Weslaco ISD projects $12.3 million from state school-finance law; majority earmarked for pay raises

WESLACO, Texas — The Weslaco Independent School District board held a June public hearing and workshop on the proposed 2025–26 budget during which Superintendent Elias Rivera and trustees outlined revenue estimates and how the district plans to use new state funds from House Bill 2.

The district's preliminary budget projects about $12.3 million in additional state revenue tied to House Bill 2, district leaders said. Trustee President Mister Nieto summarized the tradeoffs, saying, "12.3 is all the new revenues. 10.5 is what we're paying out in just salaries increases." The board later voted to adopt the 2025–26 general fund and debt‑service budgets, including the compensation plan.

Why it matters: Weslaco ISD's planning affects staffing, campus allotments and property taxpayers across the district. The new state dollars are largely restricted by purpose and, as leaders noted, will primarily cover pay increases mandated or encouraged by state law. The district must still set tax rates after the property‑value roll is finalized July 31.

District leaders told the public the budget package combines three principal revenue sources: local property tax collections; state funding distributed mainly through the Texas Education Agency and driven by average daily attendance (ADA); and federal funds (largely food service). Rivera presented a projected districtwide revenue total near $223 million for the 2025–26 year and said the district is budgeting conservatively for ADA at about 14,500 students.

House Bill 2 and pay increases: Rivera and staff detailed how the state law creates targeted allotments for teacher pay, early childhood and other programs. Staff estimated roughly $12.3 million in additional revenue attributable to HB2 for Weslaco ISD. The district's proposed compensation plan uses most of that money for salary increases: the presentation showed roughly $10.5 million budgeted for the raises themselves and an additional amount set aside for benefits associated with higher wages.

The board and staff explained the pay schedule in three tiers that mirror state guidance: larger increases for more experienced teachers (examples in the presentation included $5,000 for teachers with five or more years), smaller amounts for early‑career teachers, and locally funded supplements for other local priorities. Rivera noted the state funding is structured over a two‑year window and cautioned that some elements of the funding are not guaranteed beyond that period.

Incentive stipend and conditions: The proposed budget included a planned $1,000 incentive stipend slated for December, with a possible second stipend in May contingent on meeting ADA targets. Rivera described the budget as a "living document" that can be amended if enrollment or revenue projections change. Trustees emphasized the May stipend is contingent on campus ADA performance and urged principals to pursue attendance strategies.

Local property values and taxes: The superintendent said preliminary property values inside the district are about $4.0 billion, up roughly 15% from the prior year, driven by new construction and development. Rivera said those values remain preliminary until the August finalization process; the board will set tax rates after values are certified (statutory deadline July 31 and tax‑rate meeting in August were noted). Trustees also discussed a state homestead exemption increase referenced in the presentation (the slide said the homestead exemption would increase from $100,000 to $140,000) and that the state's hold‑harmless adjustments can partially offset compression or lost revenue.

One‑time capital and fund balance use: Trustees reviewed a list of capital and one‑time projects funded from the district's fund balance rather than recurring revenue. Rivera said fund balance has been used for large one‑time investments such as HVAC units, stadium lighting, turf replacement, and bus purchases. The presentation listed several completed projects and a set of pending projects (about $4 million remaining from the bond and fund‑balance allocations) for board prioritization.

Process and next steps: The board held the statutorily required public hearing and accepted public comment; there were no members of the public who spoke on the budget at the hearing. The board voted during the meeting to adopt the 2025–26 budget including the compensation plan. Trustees said they will finalize the tax‑rate schedule after property values are certified and continue to monitor enrollment and ADA, which directly affect state funding.

The district identified the main budget risks as enrollment shortfalls (which reduce ADA‑driven funding) and increases in fixed costs such as utilities and insurance. Rivera and trustees said they plan further monitoring and monthly updates leading into the fall adoption of final budget amendments and the external audit presentation planned for November.

Ending: The board and staff framed the budget as balancing immediate staff compensation needs with one‑time capital investments paid from fund balance. Leaders repeatedly cautioned that many new state allotments are time limited and that sustaining locally funded increases will require careful long‑term planning.