How would Allen High's Stadium Rank in the Sunbelt?

[UNTDude]

Finally some photo's are posted of Allen high School's 58 million stadium. I went out and took a look at it yesterday and the pictures actually don't do it justice - pretty magnificent. I'd rank it as a top 3 stadium if it was in the Sunbelt - maybe higher when you consider it backs up to a 60 yard indoor practice facility.

Allen High School Stadium - Link

[greenminer]

Man, I just don't understand this. I thought hockey drove the Texas bus?

[Travis]

This makes me sad. Sends the wrong message.

[Coffee and TV]

This makes me sad. Sends the wrong message.

I agree, its kind of disgusting.

[Censored by Laurie]

It'd be a joke if it weren't so pathetic.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Yeah, this isn't great. As much as I like football, the focus here is wrong. Hard to believe adults would spend money on this kind of thing when there are other educational areas needing funding that would benefit the student body as a whole, not just those in athletics. Pretty sad.

Edited March 29, 2012 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[Mean Green 93-98]

Although I have to base my opinion largely on what I've seen on TV or in pictures, I'd still say it is definitely top 3.

[Green P1]

That dump hole doesn't hold a candle to Bull Memorial Stadium. That's how football should be watched.

[Eagle1855]

This is why we're failing.

[NT03]

Meanwhile student to teacher ratio increases....

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Meanwhile student to teacher ratio increases....

When we were looking to move, we looked into Allen. Didn't like the one giant high school concept for our kids. Fell in love with Lucas...but, my wife had friends banging on us to move to Frisco. So, here we are in BF Frisco.

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

When we were looking to move, we looked into Allen. Didn't like the one giant high school concept for our kids. Fell in love with Lucas...but, my wife had friends banging on us to move to Frisco. So, here we are in BF Frisco.

Is it still known as "Frisclosure"? Heard the housing market downturn hit it hard.

[yyz28]

Posts like this make me want to put my head through the wall, as it reminds me of our arguments against the narrow-minded people who were against building Apogee.

First, Allen ISD is an exemplary school district based on requirements by the Texas Education Agency. The high school is the second largest in the state with an exemplary rating.

Second, the bond issue to build the stadium only after bond money had been spent to improve educational facilities at each and every campus within the district.

Third, the bond issue included expanding the high school for a new fine arts center and career center.

Fourth, the bond issue was approved by the voters of Allen ISD. If they are scratching their heads, they did not make an informed vote.

Fifth, the state of Texas requires bond money to be spent on what the voters approved, in this case a stadium and expansion of the high school.

Sixth, by state law and fiduciary responsibility to the district’s bond holders, the money must be spent as prescribed by the bond election. It has nothing to do with the state’s budget problems.

Finally, the district has committed to reducing administrative staff before reducing classroom teachers.

When facts are not required, it is much easier to make a point. Unfortunately, the point has little or no value. Allen ISD, just as all school districts in Texas, has an operating budget, funded from property taxes, that pays salaries, provides educational and support services, an allows the district to operate. This funding is set by the state and is the fund that is in danger of being drastically cut by the current session of the state legislature.

The District also has a Capital Budget fund that is used for construction, land purchases, and items such as school busses. This money is generated by the sale of bonds which are voted for by the residents of Allen. Once approved by voters, bonds may only be sold by the district if certain state mandated financial conditions exist.

It is against the law for the district to use operating funds for capital projects or capital funds for operating the district. It would be a violation of Texas law if the funds for the stadium were used to pay teacher salaries or fund educational services.

To say that District officials are being dismissive, to question their decision to spend money on the stadium vs. teacher salaries, or to imply that their hands aren’t tied is just ignoring the facts and state law.

The facts are that Allen residents voted and approved the sale of bonds to fund the football stadium, the district has met state mandated financial requirements to sell the bonds and the bonds are being financed without raising local property taxes. It is also a fact that stadium or not, the financial challenges faced by Allen and all school districts in Texas would not change.

BTW, I live in McKinney and have no dog in this fight, but I think the facts are important.

Edited March 30, 2012 by yyz28

[DoubleEagle]

Posts like this make me want to put my head through the wall, as it reminds me of our arguments against the narrow-minded people who were against building Apogee.

First, Allen ISD is an exemplary school district based on requirements by the Texas Education Agency. The high school is the second largest in the state with an exemplary rating.

Second, the bond issue to build the stadium only after bond money had been spent to improve educational facilities at each and every campus within the district.

Third, the bond issue included expanding the high school for a new fine arts center and career center.

Fourth, the bond issue was approved by the voters of Allen ISD. If they are scratching their heads, they did not make an informed vote.

Fifth, the state of Texas requires bond money to be spent on what the voters approved, in this case a stadium and expansion of the high school.

Sixth, by state law and fiduciary responsibility to the district’s bond holders, the money must be spent as prescribed by the bond election. It has nothing to do with the state’s budget problems.

Finally, the district has committed to reducing administrative staff before reducing classroom teachers.

When facts are not required, it is much easier to make a point. Unfortunately, the point has little or no value. Allen ISD, just as all school districts in Texas, has an operating budget, funded from property taxes, that pays salaries, provides educational and support services, an allows the district to operate. This funding is set by the state and is the fund that is in danger of being drastically cut by the current session of the state legislature.

The District also has a Capital Budget fund that is used for construction, land purchases, and items such as school busses. This money is generated by the sale of bonds which are voted for by the residents of Allen. Once approved by voters, bonds may only be sold by the district if certain state mandated financial conditions exist.

It is against the law for the district to use operating funds for capital projects or capital funds for operating the district. It would be a violation of Texas law if the funds for the stadium were used to pay teacher salaries or fund educational services.

To say that District officials are being dismissive, to question their decision to spend money on the stadium vs. teacher salaries, or to imply that their hands aren’t tied is just ignoring the facts and state law.

The facts are that Allen residents voted and approved the sale of bonds to fund the football stadium, the district has met state mandated financial requirements to sell the bonds and the bonds are being financed without raising local property taxes. It is also a fact that stadium or not, the financial challenges faced by Allen and all school districts in Texas would not change.

BTW, I live in McKinney and have no dog in this fight, but I think the facts are important.

Thank you for posting this. I will also add that in October of last year, Allen held a tax ratification election to increase it's ISD M&O tax rate by 13 cents per $100 of property valuation to offset the reduced funding from the state. The increase passed 60.5% to 39.5% and will raise approximately $10M per year which will primarily be used to hire additional teachers to accommodate student population growth as well as reduce class size.

[Monkeypox]

Yes, there are two different funds, and they can't mix. But Allen ISD and its residents have total control over their tax rates and priorities.

FWIW, Allen laid off more than 80 teachers and support staff, as well as applying for a waiver so they can increase class sizes in K-4. AND, it's not like they didn't have an option to raise tax rates or issue a bond to keep from losing those jobs. That's why they just raised the tax rate. Otherwise, they were projected to have to lose another 80-100 jobs.

So their priorities were still 1) Build football stadium 2) Protect the teachers and staff and quality of our education.

Showing that they've JUST NOW decided to fix this only further illustrates that the priorities in Allen were out of whack. Those 80+ teachers and staff still had to find new jobs. Class size this year still sucked. They still wanted a shiny new stadium that won't pay for itself until most of us will be well in the ground first and foremost.

Also, it's misleading to say it will allow them to hire ADDITIONAL teachers. It will allow them to re-hire approximately the number of staff they had to let go, and potentially unlock the salary freeze they put on, which still doesn't necessarily accommodate the need to increase the number of teachers and staff(as student population grows). IOW, they've now funded their standstill.

[MeanGreenHoops]

Posts like this make me want to put my head through the wall, as it reminds me of our arguments against the narrow-minded people who were against building Apogee.

First, Allen ISD is an exemplary school district based on requirements by the Texas Education Agency. The high school is the second largest in the state with an exemplary rating.

Second, the bond issue to build the stadium only after bond money had been spent to improve educational facilities at each and every campus within the district.

Third, the bond issue included expanding the high school for a new fine arts center and career center.

Fourth, the bond issue was approved by the voters of Allen ISD. If they are scratching their heads, they did not make an informed vote.

Fifth, the state of Texas requires bond money to be spent on what the voters approved, in this case a stadium and expansion of the high school.

Sixth, by state law and fiduciary responsibility to the district’s bond holders, the money must be spent as prescribed by the bond election. It has nothing to do with the state’s budget problems.

Finally, the district has committed to reducing administrative staff before reducing classroom teachers.

When facts are not required, it is much easier to make a point. Unfortunately, the point has little or no value. Allen ISD, just as all school districts in Texas, has an operating budget, funded from property taxes, that pays salaries, provides educational and support services, an allows the district to operate. This funding is set by the state and is the fund that is in danger of being drastically cut by the current session of the state legislature.

The District also has a Capital Budget fund that is used for construction, land purchases, and items such as school busses. This money is generated by the sale of bonds which are voted for by the residents of Allen. Once approved by voters, bonds may only be sold by the district if certain state mandated financial conditions exist.

It is against the law for the district to use operating funds for capital projects or capital funds for operating the district. It would be a violation of Texas law if the funds for the stadium were used to pay teacher salaries or fund educational services.

To say that District officials are being dismissive, to question their decision to spend money on the stadium vs. teacher salaries, or to imply that their hands aren’t tied is just ignoring the facts and state law.

The facts are that Allen residents voted and approved the sale of bonds to fund the football stadium, the district has met state mandated financial requirements to sell the bonds and the bonds are being financed without raising local property taxes. It is also a fact that stadium or not, the financial challenges faced by Allen and all school districts in Texas would not change.

BTW, I live in McKinney and have no dog in this fight, but I think the facts are important.

I hate political discussions, but as someone who had to vote for this I'll point out it's like many things in politics. They get all wrapped up with other crap. If you voted against it, you were voting against many other worthwhile and needed things which you mentioned. SO to get those through we had to also pay for this obscene stadium. Too bad we couldn't vote on each and every line item individually.

[oldguystudent]

So, here we are in BF Frisco.

I would rather UNT go down to NAIA and play flag football in Mack Park than live in Frisco ever again.

[DeepGreen]

This is still high school football. Did they really need a concrete and steel palace that costs $60 million dollars? I mean, really?

[Side Show Joe]

My old high school built a $24 million stadium about 4 years ago, that is better than some of the stadiums in the Sun Belt. The stadiun only seats 10,000, but it is very nice for a small school district.

[DeepGreen]

My kids went to 4A Port Neches-Groves HS. Renovated in 2007 $10.2 million as part of a school bond issue for the district, stadium highlights include:

Total seating capacity: 13,000

Playing Surface: FieldTurf

All-time attendance record: 16,000

Two-tier, state-of-the-art pressbox

20,000 square foot field house

Special features: 27'x17' high definition video board

Renovations included all new restrooms, home and visitors sides, and all concrete concourses, both sides.

Edited April 1, 2012 by DeepGreen

[CaribbeanGreen]

I love Frisco, you guys.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

---When we were looking to move, we looked into Allen. Didn't like the one giant high school concept for our kids. Fell in love with Lucas...but, my wife had friends banging on us to move to Frisco. So, here we are in BF Frisco.

--- I hate these mega sized schools... They are so few opportunities for kids to be involved in activities. There are a lot of kids there that would do well in activities other places and feel more worthwhile... I actually prefer large AAA and smaller AAAA size schools. Look around and see where a lot of the most successful people came from.... Example... who was the last President that attended a large high school or even lived in a very large town. I spend 30 years in public schools..

[UNTFan23]

--- I hate these mega sized schools... They are so few opportunities for kids to be involved in activities. There are a lot of kids there that would do well in activities other places and feel more worthwhile... I actually prefer large AAA and smaller AAAA size schools. Look around and see where a lot of the most successful people came from.... Example... who was the last President that attended a large high school or even lived in a very large town. I spend 30 years in public schools..

The big negative to breaking a large school into smaller schools is you are then dividing your resources.

[Mean Green 93-98]

The big negative to breaking a large school into smaller schools is you are then dividing your resources.

And thereby hindering your ability to build $58 million stadiums.

[oldguystudent]

I love Frisco, you guys.

I don't begrudge you that. Place just wasn't for me.