Here are a few things to know as early voting continues through May 2.
What does the bond include?
RRISD voters will see three propositions on their ballots: Proposition 1, at $381.66 million, emphasizes growth, renewal and safety; Proposition 2, at $133.6 million, focuses on innovation and classroom expansion; and Proposition 3, at $56.83 million, deals with fine arts and athletics projects.
The proposed bond projects involve every school in the district.
Among big-ticket items are a new high school on Pearson Ranch Road in Austin. The $150 million estimated development cost for the high school, which would be RRISD's sixth, includes $130 for the school's core facility and $20 million for an auditorium.
Other big projects in the bond include a new $32 million elementary school that would be built in northeast Round Rock as well as a proposed indoor aquatic center that would be built in north Round Rock across from the Texas A&M Health Science Center. RRISD has included $22 million in Proposition 3 of the bond to go toward the aquatic center. The city of Round Rock has signed a letter of intent to partner with RRISD to develop the center if voters approve the bond funding.
Here is an interactive map of bond projects.
What do bond supporters say?
Supporters say the bonds are necessary for RRISD to manage future enrollment growth, add capacity to existing schools that are overcrowded and allow for various safety and technology upgrades across the district.
The pro-bond political action committee Classrooms for Kids held a press conference Monday at the Round Rock Chamber office to urge voters to pass all three propositions in the bond package. The group, which is led by former RRISD trustee Catherine Hanna, was joined by former Round Rock Mayor Charlie Culpepper as well as current RRISD trustees Diane Cox, who serves as board president, and Mason Moses.
What about opponents?
Bond opponents, including political action committees such as the Travis County Taxpayers Union and the Round Rock Parents and Taxpayers Association, consider many of the proposed bond projects to be excessive and unnecessary, including the proposed new high school and indoor aquatic center. The hefty dollar amount of proposed bonds has also been derided by opponents as well as the way bond projects have been packaged into three ballot propositions rather than allowing voters to have more say in individual proposals.
Why did opponents file a complaint over pro-bond campaign contributions?
Don Zimmerman, the former Austin City Council Member who leads the TCTU, announced Monday that he had filed a formal complaint with the Texas Ethics Commission regarding a $7,536.75 contribution to Classrooms for Kids made March 24 by a now-defunct PAC called Betterment of Round Rock. Zimmerman’s complaint alleges the contribution violated Texas campaign finance law since it was made after Betterment of Round Rock dissolved and at a time when the group did not have a campaign treasurer listed with the state.
Ethics Commission records show two other campaign contributors to Classrooms for Kids, neither of which are subject to Zimmerman’s complaint. The contributors are the Round Rock Chamber, which gave $15,000 on March 13, and the architecture firm O’Connell Robertson, which gave $3,500 on March 21. O'Connell Robertson was picked in April 2016 as the architect for RRISD's proposed new high school.
Why do bond opponents doubt RRISD's cost estimate?
Disbelief over RRISD’s estimates on how the bonds could increase an average property owner’s annual tax bill has been central to bond opponents' campaigning.
RRISD says that if voters pass all three bond propositions they will give the district's trustees a go-ahead to increase RRISD's its debt service tax rate from $0.2925 to $0.3026 per $100 of property valuation. The rate would change as the district sells bonds incrementally over the course of five years. RRISD projects the full tax increase will take effect in 2020.
According to the district's estimate, the tax increase will cause the annual tax bill for an average RRISD homeowner with a home value of $290,000 would increase by $26.74.
But the TCTU and other bond opponents have balked at that estimate.
Roger Falk of TCTU said during an April 12 media event that he does not believe the district’s estimate will be able to cover the full amount it will owe in debt-service payments as the bonds the district will sell to cover the $572.09 million mature. He and other bond opponents have pushed a different calculation that puts the new proposed bonds' tax increase per homeowner at more than $300 annually.
How has RRISD responded to those claims?
The district has defended its cost estimates, with RRISD spokesman Corey Ryan and the district’s Chief Financial Officer Randy Staats saying opponents' claims do not properly account for businesses that pay taxes to RRISD, nor do they take into consideration possible future tax-base growth or increases in RRISD's total property value.
An RRISD tax-rate analysis, which Staats presented April 20 to the district’s board of trustees, estimates the district’s assessed property valuation could increase by 9 percent in 2018, then by 6 percent in 2019 and 2020. Staats said the preliminary estimates are conservative and likely to change.
District officials have also said that bond opponents' higher estimates are skewed because they do not account for the fact that, if voters approve the package in May, the district expects to sell bonds separately and with different interest rates and maturities. The district says it would also pay down existing debt quicker than opponents anticipate in an effort to reduce interest payments.
