If you’ve been keeping up with the local news, you’ve probably heard of the latest bond election. If you haven’t, then don’t worry; let me break it down for you. On the second of November, the district’s board of trustees called for an election to vote on the bond proposal. The election is the first one in a couple of years, so it’s a really big deal for everyone in the district. 

The proposal consisted of three sections: A, B, and C. Proposal A focuses on $727.2 million for renovations and constructing new schools. Proposal B includes $33.3 million to replace student and teacher technology over a period of three years. Finally, Proposal C contains $11.7 million for renovations of the high school and district performing arts centers. 

While the proposal may sound ambitious, Leander ISD plans on financing this grand monetary expedition by paying the debt off in multiple payments using money collected from rising house values. After tallying all the votes, the results revealed that while Proposal B passed, Proposals A and C didn’t. Confusion and outrage over the results were visible throughout the student body.

“I think Proposal B is the best education-wise. You can learn in a [bad] looking classroom, but if the technology is bad, it impedes education in an irreversible way,” senior Victoria Bonner said.

If you’re thinking, “What? Proposal B passed, but A and C didn’t? The last thing this district needs is more technology. This generation . . . always on their electronics!” then I would agree. . .  somewhat. 

My school laptop works perfectly fine, despite glitching from time to time, so getting a new laptop isn’t at the top of my priorities. Still, teachers need to get new technology. My math teacher’s projector broke, and now she has to use one of those old-fashioned projectors to teach all of her classes. It just conveniently happens to be propped up on the desk behind me. . .  meaning I have to bend over while writing my notes so I don’t block the projector. I can guarantee you my aching back wants that new projector. 

So while I’m grateful that Proposal B passed, I’m a little annoyed that the other proposals didn’t. If they had, it would have tremendously benefitted the district’s students. 

Like junior Emma Cavanaugh said, “We can foster a better learning environment with smaller classes.”

Proposal A called for the building of new schools, which I’m all for. Let me tell you, a room full of 30 students isn’t a class, it’s a Skrillex concert. There is no way students can receive an immersive education when all the overlapping chatter sounds like a volcanic eruption. Proposal A, alongside C, would have allowed for hundreds of millions of dollars in renovations if they had passed. 

And I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of walking into a school bathroom that doesn’t have a sink. Like. . . what? Where are the sink handles at? I’m not a fan of the building itself either, like why does every part of the school look like it was built in a different century? Again, I’m going off on a tangent; this is an article about the bond election, not the school’s questionable architecture.

While I am glad that at least one proposal passed, I think we should raise our standards as a school and as a district. We need more than just new laptops and projectors. We deserve those sink handles. The only thing that can be done now is to wait for the next bond election. If an election were to occur in the near future and you’re 18, please vote and voice your opinion. Seriously though, please vote; the school really needs those new sink handles.