BURTON SCHOOL BOARD ADDS NEW MEMBER

  

The Burton School Board swore in two incumbents and one new member at their meeting Monday evening.  Newly elected board member Linda Majek Hasten joined incumbents Misty Goldberg Lucherk and Felton Cox in taking the Oath of Office after the returns of the May 6th board election were canvassed.  The board then voted to retain the current office holders on the board with Demetrius Colvin Sr. as president, Misty Lucherk as vice-president and Ronnie Hohlt as secretary.

County Chief Tax Appraiser Willy Dilworth reported to the board that preliminary property values in the Burton School District are up by 13 percent this year.  He noted that mineral values were flat in the district and that most of the increase is from rising land values.  Dilworth stated that the state comptroller’s office is currently doing their property value survey in Washington County, and warned the board that it was going to be close if his valuations fall within the 95 to 105 percent value of the states assessment.

In other action the board voted to hire two new instructors for next year and accepted two resignations and one retirement from the district.  Joining the district for next year will be Marcus Escalante as a secondary social studies teacher and Sierra Richard as a reading intervention instructor.  Leaving Burton Schools at the end of the school year will be Librarian Rachel Harmel and softball coach Kathy Shedd.  Retiring from the district after 44 years is Kathy Ladewig, the Elementary School Secretary.

In a workshop session before the board meeting, the school board continued to look at options for a Master Facility Site Plan.  Burton voters rejected an 18 million dollar bond issue last November and the board is considering different options on what school improvements need to be made as enrolment continues to increase. Board secretary Ronnie Hohlt suggested that a community meeting be set up where people on both sides of the issue could come together work out exactly what is a necessity for the school.  The Burton School District has seen a 58 percent increase in enrolment over the past 10 years, while other small districts in the area have lost enrolment.

Newly elected board member Linda Majek Hasten (L) joined incumbents Felton Cox and Misty Goldberg Lucherk in taking the Oath of Office Monday.
What’s your Reaction?
+1
0
+1
0
+1
0

9 Comments

  1. “Jim” the Jr. High was NOT torn down and a new building constructed. The inside was renovated. The auditorium was remodeled, as well as the high school building due to years of neglect. You are correct in the fact that the appraisal district sets the tax rate, but that doesn’t mean that the tax rate is the only thing that runs our school taxes up. The bond on the new elementary school increased our taxes, which we (the public) were willing to do. And might I add that we (the public) did not get what we voted for. We voted for a competition gym. What we got was a gym with no room for bleachers, so now it’s just a gym for elementary. Trust was broken with the public. Now, with an 18 million dollar bond that is being proposed, our taxes will definitely sky rocket, and how do we know we will get what we voted on this time? We do not need all the things that are being proposed. Classrooms to educate our children yes. A football stadium that is bigger and better than most Jr colleges absolutely no. Another gym? NO!! Shouldn’t have messed up the first time!!

    1. Did you even think that “Jim” could be Mr Jim Palmer? The previous superintendent.
      All these comments are kinda funny. I can’t wait to hear what’s next.
      The Jr High school was torn down.
      A Jr College stadium? What? Haven’t heard that one yet. That’s the problem everything seems to get exaggerated. I don’t believe that these comments were ever the boards intent.
      You do realize that the majority of the board, and the current superintendent, had nothing to do with the previous bond, right? The ones I’ve talked to agree with you in regards to the elementary gym.
      It will be interesting what their next move is though. I’ll stay supportive of our school though, either way.

    2. Concerned Citizen, Yes, Jim is Jim Palmer. You are mistaken in most of your comments. I left a document containing all the information on the original $7 million bond. It has info on the conditions of the buildings that were torn down. It contains the dates the old buildings had been built. It also contains information on what was to be constructed with the bond funds. I will address some of your “concerns” and provide accurate information on the Board’s plans.

      First, the Old JH building and the current competition gym were constructed about 1964. The Old JH WAS torn down about 2009. The new JH was built on the site of the Old JH. At the same time the Old Superintendent’s Office and Tax Office were torn down also. The new Administration was built as the same time as the JH.

      Second, the $7 million bond was passed in 2008. With those funds the Elementary, Elementary gym, Ag and Maintenance buildings. When the Board had their final discussion on how much money to ask for on a bond and what to build, there was discussion about the gym. Originally there was no gym in the plans. The principals pointed out there was not enough time in a day to allow PK through HS athletics to use one gym. The Board then discussed whether to add an elementary activity gym, like we have, or a competition gym. The architect was asked about our options. He said to build a competition gym would require a larger footprint. This was because there would have to be dressing rooms and showers. He said it would require tearing down about sixty feet of the red field house. That was not acceptable because the district had just renovated that building with a/c, plumbing and showers. The Board decided to build an elementary activity gym that could be used after school for JH or HS practices. All of this was in the public record and explained in the bond campaign. Some people did not understand the distinction, but it was explained.

      Second, the Auditorium and HS buildings were renovated with some of the $1.6 million federally subsidized low interest loan. The loan was not a bond. The District pays $100,000 a year from the Maintenance and Operation budget. It takes up about 8-9 cents of the $1.04 for M & O. The Board chose this option because it was very low interest and did not require a tax hike.

      Third, the bond was advertised at being up to $1.19. The bond interest rate came in better than anticipated because we waited. That allowed the district to set a rate at $1.17. It has been less, but never more. The District performed so well on maintaining the fund balance, the Board used fund balance for about eight years in a row to keep from raising the tax rate. I say this to inform the taxpayers that the Board members were taxpayers too. They were sensitive to all taxpayers and did everything they could to keep taxes stable.

      That taxpayers pay more in taxes is not because district taxes are going up. It is due to land values or improvements made to your or your neighbors properties. Also contributing is that mineral values are going down, so other taxable properties are paying more of the total revenues.

      As for the current proposed bond, there are some issues that are combining to cause this. But that is for another post.

      I hope this provides a better understanding of the history of how Burton ISD got to this point. Having been involved in Burton ISD for twelve years I got to know many taxpayers. I held four to five town halls, met with press and submitted several articles to the paper explaining the Board’s concept. The Board members changed several times in that time, but the planning was always approved by the next Board. The Board members were able to get a lot of things done using conservative investments, long-range planning and open discussion. Some of those same people are still on this Board. I encourage any “Concerned Citizen” to attend meetings, call on the superintendent and volunteer to serve on committees.

  2. https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/perfreport/tapr/2016/srch.html?srch=D

    For information on any district in Texas one should go to the TEA website. Search AEIS reports for years up to 2012. For years 2012-2016, search Performance Reports. I posted the site I used for the last five years above.

    In 2007, the year before Burton ISD taxpayers passed the $7 million bond, the enrollment for the district was at its lowest point, 282 students. As academics and facilities improved through 2016, enrollment steadily grew to 401 in 2016. That is a gain of 119 students. That would be an increase of a little over 40%. That means the district enrollment has almost doubled in the last ten years, after the $7 million bond was spent.

    The $7 million bond, plus about $1.5 million of fund balance, was used to improve facilities and provide for growth. There was a facilities plan in place.

    The first phase built the Elementary, elementary gym, Ag Shop and Maintenance/Bus Barn. At the time, there were four elementary classrooms open. By the end of two years, enrollment in the Elementary required two classrooms per grade level and all classes were utilized.

    The Board began phase two in 2009. The old JH was tore down. The District used four temporary buildings and two labs to serve as classrooms and the Administration Office while the new JH and Administration building were constructed. The district also renovated the old Ag Shop into a new District library. The JH building had two extra classrooms. In two years, both of those were being used. The district kept two of the temporary buildings to be used for math and Band.

    Phase Three included expanding the old cafeteria. To do that, the district lost two classrooms. Once again, all available classrooms were being used.

    The last remaining project on the Facilities Plan was to improve the Auditorium. The District applied for and was approved for a federally subsidized loan of $1.6 million at a very low interest rate. The funds were used to renovate and preserve the Auditorium. The place looks beautiful. Remaining funds were used to participate in an energy conserving grant to upgrade the air conditioning, plumbing and lighting. The upgrades saved energy and money.

    As for the concerns about turnover in the district, it appears to have increased. The normal turnover rate for the district ranged from 9 to 13%. That would be three to four teachers a year. Last year the rate went to 24.3%, about double. It appears this year will be above the normal range as well.

    As to the increase in taxes, it is driven by sales of property in your area, or improvements you or a neighbor made. If you added a porch, a barn, or even your gate entrance, that increases the value of your property. If believe the value placed on your property is unfairly high or unjust when compared to others, protest. They send the form with your estimated tax for this year. You must file the protest by the end of the month.

    To protest, take pictures of trash dumped on your property, poor or muddy streets, neighbors that have unkept yards or junk in their yard. Maybe the neighbor property is run down. Provide pictures, complaints filed or whatever you have.

    As to the Ag exemptions, they have to prove they are using the property to produce goods. Examples can be cattle, hay, orchard or more. There are requirements they must meet to document they are following the requirements. They do not get to just claim it and that is it.

    There are other exemptions such as veteran, senior citizen over 65 and disabled. Claim all you can!

    Last of all, congratulations to Linda Hasten! Having been a teacher hopefully she will be able to relate to the teaching staff and their concerns.

  3. Y’all should read the local newspaper article. The article doesn’t state how many supporters came and talked to the new board member, but In reading the Newspaper article, it appears, she only reported the “no voters” that she talked to. The comment on here stating “FAKE NEWS”. However, you don’t question the validity of her report, nor are any numbers reported? But yet your excited for a new face and someone that understands what should and shouldn’t happen in this district without giving you a real number??? It appears that this was a move to shut down the bond, and not by the media. Which looks successful. Not by what she said, but by the current numbers from the appraisal district! You are complaining about something that’s in the past and not complaining about what is happening right now??? The County is raising our taxes, again! Sure, there will be a day this bond will come back up, it has to. The school is old! They have to plan for the future, it’s their job. I would be questioning if they didn’t have a future plan. It makes sense! Not to mention, the State isn’t doing anything to help the property owners by funding schools at the State level! Why are you not complaining to, or about, them? Yet all over this area we see politic signs in peoples yards for these same people at the State level, Why? Why are you not talking and writing to them about funding our schools? If you read the newspaper article, there are board members that admit that they made mistakes. Which shows they are human, and humans make mistakes. It doesn’t make them Satan! A good Christian would get that!
    The comment about the turnover, I respect those that served this community and had a positive impact and now have decided to retire. But for the others, some of those needed to move on anyway, and there are a few more that need to follow. Then maybe we could get more POSITIVITY and PRODUCTIVITY back in this school! Stop being and doing Negative stuff around these kids! Fighting against one another, come on, you’re not 12! If you’re not an asset to the kids, maybe this isn’t the career for you? POSITIVE leadership is what these kids need. Not someone that goes out to a neighboring festival and makes a slobbering fool of themselves, or have what should be confidential conversations, in front of students! This falls back to leadership, what is this board going to do about it, or are they already doing something? Let’s all be POSITIVE. Let’s support our school.
    One other thing, If you are a local rancher or farmer and make hay, or run livestock on someone else’s property that doesn’t live here, or farm here, and they received a Ag exemption, you are part of the tax problem. This isn’t just a school issue driving up taxes. How much more money would this area have if you stopped doing this. How much lower would our taxes be? Make these people that move in buy up the ranch land, and subdivide it into smaller “Ranches”, pay their share. Local family ranchers and farmers earned this exemption through years and years of back breaking work, and someone with a little more money can come in and get the same exemption and not lift a finger, and drive up our taxes, while you make their hay and feed their cows. But yet it’s the schools fault my taxes are high? I’m not hearing it.

    1. The ‘fed up with negativity’ person obviously has never heard that charity starts at home. The comments were full of negativity. Some people need to move on and a few more need to follow? Wow. Pot needs to meet kettle. Berating land owners and state funding is not the answer to a productive school district. Loving children and teaching them is. Money has never taught children. Quality teachers do. POSITIVE, quality teachers. You can always talk to your good students. They will tell you who is a good teacher and who is not. They will tell you who has made a good impression on their lives and who has not. A good principal also knows. Attacking a board, other teachers, landowners and anyone else your mad is riding does nothing to help a district. Thoughtful and honest review will. Some need to take a deep breath and examine themselves before casting stones. That kind of vitriol will damage a school district faster than anything. And focus on good teachers. They are your backbone. They are your whole district. Don’t let good ones get away.

  4. I have to agree with Concerned Citizen on their question as to where did they get the figure of a 58% increase in enrollment.Could this be “Fake News” in the making?

  5. I would like to know where the 58% increase in students came from. There may be at one time or another, depending on when you take the statistics, a slight increase, but they don’t stay. If you look back at number of graduating students in the last 10, 20, 30 years, the number of students graduating has not increased. That shows that we may have an increase in elementary, but they
    don’t stay through graduation. I would like statistics on beginning year enrollment and ending year enrollment. This was asked at some of the BABBS forum meetings, but it never got answered.

  6. Excited that a new face has joined the board. Praying that she is able to voice her opinions and ideas. The district definitely needs a new person that understands what should and shouldn’t happen within this district. It is sad there is so much turnover at this district this year. I would think it should not be this way. It seems this district is concentrating more on athletics than academics. I have heard many other parents complain about so many changes with the staff and they are saddened by the way some things are being handled but until we come together as a community, nothing will change. Prayers for those Burton staff that are affected and the students that will miss the encouraging staff that are leaving.

Back to top button