001Call the meeting of the Wakatchi Independent School District Board of Trustees to order. Let the record show we have five trustees in attendance. This meeting has been duly called and notice of this meeting has been duly posted for time and manner required by law. First item on our agenda will be our budget workshop. Bud budget workshop number three. Mr. Calen. >> Thanks sir. Good afternoon board and Miss McCutchen. A special budget workshop number three this year. So we will uh finish out with four, but there were some really big items that were left kind of hanging uh as a result of legislative action. So we kind of want to go through those with budget workshop number three. The big one being uh quite honestly staff compensation. So new developments kind of want to talk about
002things that we've now learned. So, last time we had our budget workshop was in June, and we were still um we kind of heard a good bit of the legislation that had been passed down in Austin, but we didn't know a lot of the specifics. We're still learning some of those specifics uh as we go through, but we have a much better understanding of some of these uh funding streams at this point. So, we know the state has increased basic aotment $55 per ADA. So, that went from 6160 to 6215. Uh as a district, we anticipate next year that that'll yield about $610,000 for the district. Um staff retention, the board or the legislature, sorry, has uh found a new aotment called the staff retention aotment. So this is not the teacher retention aotment. This
003is the other retention aotment. This is the staff retention aotment. $45 per ada. We anticipate that to yield about half a million dollars uh from state funding. So all told, these two items uh while basic a lotment is not directly related to uh or mandated for staff pay increases uh it is available for anything that the board would like to use it on. Um I differentiated it from the two that are further down the list because they have specific things that the legislature would like for us to prioritize with those funds. So basic staff retention aotment yield us about 1.1 million that are available for staff increases. There's also the teacher retention aotment which I didn't put on here because the teacher retention aotment it essentially is just that pass through of funds from the
004state for those uh that are on the teachers uh pay scale that are teachers in the eyes of the state. That definition has been rewritten a little bit with house bill 2, but um that's for those that are on pay steps three through whatever uh to receive that 2500 based on our size of enrollment. $2,500 at steps three and four and $5,000 for steps five and above. So, additional funds from the state, the school safety aotment, uh it was $10,000 per ADA and $15,000 per campus. It has been increased by an additional $10 per ADA to $20 per ADA and an additional $18,540 per campus. So, it's right at $33,540 per campus plus $20 per ADA. Overall, we anticipate that to yield about $800,000 for the district. Uh, mind you, we spend about a million1
005on uh salaries and security alone before we start counting our SRO cost. So, this is going a long way to help us towards uh those uh security costs that we've already incurred as a district. uh you could consider them additional funds if you would like for additional or for the purposes uh of offering a staff increase. Uh but they do have a a purpose on that school safety aotment. And then there's also the allotment for basic cost $106 per DA and this is to go towards transportation and utilities and and other essentially fixed or overhead cost within the district. Uh we anticipate that to be just under 1.2 million about 1,187. Uh so overall new funding monies from the state again not including the teacher retention aotment about 3.1 million. So kind of wanted to
006I board it is a workshop so feel free to ask questions interject at any point but let me explain a little bit of the crazy. So, in putting together this presentation, I really put it together in the way I was thinking through how do we go about identifying funds available for uh staff compensation, whether it's hard uh currency in hand, whether it's increased to benefits. So, uh I hope that, you know, the the thought process will make sense as we get all the way through it. But that's why you're going to see kind of a a uh trail, if you will, to get to what the actual proposal is. So, back to budget realities board. We talked in March and you reaffirmed in June that these are our priorities going into next year. And so,
007it is to grow fund balance. We've I've caveed that a little bit with a balanced budget. Uh that's what I've heard from the board um through this process is yes, we want to do the things that are on this list, but we want it within a balanced budget. We do not want to adopt a deficit budget um to accomplish our priorities. Our next priority in tier one is a staff salary increase. Uh I took that based off of your feedback for all staff, not just uh certain clumps of staff. And so that really is part of our our proposal that you'll hear in just a minute is for a staff salary increase for all staff. And then we have other things Lumpkins practice field and then our tier 2 and tier three items. So the
008next stop on my magical journey of trying to figure out how all this works is looking at audit reports. I want to know what our district looks like compared to our peers. I know what our district kind of looks like as a whole, but how do we compare with our peers primarily in Ellis County? And one way I was looking at this was to say, okay, by functional expenditure, by functional category, so function 11 is instruction, 12 is library materials and resources, 13 is curriculum and instruction development. How do I compare with other districts in our area on our expenditure types? So I made a couple of charts and so I'm looking at instruction related expenditures here. So functions 11 12 13 directly related to the instruction of students as a whole. Wasachi spends about
00960% 59.98% of all of our expenditures on student instruction. Whether it's function 11s 12 or 13 within that that three function range we're spending about 60% of our funds. You'll see we're in really good company. Ferris is a little bit higher at 62%. Uh, and this is about 59.3, Red Oak about 54, and then Medlotheian about 49.8 or 50%. So that 10% delta between Wachche ISD and Medlotheian ISD, you would take that 10% times our $123 million budget, that's about a $12 million difference in spend just in functions 11, 12, and 13 between us and Midlotheian. It's not right, it's not wrong, it's just a fact based off of 23 24 audit report. So then I moved on to the leadership uh functions function 2123 added those together walks actually spends about 8 and a
010half% of our budget on or of our total expenditures on leadership which is instructional leadership and campus leadership. Uh you can see that that we are a little bit higher than uh the other districts in our uh county but we are not grossly out of line. We're about half of or threequarters of 1% a little bit higher than Red Oak. Everybody else kind of in that same range about seven six and a half 7% we're at about 8 and a half%. Then I also looked at the student services. I call them student services. We're going counseling, nursing, uh social work, food service, transportation, and uh co and extracurricular activities. As a whole, the district spends about 13% of our funds on that. Uh, Red Oak is about 14 and a half percent. Everybody else is
01111% or just shy of 12%. So again, we're in the neighborhood. We're in the ballpark. None of these from 11 through 36 really surprised me in terms of wow, we are way above or way below everybody else. Sure, there are outliers here and there, but overall we spend about 81 and a half% of our funds on students. Between student instruction through co and extracurricular activities from function 11 to function 36, we spend about 11.6% of our budget and so does just about everybody else. Everybody is about 76 and a half 77% through 81 and a half 82%. Midlothian's a little bit different. They have a uh TUR a tax reinvestment zone uh that requires greater expenditures and a function 99 that makes their financials a little bit different. Uh but realistically uh not only do
012we spend the vast majority like we we spend more on students in our budget than everybody else did in 23 24. I don't believe that was an outlier and I believe these are generally uh kind of comparable numbers. So it tells me we're spending our money in the right places. We're spending our money on students for the most part because I know the next thing that I normally hear is that we are topheavy and we spend too much on administration. So I combined functions 41 which is general administration through 53 which is data processing and includes security and it also includes maintenance and operations from a plant perspective. We spend about 17% of our funds on what I would consider your your general administrative expenditures. Uh you can see we are no by no means
013are we the leader in this category. uh we are pretty close to Midlotheian. We're about half a percent more uh of our expenditures than Medlotheian does, but we're in a solid second uh to alleviate. Now, my next thought went to well, is that skewed by any one stretch? If I'm really looking at maintenance uh in with admin, is maintenance skewing our spend admin? So, I looked at just admin. Our admin's about 2.9% of our expenditures. Midlotheian is about 2.8%. um everybody else is three and a half% or higher. So all of this info to tell you that I really believe that for the for the vast majority of the way we spend our money, we're not out of line. There are no more radical big shifts that we as a district need to be looking
014at that hey, we are way over here or way under there needing to make those catches or needing to catch those up in next year's budget. So, it was a comforting feeling knowing going in, hey, there's not a radical shift that we have to make uh to be more in line. Not that we have to do what everybody else is doing, but why would we be so far out of line from everybody else? So, that was a good feeling. That was a Now we're just down to compensation plan. We're not we're not worried about moving big rocks. So, compensation plan. I expected a question already so that I could do that, but here we go. Proposal highlights for the compensation plan board. We are proposing to start our teachers, librarians, counselors, and nurses at $57,000
015next year. We're currently at 54,600. We know that with increases from other districts that that's not going to remain competitive to stay at that level. While the legislature did not appropriate funds specifically for uh teachers on pay 01 or two, we know that it is incumbent on us to remain competitive so that we can continue to get good staff uh in our district. The legislature did segregate teachers from librarians, counselors, and nurses. Uh we know that there's a minimum salary schedule uh as required by the state of Texas that lumps all four of those uh groups together. Uh so we did want to to try the best that we can to keep them together uh because we know that that that would be a really monumental shift uh to start segregating and and only advancing
016teachers and leaving everybody else out. We are proposing a 5% pay increase for all auxiliary clerical pair professional and employees who are classified on the professional scale. This is where our librarians, counselors and nurses uh would fall in. So they would be seeing uh a 5% uh increase on those steps. Uh there is a little caveat there that I'll come back to in just a minute. Uh we are proposing a 3% pay increase for administrators and we're also looking again holistically for our staff to try to make sure that we are getting uh the best staff and taking care of them the best that we can. We are looking uh to increase the monthly health insurance contribution uh from $245 per employee to $300 per month per employee. Uh that would put us more in
017line with our peer group. overall cost of of these proposals right here is estimated to be $ three and a half million dollars. Um the estimated leaves me a little bit of concern and I'm sure it does you too, but I don't fully know where all of my staff are going to fit at this point on these scales. Uh so additional people in the 01 and two range uh are going to move that scale a little bit because again 01 and two are not funded by the legislature, that's funded by the district. Um, so I'm going to roll to the next one that kind of more highlights on that teachers, librarians, counselors, and nurses. Again, starting pay of 57. Teachers on step 01 or two would receive at least a $2,300 increase. So, in making
018the adjustments in the starting pay from 546 to 57, uh there's going to have to be at least a uh $2,400 increase in there to get from 546 to 57. Uh so in realigning our steps, uh one step is looking at about a $2,300 increase. Uh the step zero would see a $2,400 increase, but we would get our steps back in line, uh to where there would be a little bit of an increase between 0, one, two, three, etc., etc. Teachers with three or four years of experience would receive $2,500 increase as funded through the teacher retention aotment. and teachers with five or more years experience would receive a $5,000 increase uh as funded through the teacher retention aotment. Librarians, counselors, and nurses to receive increases equivalent to the teacher increase at steps 0 through
019four and then a 5% increase from there on. So we we did not want to um have our librarians, counselors, and nurses necessarily receiving more than the teachers were receiving, but we wanted them to be on par with uh the teacher scale. But when we started getting to the $5,000 increase that came with year five, uh, for some steps that's over an 8% increase, and that was not something that we could just keep up with with our funds that were coming from the district. >> So, I >> Yes, ma'am. At this point, questions or comments? >> Uh, comments. The U starting with the first one, the 57,000. >> Yes, ma'am. that's going to make us the lowest paid school district for beginning teachers in our area. And I I just don't think that's acceptable. You
020know, I've been giving this whole thing a lot of thought the last few days. And Red Oak uh is going to do 576 and this is going to do 575. Uh Meloian 60. I just don't think Wahhatchee should be the lowest paid one. What I would like to see us do, I know we can't match Midlotheian. I know we don't have the money, but I would like for us to at least be 58. >> Okay. And for this um the teachers, counselors, and nurses, I would like to see them stay exactly where they have been. >> Okay. >> On the teacher scale. I just don't They've always been on the teacher scale and I think we need what I think we need to to work towards that. I also think that um our lowest paid
021employees, I took 5% of a custodian's uh pay. >> Mhm. >> And it was 72 cents out of 5%. Um so I would like all those in that category to at least receive an 8%. >> Okay. Um, you know, that's the same way with clerical and pair professionals. That 5% won't even give them, and I was looking at the midpoint, won't even give them a dollar an hour raise. Um, let's see what else I thought. You know, our administrators, and I know our administrators make a lot of money, but they do a lot, and I would like to see them get uh more than a than a 3% raise. But to go back to our counselors, nurses, and librarians, the state, and you said it yourself, uh the eyes of the state, I sometimes I
022think they're closed. They don't they don't know what we do. They don't know what happens in a school. They're blind to that. and for them to like cut out nurses and and librarians and counselors from that and also to um leave out administrators, everybody but teachers and teachers should be taken care of. I'd like to give them more than the 5,000. U but I think everybody else needs to be treated fairly. Also, that's just my thoughts. >> Yes, absolutely. I don't disagree with you. We uh had conversations about the last meaningful increase from the legislature being in 2019 and we know what inflation has done since then. Uh so yes, I would love to be able to do more uh within the confines of what the legislature has given us and with within the confines
023as directed by the board of a balanced budget. uh this really was was uh an even plan uh in terms of making sure that everybody received uh something that would be hopefully meaningful to them uh without overenriching one group over anybody else. Um as far as Mr. Mman to your comment about starting pay, I know that we're not the leader in starting pay right now. Uh and realistically as a district uh we've been kind of aiming for uh those teachers of experience. Uh we can go back and relook and look and see if uh if there's a plan to make us the leader uh other than Medlotheian at that uh beginning pay level. Um but uh realistically I think a lot of this and we've had some conversations um you know as a whole and
024and as cabinet um some of this boils down to just the number of staff that we have on our payroll. And so the more staff we have then the smaller the pie is going to be uh when it's divied up for everybody. Uh the more the fewer staff you have the larger piece because everybody's operating with the same you know one pie to be able to distribute. So, uh, that's kind of where that budget reduction committee came in in the fall was to try to identify, uh, those positions that we believe that that we could change or reutilize in a different, uh, manner and perspective and be more efficient as a district, uh, with the hopes that that would free up some funds, uh, to be able to add into this equation. And, and so,
025all in, all told, I think that uh, kind of what we're talking about right now, while it's not set in stone, I believe is a is a good step towards it. But we definitely can look at auxiliary and custodians and and uh pair professionals and clericals at an 8% and then we can look at leaving librarians, counselors, and nurses on the teacher scale. >> Mr. Cal, first on the scales, uh I had a question about diagnosticians. They're on the uh on your pay scale diagnosition. There's another special ed one. So they'll be receiving the 5%. Is that correct? >> I am going to defer that one to Miss Burkhalter because with the way the state has written who qualifies for the teacher retention aotment, it may vary by position and by circumstance. >> Miss Crinkle
026on our on our plans um the diagnosticians, SLPs, OT's, they would receive 5% like all the other staff, but they wouldn't receive the $5,000 that are that is intended for teachers. Okay. So, uh they'll receive 5% or 5,000. Is that what you just did? >> Uh no, ma'am. They'll receive the 5%. >> Okay. >> Um the $5,000 was reserved specifically for teachers. >> Okay. And so, um, understand the bill is if they do that, would those people qualify to be in a different category that would get the 5,000 if they have four hours of student contact every day? >> Okay. So, if they're coded as 087 teachers, if they that means that they have at least four hours of direct teaching. Yes, ma'am. >> And um they give grades. Um, we would we >> have
027to give grades. >> We are developing a process to determine exactly who qualifies in that area. >> Okay. I just didn't know if that if they spend four hours a day with students is is one of the qualifications. Okay. Uh, back to I agree with Miss Timberman and the I did the math a different way. Let's say that we have a janitor uh that makes 20 uh 20,000 a year, which probably would be on the high line, I would think, or maybe, I don't know, but they would get $1,000 a year, and that that's nothing, you know, in today's inflation, but I do agree with Miss Timberman. Now, one thing though, we talked about at the March board meeting and at the March workshop that I believe it's 1.3 million. I my vision is horrible
028tonight. A little bit too much sun on the drive in 1.3 million that we saved by the budget production committee. And I believe that the understanding was that we would all these positions were cut off campuses. Basically, we're we're hurting where the rubber meets the road. We we're not going to have uh the permanent subs. We've cut aids. We've cut u I've got a long list. Cut the library aids out of the junior highs. Change the through a tition or getting rid of elementary a elementary librarians. Oh, can't think of the others, but anyway, we cut a lot of things for 1.3 million. And uh I'd like to see us using that 1.3 million that to to justify that. Now, I understand going back to the House bill, the to that line, um when we
029go back and look at all of the fund fund, we have to fund $800 per $5,000 teacher and then we have to cover TRS for any of these new new people that receive the teachers, the staff retention a lotment. So, have we figured out how much we're going to have left in our blue that basic cost a lotment Friday? Hey, have we figured out if we're going to have any money left out of that? >> No, ma'am. So, that covers utilities, it covers transportation, it covers insurance, it does cover the retirement match contribution from the district. Uh so all told uh those funds will will definitely be uh utilized uh throughout the district without just a bunch of it sitting around. But no ma'am we have not done the math to figure out how much
030of these increases would specifically eat out of that pot. Right. >> Um to address your other comments um the budget reduction committee work that was done this year I believe in talking with Miss Burke Halter that was presented in May and we said that was about 1.6 6 million uh that we would be able to save, but we also talked about that being through attrition. So that was not a reduction in force. That was not necessarily going to be all funds realized upfront. And so uh in talking with Miss Burke Halter and looking at the needs of the district, there's a good number of those positions uh to the tune of about 1.3 million of those funds that have been reutilized and reinvested into uh positions to address students and student needs. uh vast majority
031of those are going back into uh special education positions to address um student needs uh and uh IEPs and new enroles uh within our district. So right now, Miss Creel, our efforts through uh the budget reduction committee really is a budget reallocation committee at this point. Uh our total savings would be about 300,000 uh overall for the year. With that uh our funding increase in all these aotments from the states about 3.1. Our proposal for uh staff increases is about 3.5. Uh so that would that would utilize that 300,000 that we'd still be saving 250,000. Uh that we'd be saving from the budget reduction uh work. Uh putting that in with the allotments from the state to yield our uh proposals for you for staff increases. uh the school safety a lotment are our aids
032I mean I'm sorry our marshals going to receive an increase out of the school safety a lotment >> our marshalss would be receiving increases according to the pay scale which would be that 5% proposed increase for um our school marshals >> do you have a quick calculation on how much more it would cost if um we did do the 8% % as proposed by Mrs. Tman vault. >> I I looked at auxiliary coming in because I I anticipated there would be a question about auxiliary. Uh Miss Timberman, I do apologize it not include clerical uh and pair of professionals, but auxiliary just on itself was $115,000 for every 1%. So it'd be about $350,000 for auxiliary to go from 5% to 8%. Um best guess would be to probably double that because there while there
033are a good number of people on auxiliary um I'm adding other criteria pair professionals and and uh clerical uh so I would imagine rough guess 700 800,000 would be my guess for another 3%. >> And would that put us in a deficit budget? >> Uh at this time I don't have another mechanism to keep us from a deficit budget by adding 800,000 to the budget. So, yes, that would that would throw us into that deficit category. >> Ryan, how about the money that we that you get like when we did the $700 bonus last year? >> How about that money? How much was that total? >> Um, so this past year, what we did is we took a little bit of our surplus health insurance and we re we reallocated that for that uh staff
034uh bonus at Christmas time. Uh we do have a budget right now uh for a staff uh payment at Christmas. It is not $700. Uh it would be the net $200 for staff. We could always look at eliminating that. Uh but I do not have a cost for you right off hand. It's about $260 or so per employee um for the gross and then we net it down to 200. So um 260 and 100 or 1700 employees. I don't have a good math answer for you and I don't have my calculator on me. >> Mr. Calden, I understand that now we are going to receive our money from the federal government. Do we know how much that is? >> Um, I really do not know. I I anticipate it being a continuation essentially of the
035same funding that we've been receiving for uh title two, title three, and title four. Um I know that title one is roughly a million one a million five somewhere in that range. Uh but the title one that we that was included in the holdback was not your basic title one that was your after school programs which we don't receive funds for. I want to tell you that title two is in the neighborhood of half a million. Title three is maybe 200,000. Um I don't really know about title four. Um, but all that to say, the release of those funds by the federal government essentially meant we didn't have to transition those expenditures into the general fund. Uh, so it really helped us out uh by not having to take on additional personnel and additional expenditures
036in the general fund to take away from these increases. How much was the amount for the insurance that that >> um we were looking at going up $55 per uh employee per month to go from 245 to 300 um overall. >> Let's see where we are. >> That looks like about 93,000. >> It's about $660 per employee and then about 750 of us. about 1.1 million 1 million155. >> So that $55 benefits how what percent of our >> uh right now it' be about 52 or 53% uh that are taking the district's health insurance. Um we would hope that with the district picking up more of a cost and being more competitive with their peers on that that we would be able to entice more employees to be able to take that uh so that
037it would be more utilized. Uh so right now it's about 52 53%. >> Mr. Cton, what is the cost for an individual to take our health insurance? >> Uh right now I believe the most inexpensive plan we have for employees only is about $300 a month. Uh maybe a little bit more with the district's current contribution of 245. Uh so that would reduce the employee cost to uh somewhere around 250 to 275 for the employee only coverage. >> The employee cost will be 215 is what you said. >> It it'd be the employee cost would be about 250 to 275 and then the district's cost would be the 300 per month. >> Okay. >> So Mr. Collins, so the work of this proposal puts us right in at balance. So, um, anything extra would put
038us in a negative >> that. So, right now with where we are in terms of open positions and getting those positions hired and filled, this is our best guess at getting us balanced. Yes, sir. >> And then what does it do for our fund balance? >> Uh, it should carry fund balance essentially forward. There might be a little bit of an increase uh 100 to 200,000 when we're operating, you know, 125 $126 million budget. I would tell you that's virtually balanced. Um, to be really candid with you, sir, uh, it does give us a little bit of of operating room because knowing from here through next year, uh, every expenditure that's going to come our way is is just not the magic eightball that I have. Uh, so it would give us a little bit
039of flexibility operations wise. Uh, probably two to 300,000 upon which we could go in and and do different things uh, throughout the course of the year. Uh but if it's any if next year is like this year, I anticipate we will use most if not all of those funds. >> Thank you. >> Has there been any consideration in giving a one time lump sum payment like at the beginning of the year instead of spreading it out over the 12 months? >> Yeah. So it's a really good question. Uh formulating or formula uh formulating it essentially like a retention bonus or retention stipen. Uh we have looked at that a little bit. One of the big concerns that we have with uh it's two-pronged, but one of the big concerns we have anytime we're making that
040payment that's not that periodic payment like your traditional monthly or semionthly uh payment, you're making that extra payment in there. The IRS has mandatory withholding requirements that are going to be much higher, like 24% uh much higher than your traditional paycheck withholding. So, it really overall would benefit our employees more to have that in a regular paycheck than it would be a special one-time payment. While they would see the funds as extra funds and and things to do, they would have more funds withheld than they really would need to um by having that extra payment. There's also a little bit of a concern. The second part of that is there's a little bit of a concern about how those payments would be viewed for TRS retirement calculations. um depending on what they are for and
041how they are reported, those would not be credible compensation for our employees. So those those would be our our two big hurdles that we would really need to look at um before doing any type of special payment uh coming out to our employees that way. >> Can I add Mr. Calden? Um, I calculated I took a look at our insurance rates and our lowest employeeonly insurance is 5.56 per month and then with our 300 that would make the employee cost 256. >> It was in the ballpark. >> Yeah. >> Just wanted to make sure we had right numbers. >> I apologize for being addressed but um my concern is we try to work. We try to do that every year. I know. Get us all get everybody inside. >> My concern with how the the
042state is doing the teacher aotment. >> Yes sir. >> And the way the way I read that and I could be incorrect is it's not guaranteed after about two years. So how does that how does that affect our pay schedule and all that? because I realize that if in our current budget situation, if they were to not fund that in the future, there's not enough money there to continue carrying at the present rate. So, how how does that work? And you may have done that while I was gone, but I still have to ask. >> No, sir. Uh, we didn't actually talk about that piece. Um, yes, there is a reading of House Bill 2, the way it was adopted that calls into question the longevity of these aotments. Uh, excuse me. To be really
043honest, um, anytime it's a special allotment, it's a special line, there can really easily be something legislation filed that will cancel that out at any point. So, uh, there is a little bit of a concern there. Uh, when we were talking uh, in the spring, I believe we talked a little bit about there were two different funding bills. We preferred the house funding bill because it added the funds to um the basic aotment which was less much less likely to get cancelled than or reduced than the uh Senate's version that added funds and special a lotments. So yes, it is a concern of ours. Um realistically the fact that it targeted teachers I believe reduces the likelihood that it's going to get uh reduced or eliminated or taken away. Uh, I honestly worry more about
044some of these other aotments, including the allotment for basic cost, which would have just as large of an impact on our district as would be taken uh some of these other aotments away. But I don't I'm not as concerned today with the teacher retention aotment going away. Could it be reduced? Could it be modified? Yes. Um, but I don't really see that on the horizon right now, but I don't know where we'll be in the legislative session of 2027. And so that is an everpresent reality that's in the back of our minds as we start preparing for 2728 budget year. But right now I don't anticipate that that's going to be the the first uh domino default. >> Yes sir. >> I had earlier when we were going through the different where we stood with
045other districts. Yes ma'am. uh we were far above on the leadership uh category and I wanted a little bit of an explanation on that. Uh so your instructional leadership is that lighter blue bar and that is going to be your directors um generally within the district. Um, we know that Midlothian had a really big restructuring over in their area. Uh, and that helped pay for some of their increases that they were able to do for staff in years past. That's not been a route that Wacetachi ISD has has undergone. Uh, but overall, I would tell you that uh, with Midlotheian as the outlier, we're not terribly out of line with anybody else. uh and in the world that we're living in with uh CCMR and and accountability, I think that our directors are really doing
046the jobs that we need them to do to make sure that our students are uh knowing what they need to know and ready for all of the assessments that the state are preparing for us. >> Yes. My question really I wasn't aware what leadership you know which pod of leadership it was if it was principles. So the darker blue is campus leadership and the lighter blue is essentially a district leader, whatever that may be. That may be your CT director, that may be um a curriculum director, that may be essentially a director somewhere in the district. Um that is geared towards student instruction and student achievement. So your maintenance director would not be in there. They'd be in 51. Um you would have transportation would be in 34. athletics would be in in 36. So,
047you have some directors that'll be spread out in other functions, but for the most part, these are your academic directors uh that are going to be they're going to be that lighter shade of blue. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. >> And Mr. Cen, um not that you have to give me a detailed answer, um just maybe a highlighted um answer. What is this restructuring that Meloian did? Um, so a couple of years back, I want to tell you two years ago, uh, they went in and evaluated pretty much every position in the district, kind of like our budget reduction committee. Uh, and they identified, uh, some really deep cuts in some areas, and within one of within some of those areas were more administrative in nature and less on campus. Um, they still
048addressed some on campus, but there was a lot at the administrative level. Mr. Cen, you may be getting there because I know we got caught up in questions. Are you going to cover some detail about the 3% admin raise? >> Uh, no sir. You essentially saw the end of my slides. Okay. >> So, I am open for your question. >> Um, who all does that include? >> Uh, that would be essentially everybody that's on the administrative scale. Uh, except the superintendent. Her uh compensation is set by contract. I would also not include mine. Um, but other than that, it would be essentially everybody else on the administrative scale. >> Thank you. >> And that would be assistant principles, directors, principles, executive directors, all those positions. >> When was the last time that we did a
049admin raise? Um, so other than the year that we're currently in, we've done an increase for staff every other year in terms of looking at compensation in term uh like comparable compensation. Oh, I believe it's been four or five years since we did a a compensation study uh to look at how does our admin compared with other admin districts of our size uh within the area or within our region or within the state. So, it's been a while since we've done the compensation study. Uh, but we have done increases for staff every year except for 2425. >> We did that 201920. That was the last. >> Okay. >> And then like if we hire say a new principal, is their compensation on par with say more current day compensation? So it's a really tough question
050to answer because uh we do our our compensation essentially uh what is fair for all who are in this a similar type position. So we look at experience, we look at where our scale is. Um we do not necessarily bring in pick on an elementary principal. We don't necessarily bring in an elementary principal who's in year one of being an elementary principal at the midpoint or the max end of our scale because that would be unfair to those that are currently here. Um there is a little bit of wiggle room within our scale. There's a min, a mid, a max. Um but while I do not set the compensation, there is a little bit of it's not a rigid um step schedule for those positions. So some latitude exists to be able to adjust down
051or adjust up. I'm sorry. Uh to be competitive with market, but it's not that we don't run to the max of our scale. >> Um just to say, oh well, so and so will offer this. So we do have to be fair and competitive with the market, but we have to be fair to our existing employees as well. >> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> So how is it that people move from like the uh midpoint to the max? I mean, I always been under the understanding that you pretty much were stuck there ever. so they can move. >> I don't mind adding a little Okay. When I'm looking at administrative salaries, I use a formula that um that looks at all of their teaching years up to eight years of experience and then all
052admin years. And then I compare their salary to um others in the cohort um so that I'm not bringing someone in above an incumbent. So um I compare make some comparisons there. Does that answer your question? I guess that's just a little bit we kind of changed it since >> since you've been in charge of it. I guess >> because that's not the answer I've heard from the past. >> Okay. So, we've been doing this process for I think this is our third going into our third year. um about uh two and a half three years ago we did look at what at that time was pay grades five and six and um implemented the the formula formulaic method and um I've been using that since since then yes ma'am >> any other questions >>
053I have a comment though uh one of our core values um is to honor and support all those that positively impact our students. >> Yes, ma'am. >> And that's why I feel so strongly about walks being competitive and I ask for that 58 um I mean I'd like to beat with Lotheian but I know we can't and also the the 8%. If you look at our scorecard too, the very first one, every student's going to grow every year. Who does that? You know, and I just feel like we need to do whatever we can do. >> I completely do not agree or do not disagree with you. I I know it's many double negatives, but I'm trying to form a thought in my head as I talk, which is always a bad idea. I agree
054completely with you, uh, Mr. Um, and also I kind of I zoom out a little bit and I say yes, all who positively impact the lives of our kids. So it's our transportation, >> that's everybody. >> Yes, absolutely. It's our transportation workers, it's our custodians, it's our child nutrition. And so in focusing on making sure that all staff are receiving an increase, um, I do feel a little bit hamstrung by priority four and that would be that being good stewards of taxpayers resources. And so, uh, I do I I believe that a balanced budget, um, especially for a recurring cost is a really strong statement for our taxpayers. It's not we're not spending ourselves into a deficit. We're not spending ourselves into a hole. Um, and so I want to be able to give our
055our staff everything that we can uh within the confines of being good stewards of our resources. I do not want uh us going out to our community and saying, "Hey, we can't support, you know, basic utility cost. Please buy our brownies or or approve this bond for uh school desks." And those are the things I think that we should be uh taking care of. And and that's part of that being a good steward of resources. >> I I don't disagree. >> I mean, I don't want to balance this in the deficit either. I don't run my house that way. But I do feel strongly that Wah Hatchee needs to be competitive. >> Yes, ma'am. >> And pay more than Red Oak and Inis. Well, and I do it is unfair sometimes to put up some
056of these charts and some of these um comparatives because just because we're in the same county, just because we're in county 070 for purposes of of a alphabetical through the state and part of our county district code, just because we're in the same county does not mean we're the same. Um and so it's it is tough for us to compare ourselves to Midlotheian. Sometimes it's easy on paper to say, "Oh, we should pay what Midlotheian's paying." Sounds great in theory except we have different standards on how many schools we have. The enrollment of each school, the makeup of our students are different. Um, our kids may or may not come with uh the same support at home. They may or may not come with uh the same economic advantages or disadvantages that you're going to
057find in Mlotheian. So that is one of the really hard things of comparing us with other districts, but I get the the basic uh tenor behind your your comment. Absolutely. We want to do what we can for our staff. We want them to stay here. We want them to be happy and enjoy uh their working at Wasachi ISD. We know some of that uh comes through compensation. We also know that some of that comes with the support that they feel from their campus leadership, district leadership. Uh we also know that that having a positive working environment is one of those key factors uh that builds into that as well. So it's everything that we can do to make sure that our culture and climate are in the right spots and that's going to vary by
058campus. Uh but one thing that we can go a long way in helping do is making sure uh to your original point that we are being competitive with our compensation and that is in the form of of salary that's in the form of benefits uh that's in the form of working environment. So, uh, I I believe, M. Timberman, that we share the same common, uh, desires. Uh, how we get there may look a little bit different, and that's fine. That's that's good for us to, uh, that enables us to have, uh, a good conversation that will benefit our staff in the long run. So, I thank you for your input and your feedback, and I appreciate where you're coming from. >> You know, we we've already lost a lot of good good people, and I
059can just see it see us losing a lot more in the future if we don't do something more. Okay. >> I want to commend your you and your staff for bringing this compensation plan. It was more than what I thought it was going to be. Everybody always wants more. And more importantly, I want to uh commend you for bringing that under a balanced budget. Thank you, sir. >> I know some of our other districts in the state are trying to dig themselves out of a hole for adopting a deficit budget last year and some are even considering doing it this year. >> And I concur with Dusty. It's very important that we pass a balanced budget. I was talking with a group of my leadership tasby people and they uh they were coming in with
060the numbers and it was like and congratulations walk you had a balanced budget you know I mean and we were one of the very few out of this list of ed list of school board members but it the 1.3 million I still uh I mean I understand what you're presenting what states giving us and that's great no it's not great but anyway But you know what I'm saying? So, we've got that money, but the 1.3 million u I mean, I just wonder if you could look at it again and see if there's anything because when the I know that the feeling was that that was going to go at that time, we thought that's all we were going to get. >> So, I don't know. Uh I mean, I'm a kind of a numbers person,
061but I have to see them. Let's have to see the numbers. So, my suggestion would be to go back and look at that. I'm not opposed to this budget, but I would like to add to it if we possibly could. And one other thing, uh, >> have we ever really talked to Baylor Scott and White about the idea of putting in a clinic for our staff? >> I don't believe >> a partnership. >> Yes, ma'am. Uh I don't believe and and if any of my peers have any more info on it, I I invite them to chime in. Uh I know last year or the year before we talked with a consultant about the possibility. What would that look like? What would the startup be? But I don't believe no ma'am to your question there
062have ever been direct conversations with Baylor Scott and White about setting up that partnership. Uh at the time the consultant told us it would be about a million uh dollars to establish one and get going. Could some of those costs be mitigated by a partnership? They maybe absolutely could. I don't know. Um but no, at that point hearing that cost, uh it was more important and more uh pressing and urgent that we put that million dollars back into staff compensation and not uh the benefit of a clinic uh within our district. So, no, ma'am, no additional work has been done since that time on that uh clinic option. I just think that would be a huge benefit, especially if we could get it at a reasonable price for our for our staff. >> Yes, ma'am.
063>> Mr. C, I just want to say thank you as well um for presenting us this option, but preserving the balance budget. I think it's imperative that we, you know, maintain that balanced budget. Um I mean, we've got hopefully, you know, another elementary school opening in the future and then we have comprehensive high school number two. So, we have to be good stewards of this money because we're going to need the money when those schools open. So, I appreciate Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. >> I echo those same feelings. I just want to say thank you. It's tough. I appreciate you. >> Anyone else? >> Okay. Thank you, sir. >> All right. Thank you, board. >> Um, just to finish the last slide only because it has like eight words on it and I
064spent a lot of time here. Uh next workshop will be August 11th at 4 as this will be our fourth uh workshop as we kind of go through the tax rate the total budget. This will be part of that process that that you guys are familiar with where we would do our normal third workshop. This time it's going to be our fourth. So August 11th will be our next one. >> Anyone else? Okay. At this time the board's going to convene into close session according to section 551.001 ETSC the Texas government code. It is now 4:52 Yeah. 5:13 the board is going to reconvene back into open session. Next item on our agenda is our open forum. This is the portion of the board meeting where the board receives input from each patron. Each person
065who addresses the board will have five minutes to speak on his or her issue. Because of posting requirements of the open meetings act, board members will not ask questions of the patron nor answer any questions posed by the patron. No action can be taken on any issue presented during the patron comment section of the board meeting. Patrons addressing the board will be notified when they are approaching the last 60 seconds of their allotted time to speak. When I call your name, please step to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Leslie Jerkash. Mr. Jash. M Mr. Pittz who will be your timeke keeper. Okay. >> Uh my name is Lesley. I live at 103 Chapman Circle in Wakahachche, Texas 75165. Can I start? Oh, okay. Hi, I'm Lesley Urash and I'm
066going into my 16th year with WD. I'm not just a teacher, I'm a mom, a homeowner, taxpayer, and community member. I'm very nervous, too. Um, I've been at Northside Elementary for all 16 of my years with WISD. And this year, going back to North Side is going to look different. We have had a lot of teachers, many dear friends leave. And people are not leaving because of North Side. They are not leaving because of the school's administration or co-workers or students. They are leaving because they are choosing a different career or moving to a district where they can make more money for their family. Outside of North Side, there are a lot more teachers leaving this district. teachers that have been here a long time. Teachers who are incredible educators and people. The district will
067definitely feel these losses. As a teacher in WISD for 16 years, my salary is $62,818. After deductions, that is roughly $53,000. Each month my paycheck is deposited. It is roughly $3,900. Thankfully, I'm an employeeonly health insurance carrier. Otherwise, it would be much less. meaning I am living on roughly $47,000 a year, not counting Christmas bonus. I'm sure you know that is not a livable wage. Renting even a modest house in Wakahhatchee costs $2,200 or more with the mortgage being even higher. That is over 50% of my monthly income which is considered severely costburdened by HUD. This is not sustainable for educators or this district long term. Because of this, I work a second job on the weekend. My car is paid off. My mortgage is reasonable. And yet, I could stand to get a third
068job for extra money and savings. On top of that, each year health insurance goes up. And I, like most of your staff, get a pay cut. Each year, property taxes go up, and I get another cut. Then there is inflation affecting car and home insurance rates, groceries, and gas, leading to more cuts. I'm not telling you this because I want sympathy or to share a Saab story. I want to share the realities of what a lot of the teachers in your district are facing. Teachers in Wakahachchi ISTD deserve to bring home a livable wage. They deserve to be able to focus on their profession without worrying about how they are going to have grocery money the last two weeks before payday. They deserve more than a 1% raise when that does not come close to
069matching average inflation, especially postcoid inflation. And most importantly, WISD students deserve to have a teacher in their classroom who is taken care of by their district. I often say that you can't fix what you don't know about. And I'm not sure you know what the atmosphere is like with a lot of your staff right now. Last year, not getting TIA, I was one of the teachers, was a huge blow in more ways than just money. all of the extra work that went into that and the attendance factor hanging over our heads for a whole year only to find out we get nothing in return. Then we found out the group 11 employees were getting $50,000 raises each which is more than I actually bring home in one year. For years we have been told that
070there was no extra money that the district was getting the same funds from the state as they were in 2019 and teachers stayed for the most part. Then this past year, we found out about the group 11 raises, and the talking between teachers began. How did the person in charge of finding money who had not been able to find money in the past find the money needed to give group 11 employees that big of a raise? This type of move leads to teacher distrust, teachers feeling confused, underappreciated, and like we have been lied to. I want this to come across as professional but real. I want you to know what people are feeling and talking about because if you don't know, you can't address it. Next week, I will walk into Northside Elementary to start
071year 16. I will walk you 60 seconds >> and ready to spend my year with an amazing administration who support and cheer me on. Co-workers who encourage each other and are always willing to help and students who need us. I'm proud to call North Side and the people that feel at home. WISD used to be known as a place that teachers wanted to be a part of and I want that back. I want to open a graphic with our new pay scale and I want to be proud. I want to share it on Facebook and have people tell me how lucky we are. I want a superintendent and board who is going to promise to do better for teachers and their families. If what is proposed tonight isn't good enough, isn't something to be proud
072of, and isn't a significant raise to teachers and staff in this district, please vote no. Stand up for us and what is right. We are counting on you. I'm available for any questions. I don't know what the rainy day fund is, but I think it's raining in our district. I don't understand the fund, but something has to be done. We have lost a lot of teachers, great teachers, and I think it's time to take risks and do something big to keep us. I appreciate your time. I'm sorry I was shaking, but thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, next item on our agenda by reports be the informationational report on WISD 2025 2026 cell phone policy. >> Good evening board. A very hot topic around along with uh budgets and raises, cell phone policy. Uh as
073I'm sure uh many of you are aware that the legislature most recently passed a law that will prohibit or let me say it requires us to develop a policy that will prohibit the use of personal communication devices on school property during school hours. So in communication with our policy consultants, this is the policy that we are proposing. Again, this is justformational. Uh but barring any changes, um I will be coming to you at the next board meeting for uh an approval of this policy. No, one of the uh excuse me, one of the big issues is use versus possession. Our policy is not asking to prohibit possession. It is prohibiting use. So students will still be uh asked to have their phones with them, but they need to be put away and put off because
074the two options are to prohibit possession from school property during school hours or prohibit the use or require students to put the phones in a secure location. Now, we are certainly uh interested in guidance from TEA, which according to as of even last Thursday's superintendent call, uh that will be coming. We're not sure when that will be coming, but supposedly TEA is also developing uh rules and policy uh recommendations. Now, talking about prohibiting use and requiring a secure location, that can be some schools have bags that each student puts those in. Uh some will have locker type devices. I've heard that those are certainly sufficient. I have also heard even from the commissioner this last week that a backpack is technically sufficient for a secure location. So, that is what we are recommending. Um, notice
075the the last bullet there uh does talk about confiscation that our our staff administrative staff ideally well it will be administrative staff will be the ones that if there is a violation of this policy that the phone will be confiscated and we will have processes on how that phone will be returned to the student or the student's parents. >> Um, Mr. K. >> Yes ma'am. So back to that. So the teachers are not going to be responsible for taking it up. It's going to be >> administration. >> Sure. We are in discussion about that. Certainly we don't want to cause any greater disruption to the learning environment by um having that become any sort of adversarial situation. So this is really something that will be we'll training our APS and principles to handle. Now, obviously,
076teachers will see these phones and and they will certainly be trained on how to handle those situations, but they're not the primary person to enforce this policy. >> Yes, ma'am. Um, now, as you can see in this policy, it does say personal communication device. Um, that is being interpreted to be many things. Certainly a cell phone, a smartwatch, even headphones, personal computing devices, things that students would use for personal communication, right? Because even these days, even earbuds can receive text, maybe even send, I'm not sure, but I know that some can receive. So, those are all in this policy uh under the the term personal communication device. uh this particular part as it was talking about if a device is confiscated, it will be returned to the student or the parent. If it is not
077picked up by the student or the parent, we have to have a process in place. One to either keep the device indefinitely or to follow required laws of notifying them uh before we dispose of it. So we chose to encourage the second version. We do not want to hold on to these things forever. So there is a a prescribed process of giving notification to parents or students both on how they need to come and pick up the device before we dispose of it. And lastly, there there has been quite a bit of conversation with our community parents all over the state. certainly concerns about students that have particular situations, uh, IEPs, individualized education programs, 504 plans with accommodations, or other medical situations. So, as you can see in the law and in the policy, we're
078suggesting there are provisions that allow for phones, personal comm communication devices to be used in these specific situations. notice. Um, as I mentioned, IEPs, 504s, or directed from a qualified physician. Um, also there's been some concern about, well, what about, you know, an emergency situation? Well, as you can see, this number three, that would fall under that because that would require a student to comply with other health and safety requirements that we have for the protection of students and staff. So, just to remind the board, this is a local policy. FNCE is where it falls. So, it will require board approval. Again, this is just the first presentation of it. So, again, there's nothing required of the board this evening. Certainly, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them, but we will
079be looking for approval of this policy uh at the next board meeting. It is required technically to be in place before September 18th. Any questions? Thank you'all very much. >> Thank you, sir. >> Okay, next item is our consent agenda. It's probably the shortest one I've ever seen. We have items A through D up for consideration. We >> have a motion by Mr. Schoolfield. >> Second by Mr. Pittz. Any other discussion? >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> Post say nay. Motion carries. 60. Moving into action item. Our first action item A was consideration with possible action to approve the 2025 2026 WISD student code of conduct. You shouldn't have sat down. >> I I guess I should have stayed up here. Um hello board. Yes. Again, I'm sure you're all aware, but
080the student code of conduct is required to be approved by the school board and we with the recent legislative changes, we got information quite recently, just uh mid July, and so we have been working diligently to prepare our student code of conduct. Um, there were many legislative changes uh many that affect us as a as a school district. I'm going to talk to you a few things that are only related to the code of conduct. So these are just the legislative changes related to the code of conduct. House bill six that is just a very few words but those that is the bill that changed chapter 37 which is the chapter regarding the vast majority of disciplinary procedures that we use in the state of Texas for uh school districts. You can see a few
081things that are mentioned there. I'm just talking about some of the highlights. Largely our code of conduct comes to us from our policy consultant. Uh and that is what we are presenting with minor changes. Um but again sorry back to uh House Bill 6. Many changes in uh disciplinary procedures. I will highlight a few of them this evening. House Bill 1481, which we just talked about, cell phone policy. Senate Bill 326, not getting quite as much discussion, but it is something affecting our code of conduct, and it is in there. Notice it uses a very specific definition of anti-semitism that is in the education code that if there's a violation of the code of conduct then we have a very specific definition to see if a violation of uh anti-semitism has occurred. And also Senate
082Bill 569 if you notice there virtual and hybrid education. Um we you may be kind of flashing back to the COVID days. It is not exactly the same but it is related. And if you notice very carefully that it does say that we are now mandated to consider to consider virtual and hybrid education which we are doing. Um some districts are further along and and have greater plans than we have in place at this time but we are certainly looking into it as we are required. So, here are a few highlights of how the code of conduct has changed and certainly will affect uh how we are doing discipline with certain violations. Nicotine delivery product, ecigarette vapes as they're often referred to. In my uh relatively short time in administration, this has changed with every
083legislative session. And yet, again, it has changed. Um, so now we are not required to send students to DAP. However, we may if we do not then they must go to ISS for 10 days. Now that may cause some of you to think uh that doesn't sound right. That is very new because if you move on to the second one, notice now ISS there is no time limit. However, there is a 10-day review that is required every 10 days and documentation to determine whether or a student needs to maybe continue beyond that 10 days for ISS. OSS out of school suspension uh has not really changed. However, as you can see, for the categories of students below grade three or homeless, they may receive out of school suspension, which is generally something that that we
084are prohibited from doing. However, the the first two or I'm sorry, the first and the fourth items in that list are not new. The two in the middle are new. So it does allow us to out of school suspend students below grade three or homeless if they are threatening the health or safety of other students or if they are documented repeatedly disrupting class expulsions again that is a similar situation um not a lot of changes I will say that there we are waiting for guidance from the state I tried to access the form just today and it is not ready but there have been some changes in discretionary versus mandatory expulsion reason codes. But if you notice here, you may be reading that and thinking, well, that's not much different than it was. But in
085fact, notice it does say using or threatening use of a firearm. So that that kind of makes it a little bit um the threshold a little bit um lighter. Then lastly, former teacher uh formal teacher removal rules. Uh those although that has been in place for many years, there have been some changes to that process that will require some meetings and um the potential for appeal by students and their families. Um but otherwise those are the highlights of the code of conduct for 2526 and we are asking the board for approval. >> Any >> questions Mr. Kaggel? >> Mr. Kel. >> Yes ma'am. >> Do you know how many kids we had in JJ A last year? >> We had approximately 12 students. So this on that earlier slide where it said virtual, was it
086talking about not sending kids there and doing virtual with them? >> So the the thought is and in the groups that I'm speaking with um to try and understand what's going on. It is it is our current interpretation and again we are waiting for state guidance but it is our interpretation that they since they have changed some of the mandatory expulsion rules that the thought is for counties that do not have a JJ that they will have an option for providing services education for those students or in the case of our JJ which um if I'm not mistaken maximum is about 24 students. So you can imagine if there are more mandatory expulsions for certain offenses, our JJ could fill up very quickly, in which case then we'll need to figure out how to provide
087education for those students um that aren't able to get into our JJ but have committed an offense that is mandatory expulsion. You know, before JJ A, well, this is back when I was at the junior high, uh, we used to have to when we expelled a kid, we had to supply some kind of form of education. >> Yes. And I think that is a return to that because there is the anticipation that there are not going to be enough JJ spots and so we'll need to be providing education for students that are committing these serious offenses. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. Anyone else? Okay. I'll entertain a motion to approve action item A as presented. >> So moved. Motion by Mrs. Timberman. >> Second by Mrs. Creel. Any other discussion? All in
088favor say I. >> I. >> Say nay. Motion carry 6. Sir. Action. Item B will be consideration with possible action to approve board policy update 125 and policies FD local and FM local. lots of policy things this evening. Um so board this is just a continuation uh from the last board meeting where I presented policy update 125 and FM local and FD local. Uh the documentation is the same. So we are asking approval of those policies. questions, comments okay I entertain a motion to approve action item B as presented. >> Motion by Mr. Scoffield. >> Second by Miss Timberman. Any other discussion? >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> Say nay. Motion carry 6. Thank you sir. >> Thank y'all very much. Action item C was consideration with possible action to approve the
089posting of the proposed Maintenance and operations in the INS interest in seeking tax rates for the 2025 2026 school year. Mr. Call. >> Thank you, sir. Uh board, we have gone through the process of receiving the certified values from the appraisal district. We have started the process of submitting the taxable value information to the state of Texas to get their approval of our MCR maximum uh compressed tax rate. Uh based on the information we have today, uh we are proposing holding the tax rate steady from uh what it was last year. uh with the increase in the homestead exemption that is proposed uh for taxpayers from 100 to 140,000 uh to be voted on in November um it does reduce our taxable values to about a 1% uh increase from last year and that's under
090the compression threshold for the state of Texas. Uh so it does enable us the ability to keep our M rate the same. our INS rate um is still within the parameters that we established with the 2023 bond program. Uh with your direction back in June, you authorized us to issue uh additional funds to take advantage of the homestead exemption or the uh additional state aid uh for the increased homestead exemption with bonds. And so uh we are in the process of completing that and we'll give you an update uh when we have the numbers from interest. Uh but all that to say we're still in bounds still in line with our 2023 uh bond model and program. So uh it's recommendation uh for your consideration to post the tax rates of 7552 for M and
0914129 for INS a total tax rate of $116 and 81 uh additional cents. >> Mr. Calden, could this change after you submit the value everything to EA? Uh realistically it could. If it does it would go down. Uh so adopting or your approval of posting these rates uh would be a ceiling and it could come in a little bit lower. It will not be any higher than the $11681. >> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> One else. Okay. I entertain a motion to approve action item C as presented. >> I move that we approve action item C as Mr. Pitts. Second second by Mr. Cooper. All in any other discussion all in favor say I. >> Say nay. Motion carry 6. All right. Our last action item will be consideration with possible action to approve
092the 2025 2026 WD staff compensation plan. >> Good evening board. Um in the last hour we talked a lot about the compensation plan, answered questions. Um, and we bring the plan to you this evening for approval. >> Mr. Alrey, I'd like to make a motion. >> U I'd like to make a motion that we approve the plan as presented. >> I'm sorry. >> Hold on. She's she started a motion. You can get it in the discussion part. Okay. >> Okay. Anyway, uh that we approve the plan as presented, but with the u directive or whatever to for y'all to look to find if there's any way we can give more to staff than what is presented in the plan. I understand it's imperative that we pass pass the plan, but I'd like to see it
093improved between now and August the 11th. Yes, ma'am. or at least have a presentation. >> Okay. So, we have a motion. Is there a second? >> A motion by Miss Creel. That was second by Mr. Schoolfield. Now for discussion. >> Okay. Mr. Col based on the discussion we had earlier, do you anticipate being able to do that and still keeping us in a balanced budget? >> In all honesty, we'll have to look at uh modifying that health insurance component. that would be the first thing that we would have to look at uh reducing. Uh truly I do not know sir at this point without running those numbers. >> I'm just asking for some clarity on um the motion. Is it a motion to work on it for over the next 12 months for next year
094or you talking about getting money together for like a onetime bonus? >> Are you asking me or Yeah. >> Does she answer that? >> Yeah. Yes. Okay. Uh my motion was to approve tonight. This is the basis basic the plan that we're going to approve, but to look at what else we could do, including if we can look include a vote a bonus at at the December time as we have in the past. >> Absolutely. It's a discussion part. Min already insured state bonus is going to be $200. >> Yes, ma'am. A net $200. >> Right. And personally, I don't want to prove anything tonight until I hear other what I asked for. So the way I understand the motion, the motion to approve the compensation plan as presented with the directive of going back
095and looking and see if there's any way that you can increase that and keeping us in a balanced budget. If you can't, then it stays the same. If not, we'll just come back and amend the compensation plan. >> Okay. >> Does that sound right? >> That is what I heard. My one question, I don't know if I'm allowed to ask it, but my one question would be, Miss Ferel, is the the hopes for all staff to receive additional or targeted staff based off Miss Timberman's comments. >> Staff according to Miss Timberman. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. So, you got it. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. So, we have a motion. I'm sorry. Do you have more discussion? >> I just say, so if we approve this as presented tonight, we can come back and
096amend it. >> Yes, sir. You can come back uh realistically all the way until August 31st. Okay. >> Uh, modify it because you haven't started the fiscal year. >> So, we could I know Mr. Cooper, we could come back completely change this if you come back with different numbers. >> Yes, sir. >> And it would be effective just like this. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. Any other discussion? Okay. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose say nay. >> Nay. >> Motion carries 51. Thank you very much, sir. And our last item will be a motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Motion by Mrs. Cregel. >> Second by Mr. Cooper. All in favor say I. >> Motion carries 5-0. Thank you. >> Sorry. 6