Setting the Record Straight …

By State Representative (D23) Terri Leo Wilson

  Texas law already allows a student to transfer to another school district when the receiving district and the parent agree. This option helps districts experiencing declining enrollment keep campuses and programs operating. Several districts within House District 23 currently accept out-of-district transfer students.

  During the 2025 legislative session, Senate Bill 686 proposed a significant change. It would have required districts to accept eligible transfer students when campus capacity was available, subject to specified exceptions. It also would have prohibited districts from charging those students tuition. The bill passed the Senate and was referred to the House Committee on Public Education, of which I am a member. The bill never received a hearing nor was a vote ever taken in committee to advance the bill the House floor for consideration.

  I spent considerable time listening to Dr. Poole’s concerns about that legislation and discussing its status. Nevertheless, district communications subsequently claimed that “our state representative refused to help” and suggested that I supported allowing nonresident students whose parents pay no local school taxes to attend BHISD. Those statements do not accurately represent either my actions or the bill’s ultimate disposition.

  Dr. Poole has also claimed that I requested “numerous agency investigations.” That is false. I have filed specific electioneering complaints regarding the use of ISD communications that I believe may constitute electioneering through publicly funded school-district platforms. Texas law prohibits school officials from using public resources to advocate for or against political candidates or legislation being considered. Whether a particular ISD communication violates those provisions is properly determined by the agencies charged with enforcing them.

  If BHISD or the Barbers Hill Education Foundation is under investigation by any state or federal agencies, I did not initiate those investigations and have not been provided confidential information about them.

  Public scrutiny of the foundation did not arise without cause. Dr. Poole has publicly discussed using the foundation to reduce recapture payments, to undertake activities the district itself could not undertake, and to place funds beyond legislative reach. Statements of that nature naturally raise questions among taxpayers, legislators and agencies responsible for public accountability.

  BHISD reportedly transferred approximately $97 million to a private nonprofit whose governing board included members of the BHISD Board of Trustees. That arrangement deserves transparent documentation and independent review. Commerce Street Holdings, the foundation’s investment manager, recently stated that the foundation came to the firm because of a conviction that public funds should be managed with “fiduciary rigor.” I agree that fiduciary rigor is essential. I also believe that money originating with a public school district demands meaningful public transparency. 

  The foundation’s lawsuit against me created additional public concern because it was authorized during a contested Republican primary involving Watkins, who was both my opponent and a foundation director. The statement at issue was made about my political opponent—not about the foundation itself. When asked why I believed Mr. Watkins was running, I said that I believed he was “running to make legal what might be illegal.” Contrary to a false narrative, put out using ISD resources, I have neither retracted that statement nor did I ever remove the news article containing it from my social-media account. In Dr. Poole’s sworn testimony before the Government Oversight Committee, he stated that it was Watkins responsibility to inform him of any conflicts of interest between serving as the director of the BHEF while being employed as the VP of Americus Holdings doing business with BHEF. If true, Watkins not disclosing a conflict of interest, in fact “might be illegal”. When Dr. Poole was asked at the hearing about the use of the BHEF to sue me, he had trouble recalling if my opponent was present and voting. Public scrutiny also ensued when Dr Poole and other board members, who were outwardly campaigning for my opponent, used the 250 million dollar foundation, intended for public school teachers, to sue one. 

  A 501(c)(3) organization is prohibited from intervening for or against a candidate for public office. Whether the foundation’s actions crossed that line is a matter for the appropriate authorities, but the timing, participants and use of foundation resources absolutely drew public attention to the foundations activities and do warrant public examination. 

  I am unsure why Poole, the executive director of the foundation, who recruited his director Watkins to run for public office, would then not anticipate such questions being raised by the public, regarding the potential conflicts involving a foundation director’s outside employment and business dealings with the foundation. Those circumstances deserve a complete review of all applicable disclosures, recusals, board approvals and conflict-of-interest requirements. A conflict should not be presumed away merely because someone failed to identify it.

  Finally, the public deserves a clear accounting of how much the foundation actually distributes in direct support of teachers, students and classrooms. Public statements have suggested that 100% of its resources benefit BHISD, while legislative testimony described a much smaller percentage of direct distributions and identified other expenditures. Education Foundations generally give back at least 65% to the purpose for which they were chartered. Under sworn testimony, Poole was asked if it were true that BHEF only gives 2.3%, to which Poole replied “it is actually double that (4.6%) because the BHEF does other things,  including the purchase of a Chambers County Youth Project Show grand champion steer.

  Those explanations invite reasonable questions: What percentage is distributed directly each year? What activities are included when the foundation calculates support for BHISD? Who authorizes major purchases, was the bid made to indicate that the purchase was being made by the BHEF and not being bought by an individual, and who ultimately receives the property purchased?

  These are not personal attacks. They are legitimate questions involving public money, nonprofit governance, conflicts of interest and the use of taxpayer-funded communication platforms. I will continue to request truthful public communications, lawful use of district resources and full accountability for money originating with a public school district.