Hickman County TN

Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding. Proverbs 4:7

School Board · Meeting · Mar 20, 2024

Wed, Mar 20, 2024

Hickman County Board of Education meetings, including regular sessions and special called meetings.

Watch the recording on YouTube

Join the Substack

This outline was generated by an LLM from a transcript and may contain errors or inaccuracies. Prefer the original recording when available.

The meeting was dominated by an extended briefing from State Representative Jody Barrett on the governor’s proposed Education Freedom Act / scholarship plan and the House-Senate split over how it would work. The key dispute was not simply “vouchers yes or no,” but whether rural districts like Hickman County would get enough offsetting money and policy relief to justify support. Barrett emphasized House-added guardrails and offsets — increased TISA weights, a $75 per-student infrastructure stipend, higher state-paid teacher insurance, reduced testing, and looser accountability rules — while board members raised long-term concerns about enrollment loss, inequitable private-school accountability, special-education access, and the fact that the program would require annual state funding decisions.

The other major thread was budget planning for the school system. Members discussed enrollment being down about 200 students, the expiration of ESSER and Project AWARE funds, the legal path to raising starting teacher pay to $50,000 by 2026–27, and how much fund balance could prudently be used next year. The board voted to have staff and counsel draft a resolution for the April 8 meeting supporting the House version of the scholarship bill, and separately approved guidance for the director to prepare an initial budget using up to $2.2 million of fund balance at a 94% spend rate. Other notable items included a possible kindergarten age-cutoff bill, out-of-county tuition, CTE funding, and discussion of a new Nashville State Community College facility.

Call to Order; Roll Call; Opening Prayer and Pledge 4:41

  • 4:41 Roll call showed a quorum present, including Chair Jane Herron, Tim Hobbs, Jim Hudgins, Doug Lane, Christy Mays, and Vance Willis.
  • 6:24 Meeting opened with a moment of silence and the Pledge of Allegiance.
  • 6:58 Chair noted the main purpose of the meeting was discussion with State Representative Jody Barrett about the proposed education scholarship / voucher legislation.

New Business / Agenda Items 6:58

Education Freedom Act / scholarship proposal briefing with State Representative Jody Barrett 7:20

  • 7:20 Jody Barrett said he was meeting with all three school boards in his district so they could make an informed decision on the governor’s proposed scholarship program before the legislative session ends in roughly six weeks.
  • 9:04 Barrett explained the legislative process: both the House and Senate must pass the same bill; if they pass different versions, the issue can go to conference committee, where a smaller group could rewrite the package quickly and with less public visibility.
  • 11:15 Board members confirmed that a conference report would still require an up-or-down legislative vote, though Barrett said the bill could also simply die if neither chamber yields.

Governor’s core proposal and year-one structure 12:03

  • 12:03 Barrett said the governor’s plan creates Education Freedom scholarships for up to 20,000 students in year one, about 2% of Tennessee’s public-school population.
  • 13:46 Eligibility would be prioritized in tiers:
    • 13:53 students already eligible for the current education account program;
    • 14:03 households at or below 400% of the federal poverty level, about $120,000 for a family of four;
    • 14:18 households at or below 500% of poverty, about $150,000 for a family of four;
    • 14:26 then households above that level if capacity remained.
  • 14:43 Barrett said the program cost was projected at about $144 million in year one, with scholarship amounts a little over $7,000 per student based on TISA funding concepts.
  • 15:08 He stressed the initial $144 million was described as a new state appropriation rather than money directly removed from current TISA allocations, though public-school funding would still be affected later if enrollment declines reduced formula counts.
  • 15:41 He added that the governor’s budget also included another $266 million for TISA, arguing that public schools were not being “defunded” in year one.
  • 16:06 Discussion clarified that Hickman County would only lose formula money if students actually left the system; members noted that could still happen in later years.
  • 16:47 Board members questioned whether $7,000 would actually cover private-school tuition; discussion suggested costs vary widely and that many families would still need to contribute at least around $5,000 or more themselves.
  • 17:54 Members raised fairness concerns that if lower-income families still could not afford the remaining tuition balance, leftover slots could end up subsidizing wealthier families already in private schools.
  • 19:28 Barrett said Governor Lee had been open about wanting eventual expansion to all students, but the House was trying to limit growth.
  • 20:00 Barrett said the House version would cap annual program growth at 20%, meaning year two could add at most 4,000 more students.

House vs. Senate approach 20:34

  • 20:34 Barrett said existing voucher/ESA arrangements already exist in some larger counties, but this proposal is a different statewide program.
  • 21:42 He framed many House additions as responses to rural-district concerns, while the Senate had largely stuck to the governor’s basic ask.
  • 21:51 On citizenship, Barrett said the House version would limit scholarship eligibility to U.S. citizens, contrasting public schools’ obligation under federal law to educate all children.
  • 22:17 On homeschool students, Barrett said House amendments were intended to exclude homeschoolers at the request of homeschool advocates worried that taking state funds would lead to regulation, testing, and oversight.
  • 24:07 Barrett said the House would require participating non-public schools, except some category-one schools, to have been accredited and operating in Tennessee for three years to prevent quick “pop-up” schools from forming just to collect scholarship money.
  • 24:46 Barrett said House members also added a prohibition on legislators and the governor’s cabinet using the program for their own children, to avoid perceived self-dealing.
  • 25:12 He said the House wanted annual reporting back from the Department of Education so legislators could track how funds were used and whether the program was working.
  • 25:54 Board members asked whether this meant scholarship-participating entities could be audited like public schools; Barrett said the Department of Education would have to oversee expenditures and report annually, but private schools would not be turned into public schools.
  • 26:18 On testing, Barrett said the House was not seeking to impose the same instructional assessments on private schools that public schools face.

Testing, accountability, and public-school policy changes bundled with the House version 28:18

  • 28:26 Barrett said the House would increase the TISA weight for a small district from 5% to 8%, increasing support from roughly $350 per student to $560 per student.
  • 29:29 He said the House also wanted a new district-size category for systems with 1,001 to 1,700 students, with an extra 2% weight.
  • 29:38 He said the sparse-district weight would rise from 5% to 6%.
  • 29:47 The House also proposed a $75 per-student infrastructure stipend to help districts pay for maintenance and facility needs such as buildings and HVAC, projected statewide at about $72.9 million in year one.
  • 30:27 Barrett said the House version sought to reduce standardized testing burdens on public schools, arguing current testing consumes too much instructional time.
  • 31:55 He estimated the testing reduction could restore about 300 hours of instructional time.
  • 32:04 He said the House wanted to use ACT testing to satisfy some federal requirements, eliminate certain end-of-course tests, and continue ACT WorkKeys for CTE seniors beyond the 2023–24 school year.
  • 32:47 Barrett said one public-school protection would keep students who transfer into a district in the second semester from counting against that district’s accountability scores.
  • 33:20 School officials described how late-arriving English learner students can currently be required to take state tests quickly, even when the timing is educationally unreasonable, and said this kind of flexibility would help.
  • 34:01 Barrett said the House also wanted scholarship recipients to follow athletic transfer sit-out rules similar to current transfer restrictions, to avoid recruiting abuses.
  • 34:33 He said the House proposal would dissolve the Achievement School District by 2026.
  • 35:05 District officials said one Hickman County school is affected by that framework; dissolving it could remove the threat of state takeover but might also reduce extra support funding.
  • 35:59 Barrett said the House also wanted to soften consequences tied to the third-grade retention framework by allowing fourth graders who score low on ELA TCAP to retake the written portion and still advance if they complete interventions such as bridge camp and tutoring.
  • 37:51 He said the House would let districts choose either a traditional 180-day school year or an equivalent-hours calendar, giving local flexibility over schedules.
  • 39:00 He said district improvement plans could be submitted every three years rather than annually for districts meeting expectations.
  • 44:32 He said districts could adopt chronic absenteeism intervention plans and receive accountability treatment based on those plans, and could count high-dosage tutoring / RTI interventions toward state requirements.

Teacher compensation, benefits, and evaluation provisions 45:04

  • 45:19 Barrett said the House version would raise the state share of teacher insurance premiums from 45% to 60%.
  • 45:25 He said that shift would cost the state about $160 million, but would free local district dollars now used to cover the difference.
  • 45:57 Barrett said teacher evaluation frequency would be reduced for strong-performing teachers:
    • 46:22 those significantly above expectations evaluated every three years;
    • 46:30 above expectations every two years;
    • 46:30 at expectations annually;
    • 46:30 below expectations under current law.
  • 46:37 He said teacher license recertification would extend from five years to eight years.
  • 47:07 School officials said those changes would help principals and let administrators focus support where it is most needed.

Hickman County-specific financial projections under the House package 48:02

  • 48:18 Barrett presented projections he said came from the Speaker of the House for Hickman County.
  • 48:27 As a sparse district, Hickman County was projected to gain about $206,000 annually from the sparse-weight increase.
  • 48:33 The $75 infrastructure stipend would provide about $233,000 annually.
  • 48:42 Raising the state teacher-insurance share to 60% would save Hickman County about $333,000 based on current staffing.
  • 50:08 Barrett and board members summarized that these three House additions together could amount to roughly $700,000 to $772,000 in annual value to the district, depending on exact calculations.
  • 50:57 The district said it commonly uses about $7,000 per student as a rough TISA planning figure because weights vary by student type.
  • 51:30 Members calculated that roughly 100 students leaving the district would consume about $700,000 in formula value, making that a rough “break-even” point against the House offsets.
  • 52:10 District officials said enrollment as of February 28, 2024 was about 200 students lower than on February 28, 2023, representing roughly $1.4 million using the $7,000 estimate.
  • 52:42 Members debated whether the first year of scholarships could realistically lead to that many departures from Hickman County, given private-school seat availability, travel burdens, and partial tuition coverage.

Concerns about private-school capacity, inflation, and recurring state obligations 54:24

  • 54:30 Barrett said he saw two practical constraints on the governor’s plan: lack of open seats in private schools and likely tuition inflation once scholarship money starts flowing, similar to what happened with the HOPE Scholarship and college pricing.
  • 56:32 Members noted another concern: the scholarship and related offsets are not tied to a dedicated revenue source and would have to be funded year to year.
  • 56:41 Barrett agreed, calling it an unfunded recurring commitment that the legislature would have to reapprove annually.
  • 57:53 He warned that in other states, such as Arizona and Florida, similar programs without firm controls had become major budget pressures.
  • 58:26 Barrett estimated there are about 100,000 private-school students in Tennessee; at $7,000 each, universal eligibility would become an enormous state obligation.
  • 58:50 He said the current state budget is about $56.2 billion, and much recent growth was helped by nonrecurring federal money.
  • 59:27 Barrett said the state also faces an F&E tax issue that could reduce recurring revenues by about $400 million per year.
  • 1:00:01 He said possible tax refunds to businesses for the prior three years could create a one-time state cost of about $1.5 billion, though that remained unsettled.

Fiscal notes and long-term district impact 1:01:04

  • 1:01:04 Board members referenced a fiscal note that acknowledged the proposal would eventually affect TISA, despite public messaging that it would not.
  • 1:02:13 Barrett said competing fiscal notes were circulating:
    • 1:02:31 one version showed about $75 million in year-one scholarship cost and $287 million annually after that, with local-revenue decreases up to $46 million statewide under the Senate version;
    • 1:03:13 the House bill showed $144 million in year-one scholarship cost and about $345 million annually after that for the scholarship portion alone, plus a $101 million decrease in state TISA expenditures.
  • 1:03:57 Barrett said he doubted the Senate would accept the House package in full.
  • 1:04:35 He added that, based on House conversations, if too many House-added public-school benefits were stripped away, the bill likely would not pass the House.

Local effect, homeschool/private-school count, and equity questions 1:04:54

  • 1:04:54 District officials said about 500 school-age students in Hickman County do not attend the county school system, including homeschoolers and private-school students.
  • 1:05:18 A member argued that some already-private-school families in the community would benefit from the scholarships without affecting Hickman County enrollment because those children are already outside the district.
  • 1:06:40 Another member countered that long term, taxpayers might still face pressure if public-school funding weakens and local tax burdens rise.
  • 1:07:43 Members discussed whether local church schools would qualify; Barrett said schools would need three years of operation and state-recognized accreditation.
  • 1:08:40 The board praised House efforts to add both funding and accountability relief for small and rural districts, saying the governor’s base plan would have offered Hickman County little on its own.
  • 1:10:27 Barrett said school-choice efforts are spreading in neighboring states and may keep returning even if defeated this year, so this may be the best chance for rural systems to secure protective additions.
  • 1:11:41 Barrett said he personally likely could not support even the House version unless the three school boards in his district — Lewis, Hickman, and Dickson — signaled support.

Public-to-public transfer issue and out-of-county tuition 1:12:18

  • 1:12:18 A board member raised language she believed would allow scholarships to be used at another public school district.
  • 1:13:17 Hickman County’s current out-of-county tuition was stated as $1,000.
  • 1:25:24 Barrett clarified that the House bill does not include public-to-public open enrollment funding, but the Senate version does.
  • 1:25:43 Members said that Senate provision could be especially harmful to Hickman County because nearby options such as Fairview and Dickson are close enough to attract transfers.
  • 1:26:08 Discussion suggested that under such a system, a parent might still owe whatever additional out-of-county charge the receiving district requires, while the $7,000 scholarship amount follows the student.
  • 1:26:41 Members also discussed the K12 Virtual Academy model in Union County and whether different homeschool / umbrella-school categories would be included; Barrett said another amendment excluded umbrella homeschool students from the House plan.

Accountability and special-education objections 2:01:22

  • 2:01:22 Members acknowledged the scholarship funding is presented as separate from TISA in year one, but objected that private schools receiving state-backed students would not face the same accountability burdens as public schools.
  • 2:01:37 A member specifically objected that private schools would not have to accept students with exceptionalities or submit to the same assessments.
  • 2:02:04 Another member said families have historically come to Hickman County because of its special-education services, which private schools may not provide.

Resolution planning and next steps 1:24:44

  • 1:24:44 Members discussed preparing a resolution for the next meeting rather than acting immediately.
  • 1:52:33 After Barrett left, the board revisited whether to draft support or opposition language and said TSBA and other groups had sample resolutions.
  • 1:53:33 Some members argued the House version’s extra money made it more acceptable in the first year; others remained uneasy about recurring funding and future governors or legislatures removing the offsets.
  • 1:55:04 A member said he would support a resolution backing the House version if that support were clearly limited to the House package.
  • 1:56:07 The director said the House version was much more favorable to Hickman County than the Senate version and recommended a resolution supporting the House proposal.
  • 1:58:39 Members agreed to place a drafted resolution on the April 8 meeting agenda after hearing more from constituents.
  • 1:59:04 Motion made to have the director and board attorney draft a resolution supporting the House version of the Education Freedom / scholarship bill for a vote at the April 8 board meeting.
  • 1:59:14 Motion received a second.
  • 1:59:21 Motion approved by voice vote; no roll-call tally was given.

Kindergarten age-cutoff bill feedback request 1:34:03

  • 1:34:03 Barrett asked for Hickman County’s input on a separate bill requested by Lewis County regarding kindergarten eligibility age.
  • 1:34:19 He said current state law requires students to be 5 years old by August 15, with some flexibility up to September 30 after evaluation.
  • 1:34:43 His proposal would move the date back to June 1, with an additional evaluation window through July 15, aiming to reduce the number of four-year-olds entering kindergarten and tighten developmental ranges in classrooms.
  • 1:35:08 He said the change would not begin until the 2025–26 school year.
  • 1:35:57 Members gave mixed anecdotal reactions, with several saying readiness varies by child and by developmental factors, but should remain subject to evaluation.
  • 1:37:49 The director said he supported the idea because some parents are not objective about readiness and very young entrants can create instructional and practical difficulties.
  • 1:38:21 Barrett said even a letter from the director supporting the concept would be useful.

YouTube/email issue deferred 2:02:32

  • 2:02:32 A member asked to discuss an email issue involving YouTube.
  • 2:02:47 The chair said she preferred to defer it because the meeting had been scheduled around budget-related matters.
  • 2:03:10 The board agreed to place it on a future agenda rather than discuss it that night.

Department / Official Reports

Director of Schools / budget and staffing discussion 2:03:17

  • 2:03:17 The board shifted to budget, staffing, and salary planning for the coming year.
  • 2:03:32 Members said they were encouraged that the governor’s budget appeared to include money through TISA to support mandated teacher raises, though exact district figures were not yet known.
  • 2:04:12 A member said the core budget question was how deeply the board was willing to go into fund balance.
  • 2:05:49 The director said the district knows several major pressures already:
    • 2:05:49 enrollment is down about 200 students;
    • 2:05:57 ESSER funds are expiring;
    • 2:06:05 about 15 employees across the district are currently funded by ESSER;
    • 2:06:13 Project AWARE funding is ending, at about $300,000.
  • 2:06:36 He added that Hickman County pays less than Lewis, Maury, Dickson, and Williamson counties in key salary comparisons, while still being obligated to lift starting teacher salaries from $44,096 to $50,000 by 2026–27.
  • 2:07:16 Looking back at the prior year, he said the district had about $9 million in available reserve not already committed to other purposes, apart from required reserve constraints.
  • 2:07:58 He said state reserve rules require about 3% of budget to remain on hand.
  • 2:08:03 The district budget was described as about $36 million.
  • 2:08:12 Last year the board approved roughly a 6% raise package for employees, which with steps left some employees closer to 7% and some as high as 9%.
  • 2:08:35 At that time the board was willing to use $2.2 million of fund balance, but current projections suggest the district will actually use closer to $1.2 million by June 30.
  • 2:09:07 That would leave roughly $7.8 million in available reserve.
  • 2:09:16 He said the lower-than-planned reserve use came partly from conservative spending and partly from postponing some capital projects, such as brick resealing at East Hickman Middle School and intercom replacements that were troublesome but still functional.
  • 2:11:06 Members emphasized that salaries and benefits account for about 63% to 64% of the budget.
  • 2:11:47 The director said that to meet the state salary trajectory and stay somewhat ahead of it, staff had discussed using about 5% annual raises for the next three years, which would put starting pay at roughly $52,000; 4.5% would approximately meet the minimum requirement.
  • 2:13:21 A rough estimate given for a 5% across-the-board increase was about $1.5 million.
  • 2:14:13 Members stressed that beyond legal minimums, the district also needs to remain competitive with surrounding systems to retain employees.
  • 2:15:03 Members recalled that Maury County gave about a 10% raise last year, illustrating the regional pay pressure.
  • 2:16:26 Discussion of prior budgets suggested the district had expected to hit fund balance in some earlier years but ended up below those projections.
  • 2:17:31 Members said last year’s willingness to use fund balance was partly intended to demonstrate to the county commission that the board was willing to use its own reserves while asking for local support.
  • 2:18:23 A member argued the board should set high-level budget goals first — especially how much fund balance use is acceptable and what raise target it wants — and then let administration build an initial balanced budget to those parameters.
  • 2:21:09 Members referenced TSBA guidance showing state minimum salary thresholds of about $44,500 for 2024–25, $47,000 for 2025–26, and $50,000 for 2026–27.
  • 2:23:10 A member cautioned that recurring use of fund balance cannot continue indefinitely because it would eventually force budget decisions regardless of board preference.
  • 2:24:23 Another member said this was the first time in years they had clearly heard that state money was intended to accompany the teacher-salary mandate, though exact district allocations were still uncertain.
  • 2:26:33 Members noted that with 200 fewer students, the district may eventually need fewer positions, and efficiency changes may be unavoidable.
  • 2:28:37 Several said the upcoming budget would be especially hard because of expiring grants, lower enrollment, and compensation pressures.
  • 2:29:44 The director said staff are building K–12 master schedules designed to be both equitable and efficient, hoping to realize staffing reductions through attrition rather than layoffs.
  • 2:33:35 He said efficiency efforts would ideally occur when employees retire or leave on their own, but he agreed the district must become more efficient and cannot continue depleting reserves forever.
  • 2:30:29 The director said he and the finance staff favored beginning the next budget process with the same $2.2 million fund-balance target used last year, especially because new House legislation, if passed, might reduce the actual need.
  • 2:39:29 A board member praised Mr. Elkins as a major budgeting resource for the district.

New Business / Agenda Items 2:37:27

Budget guidance motion for initial FY planning 2:37:27

  • 2:37:27 Motion made to direct the director to prepare an initial budget using no more than $2.2 million of fund balance at a projected 94% spend rate.
  • 2:38:14 The maker restated the motion after discussion to clarify that it was an initial guideline for balancing the first draft budget.
  • 2:39:05 Motion received a second.
  • 2:39:12 Motion approved by voice vote; no opposition was recorded.

Adjournment

  • The transcript excerpt ends during closing budget remarks; no formal adjournment appears in the provided text.

Key figures and statistics

Figure Type Context / topic Timestamp
20,000 Headcount Maximum students in year-one scholarship program 13:30
2% Percentage Approximate share of Tennessee public-school population covered in year one 13:30
400% Percentage Federal poverty threshold for second eligibility tier 14:03
$120,000 Income Approximate annual income for family of four at 400% poverty 14:09
500% Percentage Federal poverty threshold for third eligibility tier 14:18
$150,000 Income Approximate annual income for family of four at 500% poverty 14:18
$144 million Expense Year-one scholarship-program cost under governor / House framing 14:43
$7,000 Funding rate Approximate scholarship amount per student 14:51
$266 million Expense Additional governor budget funding said to be going into TISA 15:41
$5,000 Cost Example amount some families might still need to pay on top of scholarship 17:22
20% Percentage House annual cap on scholarship-program growth 20:00
4,000 Headcount Maximum additional students in year two under 20% cap 20:00
3 years Time period Accreditation / operation requirement for participating private schools 24:07
$288,000 Salary Legislator pay Barrett referenced rhetorically while discussing self-dealing criticism 24:46
5% Percentage Current small-district TISA weight discussed 28:34
8% Percentage Proposed small-district TISA weight in House bill 28:34
$350 Funding rate Approximate per-student value of current 5% small-district weight 28:43
$560 Funding rate Approximate per-student value of proposed 8% small-district weight 28:43
1,000 Headcount Upper threshold for one small-district definition discussed 29:07
1,001 to 1,700 Headcount range New district category proposed by House 29:29
2% Percentage Additional weight proposed for 1,001–1,700 student districts 29:29
5% Percentage Current sparse-district weight discussed 29:38
6% Percentage Proposed sparse-district weight 29:38
$75 Funding rate Proposed per-student infrastructure stipend 29:47
$72.9 million Expense Statewide year-one value of infrastructure stipend 29:47
15 plus Count Approximate total tests discussed across grade levels / subjects 30:51
300 hours Time Instructional time estimated to be restored by reduced testing 31:55
2023–24 School year Current year referenced for ACT WorkKeys continuation 32:21
2026 Year Year Achievement School District would be dissolved under House plan 34:33
180 days Time period Traditional school-year model discussed versus hours-based model 37:51
3 years Time period District improvement-plan cycle proposed for compliant districts 39:00
45% Percentage Current state share of teacher insurance premiums 45:19
60% Percentage Proposed state share of teacher insurance premiums 45:19
$160 million Expense State cost estimate for teacher-insurance increase 45:25
3 years Time period Evaluation cycle for teachers significantly above expectations 46:22
2 years Time period Evaluation cycle for teachers above expectations 46:30
5 years Time period Current teacher license recertification period 46:37
8 years Time period Proposed teacher license recertification period 46:37
$206,000 Revenue increase Hickman County projected annual gain from sparse-weight increase 48:27
$233,000 Revenue increase Hickman County projected annual gain from infrastructure stipend 48:33
$333,000 Savings Hickman County projected local savings from higher state insurance share 48:52
$700,000 Revenue increase Rounded estimate of combined Hickman County House-package benefit 50:08
$772,000 Revenue increase Higher estimate cited for annual House-package benefit to Hickman County 50:23
$7,000 Funding rate District’s rough TISA planning figure per student 50:57
100 Headcount Approximate number of students who could leave before House offsets are consumed 51:30
200 Headcount Enrollment drop compared with prior year 52:10
February 28, 2023 Date Comparison point for prior enrollment count 52:10
February 28, 2024 Date Current enrollment comparison point 52:10
$1.4 million Revenue loss estimate Value of losing 200 students at rough $7,000 rate 52:17
$400 Cost Approximate monthly tuition figure mentioned for some private schools in Dickson area 53:19
$700,000 Revenue amount Example annual scholarship revenue generated by 100 students 56:00
100,000 Headcount Approximate current private-school enrollment statewide 58:26
$56.2 billion Budget Approximate current state budget size 58:50
$400 million Revenue loss Estimated annual recurring state loss from F&E tax change 59:35
3 years Time period Business refund lookback period discussed for F&E tax issue 1:00:01
$1.5 billion Expense Potential one-time cost of business tax refunds 1:00:01
$75 million Expense Year-one scholarship cost cited for one competing fiscal note / Senate version 1:02:31
$287 million Expense Annual scholarship cost after year one under one competing fiscal note 1:02:40
$46 million Revenue loss Potential annual decrease in local revenues statewide under Senate version 1:02:48
$345 million Expense Annual scholarship-program cost after year one under House fiscal note 1:03:20
$101 million Expenditure decrease Decrease in state TISA expenditures cited in House fiscal note 1:03:28
500 Headcount School-age Hickman County children not attending county schools 1:04:54
$1,000 Fee Hickman County out-of-county tuition 1:13:17
6 weeks Time period Rough remaining legislative-session timeline first mentioned 1:16:25
middle of April Time period Barrett’s preferred deadline for board input / resolution 1:16:40
2 weeks Time period Timeframe for governor’s amended budget 1:17:56
$50,000 Salary State-required teacher starting salary target 1:20:40
$5,000 Funding rate CTE amount per student discussed as a positive state budget item 1:22:13
2025–26 School year Proposed first year for kindergarten age-cutoff bill to take effect 1:35:08
August 15 Date Current kindergarten age deadline under state law 1:34:19
September 30 Date Current evaluation flexibility deadline discussed 1:34:26
June 1 Date Proposed earlier kindergarten age deadline 1:34:43
July 15 Date Proposed final evaluation window under age-cutoff bill 1:34:50
45 days Time period Window between proposed June 1 cutoff and July 15 evaluation end 1:34:50
April 8 Date Meeting date set for scholarship resolution vote 1:58:49
200 Headcount Enrollment decline cited again during budget discussion 2:05:49
15 Headcount Approximate employees currently funded by ESSER 2:05:57
$300,000 Grant amount Project AWARE funding level discussed 2:06:13
$44,096 Salary Current starting teacher salary cited 2:06:52
2026–27 School year Deadline to reach $50,000 starting teacher salary 2:07:00
$9 million Fund balance Available reserve discussed from prior budget cycle 2:07:16
3% Percentage Required reserve amount under state rule 2:07:58
$36 million Budget Approximate district budget size 2:08:03
6% Percentage Raise package approved last year 2:08:12
7% Percentage Approximate effect for some employees with step movement 2:08:20
9% Percentage Approximate effect for some employees with larger combined increases 2:08:28
$2.2 million Fund balance use Maximum reserve use board had approved last year 2:08:35
$1.2 million Fund balance use Current estimate of actual reserve use by year-end 2:08:52
$7.8 million Fund balance Estimated reserve remaining after current-year use 2:09:07
63% to 64% Percentage Share of budget made up by salaries and benefits 2:11:06
5% Percentage Annual raise path staff discussed for next three years 2:12:17
3 years Time period Raise-planning horizon staff discussed 2:12:17
$52,000 Salary Approximate starting salary if district used 5% raises for three years 2:12:25
4.5% Percentage Approximate raise rate said to meet minimum salary target 2:12:25
$1.5 million Expense Rough cost of a 5% across-the-board raise 2:13:21
10% Percentage Raise Maury County reportedly gave last year 2:15:03
$44,500 Salary State minimum cited for 2024–25 2:21:19
$47,000 Salary State minimum cited for 2025–26 2:22:23
$50,000 Salary State minimum cited for 2026–27 2:22:23
K–12 Grade span Master schedules being rebuilt for efficiency across district 2:33:01
$2.2 million Fund balance use Initial target favored for next budget build 2:30:46
94% Percentage Spend rate attached to budget-guidance motion 2:37:44

External vendors, brands, and software

Name Type Context / topic Timestamp
ACT Brand Proposed substitute assessment vehicle for some state testing requirements 32:04
ACT WorkKeys Brand Career and technical education senior testing continuation 32:21
HOPE Scholarship Brand Used as analogy for tuition inflation after state aid expands 54:54
K12 Virtual Academy Brand Discussed as an example of virtual schooling tied to another county system 1:26:41
Nashville State Community College Company New facility and allied health / EMT program discussed near end of Barrett presentation 1:23:25
A Beka Brand Mentioned in homeschool accreditation discussion 1:28:03

Laws and policies

Citation / name Level Type Context / topic Timestamp
Education Freedom Act State Law Governor’s proposed scholarship / voucher legislation discussed throughout meeting 7:05
TISA State Policy State school funding formula central to scholarship and budget discussion 14:34
Federal poverty level Federal Regulation Used to define scholarship eligibility tiers 14:03
third grade retention law State Law House proposal would soften fourth-grade consequences flowing from earlier retention requirements 36:33
ELA TCAP State Policy Retake and promotion flexibility for low-scoring students discussed 36:07
Achievement School District State Policy House proposal would dissolve ASD by 2026 34:33
RTI School Policy High-dosage tutoring and RTI interventions discussed for state compliance flexibility 44:47
F&E tax State Tax / Law State revenue problem discussed as major budget complication for scholarship funding 59:27