Jump to content

Nederland is open, Barrow Resigns


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PN-G bamatex said:

Not to add fuel to a growing fire or anything, but I would just like to point out that PN-G's higher level of property wealth per capita versus Nederland, owing to the former's more industrial tax base, also means PN-GISD loses substantially more state funding than NISD to recapture, better known as "Robin Hood." When all is said and done, the net per capita funding disparity is not as significant as one might think, and nowhere near as significant as it was before the Robin Hood plan was put into effect a little over 30 years ago.

It is also worth noting that Maintenance & Operation funding (i.e., money for day-to-day operations) and Interest & Sinking funding (i.e., money to pay off bonds) are two separate streams of tax revenue for school districts that are assessed as separate line items on your property tax bill. To PhatMack's point, the latter is totally dependent on the structure and amount of the bond proposed by the school district. I doubt there's much, if any, difference in the overall cost to the individual homeowners in PN-GISD and NISD over the lives of their respective bonds after inflation is controlled for.

Yeah, we use lots of excuses on this side of the track, people could read this and either wouldn’t understand or just disregard because it’s 2 paragraphs and requires some focus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PN-G bamatex said:

Not to add fuel to a growing fire or anything, but I would just like to point out that PN-G's higher level of property wealth per capita versus Nederland, owing to the former's more industrial tax base, also means PN-GISD loses substantially more state funding than NISD to recapture, better known as "Robin Hood." When all is said and done, the net per capita funding disparity is not as significant as one might think, and nowhere near as significant as it was before the Robin Hood plan was put into effect a little over 30 years ago.

It is also worth noting that Maintenance & Operations funding (i.e., money for day-to-day operations) and Interest & Sinking funding (i.e., money to pay off bonds) are two separate streams of tax revenue for school districts that are assessed as separate line items on your property tax bill. To PhatMack's point, the latter is totally dependent on the structure and amount of the bond proposed by the school district, subject to rate caps and other mandates imposed by the state. I doubt there's much, if any, difference in the overall cost to the individual homeowners in PN-GISD and NISD over the lives of their respective bonds after inflation is controlled for, or at least little difference attributable to anything other than differences in the total, inflation-adjusted costs of the bonds.

PNG can use a loop hole in Robinhood like BH. For a small fee, our superintendent can show them.😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, El Grande Ned said:

Is there still the “Robin Hood” loophole that the district can use funds that would have gone into that system and instead put into the Interest and Sinking Fund? I know it was a tactic used by “wealthy” school districts to avoid losing the money and keeping it in their schools. And I don’t think there were many specifics on what that entailed.

This is the part where even I start to get confused. I don’t pretend to understand exactly how that works, partly because it’s only gotten more complicated as the state has started throwing large amounts of money into property tax relief (a process known in policy circles as rate compression). But, as I understand it, the district isn’t actually keeping the cash, just redirecting it away from the state in favor of bond projects, and the sums saved from Robin Hood aren’t as large as you might think. It might be better termed a subsidy than a rebate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's easy to throw opinions out there about how certain ISDs spend their money and how well they manage it.  This is straight from TEA 2022-23 school year.

"The state's school financial accountability rating system, known as the School Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST), ensures that Texas public schools are held accountable for the quality of their financial management practices and that they improve these practices. The system is designed to encourage Texas public schools to better manage their financial resources to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes."

IMG_3802.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gtj007 said:

It's easy to throw opinions out there about how certain ISDs spend their money and how well they manage it.  This is straight from TEA 2022-23 school year.

"The state's school financial accountability rating system, known as the School Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST), ensures that Texas public schools are held accountable for the quality of their financial management practices and that they improve these practices. The system is designed to encourage Texas public schools to better manage their financial resources to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes."

IMG_3802.jpeg

Exactly................School financial integrity rating of Texas (First) and TEA gave the Injuns a B......Poor old Ned got an A from both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uncle Larry did fairly well with Rotten Press Boxes, grass fields, and long lines at the restroom......Not long ago he was begging for new jerseys while other teams had 2 different helmets with several uniform choices, (and colors). Not everyone can afford or is willing to pay for all new. . Ned's problem is not about fluff.....It's LEADERSHIP in the Athletic program. Academics are fine, WIN and they will come,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is about players as well, however, and if people are not choosing NISD or leaving NISD because of the quality of facilities, then that impacts all programs…unfortunately, the numbers and some of the statements made here indicate that to possibly be the case…on a positive note, the last bond passed, upgrades are being made and hopefully they have an impact…time will tell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gtj007 said:

It's easy to throw opinions out there about how certain ISDs spend their money and how well they manage it.  This is straight from TEA 2022-23 school year.

"The state's school financial accountability rating system, known as the School Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST), ensures that Texas public schools are held accountable for the quality of their financial management practices and that they improve these practices. The system is designed to encourage Texas public schools to better manage their financial resources to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes."

IMG_3802.jpeg

This metric doesn't work the way I suspect you think it does. The grading rubric TEA uses to determine these ratings has several "ceiling indicators," which are factors that can cap the maximum possible overall score assigned to a school district if a particular condition isn't met, even if the school scored the maximum possible points with respect to every other factor for consideration. You can confirm that for yourself by viewing the rubric

This is the hidden content, please
.

PN-G's FIRST report, available

This is the hidden content, please
, indicates the district scored a 96 out of 100 and would have been given an A rating but for the failure to satisfy one ceiling indicator. According to the data considered with respect to that factor, the district's fund balance fell 25.4% over three years. The factor only allows for a maximum 25% reduction before the grade cap is triggered. I would bet good money that the decline in the district's fund balance was caused by special arrangements the district had to make due to the delays in the construction of the new schools caused by COVID, though I can't say that for sure. Whatever the case may be, failure to meet that condition capped PN-G's highest possible grade at 89, instead of the 96 PN-G would have otherwise scored.

Interestingly, Nederland also scored a 96. NISD's FIRST report, available

This is the hidden content, please
, and PN-GISD’s are identically scored in every way except for with respect to that one fund balance criterion.

In any event, this is an academic exercise that I don't think really addresses PhatMack's point. He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he was saying that the Nederland bond was more expensive and less effective at reducing NISD's long term operational expenditures than PN-G's bond packages have been and/or will be. I think he's probably correct. PN-GISD's latest bond package consolidated six schools into four, as PhatMack aptly pointed out. Less obvious is the reduction in utility and maintenance costs brought about by both PN-G's 2019 and 2007 bond issues, which altogether replaced eight old schools that were energy inefficient and costly to maintain with six new ones that are much more efficient and less maintenance-intensive, and achieved similar cost savings at the high school through extensive renovation. NISD's bond issue didn't consolidate any schools and only replaced one, though it included some renovations to a handful of others, too. I don't think there's much debate to be had that PN-G's bond issues will save the district considerably more money in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, PN-G bamatex said:

This metric doesn't work the way I suspect you think it does. The grading rubric TEA uses to determine these ratings has several "ceiling indicators," which are factors that can cap the maximum possible overall score assigned to a school district if a particular condition isn't met, even if the school scored the maximum possible points with respect to every other factor for consideration. You can confirm that for yourself by viewing the rubric

This is the hidden content, please
.

PN-G's FIRST report, available

This is the hidden content, please
, indicates the district scored a 96 out of 100 and would have been given an A rating but for the failure to satisfy one ceiling indicator. According to the data considered with respect to that factor, the district's fund balance fell 25.4% over three years. The factor only allows for a maximum 25% reduction before the grade cap is triggered. I would bet good money that the decline in the district's fund balance was caused by special arrangements the district had to make due to the delays in the construction of the new schools caused by COVID, though I can't say that for sure. Whatever the case may be, failure to meet that condition capped PN-G's highest possible grade at 89, instead of the 96 PN-G would have otherwise scored.

Interestingly, Nederland also scored a 96. NISD's FIRST report, available

This is the hidden content, please
, and PN-GISD’s are identically scored in every way except for with respect to that one fund balance criterion.

In any event, this is an academic exercise that I don't think really addresses PhatMack's point. He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he was saying that the Nederland bond was more expensive and less effective at reducing NISD's long term operational expenditures than PN-G's bond packages have been and/or will be. I think he's probably correct. PN-GISD's latest bond package consolidated six schools into four, as PhatMack aptly pointed out. Less obvious is the reduction in utility and maintenance costs brought about by both PN-G's 2019 and 2007 bond issues, which altogether replaced eight old schools that were energy inefficient and costly to maintain with six new ones that are much more efficient and less maintenance-intensive, and achieved similar cost savings at the high school through extensive renovation. NISD's bond issue didn't consolidate any schools and only replaced one, though it included some renovations to a handful of others, too. I don't think there's much debate to be had that PN-G's bond issues will save the district considerably more money in the long run.

In other words, NISD, even when you think you win…. you lose because you did it wrong.  you get an A for the operation of a Ford Escape, while PNG got a B for operating a Bugatti 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2024 at 3:38 PM, Razor said:

It is about players as well, however, and if people are not choosing NISD or leaving NISD because of the quality of facilities, then that impacts all programs…unfortunately, the numbers and some of the statements made here indicate that to possibly be the case…on a positive note, the last bond passed, upgrades are being made and hopefully they have an impact…time will tell

The decision during the bond process was made to replace the high school vs replacing all 4 elementaries.  I don't necessarily agree with that , but its done so lets move on.   The upgrades on the elementary schools look pretty good as well and are designed to last for years even if the rest of the school is replaced.  Which is why they are separate from the older parts of the schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, GoPro said:

It should be the DC from Desoto , but they will mess this up 

I haven’t heard as much about the Katy guy, but re: the Desoto coach, the idea of a local guy who was DC at the best team in the state last year sounds too good to be true. Maybe when we learn more about the Katy guy, he’s just as good. If I had a vote, I’d be falling over myself to hire the de Soto guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott Rich seems to be the consensus rumored pick. Little that can be found about him online seems to be what was stated as Katy’s QB coach for last few seasons at least. And seems to be involved in Student Leadership activities and FCA. Sounds like a class act individual. 

if this is the selection will be interesting to see what aspects he brings from Katy program (hopefully structure, discipline, fundamentals, etc). Offensively Katy usually has a run oriented approach with pro sets, i formation, single back, etc and under center. More balanced approach than typical spread. Would be interesting. Would be better if he brought along Katy’s giant OL 🤣 Although, if you haven’t seen the size of some of the middle school linemen coming up in Nederland, would be good to check out some Central middle school games next year. Let’s see if we can keep them on the field in high school.

Will be interesting day/evening with announcements. Im sure the lookouts are searching the city to see if the new coach has arrived already and touring around. 🤣 Coach Watch 2024 is on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,201
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    JBarry68
    Newest Member
    JBarry68
    Joined



  • Posts

    • naw, maaaaybe 7, definitely not 8 deep.  today im avoiding sitting by #10s parents, had to move away yesterday.   "put my son back in jub, put my son back in"  and then crying on every little touch of someone.    lets ball out today ktz!    
    • Very close game until the 2nd half (mostly the 4th) when Orangefield came unraveled. Worse defensive effort I have seen out of the Bobcats in three years. This team has to get back on D and quit getting beat over the top when pressing. Offensively, non ball handlers continually turn it over and their shot selection is poor. Basic basketball, such as: defensive hustle, boxing out, and taking care of the basketball are the areas the Bobcats need to work on most. Whitmire will get them on point, but he shouldn't have to coach effort at the Varsity Level.  We'll be at McNeese this Friday night at 6pm.
    • I don’t benefit from it, that’s not my area.  But the average cost to imprison someone is around $15k per year (on average in the US) and capital cases cost somewhere between $1.5-$3M with over half being overturned or reduced to life in prison anyway.  These numbers may be inflated since the last report I read but I’m sure it would be on both sides and higher on the DP side if anything. So what’s the point?  We feel better because we got to return the favor on someone (hopefully) who committed a heinous crime?  And I don’t know I can say we have “complicated” it. Which appeal should we cut out?  Our justice system has a pecking order and we have higher courts for a reason. When we are about to impose the ultimate judgment, should we cut steps that other cases have to save a buck?  Or do we not pay for an indigent person’s experts at the trial court level because it’s too expensive? Or do we just lock them up and throw away the key (unless we later find out they weren’t actually guilty, in which case we have a key and a life we haven’t unjustly ended) and save a ton of money?  Seems to me to be an obvious solution but I’m more of a pragmatist.
    • 1 thing for certain. Coach Earned 3 more years to figure it out lol
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...