Sharyland ISD sets June timeline for adopting 2025–26 budget; trustees told revenue uncertainty persists but attendance gains could boost funding

Sharyland ISD trustees heard an overview of the 2025–26 budget process at a budget workshop where staff emphasized statutory deadlines, uncertainty in state revenue proposals and the district’s intent to prioritize staff compensation.

The presenter said the board must set the public‑hearing date in May, complete the budget by June 19 and submit the approved budget to “TA” by June 30. Staff explained certified property values from the appraisal district — required to set the tax rate — are not available until July, so the district will initially prepare the budget under current law and update assumptions if the legislature or certified values change.

Staff noted three revenue categories: local tax revenue (dependent on appraisal values), state revenue (subject to ongoing legislative proposals staff characterized as not yet approved) and federal revenue (including indirect cost and federal grant planning). The presenter said staff are monitoring state proposals and running scenarios with the district’s financial adviser but will use current law for initial budgeting.

Trustees heard enrollment and attendance projections and were told those trends matter to revenue. Staff presented a seven‑year attendance history and said year‑to‑date projections through the fifth six‑weeks suggest the district is projecting refined ADA of 9,122 this year with an attendance rate of about 94.56 percent; staff said that projection would be roughly 22 students above the budget assumption and could increase revenue by roughly the order of magnitude discussed (staff framed the figure verbally as about $1 million in additional revenue in one scenario). The presenter described campus‑level exercises with principals showing direct funding impacts from attendance improvements.

On expenditure planning, staff described how campus allocations are generated: starting with a one‑day snapshot of enrollment, applying attendance and growth assumptions (the presenter cited a 1.75 percent enrollment growth assumption), and mapping a set of initiative allocations (for example, basic allotment, library, and other campus funding line items). Staff said those per‑student initiative amounts have remained mostly steady for several years and would change if the state increases the basic allotment.

Trustees were told staffing and compensation account for roughly 80 percent of the budget and that the district will present multiple increased‑pay scenarios on April 29 (a staffing/compensation workshop). The presenter said staff will provide conservative recommended scenarios and comparison data from other districts; if additional state funding is later approved, the district could return with a midyear increase.

Trustees asked for more granular breakdowns of allocations and for staff to provide a comparable breakdown for the roughly 80 percent of the budget tied to staffing. Board members and staff discussed the balance between short‑term restrictions and long‑term aims to reallocate spending toward salary increases and other strategic priorities.

Ending: Staff said they will call the required May public hearing, present multiple compensation scenarios at the April 29 workshop, and return to the board with any revised revenue estimates once certified values or legislative changes are available.