LISD Budget Shortfall - There is more to the story

A few weeks ago, Leander ISD (LISD) Superintendent Dr. Bruce Gearing shared a letter and video explaining the need for major job cuts to reduce spending and close a budget gap in the district.  He mentioned several reasons for the shortfall, including reduced federal funding, slower student enrollment growth, inflation, and a lack of funding increases from the state legislature(1).

While these factors have contributed to the budget problem, it’s important for the community to understand that some decisions made by the LISD Board over the past five years also played a big role in this situation.

Impact of Federal Funding, Enrollment Growth, Inflation and State Funding

1. Federal funding was temporary and ISDs were cautioned to not include the funds in ongoing operating budgets.

2. LISD’s enrollment growth hasn’t just slowed; in fact, the district had fewer students in 2024-2025 than the previous year. However, leadership has failed to adapt to these changing trends(2).

3. With regard to inflation and the failure of the legislature to increase funding, there is no arguing that inflation has had an impact, our schools need more funding.  And, reasonable people can debate whether those in favor of or those against school choice are to blame for the failure of the legislature to pass a significant increase in public school funding last session.  But, the Legislature did increase funding for some needs.  In fact, in the 2019-2020 school year, LISD received $8,341 per student for Maintenance and Operations. For 2024-2025, LISD will receive $9,641 per student (3).  The good news is Both the Texas House and Senate are working on plans to increase school funding even more this year.

The Role of the LISD Board

The LISD Board decisions in the past five years also contributed significantly to the budget deficit.  Student experience and outcomes, as well as teacher support, were subordinated to ideological goals and pet projects.  And, when Aaron Johnson left the board in 2022, no one was left to prioritize financial responsibility.

The following decisions led to higher costs:

1. Failure to adjust to enrollment trends.  

   1. Leadership should have adjusted the number of classes at elementary schools to match enrollment numbers. Some schools have very small classes, wasting resources. For example, some 1st-grade classes have only 15 students, while others have 20 (2). 

   2. Several schools in the central and southern parts of the district have low enrollment. The need to close some schools has been clear for years, and the Long Range Planning Committee was close to finalizing a plan to do so in May 2024 before their work was suddenly stopped (4).

2. Creating the LISD Police Department.  Instead of expanding their relationship with local law enforcement, the LISD Board elected to pursue the most costly approach to meeting the state security mandate, spending $4.8 million annually to create its own police department, more than three times the $1.7 million the state gave for security.

3. Building the Early Childhood Center (ECC).  In October 2023, the wisdom of an Early Childhood Center was questionable due to enrollment projections, transportation concerns and lack of input from parents on the centralized concept.  But, rather than re-evaluate the plan to repurpose LEO to an ECC, the Board chose to push up the building of an ECC on vacant land for the cost of $60 million, $23 million more than was allocated in the bond.

4. Adding PK-3.  While the state requires schools to offer early childhood programs for at-risk children, it does not require Pre-K-3.  Few districts in the state offer PK-3 because it drains resources from K-5 programs.  LISD could save valuable operating dollars and classroom space in the north by discontinuing the elective PK-3 program.

5. Across the board raises for all employees. In May 2024, the Board approved a 2.5% raise for all employees, including over $1 million for administration, even though the district’s administration salaries were already higher than the market average (5).

6. Creating a costly DEI department (now called Office of Educational Access).  

7. Refusal to participate in the state-funded Teacher Incentive Allotment (TIA).  The TIA offers bonuses to high-performing teachers to help keep them in the classroom. By not participating in the TIA, LISD is at a disadvantage when trying to hire teachers.  It seems the Board’s perspective is, since it doesn’t pay everyone, no one will get it (6).

Steps the Board Can Take Now

Here are some ways The LISD Board can improve the district’s finances.

1. Close unnecessary schools: Quickly close schools that are no longer needed, repurpose some of them for other district needs, and consider leasing or selling others.

2. Adjust class sizes: Make class sizes more consistent to ensure equitable student-teacher ratios. 

3. End the voluntary Pre-K-3 program: Save money by discontinuing this program, which isn’t required by the state.

4. Delay opening of the Early Childhood Center: Instead focus on the much needed ES #31.

5. Delay new construction: Wait to build Elementary School #32 until the district has completed school closures and zoning changes.

6. Move ahead with Open Enrollment: Increase enrollment in the South as was recommended by the Long Range Planning Committee over 2 years ago.

7. Disband the LISD Police Department: Work with local law enforcement to find a more affordable way to meet security needs.

8. Adopt the Teacher Incentive Allotment: Provide thousands of dollars in bonuses to hard working teachers.

Putting First Things First - The Importance of Student Experience

Financial viability is critical, but the core responsibility of the district is to provide a high-quality education for the children in our community. Parents are increasingly choosing private and charter schools, and the Board needs to understand why this is happening. Changes can be made to bring those students back.  

The issue isn’t about special programs or innovative academies, nor is it about our teachers and principals not doing their best—they are. The problem lies in the overall student experience. Parents are leaving because of LISD’s top-down approach, weak curriculum, and classroom disorder that has not been addressed.

By focusing on these issues, LISD can better meet the needs of students and improve its finances. If LISD were truly a destination district—a place families want to send their children—we would have full schools and the funding to support every student.

References:

1. Four Points News - February 14, 2025

2. River Place Elementary, as one example, has for the second year in a row, had 5 1st grade classes each with 16 students instead of 4 1st grade classes with 20 students 

3. Source: https://www.terrywilsonfortexas.com/articleslist/op-ed31

4. Had the Long Range Planning been allowed to continue their work, a handful of scenarios with defined impact on students and budgets could have been shared with the community this past fall and the Board could have already taken action.  Instead, because leadership did not like the direction the data was taking the hard-working, multidimensional Committee, they have gone back to square one.  As the Chief Operations Officer stated, “We are still in the early stages of gathering data and exploring options to ensure any future steps are well informed.”1  

5. April 25, 2024 Board Meeting: 2024-2025 Total Compensation Recommendations Presentation

6. When asked about the TIA, Board member Anna Smith stated, “While the Teacher Incentive Allotment boosts pay for some, it’s not a comprehensive solution. TIA benefits only a small group, leaving others unsupported. We need equitable solutions that value all staff and ensure fair compensation.”2  Community Impact  - October 2024