{
  "id": "2022-04-05_special",
  "meeting_date": "2022-04-05",
  "meeting_type": "special",
  "meeting_types": [
    "special"
  ],
  "title": "Conroe ISD Board Meeting — April 5, 2022",
  "date_display": "April 5, 2022",
  "type_display": "Special Meeting",
  "types_display": [
    "Special Meeting"
  ],
  "item_count": 0,
  "has_agenda": false,
  "has_notes": true,
  "pdf_filename": null,
  "packet_url": null,
  "generated_at": "2026-06-18T19:45:20.923075Z",
  "highlights": "",
  "sections": [],
  "agenda_breakdown_md": "",
  "meeting_notes_md": "# Conroe ISD Board Meeting — 2022-04-05\n*Special Meeting — Unofficial Notes*\n*Based on auto-generated transcript. Not an official record.*\n*Generated 2026-03-28 14:25 UTC*\n\n---\n\n# Unofficial Meeting Notes\n## Conroe Independent School District Board of Trustees\n### April 5, 2022 — Special Meeting (Workshop at 2:00 PM & Called Board Meeting at 4:30 PM)\n\n*These are unofficial notes based on an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors or omissions.*\n\n---\n\n## PART 1: BOARD WORKSHOP (2:00 PM)\n\n### Public Comment\n- No citizens signed up to address the board.\n\n---\n\n### ESSER Funding Update\n**Presented by Dr. Hines and Dr. Pam Zoda (Director of Federal Programs)**\n\n**ESSER I:**\n- Bulk of funds went to funding attendance during the last nine weeks of 2020.\n- Small amounts used for private nonprofits and some equipment purchases.\n\n**ESSER II (~$28–29 million):**\n- ~$10 million taken off the top by the state for attendance offsets in 2020–21.\n- Funded supplemental campus formula staff (teachers beyond 22:1 ratio), Chromebooks ($5 million), reading libraries ($2 million), a programmer, and the fall semester virtual academy.\n- For 2022–23: ~$3 million budgeted for campus formula staff (released early for aggressive hiring), district support staff, indirect costs, and additional non-personnel items (Wi-Fi improvements, Chromebooks).\n- ESSER II funds must be spent by end of 2022–23 school year.\n\n**ESSER III (~$65 million):**\n- Required to spend at least 20% on learning recovery; district is approaching ~50%.\n- Key allocations include:\n  - Expanded summer school (free tuition, increased teacher pay to attract staff)\n  - Campus formula staff supplements\n  - ~$9.2 million distributed to campuses for learning recovery (software, hardware, interventionists, counselors) over a two-year planning period\n  - District support staff (positions in HR, payroll, elementary/secondary education)\n  - Health services department expansion ($8 million)\n  - Equipment purchases ($1.6 million)\n  - **Virtual Academy:** District plans to apply for a campus ID number to offer limited virtual school for grades 5–8, to be brought to the board at the next meeting\n  - **Employee retention stipends:** $5 million placeholder\n  - **Attendance hold harmless:** $4.5 million placeholder\n  - **Math support:** Targeted funding for math learning recovery\n  - **T-Class pipeline program:** Full-year student teacher residencies funded partly with ESSER\n  - **Additional assistant principals** for campuses with heavy Teacher Incentive Allotment (TIA) workloads\n- For 2023–24: $4 million placeholder for stepping off the ESSER funding cliff, $2.2 million in indirect costs, summer school funds, and virtual academy support.\n- ESSER III funds must be spent by end of calendar year 2024.\n\n**Key Discussion Points:**\n- Board member asked whether ESSER-funded staff positions are short-term or long-term. Dr. Hines confirmed they are **long-term positions** the district will need to absorb into the general budget, though turnover and growth provide capacity to do so.\n- Dr. Null emphasized that aggressive early hiring helps teacher satisfaction and retention — teachers value being supported with adequate staffing.\n- The district is working to identify alternative funding sources (Title funds, IMA, Medicaid) to transition positions off ESSER before the funding cliff.\n- Board members confirmed that funds can be reallocated between line items if needs change, providing significant flexibility.\n\n---\n\n### Preliminary Budget Overview (2022–2023)\n**Presented by Darren Rice, Chief Financial Officer**\n\n#### Legislative Update\n- **May ballot item:** Voters will decide on an additional $15,000 homestead exemption (increasing from $25,000 to $40,000). Districts will be held harmless for the loss in value.\n- **TEA attendance hold harmless:** Approved for the 2021–22 school year (1st through 4th six-week periods), generating approximately $10 million for the district — essentially a break-even given attendance at ~92% vs. budgeted 94%.\n\n#### Budget Objectives\n- Meet needs for 2022–23, including opening **Gordon Reed Elementary**\n- Provide competitive compensation\n- Aggressive staffing allocations\n- Safe and productive learning environment\n\n#### Enrollment & ADA\n- **Projected enrollment:** 69,515 students (increase of 1,750 — more aggressive than the typical ~1,500 growth assumption)\n- **ADA rate used:** 94% (some risk acknowledged given COVID-era 92% rate)\n- ESSER includes a $4.5 million attendance relief cushion (~1% buffer)\n- Dr. Null stated that moving from ADA-based to enrollment-based funding is his **#1 legislative priority** — most states no longer fund based on ADA\n- Current enrollment (as of meeting date): 68,500\n\n#### Property Values & Tax Rates\n- Initial property value estimate from appraisal district: **~29% growth**\n- District is using a **conservative 15% growth estimate**, bringing certified values to ~$49.6 billion (increase of ~$6.4 billion)\n- Some districts in the Dallas/Austin area have seen 50%+ increases\n\n**Tax Rate Compression — Key Discussion:**\n- Under state law, **increased property tax revenue is offset dollar-for-dollar by decreased state funding** — the district receives **no net new funding** from property value growth on the M&O side\n- Whether property values increase 2% or 30%, the district's total funding remains the same\n- The state is the sole beneficiary of property tax increases as its liability decreases\n- State share of CISD's budget: **41% in 1997 → projected 26% in FY2023**\n- Board members expressed concern that taxpayers will see higher school tax bills and assume the district is receiving more money, when in fact the state is keeping the savings\n- Dr. Null noted the state will be \"flush with cash\" heading into the next legislative session\n- If property values were to increase enough that locally generated revenue exceeded the district's entitlement, the district could enter **recapture** (sending money back to the state)\n\n**Projected Tax Rate:** $1.1146 (down 6.14 cents), with M&O at $0.8546 (at the compression floor) and I&S at $0.26\n- Total decrease of 16.54 cents since 2018–19\n- CISD has the **3rd lowest tax rate** in the greater Houston area\n\n**Debt Service Considerations:**\n- Property value growth does help on the debt service side\n- Mr. Rice is working with financial adviser Mr. Robuck on potentially:\n  - Selling the last tranche of bonds while interest rates remain relatively low\n  - Performing a cash defeasance of some existing debt\n- A recommendation may come to the board at the next meeting\n\n#### Revenue Estimates (2022–23)\n| Source | Amount |\n|--------|--------|\n| Local revenue (compressed tax rate) | +$28.8 million |\n| State funding decrease (Robin Hood/HB3) | -$28.8 million |\n| State funding increase (1,750 new students) | +$26.2 million |\n| Teacher Incentive Allotment (first year) | +$2.2 million |\n| TRS in-kind (accounting entry) | +$1.75 million |\n| Interest income increase | +$2.5 million |\n| **Total estimated new revenue** | **$32.65 million** |\n\n#### TASA/TASB Pay Plan Study\n**Presented by Jennifer Barton, TASB HR Services**\n\n- TASB conducts annual comprehensive salary surveys comparing CISD to its local market of peer districts\n- Board member Mr. Hubert served as the board's liaison to the pay study process this year (unable to attend meeting)\n\n**Teacher Pay:**\n- At every surveyed experience point (0, 5, 10, 15, 20 years), CISD is **above the market median** — leading but not the highest in the market\n- Smallest margin at 10-year mark ($500/1% above)\n- Market typically shifts ~2% per year\n\n**Exempt Positions (Administrative/Professional):**\n- Administrative Business: 1% below market (structure), 3% below market (employee pay)\n- Administrative Education: 3% above market (structure), 4% above (employee pay)\n\n**Non-Exempt/Hourly Positions:**\n- All groups at or above market for employee pay, midpoints, and starting pay\n- TASB anticipates a **dramatic market shift for hourly positions** next year beyond the typical 2%\n\n**Police Compensation:**\n- Four benchmark jobs surveyed (officer, dispatcher, sergeant, lieutenant)\n- Compared using both school district and non-school market data for the Houston metro area\n\n**TASB Recommendations:**\n1. Adopt proposed pay plans with adjustments (strong starting salaries, midpoints aligned with market, increased starting rates for hourly groups)\n2. General pay increase model: **$1,500 for teachers, 2% for non-teachers, $13/hour floor** for all hourly groups\n3. Additional adjustments to teacher pay structure years 1–6 to support $60,000 starting salary without compression\n4. Additional individual pay adjustments (bring employees to at least minimum of range, educator career pathway premium of 2% above teacher daily rate, placement scales for nurses, special ed related services, hourly groups)\n5. Continue annual review of compensation plan\n\n**Significant Board Discussion on Compensation:**\n- A board member questioned why **retention stipends are not included** in the market comparison data, noting that TASB only looks at base/TRS salary, not total compensation\n- Concern expressed that without understanding total compensation (including stipends, insurance contributions, sick days), it's difficult to make fully informed competitive decisions\n- Dr. Null acknowledged the concern and committed to compiling a total compensation comparison\n- Other \"hidden compensation\" factors noted: monthly insurance contributions, number of sick/local days\n- District added 3 additional local days this year (total of 5), with options to use, bank, or be paid for them\n\n**Retention Stipends (Proposed):**\n- $500 on October 1\n- $1,000 on February 15\n- Total cost: ~$10 million (funded through ESSER, not general fund)\n- Can be adjusted based on budget and ADA performance\n\n**Reading Academy Stipend:**\n- Under consideration for teachers completing the state-mandated reading academy (~60 hours of uncompensated time outside school day)\n- Would be a one-time stipend for completion in CISD\n- To be brought to the board at the April 19 meeting\n\n#### Staffing Allocation Changes\n- **PreK ratio:** Changed from 22:1 to 19:1 (~$1 million cost)\n- **Grades 5–6 ratio:** Changed from 26:1 to 25:1 (~$600,000 cost)\n- **156 new teachers** for Gordon Reed Elementary and enrollment growth ($10.9 million)\n- **36 additional campus staff** ($1.26 million)\n- **10 new special education district support positions** ($785,000)\n- 1 police administrator\n- 2 paraprofessionals\n- Some auxiliary position reconciliation (reduced some over-allocated positions)\n- **Net new positions: 186** at a cost of **$12.845 million**\n\n#### Expenditure Summary\n| Item | Amount |\n|------|--------|\n| General pay increase | $13.3 million |\n| Additional personnel | $12.85 million |\n| Substitute pay increase | $300,000 |\n| Teacher Incentive Allotment | $1.89 million |\n| Retention stipend moved to ESSER | -$10 million |\n| Utilities increase | $1.85 million |\n| Other expenses (insurance, supplies, TIA) | $710,000 |\n| TRS in-kind | $1.75 million |\n| **Total expenditure increase** | **$22.65 million** |\n\n#### Balanced Budget\n- **Estimated total revenue:** $618.77 million\n- **Estimated total expenditures:** $618.77 million\n- **Balanced budget**\n\n#### Fund Balance\n- Projected unassigned fund balance: **$180.6 million**\n- 25% target: $154.7 million\n- **$25.9 million available above target**\n\n#### 2023–24 Pro Forma\n- Shows a potential **$11.8 million deficit** — no current mechanism in the state funding formula provides funding for raises beyond the current formula\n- Dr. Null has communicated to legislators that the funding structure now places the responsibility for future teacher raises on the legislature\n\n#### Vacancy Concerns\n- **60+ vacancies** in child nutrition\n- **60+ vacancies** in custodial\n- 63 teacher vacancies currently unfilled\n- Board discussion on whether $13/hour minimum is sufficient; running the floor at $14 would cost an additional ~$3 million\n- District noted it adjusted custodial pay mid-year in the past and could do so again if $13 proves insufficient\n\n---\n\n### Health Plan / Benefits Update\n**Presented by Darren Rice**\n\n#### Current Plan Performance (2021–22)\n- Total revenues: $31.4 million\n- Total expenses: $33.7 million\n- Revenues under expenses: ~$2.2 million\n- Projected total plan year shortfall: ~$3.5 million\n- High volume of high-dollar claims (over $50,000 each), driven by deferred elective surgeries\n- Three claimants exceeded the $550,000 stop-loss threshold\n\n#### Wellness Center\n- Averaging only 347 visits/month\n- Recommendation likely coming to **close the wellness center** (~$600,000/year cost; frees up 6 classrooms for instructional space)\n- Virtual health options available at no cost to employees\n\n#### Fund Balance\n- Started 2020–21 at $6.78 million\n- Projected end of year: $3.28 million\n\n#### Blue Cross Blue Shield vs. United Healthcare\n- **United Healthcare renewal:** 9.6% increase (~$5.2 million)\n- **Blue Cross Blue Shield (new):** 5.3% calculated rate **decrease** (~$2.8 million savings)\n- **Difference: ~$8.2 million** in cost avoidance (noted as equivalent to ~115 teacher positions)\n\n#### BCBS Network Structure\n| BCBS Plan | Comparable UHC Plan | Primary Hospital(s) |\n|-----------|-------------------|---------------------|\n| Blue Premiere (HMO) | Nexus | Memorial Hermann |\n| Blue Essentials | Charter/Kelsey | Memorial Hermann, MD Anderson, Texas Children's, St. Luke's, Methodist |\n| Blue Choice (PPO) | High Deductible | Wide open network |\n\n#### Proposed Premium Changes (Employee Benefits Committee Approved)\n**Blue Premiere (replacing Nexus):**\n- Employee only: **-$50/month**\n- Employee & spouse: **-$68/month**\n- Employee & children: **-$144/month**\n- Employee & family: **-$156/month**\n\n**Blue Essentials (replacing Charter):**\n- Employee only: **-$4/month**\n- Employee & spouse: **-$6/month**\n- Employee & children: **-$4/month**\n- Employee & family: **-$20/month**\n\n**Blue Choice (High Deductible):** No change\n\n- Disruption estimated at ~1.4% (~200 employees may need to find new providers)\n- Benefit plan design and premiums to be brought for board approval at the **April 19 meeting**\n- District compares favorably with peer districts on both employee premiums and district contributions\n\n---\n\n### Budget Timeline\n| Date | Action |\n|------|--------|\n| April 5 (today) | Pay plan approval |\n| April 19 | Benefit plan design approval; stipend approvals |\n| June 7 | Board workshop (if necessary) |\n| July 13 | Budget presentation to District Level Planning & Decision-Making Committee |\n| July 19 | First public hearing |\n| August 2 | First public hearing |\n| August 16 | Second public hearing; budget and tax rate adoption |\n\n---\n\n## PART 2: SPECIALLY CALLED BOARD MEETING (4:30 PM)\n\n**Invocation:** Mr. Sanders\n**Pledges of Allegiance:** Mr. Inman\n\n### Citizen Participation\n- No citizens signed up to address the board.\n\n### Consent Agenda\n- **Item 3A — Approval of Minutes:** Approved as presented.\n  - **Vote: Passed unanimously** (voice vote, no opposition noted)\n\n### Action Items\n\n**Item 4A — Consider Approval of 2022–2023 Teacher Hiring Schedule and Employee Pay Plan**\n- Mr. Rice presented the recommendation:\n  - $1,500 pay increase for all teachers\n  - 2% general pay increase (on midpoint) for all non-teacher staff\n  - Minimum starting hourly wage of $13/hour\n  - Starting teacher salary: **$60,000**\n  - Total teacher salary increase: ~$6.187 million\n  - Total non-teacher salary increase: ~$7.116 million\n  - **Total cost: ~$13.3 million**\n- Motion made and seconded.\n- **Vote: Passed unanimously** (show of hands, no opposition)\n- Dr. Null thanked staff and noted this will be shared at the **job fair on Saturday**.\n\n**Item 5 & 6 — Executive Session:** Not entered; items removed.\n\n**Item 7A — Non-Renewal Hearing for Teacher Sonia Trevino:**\n- **Tabled** — Mr. Trevino unable to attend; to be rescheduled pending notification.\n\n**Item 7B — Settlement Agreement (TEA Docket #230-SE):**\n- Motion to approve settlement and authorize superintendent to finalize negotiations and execute documents.\n- **Vote: Passed unanimously** (show of hands, no opposition)\n\n### Adjournment\n- Meeting adjourned at **4:35 PM**.\n\n---\n\n## Key Takeaways\n1. **Pay plan approved** with $60,000 starting teacher salary, $1,500 across-the-board teacher raise, 2% for non-teachers, and $13/hour minimum — total cost ~$13.3 million\n2. **ESSER funds** are being strategically deployed to avoid a funding cliff, with ~$65 million in ESSER III being spent through 2024\n3. **Property value increases (~15–29%)** do not generate additional revenue for the district due to state funding compression — the state is the primary beneficiary\n4. **Switch to Blue Cross Blue Shield** resulted in ~$8.2 million in cost avoidance compared to staying with United Healthcare, with employees seeing premium decreases\n5. **Significant hiring challenges** persist, particularly for hourly positions (60+ custodial vacancies, 60+ child nutrition vacancies) and teachers (63 current vacancies)\n6. **Non-renewal hearing for Sonia Trevino tabled** to a later date\n7. District is exploring a **limited virtual academy** for grades 5–8 and plans to bring the proposal to the next board meeting\n8. Board members requested more **total compensation comparison data** (including retention stipends, insurance contributions, leave days) for future decision-making"
}