Commentary on Bond Oversight Committee

by Chris Cottrell

During the bond debate the Katy Citizen Watchdog$ suggested that all future bond initiatives be watched over by a Bond Oversight Committee.  This was a suggestion that our organization took very seriously.  During the September General School Board Meeting, and for reasons known only to himself, Trustee Duhon flippantly made a motion to appoint the existing Bond Committee as the new Bond Oversight Committee.  Without a single moment of discussion his motion was approved.  As we have stated before, having the current Bond Committee act as the new Bond Oversight Committee was not what we had in mind.  Let’s consider the following:

By suggesting a Bond Oversight Committee, the Katy Watchdog$ want to usurp the oversight authority of the Katy School Board

This statement is false.  While it is true that the Watchdog$ do not believe that our Board members (excluding Trustee Law) have done a very good job in managing our tax dollars to date, this suggestion was not made in the hopes of taking away the Board’s authority to oversee bond funds.  Quite the contrary, the Watchdog$ believe that the Board members should remain ultimately responsible for how these tax dollars are spent.  We saw this committee being a Board Committee and not an Administrative Committee.  With it being classified as a Board Committee we are assuming that its meetings would be public.  Generally speaking, what we envisioned was a small group of community taxpayers that would look over the Board and the District’s shoulder to make sure that the bond funds are spent as outlined in the bond proposal.

So what kind of committee did the Watchdog$ envision?

Well, first and foremost we did not envision a committee that has over 100 members.  We did not envision a committee that contains individuals that are members of K.I.D.S.  We also did not envision people serving on this committee that represent local developers and KISD vendors.  We do not believe that anyone that stands to gain from this bond measure passage should be overseeing any of those funds. It is, regardless of what anyone else believes, a clear conflict of interest.

What we did envision was a committee similar to what they have in Austin ISD.  We wanted to see a committee made up of ordinary taxpayers from all over the district who had no vested interest of any kind in the bond’s passage.  Obviously, we envisioned a committee that would have to be selected by our Board of Trustees (not by our Superintendent) only after those individuals had formally applied for the position.  We saw a committee of 20 individuals that had no ties to the school district.  Any applicants that had a clear conflict of interest would not be considered.

Specifically we saw this committee:

· Reviewing and evaluating information on all projects and expenditures of bond funds from staff reports/updates on the timelines and progress of the 2006 Bond Program;

· Publicly reporting times when the Board/District try and divert bond funds to projects that did not appear on the bond initiative, and urging Board members not to vote to float bonds on projects that are either not needed or didn’t appear on the bond initiative;

· Designing, with staff assistance, electronic surveys that assess key campus stakeholders’ levels of satisfaction with the quality of work and rating of customer service i.e., courtesy, knowledge and helpfulness for the bond project workers;

· Reviewing and evaluating those survey results and any corrective action resulting there from;

· Reviewing and evaluating any proposed changes to the individual project scope of work to the voter-approved 2006 Bond Program;

· Conducting public hearings at campuses on substantive proposed changes to the voter-approved bond program prior to Board action;

· Report orally and in writing to the Board on the 2006 Bond Program in January, May and September of each year, including, but not limited to:

· Overall economics and budget status;

· Individual projects: scope, schedule, quality, and economics;

· Survey results;

· Construction management practices;

· Any proposed substantive changes;

· Environmental stewardship;

· HUB utilization and;

· Other issues/comments;

· Reviewing and evaluating new construction and renovation projects against specific criteria contained in Board Policy.  

So why do the Watchdog$ think that Trustee Duhon’s motion was flippant?

In our view the answer to this is easy; simply put, we don’t believe that Trustee Duhon put any real thought or consideration in his motion.  Likewise, those Board members that approved it without any discussion are just as guilty for making yet another uninformed vote.  This had nothing to do with making an attempt to work with the Watchdogs, but had everything to do with a vain attempt to appear sympathetic to the taxpayers.  Trustee Duhon’s little stunt proves once again that our Board (excluding Trustee Law) have absolutely no concept of what it means to be serious elected officials.

We know that there are some on the Bond Committee that will take their appointment seriously and will try to properly represent the taxpayers of this community, but unfortunately there will be those that will blindly recommend whatever the district wants.  At the end of the day, all anyone can hope for is that the latter will not be the majority.

© 2006 by Chris Cottrell. All rights reserved.

[As it turned out, Mr. Cottrell and the Watchdogs were on the money with regard to what would happen without the kind of oversight described in this essay.  For example (and there are many of them) when Mr. Frailey saw there was some extra bond money lying around, he promptly spent it on Astroturf for practice fields at all the high schools.  Never mind that the stuff is too hot to play on during the day in August and September! Never mind that the Astroturf needs more water than grass does to keep it from becoming brittle! Never mind that all vetted studies show that Astroturf is harder on kids' knees and elbows and uniforms than is plain old grass! Never mind that some people break out in a rash after playing on Astroturf!  Never mind that Frailey brought the measure to the Board at a Work Study meeting instead of the Regular Board meeting which is not normal procedure and insisted on its being voted on right then!

Remember, the Watchdogs tried to warn the public!]