Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
GUNTER ISD rated B (86) under Texas' FIRST system; district short on recommended cash reserves
Summary
District staff reviewed the 2023 FIRST (Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas) results, saying GUNTER ISD earned an 86 (B) and lost points chiefly for fund balance (64 days cash on hand), a high debt-to-property-value ratio after recent bond sales, and administrative cost ratios; staff said several metrics are improving.
GUNTER ISD trustees heard a presentation on the district's 2023 Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST) score and the reasons behind an overall score of 86, which the district described as a "B" rating. District staff emphasized the rating is based on fiscal year 2022–23 audited data and must be posted publicly and reviewed in a hearing.
The presenter said the district met the four critical FIRST indicators (audit submission, audit opinion, debt payment compliance and required payments to state/federal agencies) but lost points on other measures. "That means we had 64 days of cash on hand," the presenter said when describing indicator 7 and the district's fund-balance position, noting the recommended standard is at least 90 days. The presentation tied the debt-related loss (indicator 12) to the timing of recent bond sales to fund construction and the district's long-term liabilities.
Staff explained indicator 13 (administrative cost ratio) reflected historical staffing and payroll patterns tied to ADA calculations and said that administrative costs have dropped in subsequent years (payroll reduced by roughly $120,000–$126,000 year over year) and are expected to continue improving. The presenter said the district's policy approach has been to build savings and, where possible, pay bonds early to improve long-term ratios.
The presenter urged the public to consult the district website for the full FIRST report and supporting disclosures (superintendent contract, expense disclosures and related business-transaction documentation) that the district is required to post. Board members asked for follow-up metrics and monitoring plans; staff said they would provide details on how they will track fund balance, debt paydown and administrative-cost reductions over the next fiscal year.
Board members did not take formal action on the FIRST presentation; the hearing is required by TEA for transparency and public notice.
