Superintendent: proposed House Bill 2 increases basic allotment but state funding formulas still leave gaps for Lewisville ISD

Lewisville ISD Superintendent Doctor. Rapp told the board Monday that House Bill 2 — the current school finance proposal in the Texas Legislature — would raise the basic allotment but would not, by itself, eliminate funding shortfalls the district faces.

"The House Bill 2 was released. That's the school finance bill. It increases the basic allotment by $220. The price tag for that is $3,200,000,000 for the state of Texas," Doctor. Rapp said, summarizing the proposal and warning the board that the state and House and Senate versions differ on several key points, including how Education Savings Accounts would be calculated.

Rapp urged trustees to be cautious about citing a single per-student average. She noted the Texas Education Agency's most recent published statewide per-student average of about $10,800, and contrasted that with Lewisville ISD’s locally calculated average funding-per-student figures ranging from roughly $8,559 to $9,207 depending on what is counted.

"Just because you can calculate an average does not mean that you should," Rapp said, explaining that most district revenue available for every student is the basic allotment while many specialized allotments — for special education, CTE, bilingual, transportation, safety and security — are intended for targeted populations and cannot be spent on all students.

Rapp walked trustees through district calculations showing that Lewisville ISD’s special education allotment produces a large per-student number for that subgroup ($12,506 in one slide) but that the district spends tens of millions more than state allotments cover: the presentation said the district spends about $76 million on special education while receiving roughly $70 million in special-ed allotments, and additional shortfalls in transportation and safety. She said the district spends approximately $11.6 million more on transportation and $6.8 million more on safety than the state allotments provide.

Rapp emphasized the local share of revenue: using the $9,207 example, her slides showed the district’s property-tax-derived local share comprised about 81% of that per-student figure while the state share was about 19%.

Rapp asked trustees to tell the district’s story to legislators ahead of a House Public Education Committee hearing scheduled for Thursday. "We plan to submit comments online…with Scott's help we'll turn that into something that we can submit and we'll communicate to our elected officials," she said.

Board members asked follow-up questions about attendance-based funding (most allotments are ADA-based), how some allotments are attendance versus enrollment based, and whether new provisions in HB2 — such as an initial evaluation allotment and intensity-based special-ed funding — would make up current deficits. Rapp and staff said intensity and initial-evaluation allotments would not close the district's special-education funding gap.

Trustees inquired about next steps: several asked to receive the district’s slides and supporting materials so they could contact state legislators and follow up; Trustee Miss Glasson said she planned to reach out to her representatives after district submissions were made. The superintendent said staff would submit materials to the committee’s comment portal and share the materials with trustees for follow-up.

The presentation concluded with a reminder that proposed increases in the basic allotment translate differently in each district and do not directly replace local property-tax contributions; Rapp urged trustees to emphasize the detail that many allotments are targeted and attendance-based when they advocate in Austin.