Currently Browsing: Opinion
Robin Hood fails to save day: PISD questions use of donated funds
Photo Credit: Meghan Janette
.
Written by Veronica Wyman, Co-Editor-in-Chief
Amidst the economic turmoil and cramped quarters among a whopping 2,800 students enrolled on this campus alone, PISD stands in no place to further empty their pockets. The source of controversy dates all the way back to 1993 when the state enacted legislation to equalize funding between wealthy and underprivileged districts also known as the “Robin Hood Plan.”
This canny nickname would appropriately come into play if less endowed schools were falling apart by the seams and begging for spending money on the corner of the street with a peg leg and an eye patch. These statements would also entail that big bad wealthy education districts kick back and enjoy the high life while peasant school systems scrounge to escape their debt. However, this is no fairytale, and the state of Texas is not swooping into Sherwood Forest to save the day, but ironically stealing money from the formerly wealthier schools that presently need every penny they can get.
Playing the role of the scorned member of society properly applies under the rulings of Prince John, but when these Robin Hood Act charity cases spend millions on high school developments, donators such as PISD begin to question why they are the ones cutting costs. Recently this school year, Prosper ISD spent a jaw-dropping $113.5 million to open their “modern American high school.” This town of a quaint 7,000 used Robin Hood funds to finance Prosper High School where 850 students attend a school built for closer to 2,000. Additional schools in this region also profit from this legislation. Allen High School houses a gymnasium fit for the NBA and McKinney Boyd High School resembles an undersized castle; both, in fact, schools funded by the Robin Hood Act.
Not only do these embellished campuses seem unreasonable, but more alarming are the facilities available for students attending these schools. Prosper High School’s 590,000-square-foot monstrosity includes a medical tech lab, a restaurant-worthy kitchen, a greenhouse, a broadcast studio and, of course, an indoor football practice facility. Students attending PISD schools learn in classrooms with pullout walls, photocopied textbooks and outside portables crowding the parking lots. This does not insinuate that an effective learning environment is impossible under these circumstances, but it seems absurd that the district hoards away their school funding to sponsor “poor” school districts that appear to be competing with the modernization of NASA.
This act affects parents and teachers as well as students in crammed hallways and classrooms. For Texas homeowners, this legislation means local property tax increases, which maintain the primary basis of funds for the 1,036 Texas school districts subsidized by the act. These payments continue to increase without offering the children of these concerned guardians any of the benefits. Local members of the community continue to pay taxes that do not contribute to the quality of education for their own children, but instead feed into the growing pot of gold distributed amongst these Robin Hood “victims.”
Although supporters of this legislation argue that relying on property taxes for school funding gives wealthier districts an unfair advantage in educating their student population, the act also creates deficits for schools that now struggle to keep their heads above water. Some districts forced to donate towards the Robin Hood Plan such as Wimberley ISD, employ some of the lowest-paid teachers in the area in a building that needs massive repairs. The two scenarios should not coexist, and legislators should search for a way to balance the donated funds in relation to the district’s actual financial ability to contribute to the cause. Despite these reoccurring problems, political forces in Texas continue to make the death of the Robin Hood act not very feasible, at least in the short-term.
Email This Post
Print This Post
Leave a Reply