East Texans will face several school bond proposals on November 3, 2026. If approved, these measures would authorize tens of millions of dollars in new borrowing backed by property taxes, leaving taxpayers footing the bill for the debt and interest over time.
Three proposals highlighted here in Leon, Teague, and San Augustine independent school districts deserve close scrutiny. At a time when people are already burdened by rising property taxes, mounting local government debt and the broader cost of living crisis across the state, school districts are once again asking taxpayers to authorize millions in additional borrowing.
These proposals raise serious questions about spending priorities, fiscal discipline, and whether school officials are exhausting less costly alternatives before turning to property owners for more money.
Leon ISD: $43.7 Million in Bonds, Including Extensive Athletic Spending
Leon ISD is asking taxpayers to approve three bond propositions totaling approximately $43.7 million.
According to the district’s official bond election order,1 Proposition A would authorize $27.576 million for school facilities, career and technical education programs, playgrounds, buses, and a multipurpose facility. Propositions B and C would authorize another $16.155 million for athletic facilities, including football stadium improvements, artificial turf, visitor stands, a press box, track and golf facilities, concessions, and a multipurpose indoor athletic facility.
The cost extends well beyond the amount borrowed. Based on an assumed 5% interest rate, the election order estimates approximately $35.5 million in interest on the proposed bonds. That would put the combined principal and estimated interest at roughly $79.3 million. Actual costs could vary with the terms of the bonds.
The district’s election materials also estimate that its debt-service tax rate could nearly triple, rising from 11 cents to 32 cents per $100 of taxable property value if the proposed bonds are approved and issued. That is a proposed 191 percent increase in the debt-service rate.
While district officials have included educational and transportation improvements in the package, more than $16 million would go toward athletic facilities, including stadium improvements, artificial turf, and an indoor athletic facility.
Whether these projects justify taking on millions in additional debt is for taxpayers to decide, particularly when the district’s own estimates suggest the total repayment cost could approach $80 million.
Teague ISD: $42.2 Million Across Two Propositions
Teague ISD is asking citizens to consider two bond propositions totaling $42.175 million, according to the district’s official bond website.2
Proposition A would authorize $21.275 million for projects including elementary classrooms, a multipurpose room, HVAC work, playground improvements, greenhouse and animal facilities, and baseball and softball field improvements. Proposition B would authorize $20.9 million for a competition gymnasium, stadium lighting, and a turf area for student activities and band staging.
The district estimates that Proposition A would have a tax-rate impact of 19.673 cents per $100 of taxable property value, while Proposition B would have an impact of 19.327 cents. If both pass, the combined estimated impact would be approximately 39 cents per $100 of taxable value.
Teague ISD has pointed to its declining tax rate since 2017 and its superior financial accountability rating. But neither changes the fact that district officials are asking property owners to shoulder another $42.2 million in taxpayer-backed debt that requires local taxpayers to pay more for decades.
A history of lower tax rates is not a blank check for future spending.
Particularly concerning is Proposition B, which would authorize nearly $21 million for a competition gymnasium, stadium lighting, and turf improvements.
San Augustine ISD: $750,000 for Buses and Security Equipment
Unlike the multimillion-dollar athletic facility proposals elsewhere in East Texas, San Augustine ISD’s bond would fund school buses and security equipment. It should be noted that many districts across the state account for bus purchases and security equipment out of their annual Maintenance and Operations budget, as opposed to taking on additional debt.
The district is already carrying3 approximately $28.1 million in outstanding bond principal, with another $17.5 million in remaining interest.
With more than $45 million in existing principal and interest obligations, taxpayers have every reason to question whether additional borrowing is the most fiscally responsible way to purchase transportation equipment.
Taxpayers Should Look Beyond the Ballot Pitch
Across Texas, local taxing entities continue to turn to property owners to finance expensive construction projects, athletic facilities, and equipment purchases through long-term debt.
And while bond proposals are often presented as investments in students and communities, ordinary, hard-working taxpayers are ultimately responsible for repaying every dollar borrowed, along with the interest that accumulates over time.
With Texans already facing an enormous burden from local government debt and property taxes, local governments should be prioritizing fiscal restraint, eliminating unnecessary spending, and making better use of existing resources rather than continually asking property owners to take on more and more debt.
Texans for Fiscal Responsibility is an independent educational non-profit organization seeking to illuminate the actions of government, educate and equip citizens to effectively advocate for pro-taxpayer and pro-family reforms, and hold lawmakers accountable for their actions.
Funded by ordinary Texans who want a fair, fiscally sound, and accountable government at all levels, we exist to protect and serve the best interests of taxpayers and families in the Lone Star State. Please consider making a generous donation towards our work today!
Get The Fiscal Note, our free weekly roll-up on all the current events that could impact your wallet. Subscribe today!
