Board Meeting Comments

As a St. George resident, I’m concerned that this bond could create an unfair financial situation for both St. George and East Baton Rouge Parish. The bond language says the school board can only make improvements “to areas within their jurisdiction at the time the improvements are made.” That creates an 18-month window between when the bond funds become available in December 2025 and when a potential St. George school district could take effect in Fall 2027. If Woodlawn projects move forward during that window, one of two things happens—neither good. • Either St. George inherits the upgraded school without assuming the debt, leaving EBRPSS taxpayers to cover the bill. • Or the debt follows the facility, and St. George begins its new district millions in the red, with no realistic way to finance future projects without raising property taxes. This bond, if used before voters decide in April, hides those risks and misleads taxpayers about the true cost of forming a new district. Th

The justification for passing this bond sale is faulty. The argument has been: EBR is making a final payment to their previous low interest and no interest bonds assumed 10-15 years ago and will therefore have an additional $3.5 million available in its budget to make the payment towards the $40 million bond sale at an interest rate no higher than 6%. However, if the St. George school district is approved by voters in April, EBR will ultimately lose approximately $7 million in tax revenue from that 5.25 millage. The St. George school system is not guaranteed to be approved, but nonetheless, EBRPSS may likely face a $7 million loss rather than a $3.5 million gain. And if the School Board passes this bond resolution now and irrevocably commits the district to these payments and St. George is approved by voters in April, the EBR school system will face a $10.5 million reduction in available funds.

We know what happens with a decade of no oversight. Proposed policy giving charters more time without real supervision is dangerous. Other “school choice,”programs, such as magnet programming, which over time with no supervision, became economically segregated.Right now in all our schools the higher the SPS score the less poor and disabled students served. Magnets and charters hoard resources intended for students. They create administrative jobs and travel funds for adults in exchange for social media optics, as they exploit children on as props to keep the cash flowing. We need better policies that make sure charter and magnet schools are here to serve all students and held accountable. In light of a district that will likely suffer more enrollment losses as the result of the school closures and consolidations we need to get these policies, right for the kids. Thank you.

The District really did a disservice by not having a workshop for this whole policy where the public could ask tough questions. please vote no. Many districts are currently revising charter policy to be more efficient and to hold charters accountable for serving every child by not kicking kids with behavior problems or absences to the traditional public schools. Just because the adults don’t like the paperwork doesn’t mean we should give them an extension. Charter school should have 2 to 4 years to figure it out. At the beginning of this charter policy, there is some line about charters are not responsible for keeping open schools that would otherwise be failing? That sounds like a pass and that charters can just walk with no accountability for what they did after the money is gone and the state is coming down their back? Did we learn nothing from all the children displaced by the IDEA schools disaster? EBR Schools recommended closing IDEA but the board declined.

10 year renewals? The audacity! EBR Schools needs new rules on operators like other districts such as: operators must give up to 18 months notice of plans to close campuses and return any unused funds within 45 days of closure. Charter officials cannot sit on their board and also hold employment with the same organization, and schools can’t pressure students with absence or discipline problems into voluntarily transferring. those are examples of effective policies.. This policy is unfit for a district struggling with enrollment issues. The board needs to go back, do research and write effective policy that will lead to better outcomes and more accountability. Remember Proverbs, “ He who oppresses the poor taunts his Maker.” This policy is very much written to favorite operators pocketbook, not student outcomes. Please vote no and come back with a better policy.

Why is there no need to show demand for increasing grade levels? Where are these students going to come from? Isn’t the district on decline because of the closures and consolidations? We have already seen what happens when a system expands enrollment or come up with a new magnet without consulting the community. Not every program is meant to expand or should expand without evidence of demand and support. If charters operate like magnets they’ll just go to their board and say they’re going to expand and repurpose money for students that never show up? There is not always demand and then a community is stuck with staff and students being held responsible for an implementation of somebody else’s bad idea. We need to hold all schools to a high standard, including magnets and charters, which often put excessive pressure on schools to turn out theme related products and performances even if the cost is student and staff well being. Not everywhere should expand.