Alice ISD reviews pay-study options, considers carryovers from House Bill 2 and stipend changes

Alice Independent School District trustees on July 24 heard a TASB HR services review of the district’s compensation plan and four alternative pay models, and discussed stipend and staffing-allocation changes ahead of final budget adoption.

The presentation by TASB analyst Courtney and Superintendent Dr. Trevino outlined the district’s teacher market position, compliance with House Bill 2’s teacher retention allotment and several options the board can choose for nonteacher pay increases. TASB recommended adopting the updated pay structures and presented four cost models that combine state allotment dollars with local contributions.

Why it matters: Alice ISD would use the state’s teacher retention allotment and local funds together to implement raises and adjustments. The board must decide how much of the district’s available fund balance and local revenue to allocate to nonteacher raises, hourly increases and targeted adjustments for equity and hard-to-fill positions before adopting the final budget and tax rate.

TASB’s presentation

Courtney, an assistant director with TASB HR services, said TASB maintained the district’s market-based pay system and matched Alice ISD jobs to a peer market of about 12–15 nearby districts for most roles. She told the board that Alice ISD’s teacher salary schedule is “strong and above the local market median at every benchmark,” and that the district’s teacher pay is roughly 2%–5% above market at typical experience benchmarks.

Courtney summarized House Bill 2 guidance on the state’s teacher retention allotment: for districts under 5,000 students the allotment provides $4,000 for teachers with three to four years of experience and $8,000 for teachers with five or more years; the allotment does not fund teachers with one to two years of experience. She said TASB’s recommendation — consistent with other districts’ practice — is to consider a local supplement (for example, roughly $2,000) for teachers in years one and two so those early-career teachers also receive some increase.

Courtney also presented four models for nonteacher pay increases: (1) a 2% increase off pay-grade midpoints for nonteachers; (2) 3% off midpoints for nonteachers; (3) 2% for administrative/professional and a $0.75-per-hour increase for hourly staff; and (4) 3% for administrative/professional and $0.75 per hour for hourly staff. TASB highlighted which line items in each model would be paid by the state allotment (marked in the presentation materials) and which would need local funding, and provided cost estimates for each model.

District and staffing details presented

Superintendent Dr. Trevino said recruitment is “difficult statewide,” noting Alice ISD is competing for a smaller pool of teachers and that the district had seven vacancies at the time of the presentation. TASB reported 296 teachers and librarians were in the teacher hiring group at the time of the study.

TASB recommended increasing the teacher starting salary; the presentation said the current starting salary was $54,800 and the recommended starting salary would be $56,400 (a $1,600 increase). Courtney emphasized that pay structures were adjusted to improve starting rates and midpoint alignment so raises can be managed predictably against the budget.

Staffing allocations and stipends

District staff member Dana reviewed staffing allocations and said there were only minimal staffing changes from the prior year. Dana noted that social workers previously funded by a grant are now included in the district’s staffing table and that principals had discussed campus needs to allocate those positions.

Dana and the stipend committee presented proposed adjustments to high-school stipends. The committee recommended establishing a $3,500 stipend for English I teachers at Alice High School (the presentation said English teachers at Alice High School would receive $3,500 if approved). The committee also proposed adjustments to math and science stipends; the presentation and subsequent discussion referenced past stipend levels and proposed reductions and rebalancing so English teachers at the high school would receive stipends comparable to other core subjects. Board members asked whether reducing math and science stipends would risk losing teachers in those subjects; staff said neighboring districts’ stipends typically ranged from about $3,000 to $3,500 and that the district’s proposal aims to align with local practice while addressing urgent shortages in English-certified teachers.

Budget impacts and next steps

Courtney and staff presented cost estimates and said the state allotment would begin flowing to the district in September based on PEIMS coding, and that the district will only receive allotment dollars for employees coded as teachers of record for the relevant year. Courtney reported a district teacher-retention allotment estimate of about $1,700,000; she also said the remainder of a chosen compensation model would come from district funds, including potential use of the fund balance. Specific local-contribution totals in the presentation were discussed in workshop detail but were shown as model-by-model estimates in the materials.

Board members indicated a preference to evaluate the model that combines a 3% midpoint increase for salaried nonteachers with a $0.75-per-hour raise for hourly employees and asked staff to return cost estimates and a recommended motion at a future workshop. Staff said the board would meet again in additional work sessions and may hold a special meeting to finalize budget and tax-rate actions before the August deadlines.

No formal motions or votes were recorded in the July 24 workshop. The board adjourned at about 1:07 p.m.

Ending

The board scheduled additional workshops and possible special called meetings to firm up which compensation model will be adopted and to finalize the budget and tax-rate notice required for public posting.