TASB review shows Round Rock ISD generally at market median; district and consultants lay out 1–3% pay scenarios

Consultants from the Texas Association of School Boards and district human-resources staff presented a compensation market review and a menu of possible pay-adjustment models as trustees discussed timing and cost constraints.

Amy (TASB) summarized how Round Rock ISD compares to a long‑standing peer group and to non‑school employers for positions where the district competes outside education (custodians, police, central‑office professionals). She said the district’s teacher pay was above the market median in 2023–24 after Proposition A increases but moved to approximately median in 2024–25 because peers provided larger increases in some cases. TASB recommended narrowing pay ranges in spot areas to better align pay with market medians and reduce internal compression.

The consultant presented three modeled pay packages (illustrative only, to be finalized after legislative outcomes): models that would produce total costs roughly equivalent to 1%, 2% and 3% across‑the‑board increases when combined with structural adjustments. The illustrative adjustments include: ensuring pay grade minimums for hourly jobs, targeted strategic adjustments for positions furthest below market, teacher pay‑equity adjustments so promoted educators do not earn less than classroom-day‑rate equivalents, and placementscale corrections for hourly employees. TASB officials said the largest share of targeted adjustments typically applies to administrative‑exempt and instructional‑exempt groups where internal compression is most common.

Human‑resources director Eddie and HR staff emphasized the need to balance recruitment pressure on starting teacher pay (the board’s “shop window” at job fairs) with retention of experienced teachers. District comparisons that add salary plus employer health‑plan contributions placed Round Rock ISD in the mid‑to‑upper range of peers for total compensation; the district’s health contributions had not risen in recent years and staff noted that competing districts had increased total offerings, in some cases using voter‑approved local tax revenue.

Trustees asked how legislative scenarios would affect local choices. HR and consultants said state proposals that require a percentage of any new state funding to go to employee compensation (Lopez had described a 40% requirement in one draft) would need to be implemented carefully because the state’s pass‑through rules sometimes limit which employees may be paid with those dollars. The TASB team offered to break out the “must‑do” adjustments (minimums, teacher‑equity corrections) from “nice‑to‑have” strategic adjustments and to provide cost estimates tailored to board direction.

Why it matters: Compensation drives recruiting and retention across the district, and trustees must balance local budget constraints, statutory requirements and the board’s goals for competitive hiring. District staff said they will return with finer‑grain numbers and recommended priorities as budget and legislative certainty firm up.