{
  "id": "2024-04-02_special",
  "meeting_date": "2024-04-02",
  "meeting_type": "special",
  "meeting_types": [
    "special"
  ],
  "title": "Conroe ISD Board Meeting — April 2, 2024",
  "date_display": "April 2, 2024",
  "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": "2026-06-18T19:45:21.295949Z",
  "highlights": "",
  "sections": [],
  "agenda_breakdown_md": "",
  "meeting_notes_md": "# Conroe ISD Board Meeting — 2024-04-02\n*Special Meeting — Unofficial Notes*\n*Based on auto-generated transcript. Not an official record.*\n*Generated 2026-03-28 16:48 UTC*\n\n---\n\n# Unofficial Meeting Notes\n## Conroe Independent School District Board of Trustees\n### Special Meeting & Workshop — April 2, 2024\n\n---\n\n*These are unofficial notes based on an auto-generated transcript and may contain inaccuracies.*\n\n---\n\n## SPECIAL MEETING\n\n**Called to order:** 6:01 PM\n\n**Invocation:** Trustee Datron Williams\n**Pledge of Allegiance:** Trustee Stacy Chase\n\n### Citizen Participation\nNo citizens signed up to address the board.\n\n---\n\n### Item 3: Human Resources — Principal Appointments\n\n#### 3A: Principal of Craton Elementary — Dr. Amy Garcia\n\n- **Recommended by:** Dr. Null\n- Dr. Garcia is currently an assistant principal at Reeves Elementary, described as one of the highest-performing elementary schools in CISD for the past two years.\n- Dr. Null noted that Craton has been performing well despite being crowded and undergoing construction, making it important to find a leader who could maintain that momentum.\n- **Vote:** Motion and second received; **passed unanimously** (all in favor, none opposed).\n- Dr. Garcia gave remarks thanking district leaders including Nicole Walker, Dr. Winkler, Dr. Medford, and Dr. Taylor. She shared her personal story about a fifth-grade teacher who inspired her career in education. She promised to ensure every student at Craton feels \"valued, supported, and empowered.\" She introduced her family: parents Anthony and Bonnie Craver, husband Ben, and children Penelope and Benjamin.\n\n#### 3B: Principal of Cox Intermediate — Liz Kaylor\n\n- **Recommended by:** Dr. Null\n- Ms. Kaylor began her teaching career at Cox Intermediate, became an assistant principal there, and has since served in various roles across the district, most recently as principal at Houser Elementary.\n- Dr. Null described this as a \"going home\" moment, noting her proven track record as a principal.\n- Current principal Dr. Debbie Spoon is retiring.\n- **Vote:** Motion and second received; **passed unanimously** (all in favor, none opposed).\n- Ms. Kaylor gave remarks noting her 17 years in education (16 in CISD, 10 at Cox). She spoke about the campus namesake, Mr. Tom Cox, and his selfless character. She recognized her family: parents, son Colin (current 6th grader at Cox), daughter Kelsey (freshman at Grand Oaks), and husband John. She thanked mentors Dr. Winkler, Dr. Vandermark, Lisa Garrison, and others.\n\n#### 3C: Principal of Wilkerson Intermediate — Connie Horton\n\n- **Recommended by:** Dr. Null\n- Ms. Horton is currently an assistant principal at Wilkerson and a former longtime choir director at McCulla Junior High.\n- Dr. Null emphasized Wilkerson's strong performance and cohesive leadership team, noting that the staff had expressed strong support for her selection.\n- **Vote:** Motion and second received; **passed unanimously** (all in favor, none opposed).\n- Ms. Horton gave remarks noting her 29 years in CISD (starting as a student teacher). She thanked numerous mentors and leaders, her parents Truman and Lita Cooper, in-laws, husband Bob, daughter Andrea and her wife Lindsay, and son Ben. She quoted the song \"Ubuntu,\" meaning \"I am who I am because of who we all are.\"\n\n---\n\n### Item 4: Executive Session\nThe board entered closed session at 6:22 PM pursuant to Sections 551.071, 551.074, and 551.082 of the Texas Open Meetings Act.\n\n**Returned to open session:** 7:03 PM\n\nNo action was taken following executive session.\n\n### Item 6: Adjournment of Special Meeting\n- **Motion to adjourn:** Passed.\n\n---\n\n## WORKSHOP SESSION\n\n**Called to order:** 7:04 PM\n\n**Public Comment:** No one signed up.\n\n---\n\n### Item 1: Employee Benefits Plan for 2024-2025\n\n**Presented by:** Karen Garza (CFO), with Derek Ekko (Gallagher, health plan consultant) and Tiffany Mattfeld (Assistant Director of HR — Benefits)\n\n#### Background\n- CISD operates a **self-funded health plan**, which gives the district more control over plan design, reserves, providers, and network selection compared to a fully-insured plan or TRS.\n- The district does **not participate in TRS ActiveCare** due to restrictive movement rules (5-year commitment), lack of control over rates/providers, and questionable financial history.\n- **Stop-loss policy:** $550,000 individual deductible; $5 million aggregate limit.\n- **District contribution:** $446/employee/month vs. state average of $225/month.\n\n#### Plan Performance\n- The health plan ended FY23 with a **$7.8 million fund balance** (~14% of annual expenditures).\n- Year-to-date surplus of approximately **$2.4 million** (expected to decrease during high-utilization summer months).\n- Now in **Year 3 with Blue Cross Blue Shield**; the HMO model has proven very successful.\n- The High Deductible plan runs at ~$412/employee/month; the Premier HMO runs better than the Blue Essentials HMO due to the narrower network and quality-focused care.\n\n#### Budget Projection for FY25\n- Projected incurred claims: ~$53 million\n- Total fixed costs: ~$492,000\n- Annual budget projection: ~$53.6 million\n- **Projected budget surplus: ~$1.4 million** (current year budget was ~$55 million)\n- RX rebate guarantees increased through the recent pharmacy RFP with Prime.\n\n#### Employee Benefits Committee Process\n- Met **March 6** (initial plan design review) and **March 26** (final review and vote).\n- **Unanimous vote** from the committee to bring recommendations forward to the board.\n\n#### Recommended Plan Enhancements (using ~$1.1 million of the $1.4 million surplus)\n\n**All Plans:**\n- Add **hearing aid coverage**: $1,000 maximum per 35 months\n- Add **cochlear implant coverage**\n\n**Blue Choice PPO (High Deductible Health Plan):**\n- Add **$500 annual Health Savings Account (HSA) contribution** per enrolled employee\n\n**Blue Essentials HMO:**\n- Reduce out-of-pocket maximum from $7,350/$14,700 to **$7,000/$14,000**\n- Adjust durable medical equipment from 50% co-insurance to match plan co-insurance level\n\n**Blue Premier HMO (most significant enhancements):**\n- Primary care co-pay reduced from **$35 to $20**\n- Annual deductible reduced from $1,200/$3,600 to **$900/$2,700**\n- Out-of-pocket maximum reduced from $6,250/$12,500 to **$6,000/$12,000**\n- Durable medical equipment adjusted to match plan co-insurance\n\n#### Premiums\n- **No premium increases recommended** — premiums remain the same as current year.\n- Total estimated plan funding (district + employee contributions): ~$54.6 million.\n\n#### District Benchmarking\n- CISD compares favorably to neighboring and peer districts on contributions and plan design.\n- Humble ISD's lower costs were explained as resulting from a reference-based pricing model that can expose employees to balance billing.\n- Enhancements are designed to make CISD competitive with TRS districts and surrounding districts.\n\n#### Board Discussion Highlights\n- **Trustee Williams** expressed concern about whether employees focus on premiums rather than plan enhancement details, arguing that reducing premiums would put more money directly in employees' pockets and help with retention/attraction. He drew an analogy to truck drivers who focus on take-home pay.\n- **Dr. Null** noted anecdotally that employees often hyperfocus on salary rather than insurance value, and that some leave CISD for a $500 raise elsewhere only to pay $1,200 more in insurance premiums. He also noted that network/doctor availability is what employees really care about.\n- Staff confirmed **virtual/telehealth visits remain free** under all plans.\n- Discussion about infertility treatment coverage — acknowledged as a real need but described as \"incredibly expensive\" compared to the very low cost of adding hearing aid coverage.\n- The hearing aid coverage addition was partly prompted by a 2017 state bill that required many plans to cover it, though CISD's self-funded plan is not subject to that mandate; employees had been receiving incorrect information from community providers.\n\n**Action:** Formal approval vote scheduled for the **April 16 regular board meeting**.\n\n---\n\n### Item 2: Budget Overview for 2024-2025\n\n**Presented by:** Karen Garza (CFO)\n\n#### Financial Reporting Awards\n- Texas Comptroller Transparency Stars (Traditional Finances, Debt Obligations, Contracts/Procurements)\n- TASBO Excellence in Financial Management (one of 32 districts statewide)\n- TASBO Purchasing Award of Merit (one of 77 districts statewide)\n- ASBO and GFOA financial reporting awards\n\n#### Budget Objectives\n- Meet needs for 2024-25 (including **opening Bartlett Elementary**)\n- Continue campus/department support\n- Provide safe and secure learning environment\n\n#### Key Budget Assumptions\n- **Enrollment projection:** 74,000 students\n- **Average daily attendance (ADA):** 68,450 (92.5% ADA rate)\n- **Property value growth:** 5.75% (conservative; awaiting appraisal district values)\n- **Tax rate:** No change projected at $0.9621 (M&O: $0.7021; Debt Service: $0.26)\n  - M&O may compress an additional 2 cents\n  - Debt service increasing from $0.26 to $0.28 (voter-approved with 2023 bond)\n  - Net change: zero (potentially decrease if property values grow more than 5.75%)\n\n#### ADA vs. Enrollment Funding Gap\n- The district is funded by the state based on ADA, not enrollment.\n- Every **1% loss in ADA costs ~$4.5 million**.\n- The 7.5% gap between enrollment and ADA represents approximately **$33 million** in unfunded costs.\n- Basic allotment: $6,160 per ADA; effective funding per enrolled student: ~$5,700.\n\n#### Tax Rate Context\n- CISD's rate of $0.9621 is the **third lowest in the Houston area**.\n- Tax rate has decreased almost 32 cents over the past 6 years due to HB3 tax compression.\n\n#### Revenue Projections\n- **Decrease** in local property tax revenue due to Senate Bill 12 (recalculation of frozen ceiling for over-65 residents — shift of revenue from local to state).\n- Property value growth: +$10.5 million\n- State funding increase (student growth + SB12 shift): +$32 million\n- Golden Penny yield increase: +$1.5 million\n- Teacher Incentive Allotment growth (pass-through): increase noted\n- TRS On Behalf (pass-through): +$1.75 million\n- **Total estimated revenue increase: ~$22.3 million**\n\n#### Expenditure Projections\n- **Personnel for growth:** +$10.87 million (149.5 new FTEs total)\n  - Campus staffing for enrollment: 66.5 FTE ($4.7M)\n  - Support positions (mostly custodial for Bartlett Elementary): 10 FTE ($500K)\n  - **Special education: 73 FTE ($5.7M)** — the largest growth area\n    - $3.5M in positions transferring from federal IDEA-B grant to general fund (grant no longer sustains staffing due to growth outpacing allocation)\n    - 27 new FTE for dyslexia and special ed teachers ($995K)\n- **Teacher salary step adjustments:** $1.6 million\n- **Teacher Incentive Allotment payouts:** $1 million\n- **Other expenditures** (utilities, fuel, insurance, MCAD fees, supplies): $3.3 million\n- **Total expenditure increase: ~$18.5 million**\n\n#### Special Education Funding Crisis (Significant Discussion)\n- In FY23, CISD received ~$47 million from the state for special education but **spent over $93 million** — a massive funding gap.\n- Special education student count grew by **~2,000 students** from FY23 to FY24, with similar growth projected for FY25.\n- Average general fund cost per special education student: ~$11,000.\n- Maintaining current spending levels for the projected 2,006-student growth would require an additional **$22 million** — funding that does not exist.\n- State-level discussions are underway about shifting from an instructional-setting model to an enrollment-based funding model for special education, but implementation would take years even if approved.\n\n#### Projected Deficit\n- **Total projected revenues: ~$695.1 million**\n- **Total projected expenditures: ~$712.8 million**\n- **Projected deficit: ~$17.7 million**\n\n#### Fund Balance Impact\n- Fund balance target (20% of budget): ~$142.6 million\n- Projected end-of-FY25 fund balance: ~$132.5 million\n- **Shortfall from target: ~$10 million** (fund balance would be at ~18.6%)\n\n#### Significant Board Discussion on Deficit and Future Planning\n\n- **Dr. Null** emphasized this deficit was anticipated when the November 2023 employee raise was approved. He stated CISD has \"one year of grace\" before deeper action is needed.\n- **Planning timeline:** Budget work on reductions would begin in September-October, with a **December workshop** targeted to present a \"menu\" of budget reduction options to the board.\n- Dr. Null noted that if a raise were desired alongside cuts, approximately **$30 million in budget cuts** could be needed.\n- **Natural attrition strategy:** Dr. Null expressed confidence that, as in 2012, the district could avoid layoffs through hiring freezes, attrition, retirements, and reassignments due to growth.\n- **2012 comparison:** The last major budget reduction (~$20 million) was accomplished without anyone losing their job, through ratio adjustments and operational changes. However, those cuts were never restored, meaning there is **less flexibility now**.\n\n**On the basic allotment:**\n- Board members noted the basic allotment ($6,160) **has not been updated since 2019**, despite significant inflation.\n- Board members expressed frustration that the state is sitting on a **record $30+ billion surplus** with $4 billion earmarked but not distributed to schools.\n\n**On potential Voter-Approved Tax Ratification Election (VATRE):**\n- Garza noted this is the **only revenue mechanism within the board's control** (Golden Pennies).\n- Discussion of how other districts (Fort Bend, Clear Creek, College Station) have used VATREs for salaries.\n- Board members discussed that even a two-penny VATRE might generate ~$24 million — enough for roughly a one-time 3-3.25% raise, but with no mechanism for future raises.\n- Concern expressed about whether $30 million in cuts would be worth a ~1-3% raise given the stress on employees and students.\n\n**On bond ratings:**\n- CISD holds **AA+/Aa1 ratings** with AAA through the Permanent School Fund guarantee.\n- Next bond sale: **January 2025 (~$752 million)**; ratings calls in December.\n- Garza and staff expressed confidence that a one-year deficit with a clear plan would **not affect bond ratings**, noting rating agencies are aware of Texas school funding challenges.\n- Staff shared that rating agencies contacted CISD **the day after the February workshop** where deficit budget discussions occurred, indicating close monitoring.\n\n**On legislative priorities (board member wish list):**\n1. **Increase the basic allotment** — would also flow through to all weighted special program allotments\n2. **Shift from ADA-based to enrollment-based funding** — would close the ~$33 million gap for CISD\n\n**On the $17.7 million deficit in personnel terms:**\n- Approximately **200 positions** equivalent.\n\n---\n\n### Workshop Adjournment\n**Time:** 8:26 PM\n\n---\n\n## Key Takeaways\n\n1. **Three new principals unanimously approved:** Dr. Amy Garcia (Craton Elementary), Liz Kaylor (Cox Intermediate), Connie Horton (Wilkerson Intermediate).\n2. **Employee health plan enhancements** recommended with no premium increases; formal vote scheduled for April 16.\n3. **Projected FY25 budget deficit of ~$17.7 million** — anticipated and planned for; board will receive reduction options in December 2024 if no legislative relief occurs.\n4. **Special education funding gap** identified as a critical and growing financial challenge (~$46 million gap between state funding and actual costs).\n5. **No special legislative session** has been announced; the state's $30+ billion surplus and $4 billion education earmark remain undistributed.\n6. **Bond ratings and January 2025 sale** are a key consideration in deficit budget planning."
}