Additional Information

Running for Texas House District 94 in the 2026 Democratic primary.

Candidate Survey Responses

---

RESPONSES TO THE 2026 ATPE CANDIDATE SURVEY:

1. If elected, what are your top priorities for Texas public education?

Please describe any specific goals or legislative initiatives you would pursue to strengthen the state’s public education system.

My #1 goal would be making Texas the best state for high quality public education. My priorities for public education are fully funding neighborhood public schools, strengthening and retaining the educator workforce, protecting academic freedom, and ensuring that every child, regardless of zip code, has access to a high-quality, well-resourced public education.

Specifically, I will work to:

Increase and stabilize public education funding by raising the basic allotment, ensuring funding keeps pace with inflation, improving educator and staff pay, and providing districts with flexible dollars they can use to meet local needs rather than relying on narrowly earmarked programs.

Protect public education from privatization by opposing private school vouchers and educational savings accounts, and the unchecked expansion of charter schools, which divert public dollars away from neighborhood schools and weaken transparency and accountability.

Invest in school excellence and safety, including fully funding special education, mental health services, layered security protections, secure storage education, and student supports.

2. Public Education Funding:

The 89th Legislature passed an $8 billion school funding bill, HB 2. However, despite years of unanswered “inflationary challenges, a large majority of that funding was earmarked to specific programs and did not supply districts with significant flexible funding, leaving the majority of Texas students in districts with deficit budgets and other significant funding challenges. Do you believe Texas public schools should receive additional funding? If so, how should the state pay for it, and should that funding be earmarked at the state level or provide districts with flexible dollars?

Yes. Texas public schools need additional, sustained funding after 7 years of inflationary erosion and narrowly earmarked programs. Most school districts are in a structural deficit. The state must recommit to funding public education as a core responsibility by:

Raising the basic allotment and indexing it to inflation so school funding keeps pace with rising costs over time and districts are not forced back to the Legislature every few years just to maintain basic operations.

Providing districts with flexible funding, rather than over-relying on state-level earmarks. Local leaders are best positioned to determine whether dollars are most needed for staffing, special education, transportation, safety, or student supports. Flexibility improves both efficiency and outcomes.

Texas has multiple responsible options to pay for increased public education funding, but it can start with the general fund surplus.

3. ESA Vouchers:

Education savings accounts (ESAs) redirect public funds to private or home schools. How do you believe Texas should fund public schools, traditional and charter, alongside ESA vouchers? How should ESA spending be held accountable to taxpayers?

I do not support the use of public funds for private school vouchers or education savings accounts. Public education dollars should be invested in public schools that are held to transparency, accountability, and nondiscrimination standards, not diverted to private or home schools.

Vouchers weaken the public education system by redirecting limited state funds away from neighborhood schools that serve the vast majority of Texas students. If ESA vouchers are in place, any school or program that accepts public funds must be held to the same accountability standards as public schools, including:

• Participation in the full state assessment system
• Assignment of A–F accountability ratings
• Compliance with state curriculum standards
• Transparency in financial reporting and use of public funds
• Adherence to nondiscrimination and student-rights protections

4. Teacher Recruitment and Retention:

Under HB 2, passed in 2025, all educators in core content courses (math, English, science, and social studies) must be certified by 2030. While this is a good start, more can and should be done to ensure high-quality teachers continue to enter the classroom. What are your suggestions to improve the quality of the new teacher pipeline?

Requiring certification for core content educators is an important baseline, but certification alone will not solve Texas’s teacher shortage or ensure a strong, sustainable pipeline. To attract and retain high-quality educators, the state must address preparation, compensation, and working conditions in a comprehensive way.

I support strengthening the teacher pipeline by:

• Expanding high-quality, affordable teacher preparation pathways, including paid student teaching and high-quality residency programs, so candidates are not forced to choose between earning a credential and earning a living.
• Reducing financial barriers to entering the profession by offering tuition assistance, loan forgiveness, and stipends for candidates who commit to teaching in high-need subjects or communities.
• Ensuring all new teachers receive strong mentoring and induction support, including protected time for coaching, collaboration, and professional learning during their first years in the classroom.
• Improving working conditions that drive retention, such as safe learning communities that promote positive behavior, manageable class sizes, access to high-quality instructional materials, adequate planning time, and reduced reliance on excessive testing and paperwork.
• Strengthening certification standards and oversight while limiting the use of short-term, underprepared certification routes that place unready educators in classrooms without sufficient support.

Texas will not solve its teacher shortage by lowering standards or relying on temporary fixes. We must treat teaching as a respected, well-supported profession that talented people can afford to enter and choose to stay in over the long term.

5. Educator Pay and Benefits:

The 89th Legislature passed legislation creating a new mechanism to provide only classroom teachers with tiered raises based on early years of service and their district’s student enrollment. While the raises were significant, they did not apply to all campus educators, and the program created a significant negative funding stream at the district level due to unfunded increased costs for non-salary compensation tied to payroll, such as TRS retirement contributions. Do you support a state-funded across-the-board pay raise for all Texas educators? How would you ensure that compensation keeps pace with inflation and remains competitive with other professions?

Yes. I support a state-funded, across-the-board pay raise for all Texas educators, including teachers, librarians, counselors, nurses, instructional aides, and other campus professionals. Any compensation system that excludes key educators or shifts unfunded costs to districts undermines both morale and financial stability.
Texas must build a compensation system that keeps highly educated, highly experienced educators in the classroom. Too many teachers earn advanced degrees or develop deep expertise only to leave because the pay structure does not reflect their training, experience, or professional value.

To ensure educator compensation remains competitive and sustainable, I support:

• Across-the-board raises funded by the state, not local districts, so increases do not create new budget shortfalls or force cuts elsewhere.
• Salary structures that reward experience and advanced degrees, including meaningful pay differentials for educators who earn master’s degrees, doctorates, and specialized certifications and who continue working directly with students.
• Automatic cost-of-living adjustments tied to inflation, so educators do not lose purchasing power over time and raises do not require repeated legislative intervention.
• Full state funding of associated payroll costs, including TRS retirement contributions and other non-salary compensation, so districts are not penalized for doing right by their employees.
• Career pathways that allow excellent educators to grow professionally and financially without leaving the classroom, rather than forcing them into administrative roles to earn a livable wage.

6. Educator Health Care:

The high cost of health insurance for active and retired educators continues to reduce take-home pay, with educators shouldering the vast majority of their ever-increasing heath care costs. How would you address the affordability and sustainability of educator health care, particularly the TRS-ActiveCare and TRS-Care programs?

The rising cost of health insurance for active and retired educators is effectively a pay cut and is a major driver of educator attrition. Texas has shifted too much of the cost of TRS-ActiveCare and TRS-Care onto educators themselves, undermining both affordability and long-term sustainability.

I support a comprehensive approach that includes:

• Increasing the state’s contribution to educator health care, rather than continuing to pass rising costs on to employees and retirees. The state must treat health care as a core part of educator compensation, not an optional benefit.
• Stabilizing TRS-ActiveCare and TRS-Care through predictable, long-term funding, so plans are not forced into repeated premium increases or benefit reductions.
• Reducing out-of-pocket costs for educators and retirees, including deductibles, co-pays, and prescription drug costs, particularly for those on fixed incomes.

7. Retirement Security:

Do you believe the Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS) should remain a defined-benefit pension plan for all current and future members? If not, what is your plan to provide a secure retirement for Texas educators, particularly considering that state law has been set up such that most districts do not participate in Social Security?

The rising cost of health insurance for active and retired educators is effectively a pay cut and is a major driver of educator attrition. Texas has shifted too much of the cost of TRS-ActiveCare and TRS-Care onto educators themselves, undermining both affordability and long-term sustainability.

I support a comprehensive approach that includes:

• Increasing the state’s contribution to educator health care, rather than continuing to pass rising costs on to employees and retirees. The state must treat health care as a core part of educator compensation, not an optional benefit.
• Stabilizing TRS-ActiveCare and TRS-Care through predictable, long-term funding, so plans are not forced into repeated premium increases or benefit reductions.
• Reducing out-of-pocket costs for educators and retirees, including deductibles, co-pays, and prescription drug costs, particularly for those on fixed incomes.

8. Accountability and Assessment Reform:

The Legislature has passed a new “through-year” multi-test model under HB 8. What role should standardized testing play in evaluating students, teachers, and schools? Should test results continue to determine A–F accountability ratings or teacher pay?

Standardized assessments can provide useful information about student learning and growth when they are used appropriately. However, a single test or limited set of test scores should not serve as the primary or sole measure of student success, school quality, or educator effectiveness.

Accountability systems must be more comprehensive and reflect the full scope of what schools do. This includes multiple measures such as student growth over time, classroom-based assessments, graduation and postsecondary readiness indicators, school climate, and access to supports and resources. Reducing accountability to a single snapshot creates distortions, encourages teaching to the test, and fails to capture meaningful learning.

9. Parental Rights and Community Voice:

Recent legislative debates have focused on “parental rights” in education. In your view, what is the appropriate balance between accommodating the often conflicting wishes of individual parents while maintaining policies that reflect the broader community’s educational priorities and still providing consistency and an appropriate level of professional deference to educators?

Parental rights do not belong to any one political ideology. All parents deserve respect, transparency, and meaningful engagement in their children’s education. That includes the right to a secular public school environment, access to a broad range of books and instructional materials, and assurance that schools serve all students without discrimination.

The appropriate balance includes:

Respecting parents as partners through open communication, access to information, and meaningful opportunities for input.

Maintaining community-wide policies adopted through transparent, democratic processes rather than ad hoc decision-making driven by the loudest voices.

Preserving professional deference to educators, librarians, counselors, and administrators who are trained to make instructional decisions based on student needs, educational standards, and best practices.

Protecting students’ rights to inclusive, accurate, and age-appropriate learning environments that prepare them for life in a diverse democracy.

10. School Safety:

HB 3 (2023) imposed new school safety requirements but did not fully fund them. Although the 89th Legislature increased the School Safety Allotment, many districts continue to face substantial unfunded staffing and facility costs associated with school safety laws. How would you make schools safer and ensure the state provides adequate funding to meet safety mandates?

Families should never have to fear for their children’s lives when they drop them off at school. School safety must be addressed comprehensively, with a focus on prevention, support, and responsibility, not unfunded mandates or measures that shift risk onto educators.

To make schools safer, I support:

• Fully funding state safety mandates and layered security, including staffing, facility improvements, and training, so districts are not forced to divert resources away from classrooms to comply with state requirements.
• Investing in trained professionals, such as counselors, social workers, mental health specialists, and school-based safety staff, who are equipped to identify concerns early and support students before crises occur.
• Rejecting proposals to arm teachers and staff. Educators should be focused on teaching and supporting students, not carrying weapons. School safety should be handled by trained professionals, not classroom teachers.
• Expanding family and community education on firearm safety, including safe storage practices, and distribution of free gun locks. These prevention activities should be completed >2 times annually, across multiple channels, with accountability for completion.
• Strengthening threat assessment and intervention systems that prioritize prevention, communication, and coordinated response over punitive approaches.

11. Curriculum and Local Control:

What do you believe is the proper role of the State Board of Education, the Texas Education Agency, and local school districts in setting curriculum standards and selecting instructional materials?

The State Board of Education should be responsible for adopting clear, rigorous state academic standards and defining criteria for evidence-based instructional programs. That role should establish guardrails, not dictate classroom practice or limit districts to a narrow list of approved materials.

State standards and evidence requirements should not result in a short list of programs, especially in cases where the Texas Education Agency is effectively serving as the publisher or primary provider of instructional materials. The state should set expectations for quality and alignment, not control content development or crowd out high-quality options.

Local school districts should retain authority over curriculum and instructional materials because they best understand the unique needs of their students, communities, and educators. Instructional materials should be aligned to state standards, but decisions about texts, vocabulary lists, supplemental content, and instructional approaches beyond those standards should remain local.

12. Educator Rights and Professional Associations:

State law allows educators and other public employees to voluntarily join professional associations such as ATPE and have membership dues deducted from their paychecks at no cost to taxpayers. Do you support or oppose allowing public employees to continue exercising this right? Why or why not?

Yes. I support allowing public employees to voluntarily join professional associations and have membership dues deducted from their paychecks at no cost to taxpayers. This is a matter of individual choice, workplace fairness, and respect for educators’ professional voices.

Additional Comments from Candidate on Survey

---

COMMENTS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO THE 2026 CANDIDATE SURVEY:

I'm a product of public schools and my 2 kids go to local public schools. Fighting for public education is a big reason why I'm running for office.