Blog

Newsletter Blog News Website Update Announcement

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEJuly 21, 2025Contact:Texas Public Education Defense Fundpress@tpedf.org | www.tpedf.org<figure id="figure-hmpksdrtjvmddkrkhy"><img id="hmpksdrtjvmddkrkhy" src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/485852674/photo/equality-balance-discrimination-equal-moral-concept.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=UVxmwPVLO2IEw6c5PzokPT9VNpjno3JU7SRTnQzafgg=" alt="Equality Balance Discrimination Equal Moral Concept" title="Equality Balance Discrimination Equal Moral Concept" class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: center center;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="16:9" data-caption="" data-positionx="undefined" data-positiony="undefined" data-fullwidth="false" data-mce-src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/485852674/photo/equality-balance-discrimination-equal-moral-concept.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=UVxmwPVLO2IEw6c5PzokPT9VNpjno3JU7SRTnQzafgg=" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: center center;"></figure><h3>TPEDF Files Level One Grievance Against GCISD Over Budget Decisions Impacting Title I Campuses</h3>Colleyville, TX — On July 21, 2025, the Texas Public Education Defense Fund (TPEDF) submitted a formal Community Level One Grievance with Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District (GCISD), objecting to recent decisions made by the GCISD Board of Trustees during its June 16, 2025, budget adoption.The grievance challenges the District’s official position formally adopted with the budget, which includes: - Continuing to increase out-of-district student transfers, a policy that threatens the district’s eligibility for federal Title I funding allocated for economically disadvantaged students;- Eliminating vital intervention positions at Title I campuses that were previously funded through federal Title grants; and- Reassigning and altering the roles of Gifted and Talented (GT) Specialists exclusively at Title I campuses. These actions were taken despite a June 23, 2025, letter submitted to the GCISD Board signed by more than 140 concerned district families urging the Board to reverse the cuts to GT positions at Title I schools. The letter, representing a broad cross-section of the GCISD community, was effectively ignored. The Board proceeded without meaningful response or consideration of the community’s concerns, prompting this formal grievance filing.“These decisions disproportionately impact GCISD's most vulnerable student populations,” said Andrew Sternke, Executive Director of TPEDF. “It is unacceptable for the district to continue expanding policies that undermine support for economically disadvantaged children, all while stripping away targeted interventions and programs at the campuses that need them most.”TPEDF's grievance asserts that these budgetary actions demonstrate a troubling pattern of inequity and neglect, potentially violating the district's own equity policy and federal compliance policies. The organization urges GCISD to reconsider these harmful decisions and restore support to Title I campuses.If GCISD does not address these concerns through its grievance process, TPEDF is prepared to take further action, including formal complaints to the Texas Education Agency and U.S. Department of Education, and, if necessary, litigation. About TPEDF:The Texas Public Education Defense Fund is a nonprofit legal advocacy organization committed to defending public education, ensuring equitable funding, and holding school districts accountable to the communities they serve.

TPEDF Files Level One Grievance Against GCISD Over Budget Decisions Impacting Title I Campuses

<h3>Our Texas Families and Our Public Schools are at Risk</h3>When President Trump signed the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” into law on July 4, Texas families and communities will immediately feel the consequences. While some lawmakers claim this legislation will “streamline” federal spending, the reality is that it guts vital support systems for millions of working families by slashing Medicaid funding, cutting SNAP food assistance, and rolling back Affordable Care Act protections.This is not just a health care or economic issue; it’s an education issue, too. And our schools, students, and communities will pay the price.<h3>Texas Already Leads the Nation in Uninsured Kids</h3>Texas already has the highest rate of uninsured children in the country, and nearly one in five Texas kids has no health insurance at all. For many working families, Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) are critical lifelines that help keep kids healthy and in the classroom.Under this new bill, millions of Americans stand to lose Medicaid coverage due to harsh cuts and strict work requirements. Here in Texas, that means thousands of children will arrive at school without access to basic medical care, vaccinations, or mental health support. Chronic conditions like asthma, diabetes, and learning disabilities will go untreated, making it harder for students to attend school regularly, focus in class, and succeed.<h3>SNAP Cuts Hit Hungry Kids Hardest</h3>The “Big Beautiful Bill” doesn’t stop at health care; it also cuts funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). In Texas, more than 3 million people rely on SNAP to put food on the table, including thousands of students who depend on school breakfast and lunch programs to meet their basic needs.When families lose SNAP benefits, schools see an immediate impact: more hungry students show up to class without having eaten, affecting concentration, behavior, and overall academic performance. Hunger doesn’t stop when the bell rings; it follows kids into every lesson, every test, and every opportunity they might otherwise have to succeed.<figure id="figure-ar6n17xmnmcqdsr8a"><img id="ar6n17xmnmcqdsr8a" src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/2161159016/photo/an-elementary-school-student-with-a-disaster-backpack-and-poor-health-sitting-on-the-stairs.jpg?b=1&s=2048x2048&w=0&k=20&c=lfhcjSdAHv4fMKw_GLF_Yg5-_b4PXXC1kfFlbE2pOkw=" alt="An elementary school student with a disaster backpack and poor health. Sitting on the stairs." title="An elementary school student with a disaster backpack and poor health. Sitting on the stairs." class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: center center;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="16:9" data-caption="" data-positionX="undefined" data-positionY="undefined" data-fullWidth="false"/></figure><h3>Schools Depend on Medicaid and Nutrition Programs</h3>Many Texans don’t realize that public schools rely on Medicaid reimbursements and federal meal programs to provide essential services and nutrition. Schools use Medicaid funds to deliver speech therapy, mental health counseling, and special education support. SNAP works hand in hand with school meal programs to ensure that kids have the fuel they need to learn.When those funds disappear, schools are forced to make impossible choices—they must cover these costs themselves and provide services that help the students who need them most.<h3>The Ripple Effect on Texas Schools</h3>When students lack health insurance or don’t get enough to eat at home, they miss more school days and struggle to keep up in class. Teachers spend more time managing untreated health conditions than focusing on learning. Communities see higher dropout rates, a less prepared workforce, and a greater burden on local resources.For Texas, a state that already underfunds its public schools by thousands of dollars per student compared to the national average, these cuts pose another threat to our students and families. As our Executive Director, Andrew Sternke, reminds us:<blockquote>Empathy and caring for vulnerable students and families are nonpartisan issues, and this new bill will negatively impact our public schools and students’ academics.</blockquote><h3>Where We Stand</h3>At the Texas Public Education Defense Fund, we believe Texans must advocate for our kids and our schools. We must demand that our state and federal leaders protect Medicaid, SNAP, and other essential supports for the students and families who need them most. This is more than budgets and policy, it’s about who we are and what we value as a community.TPEDF remains committed to advocating, educating, and, when necessary, litigating to protect our public schools and the communities they serve. Together, we can ensure every Texas child has the chance to learn, grow, and thrive.

How the “Big Beautiful Bill” Puts Texas Families and Our Public Schools at Risk

Judgement gavel  American flag and policy text

<h2>When Transparency Is Treated as Optional: Why Jackson Walker LLP’s Withholding of Keller ISD Legal Invoices Undermines Texas Law</h2>By Andrew D. Sternke, J.D. Executive Director, Texas Public Education Defense Fund In Texas, the public’s right to know how its tax dollars are spent is not just a principle; it’s the law. The Texas Public Information Act (TPIA) and the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA) were enacted to ensure transparency and accountability in government operations, particularly where public money and local decision-making intersect.Unfortunately, recent developments involving Jackson Walker LLP and attorney Tim Davis in their representation of Keller Independent School District (Keller ISD)&nbsp; Board of Trustees raise serious concerns about the erosion of these protections. Based on reports and Public Information Act requests submitted by community members, Jackson Walker LLP withholds key details of legal invoices paid for by Keller ISD taxpayers under the questionable blanket assertion of attorney-client privilege.As the Executive Director of the Texas Public Education Defense Fund, I believe this misuse of legal privilege and public resources warrants close scrutiny. If attorneys can shield entire invoices from disclosure simply by labeling them “confidential,” the very foundation of open government is at risk.Let’s examine the legal, ethical, and policy failures involved and respond to the justifications that will inevitably be offered. The Law Is Clear: Legal Billing Records Are PublicThe Texas Public Information Act is unambiguous. Section 552.022 (a) (3) of the Texas Government Code provides:&nbsp;“The following categories of information are public information and not excepted from required disclosure unless expressly confidential under other law:(3) information in an account, voucher, or contract relating to the receipt or expenditure of public funds by a governmental body.”This statutory mandate applies squarely to legal invoices, and it has been reinforced repeatedly by Texas courts and the Texas Attorney General.In City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 351 (Tex. 2000), the Texas Supreme Court held that while limited redactions may be appropriate, legal billing records, particularly the general descriptions of services rendered, hours worked, and amounts billed are public.Similarly, in Abbott v. Texas Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, 212 S.W.3d 648 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006), the court emphasized that only truly privileged information, such as legal advice or litigation strategy, can be withheld. The burden is on the governmental body to justify specific redactions, not withhold entire invoices.If Jackson Walker LLP and Keller ISD refuse to produce invoices in full or are broadly redacting routine billing entries without producing a privilege log or individualized justification, they are operating outside of what Texas law permits. Rebutting the Justifications for WithholdingAttorneys defending this practice may point to the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship or the sensitivity of legal strategy. These are important principles but they are not absolute, especially in the context of public governance.1. “The invoices are protected by attorney-client privilege.”Only specific communications that contain confidential legal advice are protected. Basic billing entries like “phone call with board member,” “reviewed policy,” or “drafted memo” are not privileged unless they reveal substantive legal opinions.The Texas Attorney General’s Open Records Decision ORD-676 (2002) affirms that descriptions of legal tasks must generally be disclosed. Courts and the Attorney General's Office consistently reject broad claims of privilege without a detailed explanation.2. “Disclosure would compromise litigation strategy.”This argument falls flat unless the invoice contains specific information about case strategy. Courts in Texas have ruled that factual descriptions of services are not exempt merely because they relate to ongoing litigation. This was made clear in National American Ins. Co. v. Texas Workers’ Comp. Comm’n, 925 S.W.2d 312 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996).3. “Client confidentiality prevents disclosure.”The client in this case is a public school district board, funded by taxpayers and subject to statutory transparency requirements. The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.05 (c) (8) explicitly allow disclosure when required by law. The TPIA is such a law. Confidentiality cannot be used to override statutory mandates.4. “The request is too broad or burdensome.”Even if broad, the TPIA provides a mechanism to seek clarification or charge for retrieval under Section 552.222. It does not permit outright refusal to disclose responsive records. The governmental body must, by law, make a good-faith effort to separate exempt from non-exempt information and produce what it lawfully can. Undermining the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA)Beyond the TPIA, this conduct raises additional concerns under the Texas Open Meetings Act. If the Keller ISD School Board is using legal services for internal governance actions such as silencing dissent, controlling board member behavior, or shaping district politics, those activities must be conducted transparently. TOMA requires:<ul><li>Proper public posting of meeting agendas (§ 551.041),</li><li>Open deliberations on public business and expenditures (§ 551.002), and</li><li>Accurate records of closed sessions, limited only to permissible exceptions (§ 551.103).</li></ul> When invoices for legal services are concealed, the public cannot evaluate whether the school board is using legal counsel for appropriate district business or for political or retaliatory purposes. This frustrates TOMA’s entire purpose. Ethical Duties of Legal Counsel in the Public SectorAttorneys practicing in the public sector are held to high ethical standards. The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically Rule 8.04 (a) (3) prohibit conduct involving dishonesty, deceit, or misrepresentation. If an attorney asserts privilege over public records without proper legal basis, or enables a public client to subvert transparency laws, that attorney risks violating professional conduct rules.Additionally, public-sector attorneys have a heightened duty to facilitate transparency, not obstruct it. Hiding taxpayer-funded invoices behind a wall of overbroad privilege not only violates public trust, but it may also cross ethical and legal boundaries. The Public’s Right to KnowAt its core, this controversy is about accountability. Public school districts are stewards of community trust and taxpayer money. When attorneys advise school boards, they are by extension, serving the public interest.If invoices for legal services can be fully withheld or selectively redacted to avoid scrutiny, then what stops school districts from using public funds to engage in covert political retaliation, silencing of dissent, or wasteful legal pursuits? Transparency laws exist to prevent exactly this.Texas law does not grant attorneys or school districts the power to override transparency with vague appeals to privilege. The public has a right to see how, why, and for what purpose their money is spent, especially when legal services are involved. Final ThoughtsThe withholding of legal invoices by Jackson Walker LLP and Tim Davis in their representation of Keller ISD appears to be not just poor public policy, but legally unsound. The Texas Public Information Act and Open Meetings Act exist to ensure accountability and transparency. Ignoring them or selectively applying them to avoid scrutiny is an affront to the principles of open government.We call on Keller ISD and its counsel to comply fully with the law, disclose the requested records as required, and restore public trust in the governance of our public schools.The taxpayers deserve no less. ReferencesTex. Gov’t Code §§ 552.001–552.353 (Texas Public Information Act)Tex. Gov’t Code §§ 551.001–551.146 (Texas Open Meetings Act)City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 351 (Tex. 2000)Abbott v. Texas Dep’t of Mental Health &amp; Mental Retardation, 212 S.W.3d 648 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006)National American Ins. Co. v. Texas Workers’ Comp. Comm’n, 925 S.W.2d 312 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996)Tex. Att’y Gen. ORD-676 (2002), ORD-683 (2009)Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, Rules 1.05, 8.04 Disclaimer:The information provided in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice regarding specific legal matters or rights, readers should consult with a qualified attorney licensed in their jurisdiction.

When Transparency Is Treated as Optional: Why Jackson Walker LLP’s Withholding of Keller ISD Legal Invoices Undermines Texas Law

<figure id="figure-4p7mxqy10mmcdt6rko" class=""><img id="4p7mxqy10mmcdt6rko" src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/1269044132/photo/teenagers-covering-faces-with-speech-bubbles-successful-education-concept.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=zlOQISYOdXNoKm7DNTwJ0sX7ALDazRYZQAwX7rRo2VQ=" alt="Teenagers covering faces with speech bubbles, successful education concept" title="Teenagers covering faces with speech bubbles, successful education concept" class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: center center;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="16:9" data-caption="" data-positionx="null" data-positiony="null" data-fullwidth="false" data-mce-src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/1269044132/photo/teenagers-covering-faces-with-speech-bubbles-successful-education-concept.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=zlOQISYOdXNoKm7DNTwJ0sX7ALDazRYZQAwX7rRo2VQ=" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: center center;"></figure><h3>TPEDF Stands with Parents to Oppose GCISD Title I Campus Cuts</h3>The Texas Public Education Defense Fund (TPEDF) has issued a formal notice to Grapevine-Colleyville ISD (GCISD) demanding that the district amend its 2025–26 budget to reinstate critical interventionist positions and restore equitable Gifted &amp; Talented (GT) services across Title I campuses. These cuts disproportionately affect economically disadvantaged students at Bear Creek, Dove, Silver Lake, and Timberline Elementary and were triggered not by declining need but by administrative choices to increase out-of-district transfers.TPEDF argues that GCISD’s actions violate state and federal laws, including the Texas Constitution's Equal Protection Clause, the State Plan for Gifted/Talented Education, and Title I fiscal mandates under 20 U.S.C. § 6321. The organization proposes cost-saving alternatives, such as reducing legal fees and administrative spending to protect services for the district’s most vulnerable students.Unless GCISD amends its budget by July 11, 2025, TPEDF is prepared to support affected families in filing administrative grievances, state and federal complaints, and, if necessary, pursuing legal action to halt the inequitable changes. Read the full letter below and learn how TPEDF is defending public education:<a data-mce-href="https://www.canva.com/design/DAGrfRbFQ3o/_iPEPkrj_6NNel34sssjLA/view?utm_content=DAGrfRbFQ3o&amp;utm_campaign=designshare&amp;utm_medium=link2&amp;utm_source=uniquelinks&amp;utlId=h4c9c8cc438" href="https://www.canva.com/design/DAGrfRbFQ3o/_iPEPkrj_6NNel34sssjLA/view?utm_content=DAGrfRbFQ3o&amp;utm_campaign=designshare&amp;utm_medium=link2&amp;utm_source=uniquelinks&amp;utlId=h4c9c8cc438" data-mce-selected="inline-boundary">TPEDF Letter to GCISD Board June 23, 2025</a>

TPEDF Stands with Parents to Oppose GCISD Title I Campus Cuts

<h2>Understanding Recent Legislative Changes</h2>In recent years, Texas public schools have undergone significant legislative changes that impact students, parents, and educators alike. Staying informed about these changes can be challenging for parents. However, understanding them is crucial to ensure that children receive the best possible education. This guide aims to provide clarity on the evolving landscape of Texas public school legislation.One of the most notable changes involves adjustments to the curriculum standards. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) regularly updates the <a data-mce-href="https://tea.texas.gov/academics/curriculum-standards/teks-review/texas-essential-knowledge-and-skills" href="https://tea.texas.gov/academics/curriculum-standards/teks-review/texas-essential-knowledge-and-skills" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS)</a> to enhance educational outcomes. Parents should familiarize themselves with these updates to understand what their children are learning in school.<figure id="figure-54gqa1twvimbadqhu8" class="selected"><img id="54gqa1twvimbadqhu8" src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/865429020/photo/texas-high-school-classroom-flag-clock.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=oylKpDC5L-11-IAdVRAhV_E460Sq6vT3-0t899wtNJ4=" alt="texas schools" class="object-cover bg-gray-100" style="aspect-ratio: 16/9;" data-mce-src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/865429020/photo/texas-high-school-classroom-flag-clock.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=oylKpDC5L-11-IAdVRAhV_E460Sq6vT3-0t899wtNJ4=" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9;"></figure><h2>Impact on School Funding and Resources</h2>Another significant area affected by recent legislation is school funding. Changes in funding policies can directly impact the resources available to schools, influencing everything from classroom size to extracurricular activities. Parents should be aware of how these changes might affect their child's educational experience.For instance, the introduction of new funding formulas aims to provide more equitable distribution of resources across districts. However, this can lead to shifts in budget allocations, affecting some schools more than others. Engaging with your local school board can provide insights into how these changes are being implemented at your child’s school.<figure id="figure-8p8ias7qammbadqhu8"><img id="8p8ias7qammbadqhu8" src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/465727260/photo/saving-for-education.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=NYwDZDj6EmbZbAcjLisF83G9pjj1wjC8crcDP2HZPRg=" alt="school funding" class="object-cover bg-gray-100" style="aspect-ratio: 16/9;" data-mce-src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/465727260/photo/saving-for-education.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=NYwDZDj6EmbZbAcjLisF83G9pjj1wjC8crcDP2HZPRg=" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9;"></figure><h3>Special Education and Support Services</h3>The legislative landscape also includes changes in special education services. New policies are designed to improve support for students with disabilities by ensuring they receive appropriate accommodations and resources. Understanding these rights can help parents advocate effectively for their children’s needs.Parents should review the updated guidelines on Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and Section 504 plans to ensure compliance with state standards. Collaboration with teachers and special education coordinators can further enhance the support their children receive.<h2>Navigating Standardized Testing Requirements</h2>Standardized testing is another area where legislative changes frequently occur. Recent modifications aim to balance accountability with student well-being by adjusting testing frequency and content. Parents should stay informed about these changes to help their children prepare effectively.Understanding the state’s testing requirements can alleviate stress for students and parents alike. Resources such as study guides and practice tests are often available through schools, offering valuable tools to support student success.<figure id="figure-3urhnto9pmmbadqhu8"><img id="3urhnto9pmmbadqhu8" src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/1152410679/photo/education-school-test-concept-hands-student-holding-pencil-for-testing-exams-writing-answer.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=TcyU30vHayeafqUlWsMppcemaEby00fU1ru6tuEjX04=" alt="standardized testing" class="object-cover bg-gray-100" style="aspect-ratio: 16/9;" data-mce-src="https://media.gettyimages.com/id/1152410679/photo/education-school-test-concept-hands-student-holding-pencil-for-testing-exams-writing-answer.jpg?b=1&amp;s=2048x2048&amp;w=0&amp;k=20&amp;c=TcyU30vHayeafqUlWsMppcemaEby00fU1ru6tuEjX04=" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9;"></figure><h3>Engaging with Local School Boards</h3>Engagement with local school boards is crucial for parents navigating legislative changes. School board meetings provide an opportunity for parents to voice concerns, ask questions, and gain a deeper understanding of how legislative decisions are affecting their child’s education.Parents are encouraged to attend these meetings regularly and participate in discussions. Being proactive can lead to positive changes in the education system and ensure that parental voices are heard in shaping future policies.<h2>Final Thoughts: Staying Informed and Involved</h2>In conclusion, staying informed and involved is key for parents navigating the evolving world of Texas public school legislation. By understanding recent changes, engaging with educators, and participating in local school board activities, parents can play a vital role in supporting their children’s educational journey.It’s important to remember that parents are not alone in this endeavor. Numerous resources are available online and through local community organizations to assist parents in staying updated and advocating effectively for their children’s education.

Navigating Changes in Texas Public School Legislation: A Parent's Guide

What cuts did GCISD make?GCISD made cuts to interventionist positions, adjusted the role of the GT Specialists to include new intervention duties (which will come at the loss of GT Enrichment time), and proposed potential changes to how GT pull-out services are delivered (including proposing to combing classes). These cuts and potential changes are only occurring at the Title I campuses.Why did GCISD make these cuts?GCISD is no longer eligible for certain Title I, Part A grant funds (totaling $508,000) — determined based on the percentage of economically disadvantaged students in GCISD. Due to the large number of out-of-district transfer students (mainly at iUniversity Prep, the virtual school), the percentage of economically disadvantaged students dropped below the 5% threshold. GCISD accepted ~1800 out-of-district transfer students last year and only 40 of those students are considered economically disadvantaged.&nbsp;Is GCISD aware of how the grants are calculated?GCISD indicated that the May 2025 correspondence was the first time the funding calculation had been provided to GCISD. Per TEA, the statutory funding formula is part of ESSA, which was enacted in 2015. The letter on May 20th referred GCISD to the TEA ESSA Funding Reference Manual that was most recently updated on February 2024. The manual includes a section on page 4 titled “Charter LEAs and Inter-District Transfer Data” and explains how those students are included in the calculation of Title I grants.&nbsp;Regardless of whether GCISD was unaware or is failing to acknowledge that they were not monitoring the impact transfer students would have on the Title I grant eligibility, GCISD should not be punishing the students at Title I campuses whose supports are being cut due to the district not monitoring the transfer impact.Should GCISD cut interventionist positions at Title I campuses?&nbsp;No. Regardless of interventionist positions being Title I funded, the loss of Title I funds is not because GCISD has fewer Title I students in its geographic area. Rather, by allowing these cuts, GCISD is prioritizing students who live outside GCISD over providing needed support to students who live within GCISD. GCISD should reallocate funds from iUniversity Prep profits to cover the interventionist and paraprofessional positions at the Title I campuses that were cut.&nbsp;What the interventionist cuts mean for students?Eliminating interventionist positions will reduce the amount of time available for providing intervention services to students who need support the most. And GT Specialists do not have the same training as those who were in the positions eliminated. So GCISD will be providing less effective intervention services.&nbsp;What do the cuts to GT mean?&nbsp;Per district communications, proposed changes to GT services are at the principal’s discretion and include combining grade levels for GT pull-out services (at 3 of the 4 targeted Title I campuses). GT Enrichment to non-identified GT students (who are on the cusp of being GT identified) will also be reduced and, in some instances (such as during STAAR prep), fully eliminated.&nbsp;Are Enrichment and Intervention the same thing?&nbsp;No. GCISD’s Director of Advanced Academics confirmed that enrichment and intervention are distinct and unique services and that using the phrase “enrichment/intervention” in communications to GCISD parents could be misleading. Rather, the purpose was to identify that each principal will have discretion to make adjustments as to the percent of time enrichment services and intervention support are provided by the GT Specialists on the Title I campuses.&nbsp;Is GT a Title I funded program? No.So, why was GT targeted?&nbsp;GCISD claimed there were fewer identified GT students on the Title I campuses. However, by reducing GT Enrichment opportunities on the same campuses, the number of GT identified students will decline further. Also, every grade in GCISD has at least 4 GT identified students (the threshold for GT Pullout services). As such, each grade is entitled, under the law, to the same number of minutes regardless of whether there are 4 students or 15 students in the GT pull-out class. Some non-Title I campuses have enough GT identified students in some grades to require two separate classes. However, at the Forum, GCISD parents stated that this is not consistent from campus-to-campus with some non-Title one pull-out groups including more than 20 students.&nbsp;GCISD also identified the additional planning minutes built into GT Specialists’ schedules. However, the communication did not acknowledge the additional tasks (GT testing, data entry, Kindergarten Screening, and many more) that are required to be completed during the GT Specialists’ planning time.&nbsp;Can GT students transfer from a Title I campuses to a campus where the delivery of GT services has not changed?Most likely, no. In 2025, GCISD passed a policy that begins the elimination for options to transfers to other campuses within the district.&nbsp;Why does GCISD continue to bring up that GCISD is not required, by law, to offer GT Pull-Out?We are unsure. The issue is not whether GCISD is providing a service it is not required to provide. Rather, the issue regarding the current cuts has to do with GCISD changing the quality and delivery of GT services at only the Title I campuses. The changes should be made at every campus or at no campus.&nbsp;How did parents learn about the cuts?&nbsp;Word of mouth. Much like many of the prior cuts (especially to programs at Title I campuses) including to the two-way dual language programs, science engagement special, Leader In Me, or Scholastic book fairs, GCISD never communicated the latest cuts at the Title I campuses to parents until after parents learned about the cuts through the grapevine. Any inaccuracies or misinformation that GCISD alleges were spread in the community are a direct result of GCISD’s failure to keep families informed in a timely manner.&nbsp;Is GCISD going to make changes to iUniversity Prep transfer process?No. Instead, at the June 9th Budget Workshop, Dr. Schnautz advised he was confident that the district could continue growing the iUniversity Prep enrollment (including targeted growth from 1384 students to 1519 students). While we appreciate the need to generate revenue, this growth should be strategic and should not come at the expense of students who live within the GCISD geographic boundaries.&nbsp;What is the current financial situation in GCISD?GCISD has had a deficit budget for more than four years. This is due in part to state funding inadequacies but is also due to decisions made at the local level by the GCISD Board of Trustees and administration. These include lowering the tax rate when we had a deficit budget, paying more than $504,000 to the board’s separate counsel since June 2022 (who was hired in addition to the district’s own counsel), spending money on unnecessary lawsuits to appeal decisions about producing records the AG said GCISD must release to the public, buying matching trustee apparel, etc. GCISD has also eliminated programs that increased the basic allotment for the students in those programs. All of these are district level decisions.&nbsp;Wasn’t the VATRE supposed to stop cuts?That is what we were told. We feel blackmailed by the information that was presented when the VATRE was promoted.&nbsp;What can we do now?&nbsp;The next most crucial date regarding these changes is June 16 — the date the GCISD Board will meet to adopt the budget for 2025-26. The board has the authority - and should - vote no to any budget that fails to reallocate transfer revenue to cover the cost of the interventionist positions on the Title I campuses. Every board member who votes for a budget that does not reallocate funds from out-of-district transfers means that those board members are prioritizing one group of students over another.You should email the board and administration and ask your friends and neighbors to email the board and demand that they reallocate funds. Parents also need to speak at the board meeting. The meeting is at 5:30 pm and the online sign-up for public comment ends at 4pm.&nbsp;What if the Board of Trustees approves the budget without re-allocation of funds?Every board member who votes for a budget without requiring a reallocation of funds, is voting to provide resources to students who do not live in GCISD at the expense of Title I students who do. However, if this issue is not resolved through the budget process, additional steps can include pursuing a grievance, seeking an injunction from the courts to prevent implementation of these changes, and moving to seek other civil remedies available through lawsuits. As GCISD taxpayers and parents, we hope to avoid having to pursue a grievance or initiating a lawsuit because this will require GCISD to pay an attorney to defend which will further take money from our schools. However, if GCISD refuses to provide truly equitable services to every student in GCISD, we are prepared to take the next necessary steps.&nbsp;Why is it urgent that parents act now?&nbsp;&nbsp;Parents cannot wait until August to to see how the Master Schedule is adjusted. At the Forum, Title I parents spoke to their past experience with changes to the two-way dual language program as that program is being phased out. The district did not keep its word to those families. And continues to fail to communicate with them. Instead those families have stressed that parents must act to prevent the changes from being implemented instead.&nbsp; <figure id="figure-hi4bsyavm5mbuttan8"data-full-width><img id="hi4bsyavm5mbuttan8" src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/26nc7tshxLZllXo2dkZEXq5bkJNXefW7HGerhzYcbD27QhLWiDjwRQm0SosfTECV.png" alt="" title="" class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 1/1; object-position: 45% 45%;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="1:1" data-caption="" data-positionX="45%" data-positionY="45%" data-fullWidth="true"/></figure>

News

TPEDF Files Level One Grievance Against GCISD Over Budget...

How the “Big Beautiful Bill” Puts Texas Families and Our ...

When Transparency Is Treated as Optional: Why Jackson Wal...

TPEDF Stands with Parents to Oppose GCISD Title I Campus ...

Navigating Changes in Texas Public School Legislation: A ...

Grapevine-Colleyville ISD Gifted and Talented Program Ine...