Sharyland ISD board approves 2% pay increase for 2025–26 after debate over sustainability and paraprofessional duties

The Sharyland Independent School District Board of Trustees voted 7-0 on May 20 to approve a 2% salary increase for employees for the 2025–26 school year.

Superintendent Dr. Elaine Howard presented three options to the board and recommended a middle course that district staff said could be sustained under current law without additional state funding. “We are prepared to present to you a salary increase for the 25, 26 school year that could be achieved without additional monies from the state,” Howard said, describing a budget analysis and staffing audit carried out by administration.

The board heard fiscal estimates for the three options: a roughly $726,000 impact for a lower option that would have brought starting teacher pay to about $54,985; a roughly $1.1 million impact for a 1.5% option (starting pay ~$55,272); and an approximately $1.45 million impact for the 2% option approved by the board, which the administration said would raise starting teacher pay to about $55,570. The administration stressed the increases would be applied “as part of the step, not in addition to” existing step increases.

Trustees pressed on implementation details and risks. Board members and staff discussed that the 2% option is “doable” but would leave the district with a tighter fund balance than in previous years. Trustee Hector Rivera said the move felt like a “mid risk” but supported the priority of compensation. Trustee Julio Serra moved the final motion and Rivera seconded it; the motion passed 7-0.

Implementation and staffing changes were a major portion of the discussion. Howard described efforts to preserve employees’ jobs while aligning positions to instructional needs. She said some positions will be discontinued or restructured, but administration intends to preserve people where possible and reassign them within the district. “When that occurs, we will preserve the person, find somewhere else for them to serve in the district, preferably at the same campuses and in the same capacities if at all possible,” Howard said.

Trustees and staff also focused on paraprofessionals who perform coaching duties. Howard explained that when paraprofessionals are funded by federal or special-education programs they must provide the services tied to that funding; covering athletic duties during the instructional day is generally not an allowable charge to those programs. She also warned of overtime and Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) budgeting consequences when hourly classroom work and coaching pay are combined. “The law actually requires that they are combined at overtime under a combined weighted average of those two different salaries,” Howard said, adding that in some past cases the combined calculation raised the district’s actual hourly cost significantly.

The board asked for continued monitoring and for options to mitigate harm to employees. Howard described a grandfather plan for “unpublished extra days” that some employees have historically received; she said extra days will be preserved for employees who remain in the same roles providing the same duties, but that the district will not perpetually pay extra days for employees reassigned to materially different roles. Howard cautioned that employees who change to substantially different positions might not retain the exact pay they previously received.

Board members said they want to revisit compensation if the state makes changes during the legislative process; the superintendent said timing is uncertain and a midyear stipend could be considered depending on state action. The board directed administration to include the approved increase in the budget presented for final adoption.

Ending: The board approved the 2% increase and asked administration to continue reporting on budget projections and the state legislative outlook before final budget adoption.