Enough with grandstanding in Spring Branch ISD
I served in various leadership roles in Spring Branch ISD for 18 years, my last 11 as superintendent of schools. There were many financial challenges during those years, especially after the mortgage crisis in 2008, when we had to eliminate more than 350 positions. During that time, a few core beliefs guided the board and me.
First, we believed that before we made personnel or program cuts at school campuses, we needed to make as many reductions as possible at central office.
Second, when we were making reductions that directly affected campuses and students, we believed the projected savings should justify the possible negative impact on the affected communities. In other words, don’t create angst in the community if the decision you are making doesn’t save enough money to justify the resulting disruption.
Finally, we believed that engaging the community’s expertise would aid us in making the best decisions.
Spring Branch’s current board does not seem to follow any of these core beliefs. Recently, Spring Branch announced that it is in a financial crisis due to the inaction of state lawmakers. The district projects a $35 million deficit.
Based on the district’s financial statements, Spring Branch currently spends roughly $387 million per year. A $35 million reduction would represent 9% of its budget. However, many in the community question if Spring Branch’s financial crisis is as dire as it claims, since it currently has an available fund balance (savings account) in excess of $100 million.
Unfortunately, without answering questions from the affected communities and adequately engaging them as experts, the school board has moved forward, radically eliminating several valued programs. At Stratford High
School, the board decided to eliminate the block master schedule — a very successful academic scheduling system that has been in place for decades and has broad support from students, parents and teachers. The board also decided to eliminate the popular and well established gifted and talented program that gave students from across the district special instruction once a week at Bendwood Elementary.
Beyond those programmatic cuts, the board made deeper cuts affecting the most impoverished area of the school district. The board voted to close Treasure Forest Elementary, a highpoverty campus on the north side of the school district. The board’s rationale was that the campus is underutilized due to declining enrollment. But other campuses in the more affluent areas of the school district are also not at capacity. Were any of those campuses considered?
The board also voted to end the very popular SKY Partnership at Landrum Middle School, Northbrook Middle School and Northbrook High School. SKY is a unique partnership that combined the best of Spring Branch, KIPP Houston and YES Prep Houston programs for students in three of the most impoverished schools in the district. It has seen great success in providing access to higher education for first-generation students.
The board also decided to close the Panda Path Pre-K Center, a very successful early childhood program also located in the Northbrook area of the school district.
And recently, they took “radical” to a whole new level and announced another round of cuts including eliminating all librarians in the school system.
What’s changed? It’s the board.
Until recently, Spring Branch had a very representative board of trustees. For decades, the community always resisted electing single-issue candidates, instead electing community leaders who had dedicated years of service to the school system and had a clear understanding of the district’s finances.
In the last three election cycles, however, influenced heavily by a massive amount of outside money, a majority of the newly elected school board members have focused narrowly on social and political issues while ignoring the needs of the majority of the district’s students and the wants of the community.
For example, a few months ago, the board voted to not send its Robin Hood payment to the state of Texas in a show of defiance. (This payment is required by state law; the money is redistributed to districts with lower property values and less funds.) A member of the school board even demanded that the school district fly a “Come and Take It” flag from its flagpole. Recently, though, the board quietly voted to send the payment to the state. Such showmanship accomplishes nothing.
School boards are designed to be representative and responsive to local constituents. In this case, the constituents have many unanswered questions that deserve a clear and transparent explanation from the school board.
• Why have you decided to attack your state elected leaders instead of working with them to solve the financial problems? Previously, SBISD had a stellar reputation as a district collaborating with its elected leaders to develop trust and respect and achieve the best outcomes for its students.
• Why are you making drastic cuts when you are sitting on over $100 million in your fund balance?
• Why are most of the cuts in the most impoverished part of the school district? Suppose the students in the SKY Partnership leave the school district and go to KIPP and YES Prep schools. Won’t the school district actually lose more money in perstudent funding than the partnership currently costs?
• In both the SKY Partnership and Panda Path situations, the board has ignored their partners’ offers to renegotiate the agreements so the programs can continue uninterrupted. In the Panda Path case, the partner has offered to cover the rental costs of the facility at a savings of $220,000 per year. What is the board’s real motivation in closing these programs without any effort to keep them open?
I have a background in finance, and have reviewed the school district’s required financial reports, as well as the financial information it has provided on its website. The Spring Branch community needs to know that the cuts at this drastic level are not needed at this time.
Spring Branch’s financial crisis is largely a result of the board approving budgets that added staff at a time of declining enrollment and an excessive use of the federal pandemic funds to pay for staff. The board should have seen this issue coming and planned accordingly. Instead, they were focused on social and political issues, and not the financial health of the school system.
This challenge is an opportunity for the new board to show their competence and ability to manage the district financially and provide strong representation to all areas of the school district. So far, they have failed that test.