NEISD budget study flags voucher uncertainty, recommends one‑time retention supplement

At a June budget study session, Northeast Independent School District staff told trustees the district’s proposed 2026–27 budget faces significant uncertainty from potential state education savings accounts and enrollment shifts and recommended a one‑time 1% retention supplement rather than across‑the‑board raises.

The presenter said the district expects about $171 million in revenue for the debt service fund and noted a $37 million principal payment due Aug. 1, 2027 that must be reserved, limiting the use of those funds for schools or salaries. In the general fund, staff said nearly 87% of expenditures are salaries and benefits and that the proposed budget shows a larger deficit than the district’s forecasted actuals. Under the projection used in the presentation, the district could end the 2026–27 year with about 2.8 months of operating fund balance if no additional changes are made.

“Given our vast uncertainty with how ESAs or vouchers are going to impact our enrollment,” the presenter said, staff recommended a one‑time retention supplement paid in the fall and the possibility of a spring supplement if enrollment or attendance improves. The presentation cited a comptroller figure of 1,744 vouchers associated with Northeast, but staff cautioned it is not clear how many of those are current NEISD students and said July 15 is the deadline for families to accept private‑school seats.

In public comment, Patricia Lozano, a third‑grade teacher at Regency Place Elementary and a Northeast AFT vice president for elementary schools, urged trustees to find money in the budget for pay increases and proposed a 2.5% raise for all employees, not the retention supplements in the administration’s plan. Lozano also urged the board not to increase employee out‑of‑pocket health costs and to convert savings from coverage changes to staff pay.

Board members asked detailed follow‑ups about the nutrition fund (staff said lower participation and fewer meal service days have cut reimbursements), alternative certification pay and the long‑term cost differences between a one‑time supplement and placing increases into base salary (which affects TRS retirement calculations). Staff agreed to provide a follow‑up on the percentage of employees on the low PPO that would be affected by proposed health‑plan changes.

The presenter outlined next steps: a public hearing scheduled for Thursday, June 18; a final budget amendment for the current year; and approval of fund‑balance commitments. Trustees were told the district cannot adopt a tax rate until TEA certifies the rate.

The presentation and discussion left several open items that staff and trustees said they will continue to refine, including the final calculation of vouchers tied to district students and precise health‑plan impacts on employee pay.

The budget work session continued the board’s series of hearings on the 2026–27 budget and will be followed by the public hearing and final adoption process later this month.