001All right. Good evening, everyone. I will call this meeting to order. It is right now 5:35 p.m. And um this public hearing meeting on Wednesday, December 17 at 5:30 was uh posted. >> Um >> it was posted. >> Yeah. the next page. >> Give me a second. >> Okay. It was properly posted on the 11th day of December, 2025 at 4:45 p.m. >> All righty. Um, we will do roll call at this time. Mr. Renee Pñena, >> present. >> Mr. Eduardo Ramirez, >> present. >> Mr. Noi Castillo, >> absent. Miss Paty Garcia, >> present. >> Mr. Jesse Solis, absent. Mr. Vasilio Val, Jr. absent. And Miss Guupe Gara, >> present. All right. Um, the first item on the agenda is overview of school first financial integrity rating system of Texas. >> Good evening. >> Uh,
002welcome everyone. Uh, we're here for the public uh, first hearing. Uh the Texas Education Agency released uh the final financial accountability rating ratings for school districts and charter schools across the state. The 2025 ratings are based on annual financial reports provided to the agency from fiscal year 2324. So we're behind two years. So we're going back to 2324. The purpose of the financial accountability rating system, it was created by the Texas legislature. The school financial integrity rating system of Texas is designed to encourage public schools to better manage their financial resources to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes. How are ratings assessed? They are based upon 21 indicators and failure to pass any of four critical indicators will result in an automatic fa failing grade. It is determined by the applicable number
003of points for an A 90 to 100, B 80 to 89, C 70 to 79, and anything less than 70, it's an F. So based on these 25 indicators, a school district is assigned one of the four ratings mentioned above. For 2324, the school district RGCGISD received an A with 98 points out of 100. The passing score being 70 points as mentioned. And again these are based on the 2324 financials. So we will start with the critical indicators and the first ratings again are based on the 21 indicators such as administrative cost expenditures, the accuracy of a district's financial information submitted to TEA and any financial vulnerabilities or material weaknesses in internal controls as determined by an external auditor. Furthermore, there are four critical indicators that result in an automatic substandard achievement rating should a
004school district fail in that specific category regardless of the overall score. And the four critical indicators and as required by law, we need to review each single one of them. Compare the results of 2324 to the prior year of 2223. Indicator one was the complete annual financial audit and data submitted to TA within 30 days of the November 27th deadline for uh June 30th school district in 2023 24. Yes. 2223. Yes. Two. Was there an unmodified opinion in the annual financial report on the financial statements as a whole? In 2324, yes. 2223, yes. Three, was the school district in compliance with the payment terms of all debt agreements at fiscal year end? 2324. Yes. 2223. Yes. Did the school district make timely payments to the TRS or teacher Retirement System, the Texas Workforce Commission, the
005Internal Revenue Service, and other governmental agencies? 23 24 Yes. 2223 Yes. The following set are the solveny indicators. Five. was the total net position in the governmental activities column in the statement of net position net of accretion of interest for capital appreciation bonds net pension liability and other postemployment benefits greater than zero 2324 the ceiling was passed 2223 ceiling was passed six was the average change in fund balances over three years less than a 25% decrease increase or did the current years assigned and assigned fund balances exceed 75 days of operational expenditures? 2324 ceiling passed 22 23 ceiling passed. Seven. Was the average change in fund balances over three years less than 25% decrease or did the current year assigned and unassigned fund balances exceed 75 days of operational expenditures 23 24 10 22 23
00610 10 points. Eight. Was the number of days of cash on hand and current investments in the general fund for the school district sufficient to cover operating expenditures? 23 24 10 points. 22 23 10 points. Did the school district's general fund revenues equal or exceed expenditures? If not, was the school district number of days of cash on hand greater than or equal to 60 days? and 23 24 10 points 22 23 10 points. 10. Did the school district average less than a 10% variance when complete when comparing budgeted revenues to actual revenues for the last three fiscal years? And this indicator is not being evaluated. And every school district and charter got 10 points each of those years. the reason that it's not being evaluated because of COVID. And so we're still comparing those years
007back to when um ADA was affected by COVID. And so that's why we couldn't predict exactly uh budgeted revenues to what actual revenues 11. Was the ratio of long-term liabilities to total assets for the school district sufficient to support long-term solveny? If the school district's increase of students in membership over 5 years was 7% or more, then the school district automatically passes this indicator in 23 24 10 points. 22 23 10 points. 12. Was the correlation between future debt requirements and the and the district's assessed property value? 23 24 8 points 22 23 8 points out of 10. Was the school district's administrative cost ratio equal to or less than the traceold uh ratio 23 24 10 points? 22 23 10 points. Did the school district not have a 15% decline in the students to
008staff ratio over three years? Total enrollment to total staff. If the student enrollment did not decrease, the school district will automatically pass this indicator. 23 24 10 points. 22 23 10 points. Financial competency indicators 15. Was the school district's ADA within the allotted range of the school district's benu popular projections submitted to TEA? If the district did not submit the projections, GA did it certify TEA projections. 23 24 five points. 22 23 five points out of five. 16. Did the comparison of public education information management system data to like information in the school district's annual financial report result in a total variance of less than 3% of all expenditures by function? 2324 ceiling passed. 2223 ceiling passed. Did the external independent auditor report that the annual financial report was free of any instances of material
009weaknesses in internal controls over financial reporting and compliance for local, state, or federal funds. 2324 sealing pass. 2223 ceiling passed. 18. Did the external independent auditor report that the F or annual financial report was free of any instances of material non-compliance for grants, contracts, and laws related to local, state, or federal funds? 23 24 10 points. 22 23 10 points. 19. Did the school district post the required financial information on its website in accordance with government code, local government code, Texas Education Code, Texas Administrative Code, and other state statutes, laws, and rules that were in effect at the school district's fiscal year end. 23 24 Five points 22 23 five points out of five. 20. Did the school district's administration and school board members discuss any changes and or impact to local, state, and federal
010funding at a board meeting within 120 days before the district adopted its budget? 2324 seating passed. 2223 seating passed. 21. Did the school district receive an adjusted repayment schedule for more than one year for an overallocation of foundation of the foundation school program funds because of financial hardship? 2324 sitting past 2223. It was not uh evaluated. Also, there are certain requirements that need to be disclosed and one of them is the copy of the superintendent's current employment contract which is found on the report that was uh adhere to your agenda. Other disclosures required are reimbursement received by superintendent and board members for fiscal year 2024 and for the superintendent Adulo Pena Jr. Total reimbursements $11,92255. Board member Veronica Verra Dr. Dr. Veronica Verera 2,23344 member Nor Castillo $6,84026 board member Jay Pñena $6,22245 board member
011John Pope $5,83910 board member Eduardo Ramirez $725 board member Vasilio Variel4 $4,161.36 board member Elasar Velasquez $6,182.90. Another disclosure is outside compensation and or fees received by the superintendent for professional consulting and or other professional services for fiscal year 2024 and no amounts were reported. Another disclosure is gifts received by the executive off officer and board members and firstderee relatives if any for fiscal year 2024 and no amounts were reported for any of those uh persons. And the last disclosure required are business transactions between school district and board members for fiscal year 24. And again no report no amounts were reported for that year. And then this slide shows how the district is doing uh uh in the state and 86% received an A, 7.7% got a B, 4.92% got a C and 1.18% got
012an F. And in the region, 31 school districts received an A, five districts a B, two districts A C and one an F. And this concludes my presentation. I don't know if there are any other questions. >> Thank you. >> Or thank you. All right. Uh second agenda item uh Rio Grandy City GUI ISD rating which was that the financial >> yes >> and then the public comments on the report any any public comments? No. >> All right, we can proceed to our adjournment. >> All right, so 5:49 p.m. and this meeting uh public hearing is now adjourned.