BRENHAM SCHOOL BOARD GOES OVER NEXT STEPS TO ADDRESS JUNIOR HIGH CAMPUS

  

The Brenham School Board discussed paths forward after Brenham ISD’s unsuccessful bond proposal at its meeting Monday.

Superintendent Dr. Tylor Chaplin said the district has put out requests for proposals for architecture and engineering services to look at the junior high school from a structural standpoint, including the foundation and the walls.  He said some of the firms from those proposals will give presentations to the board in the future, although no timeline was given.

Dr. Chaplin then asked the board which direction it wants to take in the coming months.

 

 

After discussion, the board agreed to bring in some returning members of the committee that worked on the previous bond measure, as well as new members and people who were opposed to the bond.

Dr. Chaplin said he would get to work on forming the committee group so it can give the district a recommendation on how to proceed.  Board President Natalie Lange suggested putting together a public survey to get further feedback, especially from residents who voted against the proposal.

When asked what the level of participation was at the district’s open house events that were hosted to offer more information on the bond, Dr. Chaplin said it was not a large amount.

 

 

Dr. Chaplin said it would be a good idea to reach out to voters to see what people liked about the bond, what they did not like and what could have been done differently.  Trustee Jared Krenek said, with Board Vice President Tommie Sullivan and Board Secretary Susan Jenkins agreeing, that the junior high school has to be addressed and that the district should consider a bond proposal concerning just the junior high campus.

Like
Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry
3

12 Comments

  1. Sincerely, where are answers to the many questions regarding the accountability to communicate facts and transparency for the failed Bond attempt?

    Assessments of the facilities in question, should have been done LONG before a proposal Bond was drafted.

    A bigger concern, to me, is the hasty attempt to secure votes for such a huge Bond seems to border on deception, due to the knowledge of the pending the valuation increase of 25% for 36,000 tax paying properties, which could not have been a secret.

    Am I alone in feeling deceived? The entire effort reeks of manipulation and greasy snake oil. Shame on the “leadership” who devised this plan and ran with it, because it really seems like dirty politics

  2. It’s interesting that BISD proposed a bond prior to ever having the current build evaluated…that tells me that money was all they were interested in and it had nothing to do with the exiting building nor it’s current condition

  3. Perhaps, if voters were given an option to vote for *just* a new school, and not any and everything on the wish list it would have passed…

    We see how much WASTE there is from the city, why would voters assume that this would be any different. Furthermore, they need to put a leash on the architects involved here. It should be structurally and functionally sound, it does not need to be their career defining project that we just foot the bill for.

  4. My question is why did the school bard let the school deteriorate this extreme a condition.
    Fix things as time goes on. Don’t wait till it gets to this bad a condition.
    Use your brains, don’t just say “ hey look at us we are the board that got you a new school. We are your hero “. How’s that work out for you ?

  5. It’s amazing to me that we are just now professionally looking at the condition of the building. An engineering or inspection report should already have been performed before any bond was assembled. I’ve heard from so many people (mostly teachers) complain about the current building but have zero expertise in engineering or commercial buildings. An honest engineering/inspection report showing the “real” condition of the building will either prove the current building is economically viable for refreshment or not. I’m not a proponent of scrapping a building without having a thorough analysis.

  6. Just throwing this out there… Could a fundraiser be held allowing people to donate money towards the Building of a new school or repairing the old one ? I think most people in Brenham would Give something.. and companies would be able to donate as well. Just a thought, and maybe there is a reason why this cannot be done but If so Lets try that.

    1. A fundraiser? No offense, but do you honestly think that having a bake sale or garage sale would raise that kind of money to build a new school for these kids? Unless you have diamonds and gold to sell, a fundraiser is not an option.

      1. I was not thinking that at all, I was thinking a Donation drive , A letter sent out asking for monetary donations from individuals and companies. But Like I said it was just an Idea , Thanks for Jumping all over me for having it….

  7. “Superintendent Dr. Tylor Chaplin said the district has put out requests for proposals for architecture and engineering services to look at the junior high school from a structural standpoint, including the foundation and the walls.”
    SERIOUSLY? They did not do this before their previous $154,000,000 proposal where they stated over and over the JR high can’t be fixed? This SHOULD have been the first step! The current Jr High doubles as a fall out shelter and shelter during terrorist attacks, what were they planning on using instead if they had received the TWO MILLION dollars to tear it down? Seems like $2,000,000 would cover a lot of repairs.

  8. Everyday there is something saying how the bond issue didn’t pass. I have yet to see answers to the questions that were raised prior to the vote and after the failure. How did the JR High get into this condition in the first place? What happened to the money that was allocated for maintenance, repairs and upkeep? Was it spent on “band aids” or utilized for major repairs? There needs to be more transparency in BISD’s website as to where all the money is going and how it is being spent. If the tax dollars are being spent wisely and effectively then those questions will be easy to answer and BISD should be happy to do so.

    Just my opinion.

  9. If and when the financing for the replacement structure for the current Jr.High is approved, it would be wise for the board to select an architect with experience and expertise for public schools in a tropical climate. When we consider that too many local public buildings have met with a premature demise due to to climate/ moisture issues, it would seem to be a logical choice. And developing a professional maintenance staff would be appreciated by taxpayers.

    1. Tropical? We live in south Texas with dry heat! This building was built half way underground – that is why there is a moisture issue. That is why things leak and cannot be fixed. It doesn’t matter if we hire the White House maintenance company – certain things here cannot be fixed.

Back to top button