Jump to content

Bond Issues.....


Recommended Posts

Couple of questions for the informed.... I am new to the OISD(Orangefield) district. My daughter is in Kindergarten this year, and I heard through the vine that there will be a bond coming up for a new "state of the art" highschool at Orangefield. I know they renovated it a few years back, but I believe that this district will be 4A in about 6-10 yrs. Seriously. We had a school function that was just for kinder's and I swear there were more 6yr olds at that thing than LCM has in their whole HS. Seriously. The elementary school in Orangefield has like 5A level enrollment.(Maybe exaggerated, but alot of kids)Well anyway, if this were to happen then there is absolutly NO room for the coming surge in enrollment. In my opinion, why not build a new HS on SH 1442? Plenty of space, and then you wouldnt have to deal with the VERY narrow Hwy 105. Picking up my daughter in the afternoons is like trying to leave a Dallas cowboy football game. Its that bad. I guess what I am trying to say/ask is if there were a bond to build a new HS in OISD, would yall support it, would 1442 be a good place, and do any of yall OISD people see what I see coming in the future?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First thing I would do is go to a few school board meetings, watch the agendas see what they are thinking, they are open to the public, just remember if you wish to ask about future plans you have to be on the agenda in most cases, which means you will need to get put on the agenda well ahead of time probably a week or two in advance. Most school boards will gladly share information with you. Get involved and go to the meetings. You will get to see a lot of the issues that the school board is dealing with.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name="mat" post="984785" timestamp="1300452230"]
Recent news reports has the district saying enrollment numders are down.
[/quote]


That's eactly what I hear. Ironically last I heard the numbers were up a little at WOS and down at most other Orange County schools.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not heard this Kicker.  The last bond issue failed twice before it finally passed.  They had to keep cutting it back until it was almost half of what was originally planned.  If this is in the works, I think it would be hard to pass again.  I'm for it, but would be surprised if it did pass especially with the way things are right now.  As far as location, it would have to be somewhere esle, there is no room where the current schools are located.  Enrollment overall in the district is down, but with the new sewer system coming online now, look for more subdivisions to startup as well as apartments.  The district should grow over the next 10 years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Statistics

    46,206
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Ceb2000
    Newest Member
    Ceb2000
    Joined


  • Posts

    • You got a LOT more than that, you’ve got Riceland filling up. GCM is dropping down from 23-6A back down to 5A in ‘26.  GCCISD is redrawing attendance zones to make sure of that.  At the same time, BH was only about 100 students under the 6A threshold last time UIL drew districts so BH is definitely going up to 6A when those maps get redrawn, probably right into the empty spot in 23-6A GCM is leaving when they drop down.
    • Like I said, even if it’s only 10% of the 100 kids BHISD takes from GCCISD each year, that’s 10 athletes per year and that’s being generous.  You’re right about the jobs with BHISD, BTW.  There’s more than 1 athlete from Baytown originally who got transferred to BHISD after a job opened up for Mama.
    • Here’s a link to another story about it This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • It’s behind a paywall but here’s Baytown Sun’s story on it.  It was reported on in other papers statewide so if you search by the date I think you’ll find other stories on it. UIL strengthens student transfer rules By Ron McDowell [email protected] Oct 18, 2024   In order to maintain a level playing field for all member schools, the University Interscholastic League strengthened rules regarding transfer student eligibility at its most recent meeting in Austin. Every year thousands of students transfer schools in the state of Texas. A student’s ability to participate in UIL sanctioned activities may be limited base on the reasons for the transfer. A change in family status, work transfers, enrollment in an academic magnet program, or a move across town, receive scrutiny, but only rarely does one of these reasons result in the loss of eligibility. The only reason to automatically cause the loss of participation eligibility is a transfer for athletic purposes. The current rule, which has been in place since 1981, does not require a Previous Athletic Participation Form (PAPFs) to be submitted if the student-athlete does not participate in a varsity level sport during the first year of enrollment. There has been growing concern among some member schools, that other members are breaking the current rule and creating “super teams” with new transfer enrollees, and that the UIL is not doing enough to police, what appear to be, the inordinate number of transfers among high school athletes. To mitigate these concerns, the UIL approved a proposal to expand the power of the State Executive Committee (SEC) and allow it to investigate schools based upon the number of PAPFs submitted. Schools that submit an inordinate number of PAPFs would face heightened scrutiny and possible public reprimand and future sanctions. The UIL has also changed the requirements for PAPF submission, mandating that the form be submitted before a grade 9-12 transfer student may participate at any level of school athletics. This is a marked departure from the current policy which encourages schools not to complete PAPFs for students who transfer in, if the school believes that the student will not play a varsity sport in the first year the student is enrolled at the new school. Some critics of the current system think that the change doesn’t go far enough. Speaking on background, one local school district source suggested that there should be an automatic year wait for transfer students due to the number of loopholes in the waiver process. “If a student transfers, it should be a year out of competition automatically,” the source said. In addition, the UIL also approved a proposal that gives the SEC the power to appoint an independent administrator to oversee the conduct of the local District Executive Committee (DEC) if it is determined that the DEC is not consistently enforcing the rules of the governing body. The change is significant since all appeals that a school brings, starts and usually ends with the DEC. That includes the determination of transfer student eligibility. It is believed that with the implementation of this change, schools in a UIL district will be less likely to face retribution from the DEC chair and other members. The policy changes will go into effect, Aug. 1, 2025 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  
    • I was hoping WOS was going to win. To get another chance to redeem ourself. Silsbee did not look good in that game and has not played consistent during the season. Hopefully against La Vega they will play 4quarters of football
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...