Enlightening read on DMN about what the DISD bond is and is not

Dallas Morning News reporter Tawnell D. Hobbs did an article 10/17 titled "Dallas ISD bond proposal pits needed repairs against new schools".

My comments on four points:

1) Quote from Wanda Paul, DISD Operation Chief:
"At the end of the day, it should be about what's best for the kids"

Yes, it should.  So... whose kids and how many is she talking about?  I have yet to find where the FFTF looked at hard numbers about how many kids will benefit from their current plan versus fixing the top needs on the Parsons facility condition report.

Same for school choice:  how many kids does the current plans serve vs how many kids could be served by expanding current choice programs with the same amount of money?  Keep in mind, new programs will start with just one grade level, where as expanding a current program can mean opening slots at multiple grade levels.

Who knows?  Not in the FFTF meeting notes because there aren't any.  :(

2) Regarding Rosemont, one of the nine new schools on the list:
One of the Rosemont Elementary buildings would be replaced even though it’s listed in “good” condition in a district report.

Literally, over half the schools in DISD are in worse shape than this one.  In the June 25th Board meeting, everyone is surprised to see Rosemont on the list.  Trustee Cowan asked, "Why Rosemont?"*  FFTF Co-Chair Craig Reynolds cited 2002 facility condition info, totally ignoring the 2013 info from the Parsons report.  What?!  

I've been told by an FFTF member that the committee as a whole never discussed Rosemont or voted on it.  For that matter, the FFTF committee never voted on any part of the FFTF plan.  

I've made an open records request about docs supporting Mr. Reynolds' statements, so will post it here and at my DISD Bond Info blog when I get it.

3)  Quote from Trustee Cowan: “But I ask those people who are just focused on ‘choice’ to look at other things — the additions, the HVAC, the roofs, the cafeteria expansions, the CTE [career and technical education] program. It’s not just the past regime."

Would be nice, but what he just listed is NOT what the bulk of the money is going toward.  Only $500M of the $1.6B is earmarked for that, and there is need of $2B just for existing facilities (as noted in the article.)

4) Quote from Trustee Bingham:
“If we don’t do the bond election in November, then those needs are just going to keep multiplying.”

Has she read the bond proposal?!  The majority of funds are going to new things, not existing needs. A lot of existing needs will still keep multiplying under the existing plan!  :(  :(  :(

* See the video from Board of Trustees meeting, time-stamp 145:13