Keller ISD trustees continue review of proposal to split district as residents demand a vote

Trustees of Keller Independent School District on Jan. 30 outlined ongoing work on a proposal to reshape the district into smaller entities to address recurring budget shortfalls, but stopped short of adopting any formal plan and said they will continue community outreach.

The board president said "nothing has been decided" and announced a committee meeting Feb. 5 to gather community feedback. The district posted an FAQ on its website and said the board will continue to update the public as details become available.

The proposal — described in board materials as a potential detachment or "reshaping" — is pitched by supporters as a way to retain more local tax dollars and to enable smaller, more locally focused governance. District staff and outside consultants emphasized that state school-finance rules mean most maintenance-and-operations (M&O) revenue "follows the student," and that any change would reallocate existing state and local funding rather than create new state money.

Why it matters: The board framed the effort as one of several responses to a multi-year funding gap that has required large reductions in recent budgets. The proposal has immediately become the dominant public issue: more than 200 people took the two-minute public-comment slots on Jan. 30, many urging the board to put any final detachment decision to a public vote.

What trustees said and next steps - Board president: the district will "continue to explore ideas that benefit all 34,000 kids in Keller ISD" and said a committee will meet Feb. 5 to gather input. (Board president, Jan. 30) - The FAQ and committee: district staff said the FAQ will be updated with information from the meeting and that the committee will include members of the budget and finance, special projects, and infrastructure/facility committees appointed last year.

Public response and concerns Public comments ran more than two hours and produced repeated calls for a binding referendum. Several speakers framed the issue as one of democratic process and equity: "Make the right choice and assure us a vote," said Rachel Jenkins, a resident and parent during public comment. A number of commenters said the proposed boundary (roughly along Highway 377 in materials shown to the board) would create economically and racially imbalanced districts and asked whether families and staff in the portion of the district proposed for detachment would lose access to specialized programs such as the Keller Collegiate Academy (KCA) or the district natatorium.

Outside analysis presented to the board Two consulting reports discussed at the meeting reached different emphases: - Moat Casey (consultant Josh Haney) modeled revenue impact using 2023–24 data and a proposed east/west split. That analysis found combined M&O revenue across two successor districts would roughly equal current combined revenues, although one side would show higher M&O per student because of concentrations of students eligible for special-allotment funding (special education, compensatory education and bilingual services). Haney emphasized his study did not model expenditures, debt service or asset allocation. - Multiple residents and speakers said the district has not shared enough detailed, independent fiscal projections and urged the board to publish a full cost/benefit analysis — especially on duplicated administrative costs and on how shared facilities (KCA, athletic complexes, natatorium) would be handled.

Board reaction and process questions Trustees heard repeated requests for a public vote; several local elected officials who posted public comments urged a referendum as well. Board members said they commissioned the outside work to inform a public discussion but emphasized no final action had been taken at the Jan. 30 meeting. The board directed staff to continue community outreach and to post materials to the district’s website.

What’s unresolved - Whether the board will adopt a resolution pursuing detachment without a public vote, or propose detachment to the county/commissioner process that could allow a vote; many speakers demanded a binding public referendum. - Treatment of capital assets, debt service, and how shared programs — including KCA and the natatorium — would be divided or jointly managed. Consultants said those topics were outside the scope of their revenue modeling and would require separate legal and financial analysis.

Ending: The board scheduled the Feb. 5 committee meeting and said it would continue updates online; several public speakers said they will press for a public vote if the board moves toward formal detachment.