School Bond Issues - Nearly $1 Billion

[Swake]

Tulsa Public Schools is voting today on a $415 million bond issue. Assuming it passes, which it should, and combining it with the $487 million passed last month by Broken Arrow (340mm), Jenks (120mm) and Union (27mm) that makes almost a billion dollars in new capital spending for Tulsa area schools in just the last 30 days.

[Swake]

Tulsa's bonds pass with an 85% approval rate

[Plutonic Panda]

Wish OKC would do something like that. When you invest in your schools and general education, you produce a better educated workforce and it shows. Good for Tulsa.

[ljbab728]

Wish OKC would do something like that. When you invest in your schools and general education, you produce a better educated workforce and it shows. Good for Tulsa.

plupan, have you forgotten MAPS for KIDS already? It was over $540M.

[Rover]

If I understand correctly, OKC paid for cash for ours and Tulsa approved more debt. OKC made the commitment a decade earlier.

Not trying to engage the OKC v Tulsa debate, just responding to the "I wish OKC would do something like this" type comments.

[TU 'cane]

If I understand correctly, OKC paid for cash for ours and Tulsa approved more debt. OKC made the commitment a decade earlier.

Not trying to engage the OKC v Tulsa debate, just responding to the "I wish OKC would do something like this" type comments.

It's a valid point. Because what happens with these bonds that are paid for over time are increased costs that aren't accounted for in the short term. This creates gaps and then the school districts want to whine about cost overruns and inflation, etc. and want more funding to pay for the gap. I'm hopeful that with as much money that was granted to the school districts, we don't run into that. They need to be pinching every single penny they can and if anything, need to come up with surplus at the end of it all.

It's high time Tulsa and it's surrounding school districts take care of their systems. Tulsa lacks quality schools and it shows when companies move from Tulsa to other cities, and we rarely see the reverse. This is a big problem for the city's growth and has to change sooner rather than later if Tulsa and this state is to grow.
This is wonderful investment into the local school systems if we look at just the dollar amount. They better make everything of it.

And quite frankly, once these projects are all said and done, I don't want to hear anymore about how our school districts lack the resources. Swake's math is correct. Broken Arrow P.S. alone have voted on half a BILLION in this bond and the previous one. Let's make sure we make it all count.

[Plutonic Panda]

Voters pass $415M bond package for Tulsa school district - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

[ZYX2]

It's a valid point. Because what happens with these bonds that are paid for over time are increased costs that aren't accounted for in the short term. This creates gaps and then the school districts want to whine about cost overruns and inflation, etc. and want more funding to pay for the gap. I'm hopeful that with as much money that was granted to the school districts, we don't run into that. They need to be pinching every single penny they can and if anything, need to come up with surplus at the end of it all.

It's high time Tulsa and it's surrounding school districts take care of their systems. Tulsa lacks quality schools and it shows when companies move from Tulsa to other cities, and we rarely see the reverse. This is a big problem for the city's growth and has to change sooner rather than later if Tulsa and this state is to grow.
This is wonderful investment into the local school systems if we look at just the dollar amount. They better make everything of it.

And quite frankly, once these projects are all said and done, I don't want to hear anymore about how our school districts lack the resources. Swake's math is correct. Broken Arrow P.S. alone have voted on half a BILLION in this bond and the previous one. Let's make sure we make it all count.

You act as if the schools are adequately funded already. You hope that the schools don't "whine" about not having enough money? Where do you think all the money goes? This money is definitely needed, and probably more. Don't act like the districts are unfairly taking money away from the taxpayers.

[ZYX2]

And why do you think Tulsa lacks quality schools? Certainly not because the district has been given too much money over the years.

[Rover]

The school district will pay the principal and interest each year. If $415 million pays 3% and it is a 20 year bond, the cost of principal and interest is about $2.3 million per month, or an additional expense of about $140 Million total. That money comes from somewhere. The great part about the Maps For Kids in OKC was that it was pay as you go and there aren't additional interest expenses, so we got a great bang for the buck.

[Swake]

It's a valid point. Because what happens with these bonds that are paid for over time are increased costs that aren't accounted for in the short term. This creates gaps and then the school districts want to whine about cost overruns and inflation, etc. and want more funding to pay for the gap. I'm hopeful that with as much money that was granted to the school districts, we don't run into that. They need to be pinching every single penny they can and if anything, need to come up with surplus at the end of it all.

It's high time Tulsa and it's surrounding school districts take care of their systems. Tulsa lacks quality schools and it shows when companies move from Tulsa to other cities, and we rarely see the reverse. This is a big problem for the city's growth and has to change sooner rather than later if Tulsa and this state is to grow.
This is wonderful investment into the local school systems if we look at just the dollar amount. They better make everything of it.

And quite frankly, once these projects are all said and done, I don't want to hear anymore about how our school districts lack the resources. Swake's math is correct. Broken Arrow P.S. alone have voted on half a BILLION in this bond and the previous one. Let's make sure we make it all count.

You have zero idea what you are talking about.

This TPS bond issue is the end of a 20 year plan to redo all of Tulsa's schools. Previous bond issues in the 20 year plan included:
2015: $415 million
2010: $354 million
2005: $162.2 million
2001:$140.7 million
1999: $109 million
1996: $94.5 million

That's well over a billion dollars redoing TPS schools over the last 20 years. After this bond issue, TPS plans to go back and start over with the schools that were addressed in the first bond issues. This is regular cycle that leaves tax rates the same over time.

As for the major suburban Tulsa school districts, the facilities for Broken Arrow, Union, Owasso and especially Jenks schools rival any nationally.

[dcsooner]

All this money spent on buildings and Oklahoma students STILL are towards the bottom in performance in math, science, and reading

[Plutonic Panda]

It's because of education funding at a state level I'm assuming.

[Swake]

By law school facilities and infrastructure funding is supported through locally voted bond issues. Operational expenses come through local property taxes and state funding. Operational funding levels are set by the state without local input on a per pupil basis.

Therefore, local school districts can pass whatever level of funding for buildings and facilities they want locally, but all Oklahoma school districts day to day operations are funded together for costs like teachers and utilities by a state legislature that sometimes seems to hate the very idea of public schools.

[ZYX2]

There are schools literally unable to buy paper right now because operational funding from the state is so low.

[TU 'cane]

You act as if the schools are adequately funded already. You hope that the schools don't "whine" about not having enough money? Where do you think all the money goes? This money is definitely needed, and probably more. Don't act like the districts are unfairly taking money away from the taxpayers.

False, no I did not act that way, because they are not. And the issue is larger than just the amount of money pumped in. The system and the way this state takes care of education needs to be wholly re-examined.
I'm simply stating that half a billion dollars better amount to something and it better be utilized to the fullest extent before school districts turn around in 5-10 years and ask for half a billion more (which I'm worried will become the trend). Pardon me for a being a little stern with my language (for the use of "whine").

See here from dcsooner: "All this money spent on buildings and Oklahoma students STILL are towards the bottom in performance in math, science, and reading."

Yes, indeed, all this investment (albeit most of this was just passed, so the money has yet to take it's effect), and Oklahoma still ranks at the bottom...

And why do you think Tulsa lacks quality schools? Certainly not because the district has been given too much money over the years.

You're just talking to be talking now. My post was sufficient enough to express my views and understanding of the situation.
Duh, they lack quality schools because of the lack of appropriate funding (for general argument's sake, but there are other factors at play), and you can see I applauded their passage. Did you even read?

"Tulsa lacks quality schools and it shows when companies move from Tulsa to other cities, and we rarely see the reverse. This is a big problem for the city's growth and has to change sooner rather than later if Tulsa and this state is to grow.
This is wonderful investment into the local school systems if we look at just the dollar amount. They better make everything of it."

You have zero idea what you are talking about.

This TPS bond issue is the end of a 20 year plan to redo all of Tulsa's schools. Previous bond issues in the 20 year plan included:
2015: $415 million
2010: $354 million
2005: $162.2 million
2001:$140.7 million
1999: $109 million
1996: $94.5 million

That's well over a billion dollars redoing TPS schools over the last 20 years. After this bond issue, TPS plans to go back and start over with the schools that were addressed in the first bond issues. This is regular cycle that leaves tax rates the same over time.

As for the major suburban Tulsa school districts, the facilities for Broken Arrow, Union, Owasso and especially Jenks schools rival any nationally.

So, you're actually saying they've spent more than a billion dollars after this latest bond, which is it's own separate bond that's part of a larger 20 year plan? You are just arguing semantics and finer details with me at this point by trying to call me out and insist that I have "zero idea" what I'm talking about.

I'm trying to see where I rallied against these bonds to make you and ZYX so perturbed?
I actually praised it, but with a stern caution that with this much money (maybe you and ZYX don't understand exactly how much money these bond issues were really worth, let me tell you: A LOT), we better see some efficient results that won't end in even more money being asked in a relatively short time down the road (see part of my response above). Here's another reason why:

If we have to consistently pump $500 million per bond, say on average, every 5-10 years (from this point forward) simply to "keep up," then we're doing something wrong and the entire system needs to be addressed. This OBVIOUSLY plays into the larger funding issue from the state itself (again, among other things). Something will need to be addressed if taxpayers consistently find themselves needing to pass half a billion dollar bonds (I understand these most recent were the largest, but AGAIN, I'm cautioning against these becoming a pattern over the short term).

Now, would you and ZYX like to have a conversation, or would you like to continue pointing out the little details you just happened not to agree with in my post, and completely ignore my praise for these bonds? A little questioning and firm language of and towards the system and status quo never hurts.

[ZYX2]

To me, it did not seem as though you were speaking against the status quo, but rather for it. I got the impression that you were somewhat upset that TPS was asking - and was approved- such a large amount of money. That seemed to be in support of the status quo of consistently underfunding our schools.

I agree that the entire system of education in Oklahoma needs to be addressed. It is my opinion that we do a lot of things wrong. However, it is not realistic to expect the entire system to undergo major changes in the short term. In the mean time, we face dilapidated, underfunded schools. Improving facilities is a good first step in improving the education system as a whole.

What is your plan to improve Tulsa Public Schools, if you think the system is fundamentally flawed? Are you aware of the challenges that urban districts face? Of the challenges that many of their students face? I'm not being snarky, and I'm not upset. Education is just kind of a hot-button issue for me.

There are many reasons that our education system is struggling, many of which are not necessarily directly tied to funding. However, a lack of funding exacerbates these problems and limits what school districts can do.

[Swake]

It's high time Tulsa and it's surrounding school districts take care of their systems. Tulsa lacks quality schools and it shows when companies move from Tulsa to other cities, and we rarely see the reverse.

You said "It's high time Tulsa and it's surrounding school districts take care of their systems" This is untrue, I showed it to be untrue. TPS has been spending and restoring schools on a very specific schedule and plan going back 20 years. Long before "Maps for Kids” and in larger dollars. The suburban Tulsa districts have far better facilitates than anywhere else in the state, trust me, I have the property tax bill to prove it. The football facilities gap is an example of that, but to think that Jenks, Union, BA, and Owasso spend all their money on football is far from accurate. My kids go/went to Jenks with its dedicated gymnastics gym, division 1 level aquatics facility, LEED certified math and science center with its own planetarium.

Second. the Tulsa area does not lack quality schools. Tulsa Washington, Tulsa Edison, Jenks, Bixby, Union are all quality schools, among others.

Lastly any issues with schools in the Tulsa area are not from a local lack of focus on schools, it’s from a lack of state funding, an issue that is shared statewide in every district. It is an issue that is exacerbated in urban districts where poverty, crime, and large numbers of immigrant students make running schools even more difficult and costly. It was the Tulsa area districts that led the charge to get rid of that disaster Barresi and led the revolt over a Yukon legislator wanting to get rid of AP History classes recently.

Changes need to happen in schools in Oklahoma, but by far the biggest change has to happen on Lincoln Boulevard with the horrible lack of funds devoted to education in this state.

[TU 'cane]

To ZYX:

Sure, there was a *little* underlying questioning in regard to the amount of money they requested, but that should come no matter who or what is asking for an amount such as that. Ultimately, I just want it to be utilized to the absolute fullest extent with no one's pockets being lined. Now that TPS has this money, let's use it, let's make it count and actually put forth a competitive school system not just within the state, but within the country.
That's where a better Tulsa will start (and this actually applies to all the local school districts who recently passed these bonds).

What is your plan to improve Tulsa Public Schools, if you think the system is fundamentally flawed? Are you aware of the challenges that urban districts face? Of the challenges that many of their students face? I'm not being snarky, and I'm not upset. Education is just kind of a hot-button issue for me.

And it SHOULD be, not just for you, but for every Tulsan (in this particular example) and surrounding communities.
I have to admit that I don't want to get too far into this discussion because it'll turn political (my ideas aren't very popular, particularly in this type of medium)... Not something I want to partake in right now.
However, let me address a couple points (and please correct me where I may not understand the subject matter to it's fullest extent):

The lottery. What happened here? And I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I feel it needs to be brought up because many were riding on this back in the day to be the financial boon the schools statewide so dearly needed. This was supposed to pump tens of millions (or were some projections indicating hundreds? my memory fails me here) DIRECTLY into education funding.
Well, it is... But, to my knowledge the vast majority of it is going to secondary institutions, OU, OSU, JuCos, etc. Is that correct? I also believe that the projections haven't reached the levels they were supposed to, which is another major fault. Thus, the public school districts are getting pennies from it all.

In all honesty it comes down to the state legislature needing to figure out how to appropriately fund everything it needs to and cut out the nonsense. Because the municipalities are doing what they can. Of course, this can't/won't/hasn't happened for a variety of reasons. Which, to throw things a little off course but also provide a potentially REAL sustainable route to funding would be legalizing marijuana and appropriating funds to the education system. I know that's a little off the wall, probably will be scoffed at, but I think in the future it's something that really needs to be explored as a serious addition to the way our schools and other services are funded.

[ZYX2]

I consider myself to be well informed on many of the underlying principles of education and the challenges that schools face in educating students in the best possible/practical way. If there is anywhere that my knowledge severely lacks, it is the financial side of things. To be honest, I don't know much about the lottery, what was originally proposed, and what has happened with it. I don't know how exactly how much money it takes to run a district. I trust that the district administrators are giving appropriate figures. From my experience, they are, and often times are making serious concessions and still arrive at these astronomical figures. My point was that the school districts, in most cases, are not frivolously spending money.

The state legislature (and governor) needs to realize the importance of education. I think many of them either don't understand or don't care. They are depriving Oklahoma students not of luxuries, but of basic tools for learning. As I stated earlier, I know for a fact that there are local (Tulsa area) schools that cannot afford to buy paper because the state cut their funding this school year. It's pathetic.

Science scores (math and reading have separate issues) are so low because few people in Oklahoma care about science. Many completely deny it. Science scores won't improve until we start hiring real science teachers (coaches can make great teachers, but often don't).

[TU 'cane]

Yep, I hear ya loud and clear.

Perhaps Swake can enlighten the crowd in regard to the lottery funds. It's all a blur to me now.
We'll get it figured out one way. I'm not exactly in the environment to start researching that right now... Perhaps later.

[Swake]

Yep, I hear ya loud and clear.

Perhaps Swake can enlighten the crowd in regard to the lottery funds. It's all a blur to me now.
We'll get it figured out one way. I'm not exactly in the environment to start researching that right now... Perhaps later.

What does it matter what was promised with the lottery. The lottery was started 10 years ago and money is fungible. What’s more the people that made promises back when the lottery was started are long gone. Term limits, remember?

If you made a repair to your beat up F-150 in 2005 do you expect it to remain fixed? Especially when you stopped oil changes back in 2008 because of the recession? Bringing up the lottery is beating a dead horse to make excuses for not really wanting to spend money for good schools.

State funding for schools today sucks while at the same time we keep making tax cuts at the high end of the income scale, keep floating bond issues that encumber future state tax revenues and with giveaways like the lower permanent tax rates on fracking. But we can sure hate them gays good can’t we?

No, I don't think we will figure it out. The current state government isn't interested in schools or even governance really.

[ZYX2]

Yep, I hear ya loud and clear.

Perhaps Swake can enlighten the crowd in regard to the lottery funds. It's all a blur to me now.
We'll get it figured out one way. I'm not exactly in the environment to start researching that right now... Perhaps later.

Not to pile on, but I have to agree with Swake. I'm not sure we're figuring it out. I hope that I'm wrong, but I think that it will at least take a few election cycles for the state government to change it's stance on public education.