Sign up for TPR Today, Texas Public Radio's newsletter that brings our top stories to your inbox each morning.
Trustees for the Judson Independent School District made a series of split vote decisions Thursday night that leave the district on the hook for about 10% of an estimated $5 million in savings approved in June.
According to a TPR analysis of the original budget cuts and the consultant presentation the cuts were based on, eliminating powerlifting and letterman jackets, and letting two communications employees go in December, would have saved the district roughly $133,000. TPR obtained the presentation through a public records request.
Proposed Reductions for Judson ISD by Texas Public Radio on Scribd
However, trustees and district staff questioned the accuracy of some of those estimates Thursday. Several trustees also said they voted to cut letterman jackets and the powerlifting program based on incomplete information.
Later in the evening, in another split vote, trustees voted to increase stipends in 51 categories, putting Judson on the hook for another $289,000.
Thursday night’s votes — and the discussion before the votes — also showcased the ongoing turbulence between some board members, and between the superintendent and the board president.
Powerlifting - $43,000
“When this was brought to us, my understanding was that the students that were in the powerlifting were actually doing wrestling, so they weren't missing out on an after-school sport,” Stephanie Jones said. “I would have never voted to remove this if I knew these students were only doing the powerlifting—at least effective immediately.”
Trustees said 87 Judson students were enrolled in powerlifting last year, and they had heard from many of them. Two of those students, Jerusalem Silva and Tamir Gillum, spoke during public comments Thursday.
“For many of us, this program is the reason we stay motivated. It gives us opportunities to compete, represent our schools, and feel proud of ourselves,” Gillum said. “I hope you'll keep it in the district so that other students can discover their strength, just like I did.”
Before voting to reinstate powerlifting for the 2025-2026 school year and then re-evaluate, board members and district staff first had to confirm that trustees had voted in June to eliminate the program and not sunset it and then confirm that it was a club and not a class that would require last-minute changes to school schedules.
Superintendent Milton Fields said powerlifting was unique because it was treated like a sport with a coaching stipend, but it was technically a non-UIL-sanctioned club. He acknowledged that ideally students would have more time to adjust to cuts but added that any cuts they make would be difficult.
UIL, or the University Interscholastic League, is the organization that administers extracurricular competitions among public schools in Texas.
“There's not a magic club or program out there ... that we could cut that nobody cares about,” Fields said.
Board President Monica Ryan was the only trustee to vote against reinstating powerlifting.
“Every dollar is a choice in our district,” Ryan said. “What's more important this year right now, with (the accountability) ratings of our districts and the (STAAR) scores that we saw, what is the most important thing our students in our district need? Do all the students in our district need powerlifting? Or this year specifically, do we need math — academics — and reading?”
“I’ve got to push back a little bit,” Fields responded. “This is not a scores issue. This was a finance decision.”
Letterman Jackets - $20,000
During discussion about reinstating the bulk purchase of district-provided letterman jackets, it was discovered that Judson staff had misunderstood the intention of the vote and ended up pulling $20,000 from the athletics budget, even though athletics director Triva Corrales said letterman jackets only costs her department about $8,000.
“Why are we having this discussion about the athletes, when a lot of students (in band and the arts also) can’t afford it?” Trustee Lesley Lee asked, prompting the discussion that brought the confusion to light.
“What I was given when you guys came out (of closed session) was a list of proposed efficiencies with numbers by those efficiencies. The number by this efficiency was between $20,000 and $25,000,” Fields said.
“This is another frustration. It shouldn't have been in closed session,” Trustee José Macias Jr. said. “So here we are now, trying to wrestle through it.”
Trustees voted 6-to-1 to give district officials the authority to purchase letterman jackets across all departments as usual, whatever the cost ends up being. Ryan was again the lone trustee to vote no.
Ryan said she was concerned purchasing the jackets went against UIL rules, but district officials said they had confirmed the $25 purchase price for a basic jacket was allowed because the jackets are considered awards. District officials also said the deal they have with the company allows them to purchase the jackets for just $10 more than the letter alone, although they agreed the company made money from families paying for additional embellishments, like patches for names and the year.
Communications positions - $70,000
The third and final budget cut reversal approved by trustees Thursday was the elimination of two positions from the communications department effective December 31, 2025. Instead, trustees voted 5-to-2 to eliminate those positions in June 2026.
According to the financial consultant’s presentation, cutting three communications positions, including one that is vacant, would have saved the district $210,000. District officials didn’t say how much Judson would have saved if the district continued the original plan to cut the two filled positions in December.
Assuming Judson budgeted $70,000 annually for each of the three positions, keeping the two positions for one semester would have cost $70,000. By that logic, keeping the two employees an additional semester will cost an additional $70,000.
For this vote, Amanda Poteet joined Ryan in voting no.
“We are giving these employees until December, and in no position I have ever held in my entire life have I given been given that much leeway as an at-will employee in any business ever,” Poteet said. “This coming up week, we're looking at cutting our enrichment programs, and it pains me that we're having to get rid of those programs that are directly affecting our students, that are helping our students, and here we are quibbling about not giving enough time to two employees.”
“We are voting next week on whether or not we’re removing enrichment from our students, correct?” Poteet asked.
Ryan said, “Yes,” the same time Fields said, “No.”
“Yes, we’re voting to sunset,” Ryan said.
“No, I’m saying you’re still going to give them a year before you do that. You cannot come back next week and say, ‘Cut them next week. You can’t. It’s illegal (because they’re teachers under contract),” Fields said. “All I’m saying here is give these two individuals the same dignity that we’ve given hundreds across the district.”
“There’s not magic year law anywhere in the Texas Education Code anywhere except for teachers,” Ryan responded.
“The question that was asked, Ms. Ryan, was simply this: If we were to cut academic enrichment, would those teachers be gone in that week? And I said, ‘No, they’d have the year.”
“That wasn’t my question,” Poteet said.
Stipend adjustments - $289,000
Later in the evening, trustees voted 5-to-2 to increase 51 stipend categories to be closer to the market rate, as recommended in April by the Texas Association of School Boards.
Ryan and Poteet were in favor of this measure. Macias and Laura Stanford voted against it.
Stanford pointed out the contrast between Ryan’s support of the stipends and her opposition of reinstating the cuts.
“I guess the rest of the majority of the board is in disagreement: We can just spend money,” Ryan responded. “If we're going to spend money and bring back all these other efficiencies, then why would we not give money to the teachers? Because these stipends all go to teachers.”
“That's the people we're talking about affected,” Ryan added. “Not two people that now have 12 months to find a job, not six. These are actual teachers who are in classrooms with teachers staying ‘til 10 o'clock at night.”
“Please, ma’am, be very careful with your language,” Trustee Suzanne Kenoyer interjected. “That's very insulting the way you phrase that. Be careful with your language. These are people and their livelihoods we're talking about.”
“Correct,” Ryan said. “And, as a board member, I worry about positions and 23,000 students.”
“I worry about the perception of a board president who is being very. …” Kenoyer said, pausing to think.
“Fiscally responsible?” Ryan asked.
“No, and you’re interrupting me again,” Kenoyer said. “I'm worried about a board president who is talking negatively about the people in the employment of the district that they represent, and I find you quite offensive.”
“OK,” Ryan said. “Again, we have hard decisions to make related to our budget, and things do need to happen, but if the will of this board is to keep spending money, then, let's make sure we take care of everybody, especially those priority goal 1.1 people, who are our teachers.”
