[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6621821,"mediaKeyId","2794778-41fb99b85cb64ca6f166767d24e1cb2e","parentId",2794778,"title","Board approves two GMPs; staff reports EPIC construction progress and a $5.4M shortfall on Community Engagement Center","audioSeconds",5945,"startMs",2802000,"endMs",8747000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2794778-41fb99b85cb64ca6f166767d24e1cb2e&start=2802&end=8747","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2794778-41fb99b85cb64ca6f166767d24e1cb2e/thumbnail_2802000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6621821/Texas/Board-approves-two-GMPs-staff-reports-EPIC-construction-progress-and-a-54M-shortfall-on-Community-Engagement-Center","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6621821-938d4b62e9692488512a9a33fd42b92c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770724664&Signature=DfB8zr-CbZiCX5GKyP93ulF7U6o7CTTkSgdo7zywvgOISWJ-dfVZEt8IxHAiF~uy4IZrbQIwhrZCNtl2A-IFsBjKBQ3rOJTQRGLqClDiJ3RrCv97Om6hQWEFgJpY2KMVsLZRUjVKDtO0eOn9t1zfdqEMrlg~7EDoIoGl2yzgxvZQeKh4FyYcrgRprj~43VotOD7CgKRGQG9TgByy000UpszKxX4MXdNezFq6lEdmE~OB56x0em8hPNcpbmSNL6WFi2S8aKzkbARDcvJS5rM2~8yBCp0jFaAN065kHkB-hPUf5QdLValR1lEV0qYGKUxCOXWDWUjaUcBlLP6sTSKGxw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-03-27T17:35:31.813Z","article","The Spring ISD Board of Trustees on March 25 approved two guaranteed maximum prices (GMPs) tied to bond projects and heard a detailed update on bond spending, EPIC site work and operations planning, fleet purchases and a revised cost estimate for the Sheila Jackson Lee Family and Community Engagement Center.

GMP votes: Trustee Adams moved approval of the Education Performance and Instructional Center (EPIC) package 1 GMP of $16,953,586; Trustee Newhouse seconded the motion and the board approved it unanimously. Trustee Newhouse then moved approval of the multi-campus safety-systems package 3 GMP of $6,376,034; Trustee Jensen seconded and the board again voted unanimously.

Why it matters: The approvals advance construction for EPIC and districtwide safety system work funded by the 2022 bond authorization; staff said approving those GMPs will allow site work and initial packages to proceed and will increase encumbrances that move funds from available to committed as projects start.

Bond issuance and proposition breakdown: Staff presented the status of bond proceeds and expenditures. Of the $850,000,000 authorized in the 2022 bond program, roughly $318,000,000 has been issued to date (about 37% of the authorization, staff said). The bond program is organized into three propositions:
- Proposition A (facilities, safety and security, and fleet): authorized ~ $681M; staff reported about $240M issued against that proposition and showed $90M expended to date, $52M available and $114M encumbered within the issued funds.
- Proposition B (EPIC): authorized ~ $141M; staff reported about $50M issued and said EPIC had early planning and encumbrances; GMP 1 (approved tonight) is part of that work and a second EPIC GMP was expected next week.
- Proposition C (technology): authorized $28M; staff said the technology proceeds were sold in two tranches and that approximately all of Prop C had been issued, with classroom tech and network upgrades underway.

Recent and planned spending: Staff described purchases and deliveries funded from the bond: 60 new buses (35 regular and 25 special-day buses) with safety features and smart tags; police pursuit vehicles with upgraded equipment and a new body-camera docking system integrated to district Wi-Fi; classroom flat-panel displays and devices; cabling and network upgrades for redundancy and cybersecurity.

EPIC construction and operations planning: Gary Hutton and district construction staff presented updated site plans and parking phasing. Hutton said initial construction will affect some parking during the football season but added that by playoff time most additional parking and circulation would be available. For EPIC operations, staff presented a conservative estimate of operating costs and potential offsetting revenue if the district markets the facility:
- Estimated non-personnel operating costs (utilities, supplies, contracted services): about $282,819 annually (staff labeled this an average estimate).
- Personnel and event operations: staff outlined three personnel groups (facility/event staff, lighting/video/technical staff, custodial/maintenance), and said a full, stand-alone staffing model could raise the annual operating cost to roughly $1.2 million if no offsets were realized. Staff emphasized some positions could be offset by repurposing existing district employees or by revenue from rentals and district-wide event management.
- Potential revenue: staff presented conservative rental assumptions (arena/day $5,000; pavilion $2,000; performance hall $2,000; recital hall $1,000) and estimated that even modest utilization (25% of days rented) could generate hundreds of thousands of dollars in annual revenue, offsetting operating costs.

Community Engagement Center (Sheila Jackson Lee name) cost revision: Staff presented a three-phase estimate for renovating the existing facility (pool house/demo, new pool house/finishes/parking resurfacing, and a more extensive building renovation). The combined estimate with fees was about $7.9 million; the district had previously set aside $2.5 million from interest income for the project, leaving an estimated shortfall of roughly $5.4 million. Staff discussed options including: removing the pool scope (estimated savings about $900,000), staging work across multiple phases, or relocating the family and community engagement functions to underutilized district space (Teach Up) while deferring or re-scoping major capital work. Staff said no final decision was required at the March meeting and that they would return with options.

Audit and oversight: Trustees asked whether the bond-construction auditor had reviewed expended and encumbered costs; district staff said the auditor (Debbie Townsend) is engaged throughout project pay applications and has access to expenditures and is sampling and reviewing work as projects progress.

What passed at the meeting (actions): The board approved the EPIC package 1 GMP ($16,953,586) and the multi-campus safety-systems package 3 GMP ($6,376,034). Staff said EPIC GMP 2 and other encumbrances will be forthcoming and that the weekly bond updates will continue.

Attribution: Direct motion language and timing are taken from the meeting record; program and budget figures were provided by Spring ISD staff during the March 25 finance meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Special Called Session March 25, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Spring ISD Board of Trustees on March 25 approved two guaranteed maximum-price contracts tied to the 2022 bond program and received detailed updates on bond proceeds, EPIC construction and a revised cost estimate for the Sheila Jackson Lee Family and Community Engagement Center.","taxTitle","SPRING ISD, School Districts, Texas","taxId",14159,"location","Texas","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6621826,"Spring ISD board hears staffing and pay data; district falls further behind market, staff say",236,1838000,2074000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2794778-41fb99b85cb64ca6f166767d24e1cb2e&start=1838&end=2074","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2794778-41fb99b85cb64ca6f166767d24e1cb2e/thumbnail_1838000.jpg","/articles/6621826/Texas/Spring-ISD-board-hears-staffing-and-pay-data-district-falls-further-behind-market-staff-say","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6621826-95e3b1a02a691216f9ea606c8d479443/orig.mp4?Expires=1770724664&Signature=WFqwnj6seDEmoH2UxK~xUsG8CnIkcVOyU12hA3N1KnO2tUiDDZdcfUcz6FiJX7SlJIGsFOUEdr6J3n2T-32UsQTjurKmXWgfWVwZet145Mb~MDX~KAxC25ECys~XOMflXramz8ogqJv3g9uFKKONHyBGQsyqIR3BuvgqbL7-F9uI~eELTyef33lUVaGUshIFZjp5AOQkkaDAA4w4PjB-LY2fRbBemFE8HjPlqj-wCrM24wIxTMpayyw1sykZjSBqCDacooKTkwj-SBLf77L8WsQMkBQuiTqBvhIyWK3qc2R1S5Hy6xqTXpjosGguP8I6OGpZ1xGN9RSkX8znUncuqw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Spring Independent School District leaders told trustees on March 25 that teacher salaries and substitute (guest teacher) pay have lagged local market rates and that turnover patterns require attention in next year's budget.

In a packet and a presentation, Doctor King, a district staff member, walked the board through four years of turnover trends by campus and central office, and displayed salary comparisons against neighboring districts. \"We knew last year, when we were proposed for the VADER, that we were behind the market,\" King said. He showed that Spring ISD's position relative to market medians declined from roughly the mid-90 percentiles in benchmark years to the low 90s this year, leaving Spring nearer the bottom of the market for teacher pay.

Why it matters: Board and staff said teacher pay is the district's top compensation priority because recruitment and retention hinge on market competitiveness. Staff recommended targeting teachers and guest teachers in the compensation plan for 2025–26 while also developing total-rewards strategies for other staff.

Key points from the presentation:
- Market position: King displayed compensation curves that showed Spring ISD moving from a competitive position (near median market paypoints) to approximately 93%–95% of the market across benchmark teacher-experience years, which staff described as \"falling to the bottom of the comparison market.\" King said a one-year pause in raises can be tolerated; two or more years without raises widens the gap.
- Substitute (guest teacher) pay: King's slides compared Spring ISD substitute rates to peer districts and showed gaps ranging from about $14 on the low end to $30 on the high end versus market rates, depending on certification and assignment type. Staff said these gaps reduce substitute fill rates and increase operational strain.
- Teacher Incentive Allotment (TIA): The board discussed why Spring ISD is a comparatively large recipient of TIA funds in conditional payouts. King explained that TIA rewards growth and classroom-observation measures rather than absolute achievement, and that district-designation amounts vary by campus poverty level and implementation year. He said Spring teachers on exemplary designations have had average payouts around $20,000 and the highest-paid teacher approached $30,000; comparison figures cited for Klein ISD were about $16,000 at the exemplary level.

Board direction and next steps: King said the district is developing compensation models and suggested priorities: focus heavily on teachers and substitutes in the 2025–26 plan and consider a baseline $250 increase for all employees while targeting additional funds for classroom teachers and guest teachers. Trustees asked for follow-up comp-models and for more detailed ROI materials; King and staff said they will present models and further TIA detail at upcoming meetings.

Attribution note: Direct quotations and characterizations in this article come from Doctor King and staff presentations at the March 25 meeting; other trustee comments are summarized where relevant.","District human-resources staff presented turnover, market-position and substitute-pay data showing Spring ISD has slipped in competitiveness; trustees were urged to prioritize teacher and substitute compensation in the 2025–26 budget.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6621831,"Spring ISD staff outline which pending state bills could reshape 2025–26 budget",1035,335000,1370000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2794778-41fb99b85cb64ca6f166767d24e1cb2e&start=335&end=1370","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2794778-41fb99b85cb64ca6f166767d24e1cb2e/thumbnail_335000.jpg","/articles/6621831/Texas/Spring-ISD-staff-outline-which-pending-state-bills-could-reshape-202526-budget","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6621831-66ea2f64c7753c8ec6d0223774b8dd4d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770724664&Signature=kmxIIVvYp8eZzU1qfQvx8y~f9-SyikPO4iBwDvuXTIFiUUMQ2iUthEkCEgugYne44BM2SA0wOJxsTbEIMc6tjKXQHEHYkbK4aU~9AAI0JwuM0Jdc4kffnkHncLFEPmCHm0uld~ob42Id5OJ846tqUdsgHS3YTABUZFlB-mdS~AeZlGk8KBaCqI5xO1YC8RzN-y7jRGnAB4szZ3P-M0qoQAEKublnvw9iOZlKzYTG2po1wpE7ZlyIXwJ45or1Whu~kxAwbEqGRAhTDTh7CqvLS2v-fM-tKlTUh08Q6TmyYMoS-52fB4VeOn1kAVk2HzJ4hUC4YJ0Sam7PIIHYkVsXmQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Spring Independent School District leaders told the school board on March 25 that several pending Texas bills could materially affect the district's 2025–26 budget, including proposals on the basic allotment, special education funding, teacher pay requirements and homestead exemptions.

At a finance-focused meeting, Miss Westbrooks, a Spring ISD staff member who led the legislative overview, said House Bill 2 would raise the basic allotment from $6,160 to $6,380 — a $220 increase — but does not include a dedicated inflation adjustment. \"There is no inflation adjustment that's included,\" Westbrooks said, adding that without an inflation adjustment districts that do not grow enrollment can see flat revenue even after raises are granted.

Why it matters: changes to the basic allotment and the distribution rules tied to it determine how much new state money flows to Spring ISD and how much must be spent on compensation. Westbrooks said current law requires 30% of basic allotment increases to be used for compensation and that HB2 proposes to raise that to 40%. She also described ongoing work at the Legislature on a special education funding model that would establish eight tiers to better reflect intensity of services and narrow an estimated gap of about $15 million between current funding and district special education costs.

Details from staff presentations:
- Teacher incentive allotment (TIA): House Bill 2 would expand and increase the TIA and add an \"acknowledge\" designation. The bill would also create an \"enhanced\" teacher incentive allotment tied to campus performance and require that, to access the enhancement, all teachers be eligible for TIA under the district's local plan. Westbrooks said the allotment's eligibility parameters would still allow local program design but impose new state checks to maximize funding.
- Education Savings Accounts (ESA): Westbrooks and other board members discussed that the ESA or voucher language was active in several bills and remains a point of negotiation between the House and Senate. Board members noted vigorous stakeholder pushback in hearings and that final outcomes were uncertain.
- Senate Bill 26: Introduces a teacher retention allotment; for districts with more than 5,000 students it would provide one-time payments (example amounts cited: $2,500 for teachers with three to four years, $5,500 for teachers with five-plus years). SB26 would also repeal the 30% compensation requirement in current law, giving districts more local flexibility, staff said.
- Senate Bill 260 (safety allotment): Would raise the per-student safety allotment by roughly $28 per average daily attendance (ADA) and increase campus-level allocations from $15,000 to $30,000 per campus, a substantial rise over the current safety allotment (the district's safety allotment is currently just under $1 million).
- Senate Bill 4 (homestead exemption): Proposes raising the homestead exemption to $140,000. Staff warned of drafting that would hold districts harmless on interest & sinking (I&S) debt only for bonds issued as of Jan. 1, 2025, not bonds authorized but not yet issued. With $850 million in authorized bonds and roughly $318 million issued as of the presentation, Westbrooks said the difference could put as much as $60 million of state aid at risk if the language is not clarified; district staff and bond counsel are working to amend the bill language.
- Senate Bill 1502: Would limit a district's ability to levy a tax rate above a voter-approved rate after a failed tax election, potentially removing the district's ability to use \"disaster pennies\" without voter approval in certain circumstances.

District caution and next steps: Westbrooks emphasized that the bills were still in committee or conference and that final budgetary impacts are not yet calculable. \"None of our partners ... are putting out projected runs just yet because we're waiting for the dust to settle,\" she said. Staff said they will return with updated modeling at the April meeting once legislative text and conference negotiations are clearer.

Context and statewide snapshot: Westbrooks cited a Texas Education Agency report noting about 510 of roughly 1,200 Texas school districts ended 2023–24 with deficit spending, underscoring the statewide fiscal pressure districts face even as the Legislature debates funding changes.

Board discussion: Trustees asked clarifying questions about where ESA language appeared and about the timeline for tax-rate decisions if bills pass. Staff reminded trustees that, if a bill becomes law on Sept. 1 and Harris County certified values are not available until Aug. 31, operational timing can constrain immediate tax-rate adjustments.

What happens next: Spring ISD staff said they will produce budget runs under current law as well as scenario models for the board's April meeting, and will continue to work with TASB, bond counsel and financial advisers on language that could affect state hold-harmless provisions.","District staff told the Spring ISD board on March 25 that proposed state budget and education bills could change the district's revenue picture, affecting pay plans, special education funding and debt-related state aid; district leaders said they will model impacts when legislative text settles.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board approves two GMPs; staff reports EPIC construction progress and a $5.4M shortfall on Community Engagement Center

Spring ISD board hears staffing and pay data; district falls further behind market, staff say

Spring ISD staff outline which pending state bills could reshape 2025–26 budget