March 7, 2023 — Regular Meeting
Conroe ISD Board Meeting — 2023-03-07
Regular Meeting — Unofficial Notes
Based on auto-generated transcript. Not an official record.
Generated 2026-03-28 15:20 UTC
Unofficial Meeting Notes
Conroe Independent School District Board of Trustees
Regular Meeting & Workshop — March 7, 2023
These are unofficial notes based on an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors or omissions.
REGULAR MEETING
Called to order: 6:00 PM
Quorum confirmed: Yes
Opening
- Invocation delivered by the Board
- Pledges of Allegiance (U.S. and Texas flags) led by Ms. Wagman
Citizen Participation
- No citizens signed up to speak.
Human Resources — Principal Appointments
A. Principal for Houston (Sam Houston) Elementary
- Background: Outgoing principal Paula Nicolini is relocating to Oklahoma to be closer to family. Dr. Noel praised the school's trajectory from "Improvement Required" status to near A-level performance.
- Recommendation: Chelsea Fuller, current assistant principal at Houston Elementary, recognized for instructional strategy expertise and data analysis skills.
- Vote: Unanimous approval (motion and second received)
- Ms. Fuller gave acceptance remarks thanking her family, Ms. Nicolini, and the Houston Elementary staff.
B. Principal for Powell Elementary
- Background: Current principal Erin Mate is moving to become the inaugural principal of Dr. Chris Hines Elementary. The district sought a leader with deep ties to Powell.
- Recommendation: Erin Anderson, a former teacher and assistant principal at Powell, Caney Creek High School graduate and class valedictorian.
- Vote: Unanimous approval
- Ms. Anderson gave acceptance remarks noting her excitement to return to the Powell community.
C. Principal for Bosman Intermediate
- Background: Current principal Amber (surname rendered as "to Beaumont" in transcript) is leaving to open Veterans Memorial Intermediate. Dr. Noel emphasized Bosman's positive momentum in test scores and culture.
- Recommendation: Joe T. Roland IV, current assistant principal at Bosman, praised for energy, positivity, and proven leadership as summer school principal.
- Vote: Unanimous approval (multiple seconds noted)
- Mr. Roland gave an enthusiastic acceptance speech thanking family, fraternity brothers, mentors, and girlfriend Stephanie, pledging to "demand more," "pursue excellence," and ensure staff feel valued.
D. Principal for Grangerland Intermediate
- Background: Longtime principal Karen Jones is retiring. Grangerland Intermediate is splitting into two schools. The district sought a proven leader to continue her legacy.
- Recommendation: Dr. Serena Pearson, current principal of Austin Elementary for nine years, who transformed it from Improvement Required to consistent B ratings with multiple distinctions (missed an A rating by approximately one point).
- Vote: Unanimous approval
- Dr. Pearson gave acceptance remarks thanking Dr. Stickler, Dr. Shelly Winkler, and Karen Jones, with family present including her mother and college-age children.
Adjournment of Regular Meeting
- Motion to adjourn: Approved unanimously
- Board took a brief recess before beginning the workshop session.
WORKSHOP SESSION
Topic: Bond Planning Committee Update
Citizen Participation
- No citizens signed up to speak.
Bond Planning Committee Overview
Presented by: Ms. Blakelock, Darren Rice, Mr. Foster, Dr. Winkler, and Dr. Noel
Process & Timeline
- The Bond Planning Committee (BPC) is approaching its midpoint.
- All materials are posted on the district's public-facing website.
- Multiple communication channels available: pre-meeting Q&A (resource personnel arrive at 5 PM), QR codes for questions, paper comment cards, and newly launched BPC Zoom chats.
- Schedule overview:
- Currently in "information delivery" phase
- End of March / April: Begin building Proposition A (main proposition)
- May 11: Target for full draft package
- May–July: Community feedback period
- July: Committee locks in final package
- August (by August 20): Committee presents to the Board; Board decides whether to call a bond election and what to include
Meeting 1 Highlights: District Overview & School Finance 101
- Dr. Noel provided district overview
- Committee began defining consensus
- Purpose: Study facility/capital needs and recommend a bond program
- Key early vote: 98% of committee members voted that a bond referendum is needed
School Finance (Darren Rice):
- Current tax rate: $1.1146 (M&O: $0.8546; Debt Service: $0.26)
- Tax rate has decreased 16.54 cents since 2018-2019
- Projected additional decrease of ~5.5 cents for 2023-2024 based on current legislation
- Key point for committee: Higher property values do NOT increase general fund revenue (benefit goes to the state); however, they do help on debt service side
- Allowable bond uses: Construction, renovation, land, buses, safety/security, technology
- Not allowable: Salaries, pay raises, stipends, utilities, operating costs
- Debt-per-student comparison showed CISD compares very favorably to neighboring districts
- Without a bond: ~$63 million/year in capital needs would have to come from the general fund (portables for 3,000-student growth, technology, infrastructure, buses)
Meeting 2 Highlights: Growth & Demographics (PASA Study)
- Committee saw PASA demographic projections showing the district has met or exceeded growth projections every year except the COVID year
- Projection charts showed utilization exceeding capacity at alarming rates
- Capacity discussions ongoing, factoring in: 2019 bond school openings, shift from half-day to full-day Pre-K, specialized programs, updated zoning
Construction Costs & Marketplace (Mr. Foster)
- Construction costs have spiked significantly, especially in the last two years
- 2019 Bond planned for 6% annual construction inflation; actual inflation exceeded this
- Current market forecasts: 8–12% annual construction inflation
- All current figures are budget estimates (not bids) benchmarked against the January 2023 Bartlett Elementary bid (~$300/sq ft construction)
- New TEA guidelines (November 2021) require larger buildings (~15% more square footage), adding ~$6 million per elementary school with no state funding to cover the increase
Key Discussion — Inflation Models:
- Three models presented: 8% graduating down, 10% graduating down, and 12% flat
- Board members expressed 12% is too high; consensus leaned toward 8–10% range
- Significant discussion about the tension between:
- Overestimating inflation: Limits projects the committee can include; may leave unused bond funds that can't easily be repurposed
- Underestimating inflation: Risk of not being able to complete promised projects; may require general fund supplements
- Contingency budget discussion acknowledged but noted as not yet addressed with the committee
- Current general fund: $18.8 million in bond contingency fund + $30 million earmarked for land purchases (all excess general fund money spoken for)
- Board discussed alternative approaches (converting retail/office space to schools) — generally found to be impractical due to size requirements and costs, though district remains open to opportunities
Creative Campus Solutions Discussed:
- Conroe area: Build one larger high school (3,800 capacity) instead of two high schools, saving ~$160 million
- Caney Creek feeder: Build a 9th Grade Campus on district-owned 242 land (convertible to junior high in future bond)
- Grand Oaks feeder: Build a combined 7-8 / 9th grade campus on land adjacent to Grand Oaks High School — two separate schools sharing infrastructure (kitchen, potentially library/cafeteria with partitions), designed for future conversion to a standalone 9th Grade Campus when a full junior high is built
- Board members asked detailed questions about transportation costs (minimal — shuttle between adjacent buildings), shared facilities, and separation between grade levels
Meeting 3 Highlights: Land, Survey Results, Gyms & Playgrounds
Community Survey Results (300 respondents, phone survey, ~34 questions):
- 76% have positive view of CISD
- 76% rate education quality as good/excellent
- 75% positive about district financial management
- 74% of respondents do NOT have children in CISD schools
- 52% supported a $1.5B bond (initial, uninformed ballot)
- 61% supported after becoming informed (nearly 10-point increase)
- 65% believe district needs more schools
- 69% prefer building new schools to address growth
- 80% describe growth challenges as urgent/very urgent
- 77% did not know ballot must say "property tax increase"
- 58% would not believe the district if told there was no tax increase while the ballot stated otherwise
- Approval ratings for $1.6B and $1.7B packages were approximately the same when presented from highest amount first (anchoring effect)
- Southern parts of the district showed strongest support; results favorable district-wide
Financial Capacity (Mr. Roebuck's analysis, previously shared with Board in December):
- Bond Buyer Index: 3.39% (below 20-year average of 4.12%)
- 25-year structure: $1.4B (no tax increase) to $1.7–1.8B (3-cent increase)
- 30-year structure: $1.45B (no tax increase) to $1.825B (3-cent increase)
- Mr. Rice estimated the district could potentially reach $1.8B at a 2-cent tax rate increase (noting figures are conservative)
- Board noted the projected 5.5-cent tax rate decrease provides context
Land Acquisition (presented with aerial maps):
- District has existing land inventory and several parcels under contract or in negotiation
- Key areas of need identified: east/southeast of 105 corridor, north of 1488/west of I-45 (2,700 students with NO schools in the area), and west Conroe
- Active negotiations ongoing; details intentionally kept vague to protect competitive pricing
- Board member noted frequent constituent complaints about the 1488 corridor area lacking schools
- Past attempts to acquire land in certain developments (e.g., Foster's Ridge) were unsuccessful
Gyms (Dr. Winkler):
- 16 elementary campuses lack dedicated gyms (cafeteria doubles as gym/auditorium)
- Most are late 1980s–early 1990s builds with the same floor plan
- All intermediates now have gyms (thanks to prior bond)
- Gym cost estimate: ~$5 million each (based on Runyon gym)
- 38% of committee members favored adding at least 8 gyms, with most supporting a phased approach
Playgrounds:
- PTOs currently fund most playground structures; district handles mulch (~$100K/year)
- Committee explored "pour-in-place" surfaces for accessibility
- 76% of committee interested in $250K–$500K per campus for playground improvements
- No interest in $2 million per campus option
- Board discussed whether playgrounds/gyms should be in Proposition A or a separate proposition — this remains a committee/board decision
Consensus Definition Vote:
- Committee voted that 66% approval (two-thirds) defines consensus for items to be included in the bond package
- Voting conducted anonymously via iPads
Committee Engagement & Attendance
- Attendance has been strong: 95–120 members per meeting
- Fewer than 10 members have never attended
- A few early dropouts were replaced; the committee was intentionally sized to absorb some attrition
- All materials posted online for members who miss meetings
- Two Zoom Q&A sessions have been held
- Board members praised the communication effort, noting constituents report quick responses from district staff
Next Meeting
- Thursday (before spring break) at Oak Ridge High School
- Topics: Safety & Security, Transportation
- Committee will tour a master plan phase and compare older vs. newer school buses
- Location chosen to demonstrate what a master plan renovation looks like in practice
Workshop Adjournment
- Meeting concluded with thanks to all presenters and the bond planning committee for their work.
Note: These are unofficial notes based on an auto-generated transcript. For official minutes and complete bond planning materials, please visit the Conroe ISD website.