Edgewood ISD holds public hearing on SB 1882 partnership proposal with Third Future Schools; community raises transparency and Mariachi concerns

The Edgewood Independent School District Board of Trustees held a public hearing on March 24, 2026, to consider a proposed Senate Bill 1882 partnership under which Third Future Schools would serve as a campus operating partner for Brentwood STEAM School of Innovation. The district said the recommendation responds to persistent underperformance at Brentwood and offers a path to local improvement while pausing certain state interventions under TAC 11.174.

The hearing opened at 5:16 p.m. and included multiple public comments. Ebony Coleman, a sixth‑grade art teacher and Brentwood team lead, said she and other staff worry the partnership could mean the loss of electives including Spanish and Mariachi and the end of many after‑school clubs; she said several staff members would not reapply to work under Third Future. "Please do not take the things away from Brentwood that make us special," Coleman said.

Leti Barbosa, president of the Edgewood Classroom Teachers Association, urged greater transparency about the plan and its timeline and raised concerns about Third Future’s fit with the local community. Barbosa cited an example from Wichita Falls—“11 out of 52 staff members were rehired under this model”—and said there has been insufficient notice for families and staff. Barbosa also said she understood Third Future had been the subject of an investigation; Third Future’s representative disputed that characterization and said the organization had been cleared in a federal probe.

Melody Arredondo told trustees that the board had not posted attachments or draft contracts for agenda item 8C in advance and that lack of documents made meaningful public participation difficult. She asked when supporting materials would be publicly posted and where families could reliably access them.

In a district presentation, trustees and district staff said Brentwood has experienced multiple years of unacceptable accountability outcomes and that state statutes and rules create an urgency to act to avoid escalating interventions. District staff summarized steps taken so far—data reviews, capacity committees, town halls—and said the board would retain oversight through a time‑limited, performance‑based contract if an 1882 partnership is approved and accepted by the Texas Education Agency.

Third Future Schools’ superintendent, identified in the hearing as Zach Raddock, described the network’s instructional model, staffing approach and record. He said Third Future operates 12 campuses across three states and educates about 6,300 students; the network’s goal is "F to C" improvement in year one and sustained gains thereafter. He described daily instructional routines (a grade‑level first 45 minutes, brief demonstrations of learning and immediate differentiation), extended professional development, and rapid resource deployment. He also described a staff hiring process that begins with office hours and a 72‑hour survey for existing staff, followed by observations and interviews for applicants.

Trustees pressed district and partner representatives on many operational details: whether Edgewood’s DAEP and district hearing processes would remain in place (the district said yes), who would operate transportation and nutrition (district), whether campus traditions and mascots would remain (Third Future said yes), how electives and extracurriculars would be scheduled (Third Future said students would receive 60 minutes of electives per day and many advanced or mixed‑grade activities would be offered after school), counseling and social‑work availability (IEP‑driven; services to be provided), and how contract payments would be distributed (monthly, with contract specifics to be negotiated).

Board members repeatedly asked for clearer, earlier distribution of draft contract materials and for specific financial and staffing details. District staff said they had conducted numerous community meetings and town halls since September and committed to additional outreach, weekly or biweekly coordination with the partner, and continued board oversight through site visits and quarterly reports.

Third Future and district representatives described safeguards for existing employees who are "in good standing": staff who do not join the partner’s roster would be relocated to other Edgewood campuses when possible. Third Future said it would provide a timeline for interviews and hiring and that the network intends to prioritize rapid deployment of instructional resources to meet the goal of raising the campus to a C in year one.

No formal vote on the partnership was taken at the hearing. At 7:02 p.m. the board adjourned the public hearing after a motion by Trustee Sergio Delgado and a second by Ms. Castilleja. Trustees requested follow‑up materials and additional meetings to resolve outstanding questions on staffing, contract language, program preservation (including Mariachi), and the timeline for any action.

What’s next: The hearing served to collect public comment and to allow Third Future and district staff to present the proposed operating model. The board did not vote on the 1882 recommendation at this meeting; trustees asked staff to post or circulate the draft contract and supporting documents and to schedule further briefings and town halls so that the board and public can review contract terms before any final action.