Texas School Districts’ VATRE Blitz: A Choreographed Push for Your Wallet, Courtesy of the Insider Crowd
Texas – A School District Near you – Lone Star parents and taxpayers, grab your red pens—it’s election season, and the school district overlords are back with a familiar script. This November 4, 2025, voters across the state will face a barrage of Voter-Approval Tax Ratification Elections (VATREs), those sneaky little ballot measures dressed up as “local funding opportunities.”
But here’s the rub: From the sprawling suburbs of Rockwall to the dusty plains of Abilene, the pitch sounds eerily identical. Same boilerplate language, same sob stories about teacher retention and “safety measures,” same implication that saying no means dooming the kids to cardboard classrooms. Coincidence? Or the handiwork of a well-oiled machine, whispering talking points into the ears of beleaguered superintendents?
Take Rockwall Independent School District, for instance. Their glossy VATRE 2025 webpage hits you with this gem: “A Voter-Approval Tax Ratification Election (VATRE) is a local school funding election that asks voters whether or not they authorize the school district to access the maintenance and operations tax rate to create additional local funding and additional state funding to be used for specific purposes. Unlike a school bond election, a VATRE does not create new debt for the district. Instead, it provides funds for additional local funds that can be used for recruitment and retention, special education and student programs, and safety and security measures.“
Sound folksy? Patriotic, even? Now flip over to Judson ISD in San Antonio, and—bam—it’s a near-verbatim echo: the exact same assurance that this isn’t debt, just “additional local funds” for the usual suspects like special ed and security.
Hawkins ISD up north? Ditto, word for word.
Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD is chasing $20.6 million to plug a $12 million hole, and their referendum spiel? You guessed it—recruited from the same Rolodex.
This isn’t organic outrage bubbling up from PTA meetings. It’s a symphony, conducted from the shadows of Austin’s lobbying lounges. Enter the Texas Association of School Business Officials (TASBO), the self-appointed sheriffs of school spreadsheets. Founded in 1970 as a “professional association” for the bean-counters and budget mavens running Texas’ 1,200-plus districts, TASBO bills itself as a neutral force for “excellence in school business management.”
In reality? It’s a powerhouse lobby, armed with toolkits, webinars, and conference swag that turns harried CFOs into tax-hike cheerleaders. Their Voter-Approval Tax Rate Election Toolkit—complete with checklists, deadline calendars, and pre-fab messaging—practically hands districts a Mad Libs version of the script we’re seeing statewide. Why reinvent the wheel when TASBO’s got the one-size-fits-all spin on why your property taxes need another squeeze?
The timing couldn’t be more convenient. Just this summer, TASBO rolled out their 2024-25 Budget Cohort for Texas District Leaders, a full-day confab on June 18, 2025, at the Arlington Convention Center—tucked into their Summer Solutions Conference. There, amid the PowerPoints on post-legislative tweaks, business officials got the lowdown on “Effective Budget Presentations and Meetings to Adopt Budget and Tax Rate.” Translation: How to sell a VATRE without the voters smelling the rat.
Fast-forward to today, September 30, 2025, and TASBO’s dropping their “Overview of the 2025-2026 TASBO Master Calendar Webinar“—a virtual love-in to stay laser-focused on those “critical annual deadlines,” and election hustling come November. Recorded for posterity (and CE credits), it’s catnip for the compliance crowd, ensuring every district toes the line with TASBO-approved patter.
Why does this matter to constitutional conservatives who still believe in limited government and the 10th Amendment’s nod to local control? Because VATREs aren’t the benign “voter choice” they’re cracked up to be. Sure, they don’t pile on new bonds—praise be for small mercies—but they do unlock that compressed M&O tax rate, siphoning an extra 4 to 8 cents per $100 valuation straight from your pocket through direct taxation. Carroll ISD wants three cents to dodge a “trustee emergency” after blowing through $37 million.
Northwest ISD? Same three-cent plea, promising to “reduce class sizes” while conveniently ignoring enrollment booms they could’ve planned for.
Kingsville ISD eyes $2 million in “savings” to offset a $4.2 million deficit, but let’s be real: These windfalls often vanish into administrative bloat or pet projects, not the front-line heroes districts love name-dropping.
Abilene ISD‘s board just greenlit a $3.4 million VATRE grab, citing $10 million in state shortfalls that somehow ballooned to $37 million locally—because math in government is more art than science.
Judson ISD dangles $21 million in “additional funding” to offset a debt-service dip, but even they admit it’ll hike taxes by 4.5 cents—unless you buy their line about it being a “reduction” thanks to homestead exemptions.
Coppell ISD and Spring Hill ISD are in the mix too, touting $24 million and competitive salaries, respectively, as if Texas’ teacher shortage is a VATRE away from utopia.
Santa Fe ISD? Theirs will “maximize” funding by $9 million but slash the overall rate by 4 cents—smoke and mirrors to make you feel like you’re winning while the district cashes the state match.
Boerne ISD‘s two-cent bump nets them $4.8 million; Alvarado ISD‘s unanimous board call chases similar scraps; La Vernia ISD parrots the script to the letter.
It’s a statewide avalanche—dozens of districts, hundreds of millions on the line, all marching to TASBO’s drumbeat.
Folks, this isn’t democracy; it’s astroturfing with your dollars. TASBO and their special-interest bedfellows—the Texas Association of School Boards, the education unions—aren’t elected, but they’re scripting the show. They frame VATREs as a bulwark against Austin’s stinginess, but dig deeper: It’s a workaround for the very tax compression conservatives fought for, turning “limited government” into “just enough to keep the lights on… and the lobbyists paid.“
As your ballot arrives, remember: A no vote isn’t anti-kid; it’s pro-taxpayer. Demand transparency—real audits, not TASBO check-the-boxes. And if your district’s recycling their lines like a bad country song, ask who handed them the lyrics. In Texas, we don’t do scripted surrenders. We vote our consciences, one district at a time.
Austin
Texas GOP Wants Closed Primaries. New Secretary of State Robert Howden Is Preparing to Fight Them.
Austin, TX – Texas Republicans spent years demanding control of their own primary. Now they have a new Secretary of State, Robert S. Howden, appointed by Republican Governor Greg Abbott, and the man taking over the state’s election machinery is inheriting a lawsuit in which his office is expected to defend the very open primary system the GOP wants to dismantle.
The Republican Party of Texas filed the federal lawsuit in September 2025, arguing that Texas’ open primary system violates the party’s First Amendment right of association. Under the current system, Texas voters do not register by party and may choose which party’s primary to vote in during an election cycle. The GOP wants only registered Republicans participating in Republican primaries.
The case is pending in federal court in Amarillo before U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk.
And Robert S. Howden has now inherited it.
Howden Steps Into the Fight
Gov. Abbott appointed Howden as Texas’ 116th secretary of state on July 17, effective July 18. Howden previously served as Abbott’s senior adviser and director of legislative affairs and has worked in the administrations of four Republican governors. As secretary of state, he is Texas’ chief elections officer.
Abbott has been quite clear about where he stands.
At the 2026 Republican Party convention, he said Texas would eventually make clear that “only Republicans vote in Republican primaries.” Abbott has also said lawmakers “can and should be more responsive to Republicans than a judge may be,” indicating that he expects the Legislature to address the issue during the 2027 session.
But that doesn’t mean the Secretary of State’s office is supposed to simply surrender in court.
That was the position taken by Howden’s predecessor, Jane Nelson.
Nelson argued that changing Texas’ primary system was a job for the Legislature, not a federal judge. In an October 2025 statement, she said it was her responsibility to defend existing election laws and that she would implement whatever changes the Legislature lawfully enacted.
The Attorney General’s office took the opposite position.
Attorney General Ken Paxton sided with the Texas GOP, asking the federal court to strike down portions of the Texas Election Code governing open primaries. According to reporting by The Texas Tribune, Nelson’s lawyers said Paxton’s office gave them less than an hour’s notice before taking the opposing position.
So the Republican Party sued the Republican-controlled state government. The Republican Attorney General joined the plaintiffs. And the Republican Secretary of State fought the lawsuit.
That’s not exactly the tidy party unity politicians like to advertise.
The Real Fight Is Over Who Controls the Nomination
The GOP argues that crossover voting allows Democrats and independents to influence Republican nominations, potentially helping candidates who are less conservative than the party base.
The lawsuit specifically pointed to the 2024 Republican primaries involving former House Speaker Dade Phelan and Rep. Gary VanDeaver. Both won their races by fewer than 800 votes, and the party argued that crossover voters helped determine the outcomes.
The party has already made closing primaries an official priority. Republicans adopted rules supporting closed primaries in 2024 and renewed that push at their 2026 convention.
But changing the system is not as simple as flipping a switch.
Texas has more than 18 million registered voters, and the state’s registration system was never designed around party registration. Moving to closed primaries could require new registration procedures, computer-system changes and a method for existing voters to establish party affiliation.
The GOP wants the courts to clear the way, preferably in time for 2028.
San Angelo, TX – San Angelo’s battle over massive data centers has moved from City Hall chambers to the ballot box, and two council members could soon have to defend their seats before voters angry about how the city has handled the projects. What began as a fight over water, power, development and transparency is now a full-blown political revolt, with recall efforts targeting Council Members Harry Thomas and Joe Self.
And the controversy comes at an interesting moment for Texas. Gov. Greg Abbott has ordered state regulators to conduct a comprehensive audit of data centers moving through the state’s electric grid interconnection process, saying the review must be completed before any data center project moves forward. ERCOT subsequently told Fox News Digital that Abbott’s directive “effectively pauses all data center projects” while the state reviews their demands on the grid.
That means the questions being shouted at San Angelo City Hall are no longer merely local complaints from residents opposed to a particular development. Texas officials are now asking some of the same questions.
Abbott directed the Public Utility Commission of Texas and ERCOT to examine pending data center projects and gather information, including projected annual and peak electricity demand, water consumption, water sources, and whether facilities intend to generate some of their own electricity. ERCOT reported that roughly 90 percent of the 474 gigawatts of large-load interconnection requests currently under review are associated with data centers, more than five times Texas’ record peak electricity demand.
Back in San Angelo, the San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition has been pushing its own accountability campaign.
A petition seeking the recall of Council Member Harry Thomas, who represents Single Member District 3, was submitted July 15 with more than the required signatures. The city clerk later certified the petition after determining 53 signatures were sufficient, clearing the way for a recall election.
Following public comment, the City Council voted 6-1 to call the recall election.
Thomas has maintained that he has no intention of resigning.
“I weigh every decision I’ve ever made on behalf of the 100,000 citizens in San Angelo,” Thomas said after the petition was submitted. “Every time I vote, I vote for all the citizens. I have no plans to resign from my position.”
Self is now facing his own recall effort.
The coalition submitted an affidavit seeking Self’s recall and subsequently collected the signatures necessary to move forward. On Aug. 6, Self issued a statement saying he supports residents’ right to seek a recall but rejected what he described as misinformation about his involvement with data centers.
“I have not signed any non-disclosure agreements,” Self said. “I have not benefited financially. I have not voted in favor of a data center.”
Self said the council has instead voted on regulations that would apply if a data center is established in San Angelo.
That distinction between approving a specific project and approving regulations governing potential projects has become one of the central arguments in the political fight. San Angelo officials have considered rules addressing land use, water and wastewater issues as the city confronts proposals for large-scale data center development.
The proposed Skybox project has become particularly contentious. City officials have described it as a potential $7.2 billion investment, while opponents have raised concerns about water consumption, electricity demand, infrastructure, noise and transparency surrounding the development process.
The political consequences are spreading beyond San Angelo.
Residents in Temple and Granbury have also launched recall or charter efforts amid disputes over data center development. In Temple, opponents have cited concerns about land, water consumption and heat generated by facilities. In Granbury, activists gathered signatures seeking recalls involving the mayor and most members of the City Council.
Election
Texas Senate Hopeful James Talarico Shared Pride Event Stage With 11-Year-Old Child Drag Performer
Federal Court Upholds State Limits on Minors at Adult Drag Shows
Taylor, TX – A federal appeals court has just upheld a Florida law restricting minors from attending certain adult live performances, including some drag shows. Within hours of that ruling, renewed attention was focused on Texas Democratic U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico after reports resurfaced showing he headlined a 2021 Pride fundraiser featuring an 11-year-old child drag performer promoted as one of the event’s main attractions.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled in HM Florida-ORL, LLC v. Secretary of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, allowing Florida to enforce its law restricting minors from attending certain adult live performances. Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced the decision, calling it a victory for protecting children. The ruling does not prohibit drag performances for adults, but it recognizes that states may impose limits when minors are involved.
The timing has drawn renewed scrutiny to Talarico’s record as he campaigns for the U.S. Senate against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
According to promotional materials first highlighted by the Washington Free Beacon, Talarico was a featured speaker during Taylor PRIDE’s June 26, 2021 fundraiser in Taylor, Texas. The event was organized to raise money for “rural LGBTQ communities” and included live music, Drag Story Hour, adult drag performers, and an 11-year-old performer using the stage name “Kween Kee Kee.”
Taylor PRIDE advertised the child as “the absolute cutest & youngest of our drag performers.” Promotional posts stated the child would perform a drag routine and host “Kee Kee Storytime,” where children would participate in Pride-themed craft activities. The event was held at Texas Beer Company.
Photographs published from the event show Talarico addressing attendees from the stage and posing with participants. Additional photographs and video posted publicly show Kween Kee Kee, a local preteen named Keegan, performing in a shimmering blue dress, platinum blonde wig, and theatrical makeup during what organizers described as a Youth Drag Show. One attendee shared video of the child performing the splits before the audience.
The fundraiser also featured several adult drag performers, including Brianna Brinxx, Belladonna Dior, Felecia Enspire, and a performer using the stage name Sedonya Face.
Following criticism from conservative activists who protested the event, Taylor PRIDE defended the festival on social media. The organization rejected claims that the event was sexually explicit or exploitative and encouraged the public to review photographs from the event and decide for themselves.
Talarico’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment from the Washington Free Beacon regarding his participation.
The resurfaced event adds to a broader record that Republicans have highlighted throughout Talarico’s political career. While serving in the Texas House, Talarico opposed legislation restricting drag performances in the presence of children and argued lawmakers should avoid harming what he described as Texas’ drag performers. He has also opposed Republican-backed legislation restricting certain transgender medical treatments for minors and has frequently spoken in support of LGBTQ causes.
More recently, however, Talarico has attempted to present himself as a more moderate statewide candidate. He has described previous remarks, including referring to God as “nonbinary,” as “cringey” and has removed some progressive messaging from campaign materials as he seeks to broaden his appeal beyond Democratic primary voters.
The renewed attention comes as cultural debates surrounding children and drag performances continue playing out both politically and legally. Florida’s appellate court victory represents one of the most significant recent rulings supporting a state’s authority to restrict minors from attending certain adult-oriented live performances, even as litigation over similar laws continues elsewhere.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login