Pasadena ISD presents proposed $528.6M budget and warns of $29.2M projected deficit
June 23, 2026 | PASADENA ISD, School Districts, Texas
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Board President Casey Felen opened a public hearing June 23 on Pasadena ISD’s proposed 2026–27 budget and proposed tax rate. Chief Financial Officer Dr. Tamika Alfred Stevens presented enrollment and revenue assumptions and described measures staff has taken to reduce costs.
Dr. Tamika Alfred Stevens, the district’s chief financial officer, said the proposed general‑fund revenue is $528,628,857 and projected expenditures are $557,856,333, producing a projected deficit of $29,230,476. She told trustees the district is forecasting average daily attendance assumptions and has identified operational reductions of about $2.1 million and anticipated $30 million in savings through staffing adjustments and attrition.
The presentation also described two tax‑rate components staff proposed to present as a combined package: a maintenance and operations component and an interest and sinking (debt‑service) component. Dr. Stevens said the board would formally adopt rates after the county provides certified property values, typically in late July or early August.
Board members and members of the public pressed staff for context on the deficit and the enrollment assumptions. Dr. Stevens said the budget gap is primarily driven by a sharper‑than‑expected decline in enrollment compared with the forecasted decline used to build the 2025‑26 budget. She said the district had forecast a loss of roughly 1,000 students but realized a much smaller loss the prior year and now anticipates a decrease of about 1,400 students for 2026‑27. On possible causes she said staff has “no data to support” attribution but noted immigration changes may have contributed to lower enrollment.
Dr. Stevens outlined the food‑service fund (presented as balanced at $43,134,511 in both revenue and expenditures) and said the debt‑service fund is projected to cover bond payments tied to the proposed debt tax‑rate component. She emphasized the proposed tax rates are preliminary and will be revisited once certified values are available.
After public questions, the board approved budget amendments for May and June 2026 and then moved to adopt the proposed budget for 2026–27 (motion by Marshall Kendrick; second by Neld Sullivan). The board carried the motion and directed staff to return with formal tax‑rate adoption once values are certified.
What happens next: staff will bring certified property valuations to the board later this summer and the trustees will consider formal adoption of tax rates and any technical adjustments to the budget based on updated revenue figures.
Dr. Tamika Alfred Stevens, the district’s chief financial officer, said the proposed general‑fund revenue is $528,628,857 and projected expenditures are $557,856,333, producing a projected deficit of $29,230,476. She told trustees the district is forecasting average daily attendance assumptions and has identified operational reductions of about $2.1 million and anticipated $30 million in savings through staffing adjustments and attrition.
The presentation also described two tax‑rate components staff proposed to present as a combined package: a maintenance and operations component and an interest and sinking (debt‑service) component. Dr. Stevens said the board would formally adopt rates after the county provides certified property values, typically in late July or early August.
Board members and members of the public pressed staff for context on the deficit and the enrollment assumptions. Dr. Stevens said the budget gap is primarily driven by a sharper‑than‑expected decline in enrollment compared with the forecasted decline used to build the 2025‑26 budget. She said the district had forecast a loss of roughly 1,000 students but realized a much smaller loss the prior year and now anticipates a decrease of about 1,400 students for 2026‑27. On possible causes she said staff has “no data to support” attribution but noted immigration changes may have contributed to lower enrollment.
Dr. Stevens outlined the food‑service fund (presented as balanced at $43,134,511 in both revenue and expenditures) and said the debt‑service fund is projected to cover bond payments tied to the proposed debt tax‑rate component. She emphasized the proposed tax rates are preliminary and will be revisited once certified values are available.
After public questions, the board approved budget amendments for May and June 2026 and then moved to adopt the proposed budget for 2026–27 (motion by Marshall Kendrick; second by Neld Sullivan). The board carried the motion and directed staff to return with formal tax‑rate adoption once values are certified.
What happens next: staff will bring certified property valuations to the board later this summer and the trustees will consider formal adoption of tax rates and any technical adjustments to the budget based on updated revenue figures.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
