Duncanville ISD proposes $2,500 starting-teacher raise, outlines 2025–26 budget amid state bill uncertainty

Duncanville Independent School District officials on May 12 proposed a $2,500 increase to the district’s starting teacher salary — bringing it to $61,000 — and presented a draft 2025–26 budget that assumes a conservative 3% assessed-value growth while warning that pending state legislation could change the district’s revenue picture.

Brandy Mayo, Duncanville ISD chief financial officer, told the board the district built the draft budget using a conservative 3% taxable assessed-value growth and that the district’s maintenance-and-operations tax rate would be held to that growth. Mayo said the proposed $2,500 raise would cost the district about $2,189,688 including benefits and would increase starting certified-teacher pay to $61,000; certified bilingual and self-contained special education starting pay would be $65,000 under the proposal. “We would like to bring the teacher salary scale for approval on May 19,” Mayo said.

The presentation emphasized legislative uncertainty as a principal unknown. Mayo outlined the legislative calendar and said the district was tracking House Bill 2, Senate Bill 2 and a separate House Bill 500 that could include supplemental appropriations. Using current drafts, Mayo said the district’s best estimate of additional state revenue from House Bill 2 would be about $6.7 million; under existing proposals roughly 40% of that increase would be directed to teacher and certain staff pay and about 60% could offset operational needs. Mayo cautioned the figures were draft estimates and could shift as final bill language is adopted.

Because Texas school districts must adopt a budget by June 30, Mayo recommended adopting a budget now under current law and amending it after the legislative session if needed: “Any changes will require a budget amendment,” she said, noting the timing between the end of the regular session and the governor’s deadline complicates fiscal planning.

Administrators also reviewed the district’s projected year-end fund balance and deficit-reduction strategies. Mayo said vacancy-savings, nonpayroll reductions and a federal funding reclassification are expected to improve the year-end position; under current assumptions the district expects slightly more than five months of fund balance at fiscal year end. The presentation listed proposed investments and cuts that together reduced the draft budget; with the recommended teacher increases included the draft still shows a deficit that administrators expect to shrink with planned savings and any additional state revenue.

Chief academic officer Dr. Nix (presenting academic priorities) told trustees the budget decisions are being aligned with the district’s strategic priorities, with early literacy and teacher development singled out for prioritization. “Nothing improves student education like quality tier 1 instruction,” Dr. Nix said, and added the district is trimming duplicative programs (for example, choosing between some assessment suites) to free resources for higher-impact academic supports.

Trustees also questioned staffing for student support services. Mr. Graham, a district administrator describing counseling and social-work roles, said the district currently employs 35 comprehensive counselors (17 at the high school level), four support counselors focused on social-emotional learning, four restorative-practices counselors and one licensed social worker. Graham said comprehensive counselors are capable of many family-support tasks but cited time and training constraints; he described social workers’ duties as including home visits, connecting families with community resources and coordinating donations and pantries.

Board members and administrators discussed next steps and deadlines: administration will present the teacher salary schedule for board action at the regular May 19 meeting; the district plans to publish the required public-notice of a budget and proposed tax rate (the district said it plans to publish on May 28); and the board is scheduled to adopt the 2025–26 budget on June 16, with the possibility of a later amendment if the legislature changes revenue estimates.

No final budget vote or salary-scale adoption occurred at the May 12 workshop. The meeting ended after a motion to adjourn was moved and seconded and the board recessed.