District officials and the board of trustees discussed community feedback at a Jan. 12 workshop, as well as a potential bond election in May.
What happened
The $165 million bond package was split into four propositions aimed at addressing facility and technology needs across the district:
- Proposition A: construction of school facilities, including a replacement campus for Westwood and Bales elementary schools
- Proposition B: technology equipment
- Proposition C: construction of recreational facilities, including softball, baseball and practice fields at Friendswood High School
- Proposition D: refunding and refinancing of maintenance tax notes, which will be used to free up money in the district’s operational budget
The survey received 885 total responses and showed mixed sentiment toward the bond.
Respondents identified several recurring concerns, including:
- Proposition A included too many projects.
- The proposed tax increase was too high.
- The bond package was viewed as not needs-based, but rather a “shopping list.”
The data
The community survey was distributed Nov. 21, and board members followed up with approximately 80 constituents through December, according to district documents.
Survey respondents included:
- 67% parents of current students
- 14% staff members
- 19% community members with no current students
- Maintenance and infrastructure repairs
- Safety and security updates
- Replacement of Westwood and Bales elementary schools
The board discussed possible reasons for voter opposition, including mistrust of the board, concerns over the use of funds and the bundling of multiple propositions together.
“There is a consensus that things were not done, that money was taken from something to go to something else. We can reiterate that it didn't happen, or that it was changed because of needs, and it’s still not getting through,” board member Niki Rhodes said at the workshop. “I don’t know if we have the time to have that conversation, and that’s a real challenge.”
The board also noted that voters were concerned the bond package was not clearly based on actual needs or on prioritized improvements.
“A substantial portion of the voting population are non-parents. You have to reach them differently,” board member Beau Egert said at the workshop. “It's much more likely that parents have actually walked into the schools to see the condition that they are in.”
The cost
The failed 2025 bond would have increased the tax rate by $0.16 per $100 of taxable property value, according to district officials. Survey results indicated that this potential tax increase was among voters’ top concerns.
The board reviewed financial scenarios for a potential future bond, including amounts of $60 million, $80 million and $100 million.
The 2016 bonds, eligible for refunding in February, could reduce interest rates and the overall tax impact, FISD Chief Financial Officer Amber Petree said at the meeting.
These savings were not included in the original bond proposal.
The only remaining variable affecting projections is state-certified property values, which will be finalized Jan. 31. Once certified, the district can provide updated tax estimates.
The discussion
The board considered three possible timelines for a future bond:
- May 2026
- November 2026
- May 2027
The board also acknowledged that the statewide election calendar in November is crowded, which could affect voter turnout and community engagement.
What’s next
The board is considering a May election for a bond package that reflects community priorities, officials said. If the May election is approved, the board would have until Feb. 9 to finalize propositions for the bond.
“The community has heard what the main priorities are and want us to bring it back to them,” board member Rebecca Hillenburg said at the workshop.
