Education activists and education activists Sarah Terrell and Jessica Catrett explain why Houston must vote ‘NO’ on HISD Bond.
Education activists & concerned parents: Say “NO” to HISD Bond.
Podcasts (Video — Audio)
In Houston, Texas, a heated debate over a massive bond proposal for the Houston Independent School District (HISD) is taking shape. Concerned citizens, parents, and activists are at the center of the issue, and they believe that the community must reject the proposed $4.4 billion bond. While framed as a necessary investment in public schools, this bond has raised serious red flags regarding its financial and political implications. Speaking on the progressive program Politics Done Right, education activists Sarah Terell and Jessica Catrett made a compelling case for why Houston voters should reject the bond. Their arguments reflect a deep mistrust of the current state-appointed leadership of HISD and concerns about fiscal irresponsibility, political manipulation, and long-term consequences for public education.
The backdrop to this controversy is the state takeover of HISD by the Texas Education Agency (TEA), which, as Terell points out, was conducted under dubious pretenses. In March 2023, Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s administration took control of the district, citing a law that mandates a takeover if even a single school has been failing for more than five years. Despite HISD’s size—270 schools—the takeover was justified based on the performance of just one school. This decision is politically motivated, as Houston is a predominantly Democratic city with a history of electing progressive school board members. Catrett argues that the takeover violates voting rights, pointing out that her elected representative, Elizabeth Santos, was replaced by her opponent, a clear affront to the democratic process.
The $4.4 billion bond proposal is being pushed by the state-appointed superintendent, Mike Miles, who has a controversial past. Terell and Catrett emphasize that the bond would commit HISD to a 30-year repayment plan, ultimately costing taxpayers $9 billion with interest. Terell argues that this enormous debt would severely limit the district’s future borrowing capacity, locking HISD into a fiscal straitjacket and preventing it from addressing future needs. This bond would indiscriminately allocate funds instead of a thoughtful, phased approach to funding school improvements, creating a “one and done” scenario that could harm the district for decades.
One of the most troubling aspects of the bond proposal is its inflated costs. Terell presents stark comparisons between HISD’s projected spending and that of neighboring districts. For instance, HISD plans to spend $178 million to rebuild Frank Black Middle School, while Alvin Independent School District, a nearby district, is budgeting $88 million for a similar project. Across the board, HISD’s rebuilding costs appear vastly inflated, raising suspicions about financial mismanagement. These disparities are compounded by the fact that HISD proposes to spend billions on underutilized schools, with some operating at less than 50% capacity. Terell suggests that the district may eventually close these schools, making them prime targets for charter schools and private interests, which would undermine the public school system.
Catrett echoes Terell’s concerns, adding that the community has lost all trust in Mike Miles and his administration. Miles, who previously led the Dallas school district before being ousted, has a history of promoting privatization through charter schools. Under his leadership, HISD has already experienced a significant exodus of teachers, with 4,000 educators leaving the district since the takeover began. The remaining teachers are forced to adopt rigid, unproven educational models that many experts believe are harmful to students. Furthermore, Miles has closed libraries and turned them into test preparation centers, which has outraged parents and educators alike. These decisions reflect a broader trend of undermining public education in favor of privatization, a core concern for critics of the bond.
The issue of oversight looms large in this debate. Both Terell and Catrett highlight the lack of accountability under the current regime. Miles operates without real checks and balances, thanks to the appointed nature of the board of managers that replaced the elected school board. If the bond passes, Miles will have unfettered access to billions of taxpayer dollars with little to no oversight. Terell warns that there will be no going back once the district commits to this bond. HISD will be locked into a long-term financial arrangement with devastating consequences, particularly if future administrations are more fiscally responsible and wish to pursue more efficient alternatives.
Perhaps the most insidious aspect of the bond is how it aligns with broader efforts to privatize education. Catrett and Terell suggest that the bond money could eventually benefit charter schools and private institutions, especially if Texas passes a voucher system that redirects public funds to private schools. By revitalizing underutilized schools with bond money, the district could pave the way for these schools to be taken over by private interests. This clearly violates the public trust, as the bond is being marketed to improve public schools. Yet, it could ultimately erode the very foundation of public education in Houston.
The proposed HISD bond is not merely a question of dollars and cents. It is a referendum on the future of public education in Houston. Education activists like Sarah Terell and concerned parents like Jessica Catrett are urging the community to reject the bond, not out of opposition to school funding, but as a stand against financial mismanagement, political manipulation, and the creeping privatization of public education. Voting “no” on this bond is a vote for accountability, transparency, and preserving public education for future generations.
