Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Prekindergarten Partnership topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bay City ISD explores state‑backed pre‑K partnership offering 15% ADA share; legal review pending
Summary
District leaders reported progress on a proposed pre‑K partnership with a large management organization that would share 15% of average daily attendance (ADA) revenues, potentially yielding roughly $1 million in new funding; staff said the draft agreement is with legal and that several operational and funding questions remain.
Get email alerts on the Prekindergarten Partnership topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bay City ISD trustees on April 9 received an update on a proposed pre‑K partnership that district staff described as an innovative opportunity involving state and governor’s office interest. Staff said a management organization approached the district after hearing about Bay City’s existing local pre‑K partnerships and proposed a model that would pay the district 15% of ADA (average daily attendance) for participating students, with no cap identified in early negotiations.
Dr. Mac and Mr. Townsend briefed trustees on the talks and said the partner accepted the district’s requested terms in negotiations so far. "They bought 0% of the things that we wanted out of the ring," Dr. Mac said, characterizing the negotiations as favorable. District staff cautioned the board that the draft agreement must pass legal review before any commitment and flagged several questions staff will analyze, including whether the additional enrollment could change the district’s allotment category (for example, moving the district out of a mid‑size allotment and changing per‑student funding formulas).
Staff estimated the model could be "very doable" and said initial calculations showed the partnership could generate an increase in district revenue on the order of $1 million, although the final amount will depend on enrollment, formula changes and state legislation. Staff stressed that no agreement has been executed and that the district is waiting on legal to finish reviewing contractual language and compliance with special‑education and bilingual obligations.
Nut graf: The pre‑K partnership would expand district early‑childhood options while generating new revenue, but trustees were urged to weigh funding rules and formula effects carefully. Staff emphasized legal review and modeling of how additional enrolled students might affect the district’s funding category under pending formula changes in the Legislature.
District staff said the partner is experienced working with large programs and that the governor and commissioner of education are engaged in discussions. If legal review clears the agreement, staff said the partner would prefer to start next school year, though the partner had expressed a desire to begin sooner. The item remains informational; staff will return a finalized contract for board consideration once attorneys complete review.
Ending: Trustees asked staff for a legal review and fiscal modeling showing how ADA growth would affect district allotments before any final action. The board took no vote April 9.

