It would cost about $26.4 million to equip and build the Fort Bend Independent School District administration’s proposed science center – but David Wallace believes it could be done without floating bonds or raising taxes.
Wallace – who chaired a feasibility committee charged with determining whether the Global Science & Technology Center envisioned by FBISD Superintendent Dr. Timothy Jenney makes sense – made it clear Monday night that he emphatically believes it does.
In a presentation outlining its recommendations during an FBISD board worshop, the former Sugar Land mayor said his committee concluded the center would provide numerous benefits to district students and science teachers, would provide an economic development boost to the community surrounding the school district, and would even likely increase area property values.
What’s more, the committee believes the facility could be built with no new or increased taxes and with no new bond issue, but with money the district already has on hand, and that at least half the estimated $572,000 annual operating and maintenance costs would be paid for by private-sector businesses.
Unveiled to the board and public in February, the proposal has been touted as a way to bridge “the divide between theory and practice” in science. The center itself would include a planetarium, a “Sci-Max” theater, interactive labs – and a lobby featuring a giant rotating globe.
Wallace said he’s so confident of the proposed center’s benefits that he would “be more than happy” to chair a fund-raising effort “to go out and secure the capital” from the private sector to help build and maintain the facility.
The committee surveyed 100 district science teachers, 70% of whom said they need science-related professional development. Such professional development is a component of the administration’s proposal.
Also, the feasibility studied numerous similar centers around the country, and concluded that the FBISD administration’s proposal essentially overcomes the weaknesses discovered at some such centers, largely by including the best practices discovered in other centers.
And, Wallace said available state funding for technology ventures, a federal government ready to support building projects, and an economic downturn now suppressing construction costs has acted to create “a perfect storm” for building the center. He recommended getting the project started as soon as possible – if the board approves of it.
Wallace’s enthusiasm for the proposal appeared somewhat contagious, judging from the reaction of several board members.
“This is our opportunity to be leaders of the nation,” said Trustee Laurie Caldwell, adding that the resulting academic boost might mean “our students can compete on a worldwide stage.”
“I look at who worked on this, and the level of confidence of the people that put their names on this,” Trustee Steve Smelley said. He and Board President Sonal Bhuchar were members of the feasibility committee. So was Fort Bend Chamber of Commerce President Lou Garvin, Sugar Land City Councilman Michael Schiff, Jill Curtis, Rajesh Chandra, Llarance Turner, Gary Mosley and Paul Likhari.
“It’s kind of hard not to go along with the program,” Smelley added. “You know what? This makes sense. We can do this now.”
“I want Fort Bend ISD standing on the rooftops, screaming about what we have done,” Wallace said. “Just think of the economic impact it would have on our community.”
Wallace said his committee recommends that, if the board approves of the proposal’s concepts, it sign off on a public resolution that the science center:
→ – Would be built and maintained with no new taxes and no dilution of current resources;
→ – That 15% of the construction cost would be raised from private enterprise;
→ That at least 50% of the annual operating and maintenance costs would be raised from private business;
→ And that a Grant Search Committee be formed to pursue private-sector funding.
Also, because of the availability of federal and state funding, and low construction costs, “what we’re saying is, do this immediately,” Wallace said.
The only real Monday night criticisms of the proposal were raised by trustees Susan Hohnbaum and Bob Broxson.
Hohnbaum indicated she believes money used to build the center could be put to more effective use by shoring up science labs and facilities at individual district schools.
She also wondered whether building the center would undercut effort by the likes of the Houston Museum of Natural Science, which is working now on the conversion of a former prison building into a satellit museum, in Sugar Land’s Telfair community.
“Will they have a planetarium over there” at the Telfair museum? she asked Wallace.
“They have a portable planetarium,” Wallace replied.
“Do they have a theater?,” she asked.
“The prison had a theater there,” Wallace said. “I don’t know if they’re going to use it for that” once it becomes a museum facility.
“Will they have interactive labs?” Hornbaum asked Wallace.
Wallace said he assumes they will.
“I just am not convinced this is the time or place” to pay for and build such a center, Hornbaum said.
She added that she is in the construction business, and understands that materials and labor are relatively low now, but “it still is a great cost.”
Hornbaum said she would rather see science teachers and their students conducting “hands-on” experiments “every day right in their own classrooms.” Instead of making five or six trips each year to the district’s science center, classes could make those trips to the new satellite museum in Telfair.
“I don’t see it as the right thing right now,” she said of the administration’s proposal.
Bhuchar countered, saying she believes having a “central” facility for interactive labs and science experiments will prove to be more effective and less costly.
Broxson said among his concerns are those related to cost, since the Texas Legislature has not provided adequate state funding for school districts.
Noting Wallace had indicated private business might be willing to pay 50% or more of the proposed center’s annual operating costs, Broxson said he’d like more details about which businesses those might be.
If someone said “Hey, I’ll give you $27 million – I’m in,” Broxson added. “The bottom line for me is, how do we afford that in the midst of all the other needs we have before us? I don’t operate with the understanding that we have any money available to us.”
At that point, Dr. Jenney revealed that the district has an “investment fund” containing about $26 million – just $400,000 shy of the total initial cost of the center. Comprised at least in part of earned interest related to bond issues prior to 2007, the fund can only be used for certain purposes – one of them capital projects, such as the proposed science center.
Trustee Daniel Menendez asked that the district schedule another workshop on the proposal, to give him and the public time to digest details, especially the financial details.
That’s not likely to happen.
After the meeting, Jenney said he probably will recommend to Bhuchar that the board’s May 18 meeting agenda include a vote on forming a funding committee and authorizing a resolution similar to what Wallce outlined.
Chill out Carlos, you cannot make others care if they do not. Busy yourself in helping others in whatever way you can.
We deserve it. Every bit of it. No one cares enough to vote or show up at a board meeting. 97% of the voters could care less what BOT and Admin. does. I remember a bond election a couple of years ago where I tried to warn the public. You know what, I’m wasting my breath and my time. I’m out of it. I’ll find something else to do with my time. Maybe someone will appreciate it. Obviously no one in Fort Bend does.
Carlos Cain
I was reding the Chronicle and couldn’t help but laugh- I’m sure these interviews were conducted right after the workshop-
“Bhuchar urged fact finding before making sensational statements…” According to Menendez- the Board received this report on the Friday before the workshop… Well that some fact finding isn’t it, she found the book and oogled over it like thirteen year old boy checking out his first nudie mag… Nobody’s talking about how the superintendent and Wallace are going to shove this thing down everyone’s throat…
Glover said in the article: “I think its unfair to grade the board because the public didn’t understant what had taken place and what the discussions they were not privileged to heaar were..”
Sounds like more of the same double speak… all of you common people just aren’t smart enough or informed enough to make these decisions…. how many former board members had this perspective…
Did anyone see about the grammatical errors on the 2,000 peice mailer she’s bragging got her elected? Yeah that should make for some “reel” educashunal leadership.
Bhuchar said “her re-election reflects the community’s support of her work.”
The sad truth is that the 3% of voters hardly represent a mandate for of leadership by either ladies. Neither one of them should be bragging. In the end you can put lipstick on a pig but this election and its choices for representation were… well, you know the rest.
Science Muesem is just like a toll road to no mans land, just like Pct.3 commissioner Meyers defined the toll road plan in pct.3 being effected without drivers.
Dearest FSpeaking,
I agree with every single word that you have noted.
But for some reason or another, at my campus, everyone is afraid to even be part of a union or speaking out.
Several years ago when Betty Baitland was here, and an Ass. Supt. this was not the case. I had left the district for several years and came back about seven years ago.
Teachers are paraonoid, and I don’t get it.
I have a law degree and intend to go back to the legal field so I have an argumentative nature that goes along the lines of being someone who fights for what is right.
I don’t know what is going down with the voters, teachers and everyone.
You know what I really thing? I think everyone has just left the district but still lives here.
I think our people have gone to Katy, Cyfair, Lamar and even Alief. Fort Bend is not the district it used to be anymore. I think it is the new HISD. I’ve worked for HISD, and I can honestly tell you that HISD treats its personnel better than Fort Bend does.
But, in all truth, I really can’t tell you. Maybe, we have people retiring. New blood, less experience. I don’t know.
What I do know is that FBISD is really in bad shape. We have new kids, more populations, more issues, less classroom space, less money and less over head. It is a real mess.
This is crazy !!! The police department cant even get but 4 new cars but they can dump 24 million dollars on stupid stuff. This is not right. I think all the admin needs the be fired or leave. The police officers are driving 15 year old cars that are missing equipmet, dont have buller proof vest’s and do not have many items to do their job but they can blow 24 million on a science gig. I hope Fort Bend ISD is ready for a law suit when one of the officers get injured or killed because people wanted to not spend money so they could get a bonus for staying under budget “the chief”. Im glad to know our life it not important to our families. This makes me sick !!!
teacherindistrict,
Do you have any thoughts about what caused the teachers “not” to turn out? They are sleeping giants whether they know it or not. I wonder why the Union Endorsement of candidates does not have the influence and/or impact as one would think?
.I cannot fathom why teachers complain about being subjected to bad treatment and disrespected as the professionals that they really are; yet, they are AWOL when given the opportunity to demonstrate just how “powerful” they are to bring an end to being treated poorly.
You know, it is the bullying syndrome; if you kowtow to bullying and being weak or being perceived as weak, you will forever be bullied due to being perceived as weak; even, if you are not..
How in the world can teachers, who have one of the most powerful, lucrative Retirement Systems in the USA, if not the world, which is named explicitly for them; yet, many others come into their profession eyeing greedily their retirement system while, simultaneously, “dissing”, undermining, and humiliating the Teacher.
The Texas Teacher Retirement System is so lucrative, it has, even, had to fend off overtures of past and present governors who wanted to go into its coffers to reinvest elsewhere. Some how or another, although still solvent, Texas Teacher Retirement System endured a 30 billion loss in this financial havoc that our country has undergone. Pray tell, someone must have gotten into the coffers after all. Pardon me, I digress.
Back on topic, outsiders from other, high profile professions who also eye the prize of the Texas Teacher Retirement System come into education; alas, however, they come with an agenda adverse to teachers, which is to drive teachers out of their own profession. As I stated previously, I’m clueless as to why the teachers failed to flex their voting “might” last Saturday. Go figure. Please share some insight, teacherindistrict.
Twilight,
The issue is bigger than that.
As it stands, FBISD is already in trouble with state rep’s for keeping money from our employees –be them para’s., admin’s or teachers.
Last year, Jenny’s group dismissed the direct payroll deposit to one day instead of two. The sick leave and business leave issues on our payroll are a disaster. As I noted on an earlier blog, I got docked almost 500.00 for calling in during hurricane Ike.
I have heard of other teachers every year who have issues with payroll.
Our paraprofessionals are seriously over worked and leave our campuses. This affects the entire infrastructure of any campus that is struggling to keep mayhem from affecting any living individual who walks into a campus at FBSID.
As I stated earlier, S will hit the fan and things will get worse before they get any better.
I don’t know why we had such a poor turnout in voters.
You will note: ….”half the estimated $572,000 annual operating and maintenance costs would be paid for by private-sector businesses.”
That still leaves the district/taxpayers underwriting over a quarter of a million dollars in annual operating and maint. costs.
AND………no where was upgrading technology mentioned.
As we all know, our computers, etc. are outdated within 3-5 years. If we are going to be cutting edge, we will HAVE to spend a small fortune upgrading the building’s technology.
The district has a hard time keeping up with upgrading campus computer labs.
I heard some FBISD employees talking about being forced to work overtime without getting paid for it. It makes me wonder, if FBISD is stealing from employees by forcing free overtime on them, why can’t we get an investigation into their books by the department of labor? Anyone out there with real strong evidence and proof of wrongdoing from TLD Jenney and company, please please call me. I’ll keep your name out of it. Can someone please help us stop this insanity? I believe caldwell said “We have to build this, we have no other option.” No other option. I’d like to hear from a science educator on that.
Carlos Cain
832.859.5783
Despite the fact that at least two of the BOT members had serious questions about the Global Science and Technology Center, The Superintendent and other board members are ready to ram this thing down everybody’s throat now that the election is over…
Several things were stated in this meeting that set off the alarm bells-
Daniel Menendez appreciated the wonderful book but they had just received it on the Friday before the meeting- So now they will have a week to look it over and vote on proceeding with a project that is projected to cost $27 mil ( if you believe any projections at the beginning of a project)
Dr. Jenney was very clear that he wants the board to vote to proceed at the next board meeting- why the sense of urgency if there is so many public and private funds available… He’s probably promised his last three wives and accumulated children to the preselected developers of this project…
Next, David Wallace wouldn’t do anything in this community if there were no profit motivation behind it for him…
Finally- Wallace said he had talked to the Mayor of San Francisco about how this could be a revenue resource for the city as well as the district… If we’re going to use San Francisco as a measure let’s legalize prostitution like they did… that will raise revenue.
FBISD 2004 & 2007 bond committees had over listed new projects, with high over value prices for projects to create large price bond elections. Many projects listings were included for no reasons. FBISD committees form by corpate leaders only?
teacherindistrict says:
May 12th, 2009 at 10:33 pm (#)
I voted for Mr Cain and Mr. Albright and now I’m sorry they did not win.
Uhmm. Things are going to get really bad at FBISD.
The payroll is a piece of sh… Teachers’s grievances are ignored.. The problems go on and on.
Now, this project is going to take more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more…….
money from the budget set aside for what it was meant to be set by for by the taxpayers.
I am not a finacial wiz but I know things are not financial sound now with the FBISD deficit and payroll problems.
I don’t know why the district elected these two people.
S— has hit the fan.
Don’t forget our computer issues and our serious problems with viruses. When will that be taken care of?
When will we have a central air condition that works at our schools? When will we have police officers that actually take care of students, teachers and personal property?
When will we have enough staff overhead at our schools? When will we have enough parprofessionals?
Sorry. Not now. Not with the elected bot who will vote in this project.
Our kids don’t even have the basic supplies needed for an average science education. Fort Bend Now recently ran a photo of a middle school student getting ready for a dissection lab. The lab was funded by the school’s PTO. For many years, Pecan Grove parents funded a supplementary science program. It’s wonderful that these parents are trying to fill the void left by our district. FBISD needs to adequately fund science instruction in the schools.
Our kids need science labs and science equipment in their own schools. The students need to experience science fully. They should have the ability to participate in labs and to conduct experiments over time. Students will learn about cause and effect as they put the scientific method into action. Watching a movie or presentation on a lab won’t cut it. Our kids need and deserve more.
I doubt that trips to Jenney’s Super Science Fun House will fit seamlessly into instruction. Imagine trying to schedule all of the elementary and middle school kids in the district to visit the center. I doubt that students will be able to access the appropriate material at the appropriate time. What if you are teaching about animal adaptations and your class is required to go the Science Fun House-and the only available presentation/movie/slideshow is on the periodic table? Sounds like a big waste of instructional time to me.
Does anyone have the list of the things the bonds from the last decade should have covered? Were all of these things built, purchased, repaired or replaced? If not, FBISD has some explaining to do. There is so much money lying around because FBISD failed to use the bond money as promised.
First Mr. Wallace doesn’t have to assume anything about the HMNS Sugar Land (Telfair) Facility. He was Mayor during the negotiations and contract signing. He also has a full copy of the presentation the Museum prepared and I bet the BOT hasn’t seen it. Wallace knows exactly what will be at Telfair. I wanted to puke when I witnessed the bull*D@# flying around the Board Room last night. Is it possible that a room full of people can be as ignorant to the reality of what is happening. You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth. Well the truth is there is in my estimation about 90 million left over from the 2003 bond that was never spent. That is where the money is coming from. It’s tax dollars and is currently stashed in the capital projects fund. There is no law forcing them to use bond proceeds on promised projects. It’s hard to steal when it’s sitting in the bank. When you start turning these investments into purchase orders and contracts then there’s kickbacks, travel the world meetings and look at other facilities, equipment purchases, shindigs, grand openings, gala’s etc. If there was one iota of concern about education they would put emphasis in the classroom. Their own studies indicate asian countries pump out more scientist and engineers. I can assure you they don’t have Taj Mahal science centers. In 2007 I spoke out against the $428 Mil. Bond as being excessive. Well it was. Look around at the projects listed? How many have been completed? And that 3500 new students annually? Well the numbers are
1992 to 2005 avg. 1617 per year.
2005/06 Katrina hit N.O. 2087 new students
2006/07 – 1983 new enrollments
2007/08 – 610 new enrollments
2008/09 – 1186 new enrollments
Or an average of 1173 new enrollments per year. 444 less than the avg. growth from 1992 to 2005. Put this all together and it means. They gave you false demographic numbers in 2007. They knew they were false. They wanted a grandios bond fund to play with, even though they still had $176 mil. left over from the 2003 bond sale(over half of the funds). Well they have it. And you, Mr. & Mrs. taxpayer are paying for it. Now they are admitting their ability to educate our children has actually gotten worse. Now they want you to believe that THROWING YOUR money at their problem will make it go away. Anybody out there with a friend or family member with addictions? What do they do when you give them more $$? Go to Rehab? Right. Well our School Board is addicted to your money. It’s time you put your foot down and say Hell no. Quit wasting money and start teaching. You work for me. Now do your job Mr. BOT. Make them TEACH. Thats all, just teach. Not build, not tweak demographics, just teach. Bus them new kids to an old school until we really need a new one. Then build it. At a reasonble cost. Not 100 Mil. I said reasonalbe. Put the money in the classrooms and TEACH!!! Now you know why I was not welcomed as a candidate for your Board of Trustees. They don’t Trust me… Wonder why?
Your Friend,
Carlos Cain
832.859.5783
Hallelujah Susan Hombaum! Finally a voice of reason. How can Bhuchar and Wallace possibly think it is more academically (or financially) sound for students to visit a central location 5 or 6 times a year to perform hands-on science experiments than it is to actually have a lab on their own campus that they can visit each week?? Who is going to pay for transportation to and from this central location? What other academic area are you going to take time away from in order for students to make this trip 5 or 6 times a year?
And another thing . . . do you seriously think it takes a special building in order to provide effective staff development? If so, are you going to build math and social studies buildings so those teachers have to same opportunities to receive “effective” staff development?
I haven’t seen a hard-sell like what I experienced last night from the “feasibility committee” since I bought that $1,000. vacuum cleaner thirty years ago! Our Board of Trustees looked as amazed as children at the circus begging for the twenty-dollar flashlights.
Look, here’s the issue: Our school system is not successful at teaching science for a number of reasons, not the least being that we don’t know what science is. FBISD teachers are forced to dance around core science issues like evolution, and the understanding that associations that may or may not create causal links, and how to proceed with the scientific process in understanding our environment and how our choices may under-mind our best long term interests.
These issues are real and have nothing to do with funding redundant museums. Another real concern that our school board trustees should be very cognizant of it that Sugar Land is almost all “built-out.” What that means is that developers will now finish, as they have with all of there development projects, with a flurry of apartments. This will mean that our schools will have rapidly rising demands placed on them “without” the tax base to support them, because apartments pay a very greatly reduced property tax base than do single family homes. It is also often the case that a larger percentage of students living in apartments require special and expensive school services. In this way, if our board of trustees is unaware, or refuses to be aware, of what our real education and science challenges are, we can expect more developer oriented snow jobs.
We are fortunate enough to have a fantastic new discovery museum opening in Telfair this coming fall. It should be supported it fully, not undermined. We must also demand that our School Board prepare for real challenges that our developers have coming with their influx of multifamily, low tax based apartments. Remember, not all associations create causal links, as science educated people, we must be able to ask the questions that lead to the best qualified answers, and choices