Uvalde CISD board selects midline budget planning scenario after hours of debate over enrollment, stipends and Slate Creek proceeds

The Uvalde CISD Board of Trustees on Aug. -- (date not specified) directed administration to prepare the 2025–26 budget using the planning scenario labeled in the packet as “30.97” after an extended discussion weighing state pupil projections, local attendance trends and personnel costs.

CFO-level staff and district administrators presented multiple scenarios showing how different average daily attendance (ADA) and pupil‑value assumptions would affect revenue and the district’s fund balance. Administrators recommended a conservative scenario based on TEA (Texas Education Agency) demographer projections; district staff warned the board that state payments are based on TEA’s projections and the district would be paid during the year on those estimates.

At the meeting, community commenters raised concerns about the administration’s draft assumptions. Public commenter Simon Ortiz, who submitted a handout with colleague Dr. Hector Gonzalez, said the district’s preliminary budget assumed a 10% decline in enrollment and ADA and questioned that assumption, describing it as overly conservative. Ortiz said the draft assumption would produce a "$9,900,000 decrease" in revenue under the model he reviewed and suggested using a higher ADA percentage (about 83.1%) that his analysis projected would produce an $800,000 surplus instead.

The board’s discussion split along caution vs. risk‑taking lines. Some trustees argued for a more optimistic planning assumption — trustees urged using an ADA figure tied to an estimated $31.43 (81%) or as high as $32.60 (83%) to preserve teacher stipends, retain incentives tied to Slate Creek proceeds and avoid cuts. Supporters of the higher assumption said community leaders and a new truancy/referral process could raise attendance and that keeping stipends and incentives would help retain and recruit certified teachers.

Other trustees and the CFO urged caution, citing long‑term fund‑balance shortfalls and TEA pupil‑projection methods (which rely on birth‑rate and census data). The CFO said the state “will pay us based on their estimation for this school year,” and warned that overestimating revenue could force the district to draw down fund balance or make deeper cuts later.

After an initial tied vote on an alternative number, the board approved the planning scenario using the 30.97 figure by majority vote (mover and seconder recorded in the meeting minutes). Board members said staff will continue to monitor registrations and ADA during the summer and present final budget documents and compensation proposals for formal approval at the next business meeting.

Ending: The board directed staff to prepare the budget documents using the chosen scenario and signaled that compensation details and any specified stipend or program changes will be presented for a formal vote in the subsequent meeting packet.