The Taxpayers Involved In Governement Education Reform (T.I.G.E.R.)s are a shoestring, grassroots political action committee in Lancaster. For the last three elections the TIGERs have gathered a few bucks each from a few hundred donors. With that limited funded the TIGERS sent out a few postcards discussing the Lancaster ISD's three recent school bond proposals.

Each election, the bonds were defeated.

All that the TIGERs have done is channel the voices of the Lancaster community. We didn't --couldn't --- create this sentiment. We simply help people in the community talk to each other, ask questions and find their polling place. The district refuses to hear, much less answer, the questions, so they keep getting surprised by the election results.
Will the community support building more schools, new schools? Yes, sure. Will voters favor demolishing existing schools – as they’ve already been done on one campus?. No, no, and no. Clearly, Lancaster is not Highland Park, and "tear downs" aren't a popular idea in our community. Three times we've been asked to approve a plan involving "tear downs" and three times we've rejected that plan. When will voters approve MORE buildings on NEW sites? As soon as that proposition hits the ballots.

Is the community willing to tax itself to the max to build new schools? We're within 11 cents of state tax caps -- and our valuations will support a $60 million dollar or so bond package. Will we go to the max for our kids? Yes, sure. Will we approve a package that asks for a blank check -- 30, 80, 100 million more than our credit limit? No, no and no. Three times we've been offered a bond package that exceed our debt cap and three times we’ve rejected it. Our board is obviously not shy about frequent bond elections. When will voters approve maximum tax rates? As soon as proposed maximum is really the max.

Is the community willing to borrow for a new "teacher resource center", a "maintenance center", a bus barn, stadium renovations, and short term buys of computers, staff cars, and grounds keeping equipment? No, no, and no. Three times those proposals have been set before the voters and three times the voters have rejected those plans. When will voters put children first? When the propositions set the same priority.

Has the district used its 2004 bond funds wisely? For instance, when a $14 million dollar estimate for renovation works drew bids costing nearly $30 million, did the district attempt at least half of the renovation work? Did they go back to a citizens’ oversight committee to prioritize the projects with the money they had? No, no, and no. Oh, the money was spent LEGALLY, sure. It's legal to use 30-year loans to pay for choir robes, squad cars, computer software -- it's legal. But wise? And are those the reasons voters approved the 2004 loans? No. The point of separate propositions is to ensure each project and each school has a separate approved budget limit so funds don't slosh from one purpose today to another purpose tomorrow. When will voters approve bond propositions? When the vote makes a difference to the projects.

Is this some kind of anti-school, anti-child, anti-tax, anti-Superintendent effort? No, no, no, and no. The biggest problem our voters have with our superintendent is he insists on having his own way over the wishes of the voters. It's certainly not a racial thing. A black incumbant trustee who opposed the bond defeated a black challenger who supported it. A white incumbant trustee who supported the bond lost to a white challenger running on a "good stewardship" and accountability -- anti-bond -- platform. Will we support Dr Lewis? When he supports us.

Are the TIGERS going to defeat another bond package next November? If the proposals are the same a fourth time, the TIGERs will not have any difficulty whatever in continuing to channel the existing voter sentiments. But if the district comes back with four or five or so small packages dedicated to fixing existing schools, building more new classrooms, and focused on children first -- the TIGERs will be leading the effort to PASS the proposals.