Dallas Morning News Voter Guide

I submitted the following responses on March 26th to the request I received from The Dallas Morning News.

Why are you running, and what in your past would make you a benefit to constituents?

My wife Stephanie spent 30 years in CFBISD as a teacher, administrator, and most recently was principal at Newman Smith High School until she became the assistant superintendent in another district. I've lived the reality of this district at our kitchen table for a very long time. I've also spent 30 years in the private sector leading organizations with over $150 million in revenue. I know how to read a budget, ask the hard questions, and hold leadership accountable for results.

I'm running because this district is at a crossroads. We've had consecutive deficit budgets, four school closures, a lawsuit over how those decisions were made, and a community that has lost confidence in its board. Those are governance problems, and solving them is what I've done professionally for my entire career. At the same time, the state froze per-pupil funding for six years while passing a billion-dollar voucher program that threatens every traditional public school district in Texas. CFBISD needs board members who understand both the local challenges and the statewide forces working against us, and who will fight on both fronts.

What should your district do to counter or address declining enrollment?

First, be honest about what's driving it. Declining enrollment in CFBISD is primarily demographic. Birth rates are down, families are making different choices, and charter school growth is pulling students and funding out of traditional districts. The ESA voucher program launching next school year will accelerate that pressure further.

The board's job is to make CFBISD a district families actively choose, not just one they happen to live in. That means strong academic programs, expanded career and technical education pathways, competitive teacher compensation so we attract and retain the best educators, and responsible stewardship of the $716 million bond to modernize facilities. It also means getting the district's financial house in order with a transparent, multi-year plan so families and taxpayers have confidence in the direction we're headed.

We have to go on offense and compete hard for the minds and hearts of the families in our district so that we are the clear and obvious choice for their kids. We need to tell the fantastic stories of success in the district, promote the unique programs we offer, and mobilize the families, faculty, and staff across the district to amplify these messages. 

Closing half-empty buildings was a necessary step. But consolidation alone is not a growth strategy. The district has to give families a compelling reason to stay and a compelling reason to come back. 

Do you foresee additional campus closures during your tenure? Are you open to such closures as district leadership determines they are necessary?

I would not take further closures off the table, but they should not be the first tool the board reaches for. If the data shows a campus is operating far below capacity, costing the district millions to maintain, and students would be better served at a stronger receiving campus, then consolidation has to be considered. Ignoring that math doesn't make it go away. It just makes it worse for the students who remain.

What I would insist on is a much improved process. The selection criteria need to be transparent and data driven. Enrollment trends, facility condition, academic performance, transportation impact, and community impact should all be part of the analysis. Families need to appropriately take part of that process before the decision is made, not after. The closures CFBISD went through were directionally correct, but the way they were communicated left families feeling blindsided. That damaged trust in ways the district is still recovering from. You don't get a second chance to do that right. 

When we have to do hard things, WHAT we are doing is not the most important part. HOW we do it is the most important part. That’s how you manage difficult change with a large group of people.

Should districts extend online school options to students who live outside of the district?

It's worth exploring, especially if every student who enrolls in a CFBISD online program generates ADA driven funding for the district without adding significant costs. In a district dealing with declining enrollment and the financial pressure that comes with it, this is something worth evaluating and even piloting. It could serve as an excellent opportunity to partner with families that have decided to homeschool their children, bringing those families back into the public education fold.

It has to be done right. The online programs have to be high quality and produce real student outcomes, not just serve as a revenue strategy. If the academic rigor isn't there, it hurts the district's reputation and accountability ratings. The district should also ensure that expanding online options to outside students doesn't stretch resources in a way that diminishes the experience for the families who live here and fund this district with their property taxes.

If CFBISD can build an online program strong enough that families outside our boundaries want to enroll in it, that's a sign we're doing something right. I'd want to see the data on costs, capacity, and outcomes before committing, but the concept aligns with making this a district people actively choose.

What are your views of technology in the classroom? Should schools expand the cellphone ban to include limits on other devices, such as Chromebooks?

Technology in the classroom should serve instruction, not distract from it. The cellphone ban makes sense to me. There is solid research showing that unrestricted phone access during the school day hurts student focus, increases anxiety, and undermines the learning environment. I support it.

Expanding restrictions to devices like Chromebooks is a different question. Chromebooks are instructional tools issued by the district for educational purposes. Banning them would be akin to banning textbooks. The issue isn't the device. It's how the device is used and whether teachers have the training and support to integrate technology in ways that actually improve learning.

I am a technologist. I have been one my entire life and career. I have completed a post-graduate program in AI and Machine Learning at the University of Texas at Austin. I believe technology and AI are going to fundamentally reshape how students learn and how schools operate. CFBISD should be preparing students for that future, not retreating from it. But that requires intentional implementation, strong digital citizenship standards, and teachers who are equipped to use these tools effectively. Handing a student a Chromebook without a clear instructional purpose is not a technology strategy. It's just a screen.

Are you concerned about your district’s process for vetting and hiring coaches, teachers and others who interact with students?

Student safety is non-negotiable. Every district should have rigorous, consistent processes for background checks, credential verification, and ongoing monitoring of anyone who interacts with students. That includes teachers, coaches, substitutes, contractors, and volunteers.

I don't have specific evidence that CFBISD's current vetting process is failing. I have been through it myself and found it to be a complete and thorough process from the volunteer's perspective. I do know that statewide, the TEA just created a new Inspector General for Educator Misconduct position because reports of misconduct have surged across Texas. The Legislature also passed SB 571 creating a statewide "Do Not Hire" registry and requiring superintendents to report alleged misconduct to TEA within 48 hours. Those laws exist because the systems that were in place were not catching enough problems fast enough.

As a trustee, I would want to see a regular review of the district's hiring and vetting procedures to make sure they meet or exceed state requirements, that the processes are being followed consistently at every campus, and that campus leaders feel supported in reporting concerns without fear of retaliation. My wife spent 30 years in this district including years as a principal. She knows what it takes to build a safe campus culture. Hiring and vetting are the foundation of that, and the board should be asking the administration pointed questions about whether our processes are keeping up with what the state and our families expect.

Has your district struck the right balance between college readiness and workforce readiness?

Not yet. Too many districts, including CFBISD, have defaulted to a college-for-everyone model that doesn't reflect the reality of what students need or what the economy demands. Not every student is on a four-year college track, and they shouldn't have to be. A student who graduates with an industry certification, a skilled trade, or a technical credential is not a lesser outcome than a student who graduates with a university acceptance letter. Both are wins.

CFBISD needs to expand career and technical education pathways, especially in an age where AI is redefining what it means to be college and career ready. CFBISD must build stronger partnerships with local employers and give students access to credentials that have real labor market value before they walk across the stage at graduation. That's how you make a district a destination for families who want practical, high-value options alongside the traditional college prep track.

The state's accountability system is actually pushing in this direction. The A through F ratings now weigh college, career, and military readiness outcomes more heavily than before. CFBISD should treat that as an opportunity, not a compliance exercise. If we build CTE programs that connect students to real careers in this economy, families will choose this district because of it.

What is your opinion of teacher evaluation systems and tying those to teacher pay?

Teachers should be evaluated, and those evaluations should be meaningful. A system that treats every teacher the same regardless of performance does not serve students and does not respect the profession. The best teachers know who the great teachers are in their building and who the struggling ones are. The evaluation system should reflect that reality.

Tying pay to student outcomes should be part of the picture, but it cannot be the whole picture. Student outcomes should be one factor alongside experience, credentials, and the difficulty of the assignment. A teacher who produces real growth with struggling students in a high-need campus deserves to be recognized and compensated for that work. Texas already has a framework for this through the Teacher Incentive Allotment, which rewards teachers designated as recognized, exemplary, or master level with additional compensation. That's a sound concept.

Where evaluation systems fall short is when they become purely bureaucratic, when the metrics are disconnected from what actually happens in a classroom, or when teachers feel the system is being used to punish rather than develop. My wife spent 30 years in CFBISD, including many years evaluating teachers as a principal. She will tell you that the most effective evaluation is one where the teacher trusts the process, trusts the evaluator, and gets honest feedback that actually helps them improve. The paperwork matters less than the relationship, the actions take for improvement, and the rigor behind it.

The board's role is to make sure the district has an evaluation system that is fair, consistent, and connected to outcomes. Not to design it from the boardroom. That is the superintendent's job.

What are your ideas for keeping and attracting the best teachers in your school district?

Pay matters. Let's not pretend it doesn’t. Texas teachers make an average of over $7,000 less than the national average, and CFBISD has to compete for talent with neighboring districts and a private sector that is actively recruiting people with the same skills. The new Teacher Retention Allotment under HB 2 is a step in the right direction. The board must make sure those dollars actually reach teachers and don't get absorbed into overhead.

But pay alone doesn't keep great teachers. What keeps them is feeling supported by campus leadership, having a voice in decisions that affect their classrooms, and not being buried under administrative tasks that pull them away from teaching. My wife spent 30 years in this district. She stayed around so long because she had colleagues who made the work meaningful and had central office leadership that meaningfully supported campuses. That meaningful support must be a focus area and part of the measures of success in the district.

The board can influence this in several ways. Protect classroom instruction funding even when the budget is tight. Ensure central office exists to serve campuses, not the other way around. Support professional development that teachers actually find valuable. And create an environment where educators feel respected enough to build a career in CFBISD, not just pass through on the way to somewhere else.

The district also needs to think creatively about pipelines. Partnerships with universities, residency programs, and grow-where-you-are initiatives that identify promising people already working in our schools and help them earn their certifications. The teacher shortage is not going away. CFBISD has to compete, and that starts with being a place people want to work.

How do you propose to improve parental involvement and communication in your district?

Start by earning back trust. Parents in CFBISD watched four schools close in a process many felt excluded from. Families sued the district over how those decisions were communicated. You cannot ask parents to engage with a system they don't believe is listening to them. Rebuilding that trust is the first step, and it starts with the board modeling transparency in everything it does.

Practically, communication has to go both directions. The district should be pushing information out in clear, accessible language, not buried in board agendas and PDF attachments that nobody reads and fewer understand. But more importantly, the district has to create real channels for input before major decisions, not perfunctory public comment periods after the decision is already made. When parents show up to a board meeting and the vote is a foregone conclusion, they learn very quickly that their presence doesn't matter. That is how you kill engagement.

I also think the district needs to meet parents where they are. Not every family can attend a Thursday evening board meeting. Digital communication, campus-level forums, surveys that actually influence decisions, and direct outreach in the languages our families speak all have to be part of the strategy. CFBISD serves a diverse community. Over 40% of our students are in bilingual or English language learning programs. This is the reality of the district. If we are only communicating in English through formal channels, we are missing a huge portion of our families.

The board's role is to set the expectation that parent engagement is a priority, fund the infrastructure to support it, and hold the administration accountable for results. A superintendent evaluation should include measurable indicators of community engagement and satisfaction. What gets measured gets managed. If the board treats parent communication as an afterthought, the administration will too.

What is the role of a public school district in inculcating patriotism in students? Should, for instance, students be taught that America is the greatest country in the world, as fact?

Public schools should absolutely teach students to understand and appreciate the principles this country was founded on. Constitutional governance, individual liberty, the rule of law, and the idea that your circumstances at birth should not determine your future. Those aren't partisan ideas. They are American ideas, and students should learn them deeply.

Schools should also teach honest, rigorous civics and history. Students should understand how our system of government works, why it was designed the way it was, and what their responsibilities are as citizens. That includes voting, civic participation, and understanding the sacrifices that built and defended this country. If we want students to love this country, the best way to get there is to teach them enough about it that the appreciation is earned, not just recited.

What the district should do is equip students with enough knowledge of our history, our institutions, and our founding principles that they can arrive at their own informed conviction about what this country means. I believe if we do that well, most students will reach that conclusion on their own. I did.

The board's role here is the same as everywhere else. Set the expectation that civic education is rigorous and substantive, make sure the curriculum meets that standard, and leave the teaching to the professionals in the classroom. The board does not write lesson plans. It ensures the district produces graduates who are prepared to be informed, engaged citizens. That is patriotism in practice.

What can school districts do to provide a safe and welcoming environment for students of a minority race, religion or sexuality? Should there be any limits on majority influence?

Every student in CFBISD should be able to walk into their school and focus on learning without feeling unsafe, unwelcome, or targeted. That is not a political statement. It is a basic operational requirement for a functioning school district. It is creating an environment ready for learning. A student who feels threatened or excluded is not learning, and a district that tolerates that environment is failing at its core mission.

The district's responsibility is to enforce clear, consistent policies against bullying, harassment, and discrimination, and to make sure those policies are applied evenly at every campus. Campus leaders and teachers need training and support to recognize problems early and respond effectively. And when incidents happen, families need to see that the district took it seriously and acted.

On the question of limits on majority influence, the framework already exists. Public schools serve every student who walks through the door. That is the law and that is the mission. No student should be made to feel like an outsider in their own school because of their background, their family, or who they are. At the same time, the district should not be in the business of promoting any particular ideology. Its job is to educate students and keep them safe while doing it.

I also believe parents have the right to raise their children according to their own values and beliefs. That right is real and should be respected. But a parent's right to instill their values at home does not extend to creating an environment at school where someone else's child feels unsafe or unwelcome. Those two things can coexist, and a well-governed district makes sure they do.

The board sets the expectations. The administration implements them. And every student, regardless of who they are, deserves to walk into a CFBISD school knowing they belong there.

Are the current statewide assessments the right way to measure student progress? What changes would you support?

Standardized assessments serve a purpose. You need a consistent, statewide measure to compare performance across districts, identify achievement gaps, and hold schools accountable for results. Without some form of standardized measurement, the board has no objective basis for evaluating whether students are actually learning. I support accountability and I support measuring outcomes.

That said, the current system has real problems. The STAAR redesign, the shift to online administration, and the introduction of automated scoring have all created uncertainty about whether the results are reliable. Over 120 districts sued TEA because the commissioner changed the A through F accountability benchmarks retroactively, applying new standards to school years that had already been completed. That is not accountability. That is moving the goalposts after the game is over. When districts cannot trust the rating system, and when parents cannot trust that a grade reflects their school's actual performance, the system loses credibility.

I would support several changes. First, the state should commit to stable, transparent benchmarks that districts know in advance, can plan around, and do not ever change after the fact. Second, assessments should measure growth over time, not just a single snapshot. A student who starts the year two grade levels behind and gains a full year of growth is a success story that a single pass/fail score does not capture. Third, the accountability system should include meaningful indicators beyond test scores, things like attendance, graduation rates, career and military readiness outcomes, and post-secondary enrollment. These additional dimensions in the data would allow the district to plan for even bigger jumps in student outcomes in the future.

The board's job locally is to make sure CFBISD uses assessment data to improve instruction, not just to chase ratings. Testing should inform teaching. If it is only being used to generate a letter grade for a billboard, we are missing the point.

What measures do you support to address the mental health crisis among children?

This is real and it is urgent. The data is alarming. In 2021, nearly 45% of Texas youth reported prolonged feelings of sadness and hopelessness, a 53% increase from 2011. One in eight Texas teens seriously considered suicide. These are not abstract statistics. These are kids sitting in CFBISD classrooms right now. It’s a massive concern of mine.

The district has a role to play, but it has to be honest about what that role is and is not. Schools are not mental health clinics. They cannot replace professional treatment. But schools are often the first place where a struggling student becomes visible to an adult who can help. Teachers, counselors, and campus staff need the training to recognize warning signs and the resources to connect students and families to appropriate support quickly.

I would support ensuring every campus has adequate counseling staff, not just for college advising but for actual student wellbeing. The American School Counselor Association recommends a ratio of one counselor per 250 students. Most Texas districts are nowhere close to that and at the moment, I don’t think this ratio is possible due to financial constraints. I would support partnerships with community mental health providers so the district is not trying to build clinical capacity it was never designed to have.

The Legislature has mandated multiple mental health initiatives for schools over the last several sessions but has never provided dedicated funding to implement them. That is the pattern CFBISD and every other district deals with constantly. Unfunded mandates sent down from the state and the TEA that sound good in a press release but leave districts scrambling to deliver with money they don't have. The board should advocate aggressively for the state to fund what it requires.

One thing I would be cautious about is the district overstepping into territory that belongs to families. Parents should be notified and involved when their child is receiving support services. The school's role is to identify, connect, and support. Not to replace the family in making decisions about a child's care.