives such as merit pay for teachers.

Will I get a property tax cut?
Probably, but not until next year. State leaders are determined to cut property taxes as part of any overhaul. Other taxes, on consumers and business, will probably be increased.


DISTRICTS MOVING TOWARD THE CAP

Since the last major school finance overhaul, Texas school districts have steadily moved toward the maximum property tax rate of $1.50:
Tax rate 1993-94 2003-04
At $1.50 2% of districts (1% of total students) 48% of districts (54% of total students)
Above $1.45 6% of districts (6% of students) 67% of districts (81% of students)
Below $1.40 89% of districts (85% of students) 20% of districts (10% of students)
NOTE: Some districts are counted in both of the first two categories.
SOURCE: Texas Supreme Court

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE OPINIONS

From Justice Nathan Hecht's majority opinion:

On the school finance system:
"Although the districts have offered evidence of deficiencies in the public school finance system, we conclude that those deficiencies do not amount to a violation [of the constitution]. ... We remain convinced, however ... that defects in the structure of the public school finance system expose the system to constitutional challenge. Pouring more money into the system may forestall those challenges, but only for a time. They will repeat until the system is overhauled."

On property tax rates:
"If school districts are forced to tax at or near maximum rates to meet constitutional and statutory requirements, then control over local ad valorem tax rates and spending effectively shifts to the state, depriving school districts of any meaningful discretion to tax below the rate cap set by the state or to spend on programs other than those required by the state and the Constitution."

On long-term problems:
"There is substantial evidence ... that the public education system has reached the point where continued improvement will not be possible absent significant change, whether that change take the form of increased funding, improved efficiencies, or better methods of education. ... But an impending constitutional violation is not an existing one."

On proposed solutions:
"We are constrained to caution ... that a cap to which districts are inexorably forced by educational requirements and economic necessities ... will in short order violate the prohibition of a state property tax."

From Justice Scott Brister's lone dissent:

On the school districts' lawsuit:
"By failing to demand an 'efficient system' as the Texas Constitution requires ... this case once again focuses on short-term funding rather than long-term solutions. Of course, the true goal of this litigation is to put pressure on the Texas Legislature."

On districts' standing to sue:
Before today, we have never held that government agencies have standing to sue the state for a bigger budget. The school districts allege they have insufficient money to carry out their duties, but it is not money for their own account. ... School districts hold money only as trustees for school students."

On the property tax ruling:
"Before the courts can declare the state's school-finance system unconstitutional, each and every district must prove it had no other choice [in taxing or spending]. Here, none did."

HOW THEY VOTED
FOR
AGAINST

Nathan L. Hecht
Place 6
Justice Hecht delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice O’Neill, Justice Wainwright, Justice Medina, Justice Green, and Justice Johnson joined.

Quotable: "The Legislature's decision to rely so heavily on local property taxes to fund public education does not in itself violate any provision of the Texas Constitution, but in the context of a proliferation of local districts enormously different in size and wealth, it is difficult to make the result efficient."
Full text: Opinion of the court Scott A. Brister
Place 9
Justice Brister delivered a dissenting opinion.

Quotable: "There is no end in sight; if the past is any indication, the new funding will not last long, and public education will not change much."
• Full text: Dissenting opinion
Wallace B. Jefferson Place 1


David Medina
Place 4

Dale Wainwright
Place 7
Phil Johnson
Place 8
Harriet O'Neill
Place 3
Paul W. Green
Place 5
DID NOT VOTE
Don R. Willett
Place 2

[lonny23]

I guarantee you there will be football next year. We'll have football as long as this is Texas! :D

[JC73]

I guarantee you there will be football next year. We'll have football as long as this is Texas! :D
Or Lonny, I will pour gasoline on my head and light myself on fire. :D

[lonny23]

Or Lonny, I will pour gasoline on my head and light myself on fire. :D
Yeah, we don't want that to happen! :D

You never did tell me if you were going to be a fan next year or not! :p

[reed35]

I am sure they will fix the problem. I just hope they fix it right.

[Tejasnole]

O they will or some kids get an extra long summer break!

[DiamondJ2]

Fix it right? Not this governor or legislature. As far as they are concerned and the Supreme Court funding is adequate. Translation: kids are receiving an adequate education, but the accountablility doesn't fit the adequacy. Just like educators in the state are need about a $6,000 raise to be in line with the nationalaverage. If they get that raise, does that mean they can start teaching average?!! Problem is Bush and Texas politicos want a Cadillac education on a Volkswagen budget.

[LoneRocket]

My hang up is, having to send tax dollars to other school districts, while the kids in my district need that money the most. Some districts are having to give 50% - 75% of their operating budgets to Robin Hood. If this keeps up you will see more layoffs and even the closing down of some schools. Do not be surprise if you hear the Texas leadership talking about raising the $1.50 tax cap, making robinhood legal or not closing tax loopholes while certain business do not pay their fair, but figuring a way to stick it to us more. They need to find away to fund schools first, teacher pay raises second and then cut property taxes third.

[ruffshod]

Just like educators in the state are need about a $6,000 raise to be in line with the nationalaverage. If they get that raise, does that mean they can start teaching average?!! Problem is Bush and Texas politicos want a Cadillac education on a Volkswagen budget.

Yeah. But how does it realte to the cost of living average. The pay rate in California is twice what it is here, but the cost of living is 3 times as much for example.

[myround0]

Republicons make it no secret they want to dumb down americans, what a joke i first heard this question posed on CNN, Lou Dobbs Moneyline and thought it would never happen, closing public schools, you can bet private schools the jesuits will open on time, its the public school who are threaten with being shut to save governmental funds...these people just are unbelieveable, Rick Perry, will smile in your face and then (refuse to finish the thought since I am sure he is a fellow american)...it amazes me, how did we even get to this, all these monies (taxes we pay, people like me who are without child, still pay property taxes that are suppose to go toward schools) from the government to pay for schools will be diverted to washington to pay for the other needs...if schools aren't open then we might as well be talking about americans the next time we talk about a third world nation and its literacy rate...you continue to follow the blind, eventually you will become blinded...

[dragons08]

O they will or some kids get an extra long summer break!
sounds good to me! :D

[DawgsFanForLife]

There are a lot of good and bad in all of this but do you really believe it is fair for the small schools in the middle of no where that do not have a tax base to not receive the same level or a quality education as those in more affluent areas?

I truly believe a lot of smart people have came from these smaller communities but i do not think those that have too or choose to live in a rural community with smaller schools should be penalized because of a lack of funding. I bet if people looked harder they would find a lot of money missing from their schools from everyone putting it in their own pockets by misappropriation and other things. I am not saying all do it but the more money involed and the bigger the budgets the easier it is to hide diverted funds, pay outs, etc.

Next time get out and vote and make sure the people you elect are making the decisions that you want them to make and why you put them in office, if not do not reelect them.

DFFL

[WildcatFan]

Well I am from Plano so don't get me started on this issue. I moved to Plano because of the good schools and I am sorry that some people live within certain ISD's with no cheddar because of low property tax valuations how is that my problem.

Find a good job and move to Plano, but don't make me fund your schools because you choose to live in a certain area.

But I digress the real problem here is simple.

In order to fund the public school system in Texas at the level we need I am afraid the property tax system is outdated.

Like California the only way to make it happen, is I am afraid a state income tax. The idea of a state income tax in Texas would go over like a lead balloon and perhaps cause a wide spread stake buring march on Austin.

This is the insidious piece the media and definatly the lawmakers don't mention as it would be political suicide to even bring up the idea of a sate income tax, its taboo like Cheerleader Porn and Selling liquor in the city limits of Lubbock.

Let's face it I don't think they can come up with a way, without all of us forking over more cash.

[reed35]

We do not have chidlren, but own property and pay school tax. We know that some people around us have 3,4,5 kids and rent and pay no taxes. This is where we get frustrated. One thing we suggested is if a kid is enrolled, those parents pay tax. If you think about all the retired people still paying tax because they own property, then all the people renting (houses, Apt's) that do not have to pay tax because they do not own the property. This is a problem and wrong. Just want them to fix it right.

[lonny23]

We do not have chidlren, but own property and pay school tax. We know that some people around us have 3,4,5 kids and rent and pay no taxes. This is where we get frustrated. One thing we suggested is if a kid is enrolled, those parents pay tax. If you think about all the retired people still paying tax because they own property, then all the people renting (houses, Apt's) that do not have to pay tax because they do not own the property. This is a problem and wrong. Just want them to fix it right.
It would be fairer to make parents with kids pay the taxes, but the people who own the rental property already have to pay the taxes.

[reed35]

It would be fairer to make parents with kids pay the taxes, but the people who own the rental property already have to pay the taxes.
very true, and that is why i agree it should not be a property tax. that was wrong worded for long time.

[lonny23]

very true, and that is why i agree it should not be a property tax. that was wrong worded for long time.
The whole property tax thing is a little funny. It looks like they're attempting to tax those who have money (own a house), but they do so much to not tax the rich in other areas!

[DiamondJ2]

well, ruffshod, you tell me why there is a shorttage of teachers in Texas. The main reason is the salary. Many school districts pay extra for science, math and technology educators because they know that those specialized teachers can earn more in the business world. Plus many teachers are fed up with NCLB and other standerdized testing. Throughout the school year students lose 17 days to testing, not counting the 10-20 minutes demanded by administration to do TAKS warm-ups.

Curriculum-wise, students are pushed to receive a "global liberal arts education". Are all students really being prepared for college? On paper, yes, but in reality many could care less about being able to compete on the global playing field. One area that has been cut back drastically over the last decade is vocational classes while substituting work--study programs. If a student can go half a day to school, then be employed the rest of the day and still earn a diploma that is o different than other students receive.

Have we dumbed down? Yes. Trend in the 80's and 90's: don't hurt their self-esteem. If they get close to the answer, give them credit: out-based education. Let's get back to the basics of 50's, 60's and part of the 70's educational system, and the government, federal and state, should fund the demands that they make on educators.

[LoneRocket]

We do not have chidlren, but own property and pay school tax. We know that some people around us have 3,4,5 kids and rent and pay no taxes. This is where we get frustrated. One thing we suggested is if a kid is enrolled, those parents pay tax. If you think about all the retired people still paying tax because they own property, then all the people renting (houses, Apt's) that do not have to pay tax because they do not own the property. This is a problem and wrong. Just want them to fix it right.
Wrong renters pay property taxes in the form of higher rent, if they are not we have some people making bad business decisions. I can make the same statement that I should not have to pay for the roads you drive on especially even if I never drive on those roads. It benefits everyone if we have an educated society. My biggest hang up is we have tax elections where people who do not own property or pay rent, but they can vote to raise a tax cap. I think we have to find away where EVERYBODY pays. I do not mind paying taxes as long as I see it benefiting kids.

[lonny23]

Wrong renters pay property taxes in the form of higher rent, if they are not we have some people making bad business decisions. I can make the same statement that I should not have to pay for the roads you drive on especially even if I never drive on those roads. It benefits everyone if we have an educated society. My biggest hang up is we have tax elections where people who do not own property or pay rent, but they can vote to raise a tax cap. I think we have to find away where EVERYBODY pays. I do not mind paying taxes as long as I see it benefiting kids.
I'd never have any money if we went to a system where you pay for the roads you drive on!:eek:

[rantanamo]

I love it when Americans talk taxes. We sound like morons. How about everyone pay for everything they use themselves. No societal benefits. Roads by the mile. Natural resources by the kilo. Grow your own food and pay for each lb of soil you use based on land valuations.

[WildcatFan]

I'd never have any money if we went to a system where you pay for the roads you drive on!:eek:

Then don't move to Plano "lonny" the main North South route is the North Dallas TollWay and the new main East/West route is the George Bush Turnpike both pay roads.

On top of that for every dollar Plano ISD takes in 50 cents is sent back to poorer districts.

Everyone hates Plano yet we have to pay to drive and pay to fund the rest of the states schools!:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[WildcatFan]

I love it when Americans talk taxes. We sound like morons. How about everyone pay for everything they use themselves. No societal benefits. Roads by the mile. Natural resources by the kilo. Grow your own food and pay for each lb of soil you use based on land valuations.

I would agree with that line of thinking if the scales were not tilted.

Of course as my daddy always says "The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Keep Making Babies"

[mtbray]

I personally would like to see school funding by a state sales tax, in addition to property tax. That way EVERYBODY pays! Yeah it may fluctuate with the economy, but I'm talking about the sales tax as a supplement.

[lonny23]

I love it when Americans talk taxes. We sound like morons. How about everyone pay for everything they use themselves. No societal benefits. Roads by the mile. Natural resources by the kilo. Grow your own food and pay for each lb of soil you use based on land valuations.I think a few already do that!:p

[lonny23]

Then don't move to Plano "lonny" the main North South route is the North Dallas TollWay and the new main East/West route is the George Bush Turnpike both pay roads.

On top of that for every dollar Plano ISD takes in 50 cents is sent back to poorer districts.

Everyone hates Plano yet we have to pay to drive and pay to fund the rest of the states schools!:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
I would just drive on other roads a lot of the time. I was mostly talking about long-distance roads, though.

[LoneRocket]

Then don't move to Plano "lonny" the main North South route is the North Dallas TollWay and the new main East/West route is the George Bush Turnpike both pay roads.

On top of that for every dollar Plano ISD takes in 50 cents is sent back to poorer districts.

Everyone hates Plano yet we have to pay to drive and pay to fund the rest of the states schools!:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
I was reading where some districts are giving 60-70 percent of their operating budget to other districts. It mentioned that Austin ISD is giving close to 180 Million of a 700 million budget to other districts they mentioned at the time that most of that money is going to Galand and also Eanes was giving close to 52 + million of a 100 million dollar budget; most of that money was going to Lockhart.

[Redneckn]

Perhaps if you sold the Jumbo-Tron, you could pay the teachers. Or not spend millions on stadium.

And I know it will come up that the stadium money was "raised", and that's fine, but why not "raise" some money to pay teachers?

It seems like everybody is waiting on some stupid bum politicians to make decisions. NONE of them are interested in what you want or need. They are only interested in taking care of themselves. The best idea would be to give the politicians the finger on next time and elect your next neighbor. If somebody has a law degree, they do not belong in office. They have lost touch with society and are useless to "us".


That's all, have a nice day.

[LoneRocket]

Perhaps if you sold the Jumbo-Tron, you could pay the teachers. Or not spend millions on stadium.

And I know it will come up that the stadium money was "raised", and that's fine, but why not "raise" some money to pay teachers?

It seems like everybody is waiting on some stupid bum politicians to make decisions. NONE of them are interested in what you want or need. They are only interested in taking care of themselves. The best idea would be to give the politicians the finger on next time and elect your next neighbor. If somebody has a law degree, they do not belong in office. They have lost touch with society and are useless to "us".


That's all, have a nice day.
I think that is Round Rock ISD that has the JumboTron not Austin ISD. Which was probably paid for by bond money not operation money. I do not think it is legal to pay salaries with bond money. My friend told me that Austin's stadiums are in need of repairs badly. Most of the Texas leadership promised if they were elected they were going to fix this thing, the issue is because of the state law "Chapter 41" can only be fixed by our elected officials.