{
  "id": "2020-10-06_regular",
  "meeting_date": "2020-10-06",
  "meeting_type": "regular",
  "meeting_types": [
    "regular"
  ],
  "title": "Conroe ISD Board Meeting — October 6, 2020",
  "date_display": "October 6, 2020",
  "type_display": "Regular Meeting",
  "types_display": [
    "Regular Meeting"
  ],
  "item_count": 0,
  "has_agenda": false,
  "has_notes": true,
  "pdf_filename": null,
  "packet_url": null,
  "generated_at": "2026-06-18T19:45:20.782041Z",
  "highlights": "",
  "sections": [],
  "agenda_breakdown_md": "",
  "meeting_notes_md": "# Conroe ISD Board Meeting — 2020-10-06\n*Regular Meeting — Unofficial Notes*\n*Based on auto-generated transcript. Not an official record.*\n*Generated 2026-03-28 13:15 UTC*\n\n---\n\n# Unofficial Meeting Notes\n## Conroe Independent School District Board Workshop\n### October 6, 2020\n\n---\n\n*These are unofficial notes based on an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors or omissions.*\n\n---\n\n## Public Comment\nNo one signed up for public comment.\n\n---\n\n## Item 1: Bond Sale Results & Enrollment/Budget Update\n**Presented by: Mr. Darrin Rice, with comments from Dr. Null**\n\n### Bond Refunding Results (Preliminary)\n- The district completed a bond sale earlier that day, refunding approximately **$170 million** in 2012 bonds plus a **$189 million** new money sale.\n- Results were preliminary (books had just closed), but the district achieved approximately **$50.067 million in savings** — exceeding the initial estimate of $43 million and hitting the hoped-for $50 million target.\n- Savings represent over **20% on refunded bonds**.\n- The refunding **did not extend the bond term** — stayed within the existing 10-year window.\n- Overall new money interest rate: **2.47%**, compared to the 4.5% used during the bond referendum, representing approximately **$48 million in additional capacity** for the bond program.\n- The market was volatile that morning; the team waited until 10:00 AM (rather than the usual 8:30 AM) to find a favorable entry point.\n\n### Enrollment Update\n- **Budgeted enrollment:** 66,298 (anticipated 1,500 student growth)\n- **Budgeted ADA:** 62,452 (using 94.2% attendance rate)\n- **Current enrollment (as of Oct. 5):** 64,527 — **1,771 students below budget**\n- **Current ADA:** 1,668 below budget\n- The state extended its **hold harmless provision** by an additional six weeks (through the first semester), holding the district harmless at an ADA of **62,852** — actually **400 higher** than what CISD budgeted.\n- This is the first year in recent history where enrollment trended downward; the district is **271 students below** where it ended last year.\n- However, compared to the **same date last year**, enrollment is approximately **570 students higher**.\n- The district is adding approximately **20 students per day** (about 100 per week). Dr. Null expressed confidence the district would exceed **65,000** by end of October.\n\n### Enrollment by Grade Level\n- **930 of the missing students** are in early education (pre-K, kindergarten, and first grade) — consistent with statewide and nationwide trends.\n- The district launched a social media campaign encouraging families to enroll pre-K and kindergarten students, emphasizing it's \"not too late.\"\n- Dr. Null expressed concern that missing early childhood education will have long-term academic consequences.\n- Board discussion clarified that **compulsory school attendance age in Texas is six** (first grade), not seven as initially stated. (Dr. Hines corrected this during his later presentation.)\n\n### Budget Impact\n- Projected decrease in state funding: approximately **$5.3 million** (including hold harmless).\n- The adopted budget included a **$5.46 million surplus** — essentially bringing the district to **break even** in the worst-case scenario.\n- Dr. Null emphasized this is the worst case; continued enrollment growth means the district **will not be in a deficit** and will maintain a surplus.\n- The **fund balance remains strong**, positioning the district well.\n- **Budget preparation for 2021-2022** will be \"unlike anything we've ever dealt with\" due to uncertainty around remote learning policies and enrollment projections.\n\n### Teacher Retirements Discussion\n- Board member asked about rumors of increased teacher retirements statewide.\n- **Ms. Green** confirmed more resignations and retirements than usual due to COVID, though she hadn't broken it down by age.\n- Dr. Null noted more \"late resignations\" (just before or during school) and expects more **mid-year retirees** than ever before.\n- Contributing factors include health concerns and the difficulty of adapting to new teaching models.\n- The district maintains a running spreadsheet tracking resignations weekly.\n- Despite increased turnover, the applicant pipeline remains strong — more applicants attending virtual job fairs than there are retirements. Student teachers also provide a hiring pool.\n\n---\n\n## Holdsworth Center Leadership Development Program\n**Presented by: Dr. Taylor**\n\n### Overview\n- The **Holdsworth Center** was founded in 2017 by **Charles Butt** (HEB chairman), named after his mother (an educator), and funded by a **$100 million investment**.\n- The program provides **free** leadership development for school districts (compared to alternatives costing $130,000–$230,000).\n- Leadership philosophy: 70% from job experiences, 20% from coaching/interactions, 10% from formal education.\n- Curriculum covers personal leadership development, empowering others, and creating systemic change.\n\n### Program Details\n- **Cost:** Free (aside from in-state transportation, currently waived due to COVID — all virtual).\n- **Participants:** Superintendent + five district-level leaders.\n- **Duration:** Two-year program with site visits and coursework.\n- **Current participants:** 13 districts statewide across two cohorts, including comparably-sized districts: **Round Rock ISD, Arlington ISD, and Klein ISD**.\n- Currently accepting applications for **Cohort 3**; application due **November 20, 2020**.\n- If selected, the district would begin in **summer 2021**.\n\n### Board Discussion\n- Board members asked about curriculum specifics (Dr. Taylor has seen testimonials/videos but not the full curriculum), post-program obligations (none beyond the two-year commitment), and selection competitiveness.\n- The Holdsworth Center **directly reached out to Conroe ISD** to apply for Cohort 3 (they did not reach out for Cohorts 1 or 2).\n- **This does not require board approval** — Dr. Null shared it as informational. There is no cost to apply.\n- Dr. Taylor expressed hope to be included among the six participants. (Laughter from the board.)\n\n---\n\n## Item 2: District of Innovation Plan Reauthorization\n**Presented by: Dr. Hines (assisted by Mr. Hartwell Brown and Dr. Pam Zoda)**\n\n### Background\n- The 84th Texas Legislature (2015) created the **District of Innovation** option via **HB 1842**.\n- Allows districts to design innovation plans for local flexibility without going through the state waiver system.\n- Must be **renewed every five years** — the current plan **expires in January 2021**.\n\n### Current Plan\n- Currently used **only for the flexible (early start) calendar** — allows starting before the fourth Monday in August.\n- The district is eligible to apply (not in substandard achievement status).\n- Approval requires **two-thirds board vote**.\n\n### Proposed Changes for New Plan\nThe district is considering adding **CTE (Career and Technical Education) certification flexibility**:\n- Would allow hiring industry professionals **without standard teaching certificates** for hard-to-fill CTE positions (e.g., welding, collision repair, auto technology, health sciences).\n- Would be **narrowly defined** — only for specific positions where certified applicants cannot be found.\n- Would likely require **Dr. Null's individual approval** for each hire.\n- Neighboring districts (Aldine, Fort Bend, Humble, Katy, Klein, Spring, Tomball) already include this in their innovation plans.\n\n**Special Education/CTE:** Would also allow existing special education life skills teachers who teach career courses to receive CTE course coding, enabling **weighted pupil funding** — a direct financial benefit without changing current practices.\n\n### Board Discussion\n- **Significant concerns raised** about:\n  - Board oversight of non-certified hires — Board member John (appears to be Mr. Husbands) emphasized the board should have direct knowledge of any such hires, not just macro-level awareness.\n  - Compensation equity between certified and non-certified teachers.\n  - Ensuring non-certified hires receive adequate pedagogical training and support.\n- Dr. Null clarified that non-certified hires would still go through the full interview process and would likely be known quantities from industry partnerships.\n- Dr. Hines noted the district has managed to fill all CTE positions for the past five years without this flexibility, but having it as an option provides a safety net.\n- The plan would **only cover the calendar and potentially CTE** — explicitly **not** requesting flexibility for non-highly-qualified teachers in academic areas.\n\n### Timeline\n- **October board meeting:** Board will vote on a resolution to explore the District of Innovation application.\n- **Public hearing** will be held.\n- **District Level Planning Committee** (teachers, parents, community members, administrators) will develop the plan.\n- Plan must be posted online for **30 days minimum** (before November 15).\n- **December board meeting:** Final vote for plan approval (requires two-thirds majority).\n\n---\n\n## Item 3: Teacher Incentive Allotment (TIA)\n**Presented by: Ms. Green and Dr. Pam Zoda, with extensive commentary from Dr. Null and Dr. Hines**\n\n### Overview\n- Part of **House Bill 3** (last legislative session), designed to attract, retain, and reward the most effective teachers at the highest-need campuses.\n- The state provides additional funding (**$3,000–$32,000 annually** per designated teacher) based on:\n  1. **Teacher designation level:** Master, Exemplary, or Recognized\n  2. **Campus socioeconomic need** (geo-codes based on student demographics)\n  3. Rural status (not applicable to CISD)\n- Designations are added to the teacher's **SBEC certification** and are **valid for five years**, portable across districts and campuses.\n- Districts must use **90% of funds on teacher compensation** at the designated teacher's campus; 10% may be used administratively.\n\n### Two Pathways to Designation\n1. **National Board Certification** — Automatic \"Recognized\" level. CISD currently has **three** national board-certified teachers (all at secondary campuses). This funding flows automatically for 2021.\n2. **Local Optional Teacher Designation System** — District-created, must be approved by TEA. This is the complex system CISD is developing.\n\n### Components of the Local System (Under Development)\n1. **Teacher Observation (mandatory):** Using **T-TESS** (current evaluation system). Plans include recalibrating all raters for consistency across the district.\n2. **Student Growth (mandatory):** Committee is leaning toward **pre and post tests** as the most objective measure. STAR assessments and other interim assessments would be used.\n3. **Teacher Leadership/Mentoring (optional):** Committee currently plans to **start with only the two mandatory components**, though Board Member Husbands strongly advocated for including mentoring/teacher leadership as a measured component. Dr. Null noted that T-TESS already incorporates teacher leadership elements.\n\n### Proposed Weighting\n- Student growth (pre/post tests): **60%**\n- Teacher observation: **40%**\n- These percentages are still under discussion.\n\n### Eligibility\n- Teachers must spend **90 days at 100%** or **180 days at 50-99%** working directly with students.\n- Includes some non-teacher-of-record positions (e.g., special education inclusion support teachers).\n- Goal: 100% of eligible teachers participate.\n\n### Initial Implementation Plan\n- Committee is considering starting with the **Caney Creek feeder zone** (highest-need campuses) and potentially expanding to all campuses at **75% or higher economically disadvantaged**.\n- Additional qualifying campuses beyond Caney Creek: Anderson, Armstrong, Runyon, Travis, and Houston.\n- Focus on tested grade levels and tested subjects initially, with processes for pre-K through 2nd grade.\n\n### Funding Examples Discussed\n- **Master designation at Caney Creek:** Approximately $19,000 additional\n- **Master designation at David Elementary:** Approximately $12,294\n- **Recognized designation at David:** Approximately $3,088\n- Board discussed the potential for **stratifying payouts by campus need level** (e.g., 90% at highest-need campuses, lower percentages at others) to increase retention incentives.\n\n### Key Board Concerns & Discussion\n- **Subjectivity in teacher evaluation:** Multiple board members raised concerns about fairness in designating teachers, potential favoritism, and the difficulty of comparing teachers across different contexts.\n- **Retention mechanism:** Board discussed whether teachers could be required to stay at a campus for a certain period (similar to the former DATE Grant). The answer is unclear — the designation and funding follow the teacher through the state system.\n- **Five-year designation term:** Concern raised that a teacher could \"tank\" after receiving designation and still keep it for five years with limited accountability.\n- **TRS implications:** Unknown whether TIA funds count toward Teacher Retirement System salary calculations.\n- **Payment timing:** Likely annual; discussion about whether paying in September could serve as a retention tool.\n- **Legislative risk:** Dr. Null noted the legislature convenes in January 2021 with significant budget shortfalls; while no one is talking about eliminating TIA, it could be vulnerable to cuts.\n- **Statewide participation:** Currently only **26 districts** (about 2% of Texas districts, mostly small/rural) are approved. No large districts are fully participating yet. Board members noted the potential cost if all districts participated could reach hundreds of millions or billions.\n\n### Board Sentiment\n- Despite extensive concerns and questions, there was general acknowledgment that **participation is necessary** — Dr. Null stated that choosing not to participate would be a \"fatal error\" as competing districts would attract CISD's best teachers.\n- Caney Creek feeder zone principals are described as **\"ecstatic\"** about the opportunity.\n\n### Timeline\n- **April 1, 2021:** Application/notification deadline to TEA\n- **2021-2022:** Data capture year\n- **Spring or Fall 2023:** State funding would begin flowing\n- Committee will continue working on plan details and bring updates to the board.\n\n### Historical Context: DATE Grant\n- Dr. Hines provided a synopsis of the **DATE Grant** (approximately 2008-2011), a state-funded program where CISD distributed ~$3.5 million annually to teachers at campuses with 45%+ economically disadvantaged students.\n- Featured performance targets, subject-based team payouts, and per-student multipliers for eco-dis student success.\n- Required teachers to return the following year to receive payment (retention mechanism).\n- Average payouts: ~$3,200-$3,300 (elementary), mid-$4,000s to low-$5,000s (secondary).\n- The program was described as \"very successful\" — ~90% of schools hit targets annually, and turnover was reduced.\n\n---\n\n## Votes\n**No votes were taken** — this was a workshop/informational session.\n\n---\n\n## Items for Future Board Action\n1. **District of Innovation Resolution** — Expected at the October regular board meeting\n2. **District of Innovation Plan Approval** — Expected at the December board meeting (requires two-thirds vote)\n3. **Teacher Incentive Allotment Application** — Due to TEA by April 1, 2021 (committee will continue development)\n4. **Holdsworth Center Application** — Due November 20, 2020 (does not require board approval)\n\n---\n\n## Other Notable Items\n- Bond refunding results are **preliminary/unofficial** as of the meeting\n- The state's hold harmless provision has been extended through the first semester; further extension into the second semester is possible but not guaranteed\n- The state has signaled that districts should \"adjust your budgets and be ready\" — keeping options open for second semester"
}