Coppell Chronicle Vol. 3, No. 2
Trustees Can’t Officially Advocate for Bonds • City Considers Funding Senior Village • Contractor Finally Found for Thweatt Park • Groundwork Laid for Complex by Walmart
Two Tuesdays ago, I stopped by Heritage Auctions in Irving because my radio heroes from The Ticket were broadcasting from there. During that show, I unexpectedly got to deliver an on-air promo for this newsletter — which I failed to identify by name. D’oh! (Click here to listen to how that went.)
Despite my questionable marketing techniques, my brief interview must have made an impression. Nine days later, when “The Musers” were discussing how their brains fail to process certain topics, former Coppell resident George Dunham said this: “Let me tell you about the latest bond election in the city of Coppell and see how long you last.”
I think he accidentally coined a great new slogan for the Coppell Chronicle.
Trustees Can’t Officially Advocate for Bonds
Before the Coppell ISD Board of Trustees called a $321.5 million bond election on Feb. 13, they had a private discussion regarding their “duties, roles, and responsibilities as related to a possible bond election.” That same item was also discussed behind closed doors during their Feb. 6 workshop.
Fortunately for curious minds like mine and yours, the Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD Board of Trustees had an open-session briefing on that topic during their Feb. 2 meeting, when they called a $716 million bond election. This briefing was delivered by Lesley Weaver, the director of communications for Huckabee, an architecture firm that specializes in educational facilities.
Weaver, whose resume includes stints directing communications for Northwest ISD and Irving ISD, wanted to dispel any notion that a district’s trustees are not allowed to talk about bond propositions during an election.
“You absolutely are allowed to talk about it,” she said. “In fact, I would encourage you to talk about it.”
However, Weaver said trustees have to walk a fine line between communicating and advocating. As private citizens, she said, they are free to express their views on bond propositions via face-to-face conversations, signs in their yards, or stickers on their bumpers. But they have to be careful when performing their duties as elected officials.
“When you have your school board member hat on — when you’re wearing a school board member nametag or badge — you can always educate; you just can’t advocate,” Weaver said. “You can always share facts; you just can’t share your opinions.”
Weaver’s presentation included this slide with examples of advocacy.
Weaver also posed several questions on another slide that began with this headline: “ALWAYS share facts, but THINK before you advocate.” Those questions included “Are you using district resources?” and “Are you perceived to be on duty?” This was my favorite one: “Do I want this email or comment to appear in the newspaper or go viral?”
Speaking of comments, I saw this one on Nextdoor.com after the Coppell ISD election was called: “Get ready now for a propaganda blitz from the school board in support of the bond issues. And, of course, the propaganda blitz will be paid for with our tax dollars.”
Coppell City Council Member Mark Hill tried to set that commenter straight: “It is, in fact, against state law for any school board to put out propaganda in support of a bond,” Hill wrote. “All they are allowed to do is state the facts regarding items contained in the bond and provide information on the costs. Private citizens and groups may, however, distribute information supporting the bond.”
Ah, yes — private citizens. When Coppell ISD had its most recent bond election in 2016, groups of private citizens formed political action committees on either side of the issue. The one against the bond package was called “A Better CISD,” and its leaders included four-time City Council candidate Davin Bernstein. The one in support of the bond package — which was called “Yes! Our kids. Our future.” — was co-chaired by Nichole Bentley, who would become a Coppell ISD trustee two years later after besting two opponents: Victory Place teacher Lynne Ryan and some bald, bespectacled bozo whose name escapes me.
The “Yes!” committee purchased newspaper ads that listed their supporters, and the biggest, boldest names were those of Hill and his fellow City Council members, who were identified only as “Local Elected leaders.” Below their names were those of 15 PTO presidents. All seven of the Coppell ISD trustees at that time were sprinkled among more than 175 smaller names at the bottom of the ad. Because they were not identified as school board members in the ad, they were supporting the bond package as private citizens.
If any political action committees get organized around this bond election, they’ll have to submit campaign finance reports to the district, just like candidates do. Those reports will be due 30 days and eight days before the May 6 election, so you can look forward to my analysis of them in the April 9 and April 30 editions.
I’m going to lift the paywall for all bond articles, so if you’ve lasted this long, you know what to do.
City Considers Funding Senior Village
It’s been nearly a year since I’ve written about Coppell’s Future Oriented Approach to Residential Development Task Force. This group of volunteers has been formulating a business plan for a “senior village,” which would be a suite of services offered to older residents, rather than a geographic location.
(See “Seniors Eager to Learn About Village” in the April 10 edition.)