$90 Million LGISD Bond Proposition Explained, Scrutinized

Supporters of the La Grange ISD $90 million bond proposition held a presentation on Wednesday, March 25, at Frisch Auf! Country Club.

About 60 people were in attendance. School board member Travis Ulrich, Superintendent Andy McHazlett and La Grange Elementary PTO President Holly McBroom spoke to the audience about the construction projects included in the bond.

“Our facilities are telling a story, and right now that story is one of outdated buildings struggling to keep up with the needs of a 21st century education,” Ulrich told the audience. “The 1923 building, a cornerstone of our La Grange ISD history, sits largely unused because it no longer meets modern standards.

“Our band practices on pasture land that is ridden with potholes and the Texas heat while they perform on turf surfaces,” he went on to say. “Sixth graders are still learning in an elementary school environment where they should be transitioning into middle school. And in an emergency, we still rely on outdated communication systems that simply doesn’t cut it anymore.

“That is why we are ask-ing for you to support a new bond for La Grange ISD, not as a luxury but as a necessary investment in our children’s success,” Ulrich added.

Ulrich said the bond will spread the cost over many years while providing facilities that will serve the district for the next 30 to 50 years.

McHazlett said state law prohibits him from advocating for or against the bond.

“Today my purpose is to give you facts of the cost of the bond, what’s being built, and so forth, and that’s it,” McHazlett said.

He detailed all of the major expenses that the bond would pay for. Renovating the historic 1923 high school building would cost about $16.2 million. That building would house administration offices, a board room, training room, the district’s disciplinary alternative education program (DAEP), and other district educational programs.

At the middle school, an expansion project would add classroom space and a new cafeteria for 6th, 7th and 8th grade. This would allow sixth graders to move from the elementary campus to the middle school. The middle school expansion would cost about $25.25 million.

High school renovations would include science lab upgrades at a cost of about $4.05 million and restroom upgrades estimated at $1.11 million. In an interview with the Record after his presentation, McHazlett said the high school restroom upgrades are among the most pressing needs for the district.

One wing of the high school is currently closed due to restroom plumbing issues. If the bond doesn’t pass, McHazlett said, the district will need to find some way of paying for the high school restroom upgrades.

Perhaps the most controversial part of the bond proposal is a $33.6 million “multi-purpose education activity center.” This large building would include an indoor 60-yard turf surface that could be used by the marching band and athletics teams for practice, along with other extracurricular activities like cheer, drill team and dance. The building would also house career and technical education programs such as cosmetology courses, health and science courses, in-person dual credit courses. McHazlett told the Record that the multi-purpose building would allow the district to move cosmetology and other career courses out of the Norma Webb Center at the old Fayette Memorial Hospital.

If the bond passes, McHazlett said, all district offices and classrooms at the old Fayette Memorial property would not longer be needed. He said the school could then sell that property and use the proceeds to pay down the bond.

“Other district-wide and campus improvements include additional parking and drop-off areas at approximately $4.85 million, renovations to intermediate classrooms and restrooms totaling about $1.7 million, covered walkways across campuses totaling just over $800,000, elementary playground structures at approximately $180,000, district- wide intercom and access control upgrades estimated at $1.3 million, the purchase of four buses at approximately $680,000, and high school furniture replacement estimated at $115,000,” McHazlett said.

McHazlett said the estimated property tax increase to fund the bond would amount to $0.3662 per $100 of taxable value. The current tax rate for La Grange ISD is $0.77372.

“To give a practical example, for a home with an appraised value of $300,000, after the state-mandated $140,000 homestead exemption, that would be an estimated maximum increase of about $48 per month,” McHazlett said.

The lgisdbond2026.net website includes a tool to calculate the tax impact for any property value. Owners of commercial properties and residential properties without a homestead exemption, such as rental properties, will see a much larger increase if the bond passes. For example, a rent house worth $350,000 will see an increase of $106.81 per month or about $1,281 per year.

State law provides homeowners aged 65 or older who have a homestead exemption with additional protections from school taxes. Those homeowners will probably not see any increase in school property taxes unless significant improvements are made to their property.

Holly McBroom, a La Grange alumna and parent, spoke about her reasons for supporting the bond.

“I remember what La Grange used to be,” McBroom said. “When I was in school, we were the standard. Students were proud to be here, and other schools wanted to be us. I refuse to accept that we shouldn’t still be that. I refuse to believe our kids deserve anything less than what we have, and even more. Our kids deserve to feel that same pride. They deserve to be part of a school system that sets the standard, not one that struggles to keep up.”

One of the main questions raised by critics of the bond is why there is only one proposition instead of breaking the project up into two or more propositions for voters to consider. The Record posed this question to McHazlett at the meeting. He said the school’s public facilities committee made that decision. The committee was made up of school staff, parents, business representatives and other stakeholders in the community.

“I kind of wanted to do it by proposition,” McHazlett said. “But then the committee said the problem is that, sometimes, taxpayers really don’t want to vote for everything, maybe they want to vote for the cheapest one. And then the other pieces don’t fall into place like what you really intended to get out of it. At the end of the day, the committee said we want to go for all of it.”

McHazlett said the committee actually trimmed some items from the proposal that had been under consideration, including an aquatics facility that would have cost an additional $18 million.

The bond website details all of the construction projects that would be funded by the bond if voters pass it. But it does not include details about how much each of the projects will cost, which has been a point of criticism from bond opponents.

Ken Dernehl serves as treasurer of the political action committee opposed to the bond, Taxpayers for Responsible Schools. Dernehl told the Record that he requested a cost break-down from the school. Dernehl said the school told him he needed to file a public information request in order to see that information. He shared his open records request with the Record, which was stamped received by the school on March 18.

A cost break-down document dated Feb. 9 was distributed at a school board meeting earlier this year and at the presentation last week. Dernehl says the document should have been made more available to voters. Dernehl said he wanted to question the bond supporters about this lack of transparency in front of the crowd at the meeting last Wednesday, but he was not allowed the opportunity to do so. The meeting last Wednesday did not include an open question-and-answer session. Instead, organizers asked the audience to present their questions one-on-one with the school officials and bond supporters who were present.

Dernehl said his group plans to hold their own public meeting about the bond proposal at a date yet-to-be announced.

Election day is May 2. Early voting runs from April 2028. The last day to register to vote for this election is April 2.