Another school debate: HS football stadium

12 posts / 0 new
Last post
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763
Another school debate: HS football stadium

Allen H.S. unveils $60 million football stadium

I went with a fox site, but the articles are similar at the other sites too.

In a nutshell:

The new Eagle Stadium, located in a booming suburb just north of Dallas, will merely rank fifth in the state among facilities used for Friday night football on a weekly basis.

But it's that $60 million price tag...

...Allen raised the money for its new stadium as part of a $119.4 million bond package in May of 2009 that passed with an impressive 63.66 percent of the vote.

So the voters passed a $120 million bond, of which half went to build a stadium - 1 stadium at 1 high school.

Entire schools can be build for a fraction of that cost. (IIRC, the school our district is planning is around $17 million; I'll look it up if anyone wants me to verify.)

So what do you think? Is it just up to the voters to set building a high school stadium as a priority over any other education-related issue?

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 3 months ago
Joined: 05/13/02
Posts: 414

That is just insane....and sad where the priorities are Sad . TX schools are hurting so much for funding right now, and that just seems like a slap in the face to all the teachers.

KimPossible's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 days 7 hours ago
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3472

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

Allen H.S. unveils $60 million football stadium

I went with a fox site, but the articles are similar at the other sites too.

In a nutshell:

So the voters passed a $120 million bond, of which half went to build a stadium - 1 stadium at 1 high school.

Entire schools can be build for a fraction of that cost. (IIRC, the school our district is planning is around $17 million; I'll look it up if anyone wants me to verify.)

So what do you think? Is it just up to the voters to set building a high school stadium as a priority over any other education-related issue?

Thats really tough. I mean the voters are the ones who have to also use the school district and i guess if thats what they want out of their school...then...its...okay? gosh i had a hard time even writing that, which means that i don't really believe its okay. This seems to be an issue of voters not really knowing whats best for them. But I could see it being a bad thing for govt to take away decision making power based on the notion that they 'know better' Also if a district was considering such a project, considering its price, i think you would want to have voters involved, instead of a district deciding just to do it on their own. Basically if you are going to commit to such a project, you need to know that your community supports it.

I don't know, i think the only solution would be to officially put a cap on these types of things and make it so that much money could never go to such a project. But football is so huge down there, i find it unlikely that that would ever happen.

mom3girls's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 01/09/07
Posts: 1537

I have no issue with this. Football stadiums are not used just for football, they are used for a lot of sports as well as community events. The taxpayers knew where the money was going and they approved it.

KimPossible's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 days 7 hours ago
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3472

"mom3girls" wrote:

I have no issue with this. Football stadiums are not used just for football, they are used for a lot of sports as well as community events. The taxpayers knew where the money was going and they approved it.

You need to spend 60 million to create a space for football, sports, and community events?

I don't believe that. I think thats over the top and i think those voters are crazy, or simply another victim of our messed up football culture....this coming from someone who loves football.

Offline
Last seen: 8 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 05/23/12
Posts: 692

I believe it's wasteful. Allen is not far from where I live and I know that area is fairly new. It's growing rapidly, but I would think that they would be able to use that money for additional schools they are going to need to keep up with its growth. I think there should be a cap toward non essential, and I mean nonessential in comparison to having a school, which is essential. It makes me really sad. I know there are some school districts in the Dallas area that really needs money.

Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763

"mom3girls" wrote:

I have no issue with this. Football stadiums are not used just for football, they are used for a lot of sports as well as community events. The taxpayers knew where the money was going and they approved it.

Yes, football stadiums are used for other things, but this is a HS football stadium. Thus it is the "home turf" for one team. I don't know how it is in Allen, TX, but where I live, there are about 10 schools in the HS district. This would create a huge inequality.

If it's main intent is to be used as something other than a HS football stadium, it shouldn't have been packaged as part of an education bond. Since football is such a huge deal there, I think it would have passed if hadn't been tied to an education bond.

Then again, maybe their intent was to get a bond passed for $60 million toward education and packaged it with a football stadium. If the choice is have a $120 million bond pass with $60 million going to a stadium or not having a $60 million bond pass sans stadium I guess it is a good thing.

mom3girls's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 01/09/07
Posts: 1537

"KimPossible" wrote:

You need to spend 60 million to create a space for football, sports, and community events?

I don't believe that. I think thats over the top and i think those voters are crazy, or simply another victim of our messed up football culture....this coming from someone who loves football.

I know it can be build for WAY less, my community is building one right now that is 3 mil and that is with artificial turf and it will be a covered stadium. I just dont have an issue with it if the voters knew what they were paying for.

FWIW I also think 60 mil for a new high school is really high too. But school around me are a lot smaller. Our high school is 4 grades serving 4 small towns and I think it is only about 700 kids.

Offline
Last seen: 3 months 1 week ago
Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2256

That's insane. Those people just anger me. 60 million dollars for a stadium? Gross. I hate football and see no use for it so that might be tainting my opinion though.

Offline
Last seen: 3 years 11 months ago
Joined: 12/10/05
Posts: 1681

That is a ridiculous amount of money to spend on football... But, I also dislike football, so....

However, if the voters all think it is a great idea, so be it. Just don't complain about other lacks in the education system.

GloriaInTX's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4229

It is a lot to spend for a high school, but I can see some justification when they only have one high school with 5388 students. If their previous staduim had 14,000 seats and they were filling it well over capacity it sounds like they will easily fill this new one with 18,000 seats. It also says they are going to make money off the stadium by renting it out for college and soccer games. 1200 kids playing football is a lot of kids using that stadium.

ClairesMommy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 3 months ago
Joined: 08/15/06
Posts: 2299

OMG. That is obscene and IMO unjustifiable.

Our dome was estimated to cost $60M (and it did go over budget) too, but that was to house the 1988 winter Olympics, NHL hockey, national lacrosse league and various other sporting events. Clearly justifiable in its expense.

Maybe it's because we don't quite as ga-ga over highschool football up here, but that's just gross to me - $60M for a highschool football stadium.