As Texans continue to grapple with high property taxes and a rising cost of living, school districts across the San Antonio area are asking voters to approve higher taxes and billions in new debt for long-term spending commitments. On November 3, voters in five area school districts will decide Voter-Approval Tax Rate Elections (VATREs), while San Antonio ISD and Northside ISD are also seeking approval for a combined $1.49 billion in new school bonds.
Five Districts Seek Additional Operating Revenue
A VATRE allows a school district to ask voters to approve a maintenance and operations (M&O) tax rate that generates more revenue and raises property taxes on property owners.
Five San Antonio-area districts1 are seeking voter approval for VATREs this November: Schertz-Cibolo-Universal City ISD, San Antonio ISD, Northside ISD, East Central ISD, and South San Antonio ISD.
Schertz-Cibolo-Universal City ISD (SCUC ISD) is proposing a 12-cent increase in its M&O tax rate. The district claims the money is needed to help address operating expenses and an $8 million budget deficit. SCUC ISD’s official VATRE website2 provides details about the proposal and its stated rationale, but the materials understate key drivers of the shortfall. District documents show that an estimated 3,000 students3 living within SCUC boundaries attend nearby charter or private schools while overall enrollment has been declining4 in recent years. Fewer students should mean spending less. At the same time, the claim that state funding has risen by less than 1 percent since 2019 completely ignores House Bill 2 from the most recent legislative session, which delivered a massive $8.5 billion package that included teacher retention allotments, a new basic-costs allotment for items such as utilities and insurance, and other targeted aid.5 Taxpayers deserve a fuller accounting of these factors and of remaining efficiencies before being asked to approve higher property taxes, especially after taxpayers rejected6 an even smaller increase just last year.
San Antonio ISD (SAISD) is asking voters to approve a 3.17-cent M&O tax rate increase. The district says the funding would support career and technical education, teacher pipeline initiatives, and a one-time employee supplement. SAISD’s official election announcement7 details the proposal. Taxpayers should examine how the district intends to allocate the additional revenue, how it will measure the results, and determine whether more hard-earned money coming out of their pockets is worth the supposed benefits.
Northside ISD is proposing a three-cent M&O rate increase. Northside ISD’s official project and funding breakdown provides the details.8 The district says the additional funding would support daily operations and staff compensation. Voters should consider this request alongside the district’s separate bond package.
East Central ISD is proposing to increase its M&O rate by 3.72 cents while reducing its interest and sinking (I&S) rate by 3.71 cents. East Central ISD’s VATRE information9 explains the proposed rate changes and expected revenue. Even with the decrease in the I&S rate, the district is seeking to raise property taxes on residents. Rejecting the VATRE would actually lower property tax rates, and enable local families to keep more money in their pockets.
South San Antonio ISD is proposing10 an approximate seven-cent increase in its M&O rate through a November voter-approval election11 that would shift pennies from the debt-service side while keeping the overall rate near $1.197 per $100.12 The change is projected to raise an additional $2.6–2.8 million annually for operating funds, taking more money out of the private sector.
SAISD Seeks $600 Million in New Bonds Amid Questions About Previous Spending
San Antonio ISD is also asking voters to approve a $600 million bond package13 divided into three propositions (B, C, and D, respectively): $492 million for school modernization, facility systems, and safety improvements; $102 million for technology; and $6 million for improvements to Alamo Stadium and Convocation Center.
However, the request comes as the district’s previous $1.3 billion bond package, approved by voters in 2020, faces a forensic audit.14 According to the San Antonio Express-News, approximately $420 million remained unspent six years after the earlier bond election, while several projects were delayed or stalled. The audit is examining how the district managed the funds, including whether financial records reveal irregularities or potential fraud.
SAISD has also faced questions15 about identifying which campuses would receive improvements under the new package. The district has named schools under consideration for some upgrades but has not finalized all campus-level allocations for major renovations.
These circumstances make transparency particularly important. Before taxpayers authorize another $600 million in new debt, they deserve a complete accounting of previous spending, a clear explanation of outstanding projects, and detailed information about how new funds would be allocated.
Northside ISD Proposes Nearly $886.2 Million in Bonds While Previous Projects Remain on Hold
Northside ISD is seeking approval for three bond propositions16 totaling approximately $886.2 million. The largest, Proposition B, would allocate about $764.7 million for general school facilities, renovations, security, and transportation. Proposition C would provide $56 million for instructional technology, while Proposition D would allocate $65.5 million to replace the George Block Aquatics Center.
The package comes four years after voters approved a $992 million bond in 2022. However, nine projects17 from that earlier package, totaling approximately $198.47 million, have been placed on hold while the district reassessed its facilities needs and the best use of the funds.
Northside says18 the bonds associated with the paused projects have not been sold and that the funds have not been redirected to other purposes. The district is reassessing how best to proceed with the projects.
The district’s circumstances raise legitimate questions about planning and priorities. Why should taxpayers authorize another major bond package while nearly $200 million in previously approved projects remain unresolved?
Taxpayers Deserve Accountability Before More Spending
The November ballot presents San Antonio-area taxpayers with serious decisions about higher property taxes, recurring operating expenses, and long-term capital spending, especially as several districts are asking for more revenue while earlier bonds remain unfinished, unspent, or under review.
As taxpayers review the ballot, they should look beyond the headlines and examine the details of each proposal. Taxpayer dollars are not an unlimited resource, and taxpayers should seriously consider the consequences of fueling more government spending with their hard-earned dollars.
Texans for Fiscal Responsibility is an independent educational non-profit organization seeking to illuminate the actions of government, educate and equip citizens to effectively advocate for pro-taxpayer and pro-family reforms, and hold lawmakers accountable for their actions.
Funded by ordinary Texans who want a fair, fiscally sound, and accountable government at all levels, we exist to protect and serve the best interests of taxpayers and families in the Lone Star State. Please consider making a generous donation towards our work today!
Get The Fiscal Note, our free weekly roll-up on all the current events that could impact your wallet. Subscribe today!
- https://www.tpr.org/education/2026-08-19/which-san-antonio-school-districts-have-tax-measures-on-the-ballot-this-november ↩︎
- https://vatre.scucisd.org/ ↩︎
- https://www.scucisd.org/o/wilder/article/2747159 ↩︎
- https://ballotpedia.org/Schertz-Cibolo-Universal_City_Independent_School_District,_Texas ↩︎
- https://tea.texas.gov/taa-letters/house-bill-2-hb-2-implementation-foundation-school-program-fsp-funding-formula-changes ↩︎
- https://communityimpact.com/san-antonio/education/scucisd-resets-property-tax-rate-calls-for-financial-committee-after-vatre-failure/ ↩︎
- https://www.saisd.net/o/bond/article/3136802 ↩︎
- https://www.nisd.net/community/bond/2026/project-details ↩︎
- https://www.ecisd.net/our-district/bonds-finance/vatre ↩︎
- https://www.southsanisd.net/propa ↩︎
- https://www.expressnews.com/news/education/article/ssaisd-voters-decide-tax-rate-change-fall-ballot-22391610.php ↩︎
- https://sanantonioreport.org/voter-guide-2026-south-san-vatre-election/ ↩︎
- https://www.saisd.net/o/bond/article/3136802 ↩︎
- https://saobserver.com/saisd-420-million-unspent-east-side-schools-600-million-bond/ ↩︎
- https://saobserver.com/saisd-bond-2026-what-the-600-million-ballot-measure-would-pay-for/ ↩︎
- https://www.nisd.net/community/bond/2026/project-details ↩︎
- https://sanantonioreport.org/northside-isd-pauses-building-upgrades-9-elementary-schools/ ↩︎
- https://www.nisd.net/community/bond/2026/faqs ↩︎
