Docstoc

April 19

Document Sample
April 19 Powered By Docstoc
					AT A JOINT MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF

GLOUCESTER COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD ON TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 2005 AT 5:45 P.

M., IN THE DUKE ROCK CAFE AT GLOUCESTER HIGH SCHOOL, 6680 SHORT LANE,

GLOUCESTER, VIRGINIA:

THERE WERE PRESENT:

                               John J. Adams, Sr., Chairman
                               Louise D. Theberge, Vice Chairman
                               Charles R. Allen, Jr.
                               Teresa L. Altemus
                               Burton M. Bland
                               Michelle R. Ressler
                               Christian D. Rilee
                               William H. Whitley, County Administrator
                               Daniel M. Stuck, County Attorney

            The Board of Supervisors meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Mr.

Adams. At roll call, Ms. Altemus was absent but arrived at 5:50 p. m. and Mr. Rilee was

absent, but arrived for the 7:00 p. m. meeting.

            The School Board Vice-Chairperson, Mr. E. Stanley (Stan) Belvin, Jr., called the

School Board to order. The following School Board members were present:

            Mr. Alvin J. (Jay) McGlohn, Jr., Chairperson, arrived at 5:50 p. m.; Mr. E.

Stanley (Stan) Belvin, Jr., Vice-Chairperson; Mr. Michael D. Jenkins, Ms. Ronnie Cohen,

Mr. Kevin M. Smith arrived at 5:50 p. m.; Ms. Ann F. Burruss, Dr. Jean E. Pugh. Also

present were Dr. Howard B. (Ben) Kiser, Superintendent of Schools; Dr. Donna P. Owen,

Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Services and G. Victor Hellman, Jr., Assistant

Superintendent for Administrative Services.

            Ms. Jennifer Scott, Chairperson of the Gloucester Youth Commission,

requested a moment of silence prior to dinner with the Board of Supervisors and School

Board.

IN RE:      GLOUCESTER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS FY 2006 BUDGET – DR. BEN
            KISER

            Dr. Kiser addressed both boards and thanked them for the opportunity to

share the School Board’s adopted budget.

            Dr. Kiser expressed the view that from the School Board’s prospective they

have the responsibility legally to provide policy and direct management oversight in terms

of services provided to children. Further, Dr. Kiser advised that the Board of Supervisors,

as a governing body, has the legal obligation to provide resources in order for the School

Board to provide the services to children.
                                        Tuesday, April 19, 2005                            2
                    Dr. Kiser advised that the School Board would like the Board of Supervisors to

consider all that the Board can do in providing funds for their educational programs. Dr.

Kiser stated that before the Board of Supervisors can provide funding for what the School

Board was requesting, he would like to provide the rationale for the School Board’s budget.

                    Dr. Kiser then gave the following power point presentation:

Slide
1                                                                                                                                              School Board’s Adopted Budget for 2005-06
                                                                                                                                               Gloucester County Public Schools
                       S c h o o l B o a rd ’ s A d o p te d
                          B u d g e t fo r 2 0 0 5 - 0 6

                          G lo u c e s te r C o u n ty P u b lic S c h o o ls




Slide
                    P u rp o s e o f a S c h o o l B u d g e t
2             P ro v id e q u a lity e d u c a tio n a l s e rv ic e s to a d iv e rs e
                                    s tu d e n t p o p u la tio n .
                   ( S o u rc e o f in fo rm a tio n : F a ll M e m b e rs h ip R e p o rt & D e c e m b e r 1 C h ild C o u n t)

                     E n ro llm e n t                             6 ,1 1 8
                     C a u c a s ia n                             8 5 .7 %
                     A fr ic a n A m e r ic a n                   1 1 .1 %
                     H is p a n ic                                1 0 1 ( U p fr o m 8 7 t w o y e a r s a g o )
                     O th e r E t h n ic ity                      9 2 ( U p fro m 7 5 tw o y e a rs a g o )
                     ELL                                          1 7 ( U p fro m 0 tw o y e a r s a g o )
                     F re e / R e d u c e d L u n c h 2 7 .0 %
                     D is a b le d                                1 1 .8 %




Slide
            A d e q u a te Y e a rly P ro g re s s - N C L B
3                               R e a d in g           R e a d in g           M a th
                                                                                  th            M a th
                                                                                                    th          T a rg e t      T a rg e t
                                                                                                                                    rg

                                  0 2 -0 3               0 3 -0 4            0 2 -0 3          0 3 -0 4          0 4 -0 5           1 3 -1 4

              A ll                 83%                    84%                 76%               86%               70%               100%
         S t u d e n ts
           tu        ts
          A fr ic a n              69%                    69%                 58%               72%               70%               100%
         A m e r ic a n
          H is p a n ic            92%                    76%                 82%               91%               70%               100%

         C a u c a s ia n          84%                    86%                 78%               88%               70%               100%

          D is a b le d            56%                    58%                 47%               67%               70%               100%

            Econ.                  70%                    73%                 70%               81%               70%               100%
           D is a d v .
              LEP                     *                      *                   *             100%               70%               100%
                                                                     Tuesday, April 19, 2005                                                       3
Slide                                                                                                Adequate Yearly Progress-NCLB Progress
4                              P ro g re ss M a d e                                                  Made
        A ll s c h o o ls a r e fu lly a c c r e d ite d .
        A ll s c h o o ls h a v e m e t a d e q u a te y e a r ly p r o g re s s ( N C L B ) .
                                                                                                       All schools are fully accredited.
        T h e g r a d u a tin g c la s s o f 2 0 0 4 m e t th e re q u ir e m e n ts o f
        v e r ifie d c r e d its .
                                                                                                       All schools have met adequate yearly progress
        P r o fe s s io n a l d e v e lo p m e n t is d ir e c te d to w a r d re a d in g ,
        m a th e m a tic s , a n d a c h ie v e m e n t fo r a ll.
                                                                                                       (NCLB).
        F o u r te a c h e r s h o ld N a tio n a l B o a r d C e r tific a tio n , w ith
        m o r e s e e k in g , a n d s e v e r a l e m p lo y e e s ( in c lu d in g s u p p o r t
                                                                                                       The graduating class of 2004 met the
        s ta ff) a r e p u r s u in g a d v a n c e d d e g re e s .
        R e c o m m e n d a tio n s fr o m th e M in o r ity T a s k F o r c e a r e
                                                                                                       requirements of verified credits.
        b e in g im p le m e n te d .
        E x p a n s io n , re n o v a tio n , a n d p la n n in g fo r s c h o o l fa c ilitie s
                                                                                                       Professional development is directed toward
        c o n d u c iv e to te a c h in g a n d le a r n in g a r e o n g o in g .                     reading, mathematics, and achievement for all.
                                                                                                       Four teachers hold National Board Certification,
                                                                                                       with more seeking, and several employees
                                                                                                       (including support staff) are pursuing advanced
                                                                                                       degrees.
                                                                                                       Recommendations from the Minority Task
                                                                                                       Force are being implemented.
                                                                                                       Expansion, renovation, and planning for school
                                                                                                       facilities conducive to teaching and learning
                                                                                                       are ongoing.


Slide                                                                                                Strategies for Improvement
5       S t r a t e g ie s fo r I m p r o v e m e n t                                                   Highly effective teachers/staff
          H ig h ly e ffe c t iv e te a c h e r s / s t a ff
                            tiv                       ta                                                    Competitive compensation
               C o m p e t it iv e c o m p e n s a t io n                                                   Professional development for all staff
               P r o f e s s io n a l d e v e lo p m e n t fo r a ll s t a f f
          I n te r v e n t io n e ffo r t s fo r s tr u g g lin g le a r n e r s
              te         tio            ts                                                              Intervention efforts for struggling learners
               B e fo r e s c h o o l, a ft e r s c h o o l, a n d d u r in g s c h o o l                   Before school, after school, and during
               S t r o n g p a r e n t a l in v o lv e m e n t a n d s u p p o r t
                                                                                                            school
          S tr o n g c u r r ic u lu m a n d a p p r o p r ia te r e s o u r c e s
          F a c ilitie s th a t a r e s a fe a n d c o n d u c iv e toto
                                                                                                            Strong parental involvement and support
          le a r n in g                                                                                 Strong curriculum and appropriate resources
                                                                                                        Facilities that are safe and conducive to
                                                                                                        learning




Slide                                                                                                Compensation/Benefits
6                  C o m p e n s a tio n / B e n e fits                                                Starting teacher salary of $34,000
        S t a r t in g t e a c h e r s a la r y o f $ 3 4 ,0 0 0                                       Reduction of the number of steps required for
        R e d u c t io n o f t h e n u m b e r o f s t e p s r e q u ir e d                            teachers to reach the top of the scale (25)
        f o r t e a c h e r s t o r e a c h t h e t o p o f t h e s c a le
        (2 5 )                                                                                            Currently 30 years are required
            C u r r e n t ly 3 0 y e a r s a r e r e q u ir e d                                           Scale adjustment as opposed to flat
            S c a le a d ju s t m e n t a s o p p o s e d t o f la t in c r e a s e s
        A m in im u m o f 4 % r a is e fo r a ll s t a ff
                                                 fo              ff
                                                                                                          increases
        B id d in g h e a lt h / d e n t a l in s u r a n c e t o c o n t r o l                        A minimum of 4% raise for all staff
        p r e m iu m in c r e a s e s
                                                                                                       Bidding health/dental insurance to control
                                                                                                       premium increases




Slide                                                                                                Intervention Strategies
7                  I n te r v e n tio n S t r a te g ie s
                                  t io    tr                                                            Intervention teacher at each elementary school
         I n t e r v e n t io n t e a c h e r a t e a c h e le m e n t a r y                            (3 needed)
         sch o o l (3 n e e d e d )                                                                     Special education teachers to staff one
         S p e c ia l e d u c a t io n t e a c h e r s t o s t a ff o n e
         t e a c h e r / t w o g r a d e s fo r c o lla b o r a t iv e                                  teacher/two grades for collaborative instruction
         in s t r u c t io n ( 3 n e e d e d )                                                          (3 needed)
         O n e r e a d in g t e a c h e r a t P a g e M .S a n d 2
         r e a d in g t e a c h e r s a t P e a s le y M .S . ( 1 .5                                    One reading teacher at Page M.S and 2
         needed)                                                                                        reading teachers at Peasley M.S. (1.5 needed)
                                                                              Tuesday, April 19, 2005                                                   4
Slide                                                                                                      Additional Staffing Strategies
8               A d d it io n a l S t a ffin g S t r a t e g ie s                                            Instructional technology teachers to meet
            I n s t r u c t io n a l t e c h n o lo g y te a c h e r s t o m e e t
                                                        te                                                   1/1,000 students required by SOQ (4)
            1 / 1 ,0 0 0 s t u d e n t s r e q u ir e d b y S O Q ( 4 )
            C u s t o d ia n s t o a c c o m m o d a t e t h e a d d itio n a l
                   to                                                      it io                             Custodians to accommodate the additional
            s q u a r e f o o t a g e a t A c h ille s a n d B o te to u r t ( 2 )
                                                                       te to
            O n e 1 1 - m th c le r ic a l p o s it io n a t e a c h e le m e n t a r y
                                                                                                             square footage at Achilles and Botetourt (2)
            school                                                                                           One 11-mth clerical position at each
            M o d ify p a r a p r o f e s s io n a l e m p lo y e e s ’ w o r k h o u r s
            fr o m 7 h r s ./ d a y t o 7 .5 h r s ./ d a y t o a lig n w ith
            fr                             to                                                                elementary school
            te a c h e rs .
            H ir e a n a s s is t a n t t r a n s p o r ta tio n d ir e c t o r t o w o r k
                                                         t a t io                                            Modify paraprofessional employees’ work
            w it h s p e c ia l n e e d s s t u d e n t s a n d n e w r o u t in g
                                                 tu
            s o ftw a re .
                ft                                                                                           hours from 7 hrs./day to 7.5 hrs./day to align
                                                                                                             with teachers.
                                                                                                             Hire an assistant transportation director to
                                                                                                             work with special needs students and new
                                                                                                             routing software.




Slide                                                                                                      Costs of New Positions/Benefits
9           C o s t s o f N e w P o s it io n s / B e n e f it s
        I n t e r v e n t io n , K - 5                                    3                1 5 3 ,3 0 3
        S p e c ia l E d u c a t io n , K - 5                             3                1 5 3 ,3 0 3
        R e a d in g T e a c h e r                                    1 .5                  7 6 ,6 5 2
        I n s t r u c t io n a l T e c h n o lo g y                       4                2 0 4 ,4 0 4
        C u s t o d ia n                                                  2                 4 8 ,0 0 0
        1 1 - M t h C le r ic a l                                         6                 1 8 ,8 5 3
        P a r a p r o f e s s io n a ls - 7 .5 h o u r s               86                  1 4 2 ,0 0 0
        A s s t . D ir . o f T r a n s p o r t a t io n                   1                 4 3 ,0 0 0
        H e a lt h I n s u r a n c e I n c r e a s e                                       3 3 0 ,0 0 0




Slide                                                                                                      Curriculum/Resource Strategies
10          C u r r ic u lu m / R e s o u r c e S t r a t e g ie s
        A P & I n d u s t r y C e r t if ie d E x a m s                                       3 4 ,0 0 0
        T u g B o a t P r o g r a m w it h R C C                                              3 0 ,0 0 0
        P r e - s c h o o l S e r v ic e s a t B o t e t o u r t/ A c h ille s                2 0 ,0 0 0
        T e x t b o o k a d o p t io n f o r E n g lis h , M a t h , & F L                  3 0 0 ,0 0 0
                                                                                                  ,0
        E n h a n c e d r e s o u r c e s f o r F in e A r t s                                3 0 ,0 0 0
        C a r e e r / T e c h n ic a l t u it io n f o r N e w H o r iz o n s C e n te r      6 0 ,0 0 0
        S t u d y t r ip s t o r e d u c e c o s t s t o p a r e n t s                        2 9 ,8 0 0
        S t u d e n t a c c id e n t in s u r a n c e f o r a ll s t u d e n t s              3 0 ,0 0 0




Slide                                                                                                      We no longer have the option of being satisfied
11      W e n o lo n g e r h a v e t h e o p t io n o f b e in g s a t is f ie d                           with 80% of our children succeeding.
            w it h 8 0 % o f o u r c h ild r e n s u c c e e d in g .
                                                                                                           Increases proposed in this budget address proven
        I n c r e a s e s p r o p o s e d in t h is b u d g e t a d d r e s s p r o v e n
            s t r a t e g ie s t o e n h a n c e e d u c a t io n a l s e r v ic e s f o r a ll            strategies to enhance educational services for all
            c h ild r e n .                                                                                children.
        W e a r e b e in g g o o d s t e w a r d s o f t a x p a y e r s ’ m o n e y .
            A ll p o s it io n s a r e b e in g s c r u t in iz e d a s v a c a n c ie s                   We are being good stewards of taxpayers’ money.
            o c c u r t o d e t e r m in e t h e ir n e c e s s it y a n d h o w t h e y                   All positions are being scrutinized as vacancies
            a lig n w it h t h e s c h o o l d iv is io n ’ s g o a ls .
        C a n w e d o b e t t e r in f u n d in g p u b lic e d u c a t io n ? W e                         occur to determine their necessity and how they
            b e lie v e w e c a n a n d im p lo r e y o u t o c o n s id e r                               align with the school division’s goals.
            w a y s to d o s o .
                                                                                                           Can we do better in funding public education?
                                                                                                           We believe we can and implore you to consider
                                                                                                           ways to do so.
                                                                                                                                                           Tuesday, April 19, 2005                                                                                              5
Slide                                                                                                    Loca l S u pport



12                   5 0,0 0 0,0 00


                     4 5,0 0 0,0 00                                                                                                                                                       4 3 ,57 7 ,5 3 0
                                                                                                                                                                                                              46 ,5 55 ,09 9




                     4 0,0 0 0,0 00                                                                                             3 8 ,2 4 8,5 3 9     3 7 ,98 1 ,32 9    3 8,7 7 4,8 95
                                                                                                               37 ,48 3 ,63 2
                                                                                            3 5 ,1 8 0,3 1 8
                     3 5,0 0 0,0 00                                       3 2,8 10 ,1 19
                                                         29 ,94 3 ,64 0
                     3 0,0 0 0,0 00
                                      2 7 ,2 5 2,7 0 4
           Dollars




                     2 5,0 0 0,0 00
                                                                                                                                                                                               21 ,07 2 ,50 8    2 1,7 06 ,5 37
                                                                                                                                                           18 ,9 02 ,4 80   1 9 ,2 5 0,0 7 2
                     2 0,0 0 0,0 00                                                              18 ,0 21 ,93 7    1 7,6 7 7,4 7 5   1 8 ,42 6 ,18 9
                                                                              1 6 ,94 5 ,3 6 0
                                                             1 5,8 3 4,3 68
                                          14 ,8 32 ,67 4
                     1 5,0 0 0,0 00


                     1 0,0 0 0,0 00


                      5,0 0 0,0 00

                                                  5 4 .4 %          52 .9%            5 1 .6 %          5 1 .2 %          4 7.2 %               4 8 .2 %          49 .8 %           4 9.6 %           4 8 .4%            46 .6 %
                               -
                                               1 99 7            1 9 98           19 9 9             2 00 0            2 0 01            2 00 2                2 0 03           20 0 4             2 00 5          Pr o po s ed
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    f o r 2 00 6
                                                                                                                          F is c a l Y e ar s




Slide                          L o c a l C o n t r ib u t io n s a s P r o p o s e d b y t h e
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Local Contributions as Proposed by the
13                                            C o u n t y A d m in is t r a t o r                                                                                                                                                  County Administrator
          S o u rce                            2 0 0 4 -0 5                        2 0 0 5 -0 6                          2 0 0 5 -0 6                                   Inc/D ec                        P e rce n t
                                                                                   Sch. Bd.                              P ro p o se d                                                                  Change

        O p e r a t in g                   1 7 ,3 7 0 ,8 5 7                    2 0 ,6 3 4 ,6 9 7                        1 8 ,5 8 6 ,8 1 7                       + 1 ,2 1 5 ,9 6 0                           + 7 .0 %


        C IP                                        6 5 3 ,2 6 0                           4 1 3 ,5 3 7                          4 1 3 ,5 3 7                            - 2 3 9 ,7 2 3                      -3 6 .7 %


        Debt                                   3 ,0 4 5 ,3 9 1                      2 ,7 0 6 ,1 8 3                         2 ,7 0 6 ,1 8 3                              - 3 3 9 ,2 0 8                      -1 1 .1 %


        T o ta l                           2 1 ,0 6 9 ,5 0 8                    2 3 ,7 5 4 ,4 1 7                        2 1 ,7 0 6 ,5 3 7                              + 6 3 7 ,0 2 9                       + 3 .0 %




Slide                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Strategies for Improvement
14                       S t r a t e g ie s f o r I m p r o v e m e n t                                                                                                                                                               Highly effective teachers/staff
                                   H ig h ly e ff e c t iv e t e a c h e r s / s ta ff
                                               ffe                               ta                                                                                                                                                       Competitive compensation
                                              C o m p e t it iv e c o m p e n s a t io n                                                                                                                                                  Professional development for all staff
                                              P r o fe s s io n a l d e v e lo p m e n t f o r a ll s t a f f
                                                    fe                                   fo
                                   I n te r v e n tio n e ffo r ts fo r s t r u g g lin g le a r n e r s
                                       te         t io          ts
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Intervention efforts for struggling learners
                                              B e fo re s c h o o l, a f t e r s c h o o l, a n d d u r in g s c h o o l                                                                                                                  Before school, after school, and during
                                              S t r o n g p a r e n t a l in v o lv e m e n t a n d s u p p o rt
                                                                                                              rt                                                                                                                          school
                                   S tr o n g c u r r ic u lu m a n d a p p r o p r ia t e r e s o u r c e s
                                     tr                                                te
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Strong parental involvement and support
                                   F a c ilitie s t h a t a r e s a fe a n d c o n d u c iv e t o
                                         ilit ie                    fe                          to
                                   le a r n in g                                                                                                                                                                                      Strong curriculum and appropriate resources
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Facilities that are safe and conducive to
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      learning




                                      The Chairman of the School Board, Mr. McGlohn, asked if Board of Supervisors

members had questions of staff or the School Board.

                                      Mrs. Theberge advised that she was very concerned because the information

provided by the School Board Chairman, included only debt service in the increases given

to the School System over the past nine years by the County, which he indicated showed a

decline in funding.                                                                         Ms. Theberge indicated that debt service should not be considered

because it changes according to the size of the school project undertaken.

                                      Further, Ms. Theberge advised that based on the information provided to her

from Mr. Whitley, over the six years she has been on the Board, the increases to the School

Board have been figured based on the operational budget.
                              Tuesday, April 19, 2005                             6
            Ms. Theberge noted that if you consider operational funds, the School System

had requested almost an 18.8% increase in operational funds over the 9.8% that the

County gave the School System last year.

            Further, Ms. Theberge advised that in the last two years on the charts provided

by the School Board Chairman, it shows the County’s commitment in funding to the School

System decreasing because the School Board included categorical aid in the formula, which

is 3 to 4 million dollars each year, and that aid is not available for the Schools, which

throws off the math tremendously.

            Ms. Theberge advised that the County had been very consistent in their

support of funding to the School System since the year 2000 in their operational budget

and that’s a lot more money than indicated in the School Board’s information.

            Ms. Theberge advised that Mr. Whitley’s recommendation for next year’s budget

suggests a 7% increase in operational funds for the School System and not their total

budget.

            Ms. Theberge advised that personally she was very concerned with the way the

Schools presented their budget figures this year because it suggests a decrease in the

County’s support of the school system because of the difference in their figures and the

County’s figures, which could create a problem for the School System in the future.

            Mr. Whitley clarified that the Board’s concern with the School Board’s figures

and that the charts offered by the School Board Chairman in his memorandum sent to the

Board of Supervisors members of April 13, 2005, was that they contained inaccurate

information.   Mr. Whitley indicated that in both charts, the School Board Chairman

attempts to indicate that the percentage of education expenditures as measured against

total County expenditures had reduced over the past nine years. Unfortunately, he had

included funds in his General Fund Expenditure Column that are not available for school

or general fund expenditures.     These total $4.1 million for the FY 2006 Fiscal Year.

Additionally, the School Board Chairman had not included funds that do go to the schools

in the School Construction Fund that total $1.3 million for FY 2006.

            Mr. Whitley stated that examples of funds that the School Board Chairman

states are available for appropriation by the Board of Supervisors to the schools include

funding for constitutional officers that must be spent on those offices, federal funding for

hurricane relief, and federal funding for the Bay Transit Program.
                               Tuesday, April 19, 2005                            7
            Mr. Whitley advised that the School Construction dollars are the remainder of

the funds the Board of Supervisors appropriated last year to support the additional cost of

the Achilles and Botetourt School projects. This total was $2.2 million dollars that was

taken from the County operating reserve fund. He noted that when these numbers are

considered in the analysis, the funding for schools shows consistency over the past six

years. In FY 2001, the funding for education, including capital, debt service and school

construction was 54% of the total general fund dollars available, in FY 2002 the figure was

54.5%, in FY 2003 the figure was 52.7%, in FY 2004 the figure was 48.9%, in FY 2005 the

figure was 55.5% and proposed for next year is 54.2%.

            Mr. Whitley indicated that, based on that analysis of total education spending

by fund source for the schools as a percentage of the total, over the years shows that the

County’s funding effort has been consistent. Mr. Whitley explained that in FY 2001 the

County provided 37.9% of the total funding for schools, in FY 2005 the County total was

39.5% and proposed for next year is 39.4%.

            Mr. Whitley advised that to indicate that the funding effort from the County

had decreased over time using incorrect numbers is inaccurate information.

            Dr. Kiser advised that he would be glad to review the figures over the last ten

years and deduct the categorical aid from the equation as presented because they want to

be comparing apples to apples. Further, Dr. Kiser advised that regarding the 1.3 million

dollars for school construction mentioned by Mr. Whitley, the figure they gave represent

debt service, which is on-going annual payment and not a one time payment out of the

fund balance.    Dr. Kiser indicated that the 1.3 million dollars was a one-time fund

payment, actually 2.2 million dollars based on a fund balance of two years ago and

therefore that amount should not be considered as apart of an on-going annual

commitment from the County.

            Mr. Whitley advised that the information he passed around to the School

Board, the chart entitled Education Spending as a Percentage of Total General Fund

Available for Appropriation shows the true County support of its commitment to funding

the School System and it is very consistent.

            Mrs. Ressler advised that she had several observations and possible questions

on this issue. Further, Mrs. Ressler advised that the 1.3 million dollars has been a point of

contention and her personal perspective is that the County borrowed 10 million dollars last

year, the School System needed 12 million dollars and the County gave the schools the
                               Tuesday, April 19, 2005                              8
additional 2 million dollars. Mrs. Ressler advised that she did not agree with the school’s

indication that they are being slighted because the County was not doing the same thing

this year.

             Mrs. Ressler asked the School Board if they would be comfortable with the

County separating their contribution to the Schools into five categories if that would make

things easier because part of the problem was debt service. Further, she noted that by law

the County was allowed to categorize the funds into instructional, administration,

transportation, operation and maintenance and debt service.

             Mrs. Ressler advised that the budget proposal recommends a 3% raise for

County employees and if the School Board gives their support staff a 3% raise instead of

the 4% recommended, would that extra 1% give the Schools the chance to do their scale

raise as mentioned in Dr. Kiser’s presentation?

             Dr. Kiser advised that the staff was working hard to try and accommodate the

budget that was presented to the Board of Supervisors. Further, he noted that at present

their available dollars for operating expenditures are short by 2 million dollars.

Dr. Kiser stated that what they have proposed for raises for their employees would not be

implemented unless they have the resources to so do and by having a shortfall would

obviously spill over into what was being proposed for school employees for raises. He noted

that they are considering cutting costs by not filling positions that become vacant

anticipating the budget that was before them. Dr. Kiser noted that depending on the final

budget adopted by the Board of Supervisors, staff would present the School Board with

several options to meet the budget. He noted that the School Board would live within the

budget amount they receive from the County, as they always do.

             Mrs. Ressler advised that she is a huge proponent of the schools and she

thinks the Board should support the schools as much as we possibly can and last year she

felt they took a huge step forward and said she would like to continue on that path but she

cannot afford two huge steps this year. Mrs. Ressler further advised that, depending on

which set of figures were right, depends a lot on the money available.

             Mrs. Ressler advised that categorical aid, as stated by Ms. Theberge and Mr.

Whitley was correct; because they have no choice in how those funds are spent and they

are told how these funds must be spent and the schools are not included in this funding.

She noted that if you figure the categorical aid cost that the schools included, the 1.3

millions dollars given the schools last year and what was being requested this year, it
                                Tuesday, April 19, 2005                               9
equates to almost 5.5 million dollars. Mrs. Ressler advised that as of right now, the County

cannot afford this type of an increase at the detriment of the rest of the County budget.

            Ms. Altemus advised that last year in June the Board of Supervisors

reappropriated 1.3 million dollars from the state to the School Board and as a stewards of

the taxpayer’s dollars she would want to know what happened to those dollars. In addition,

Ms. Altemus advised that the schools requested an additional 2.2 millions dollars to

complete renovations at Botetourt and Achilles Elementary Schools. Ms. Altemus noted

that it was her suggestion to take this money from the reserve fund balance, which they

maintain in case of a shortfall. Ms. Altemus stated that with the reappropriated 1.3 million

dollars, the additional 2.2 million dollars and the carry over funds, the schools received 3.7

million dollars in additional funds for their budget.      Ms. Altemus advised that when a

citizen asks her why she was not appropriating the amount of dollars she should be

appropriating to the schools, she finds this difficult to accept.

            Ms. Altemus indicated to Dr. Kiser that she cannot raise taxes ten cents to

support the School Board’s budget request.          Further, Ms. Altemus advised that she

supports education and is proud to work in the school system. She noted that there are a

lot of good teachers and good students in the school system, but as a Supervisor and as an

individual responsible for taxpayers dollars, she cannot raise taxes ten cents when the

County is expecting an assessment on January l, 2006, because she does not believe this is

fair.

            Ms. Altemus advised that to her knowledge, in the twelve years she has been a

member of the Board of Supervisors, the Board had reappropriated every dollar backed to

the schools that they have been asked to reappropriate, which was close to 4 million dollars

in additional funds. Further, Ms. Altemus advised that money that the schools ask to be

reappropriated is already in their current budget and one year the schools asked for a half

of millions dollars back which were unencumbered funds. She indicated that last year the

Board reappropriated approximately $269,000 to the School Board as requested and those

dollars, unencumbered, are in this year’s budget.

            Ms. Altemus advised that Mr. McGlohn had said to her on several occasions,

the same taxpayers that elect me elect the Board of Supervisors, but if the School Board

had taxing authority, they may be questioning you in the same regard that citizens are

questioning her.
                              Tuesday, April 19, 2005                           10
            Ms. Altemus stated that the Board of Supervisors borrowed 3 million dollars

several years ago to demolish the Old Kenney Building and that debt service was paid by

the County and not the schools, the renovated office space that the school administration

occupy was paid for by the County and is cleaned by County custodians, and there are no

charge backs to the school system. Ms. Altemus stated that she had an issue with the way

the School budget was presented but it’s an issue they need to work through.

            Ms. Altemus explained, that in her opinion, this meeting was too late because

these type meetings should be held in the fall of every year. Further, Ms. Altemus advised

that this meeting should not be held after the school board has their public hearing and

have adopted their budget. Ms. Altemus noted that this process should be started this fall

and not next year this time.

            Dr. Kiser addressed the Board and advised that the information he presented

was not any kind of a message regarding previous support from the County, because that

was certainly not their intent.   Further, Dr. Kiser advised that the School Board was

grateful for all the support that the County has given the School System over the years. Dr.

Kiser indicated that they are more than happy to discuss future funding of the School

System with the Board of Supervisors and he would agree that maybe this meeting should

have taken place in the summer or fall, with the discussion on how the County could

enhance funding to the School System.

            Mr. Bland advised that he could not impoverish the County’s older citizens who

are on fixed incomes to benefit our younger citizens because there should be a balanced

between the two.

            Mr. Allen advised that he too was almost offended to hear that the County’s

funding efforts to the School System were not good enough but at the same he realizes that

the School Board and their staff have the students best interest at heart. Further Mr. Allen

noted that the School Board has a stuff job and so does the Board of Supervisors.

            Mr. Adams advised that the Board of Supervisors asked for Mr. Whitley’s

assistance in understanding the figures provided by the School Board Chairman and he

trusts Mr. Whitley’s figures.

            Further, Mr. Adams advised that the two Boards have established a wonderful

relationship and he would like this same rapport to continue in the future. Mr. Adams

noted that all the information would be taken into consideration.
                              Tuesday, April 19, 2005                             11
            Mr. Adams advised that he was disappointed about an article in the newspaper

which indicated that the School supporters maybe be having a rally outside of the High

School in support of the school budget and he could not believe that citizens did not realize

that the Board of Supervisors was trying to do everything possible to support the schools.

            Mrs. Ressler advised that she would not have mined if citizens had showed up

outside in support of the school budget because she can remember a time when they were

discussing a tax issue and two hundred (200) people showed up and she thought it was

wonderful. Further, Mrs. Ressler advised that she wished two hundred (200) people had

showed up tonight, that would have been wonderful and maybe that’s part of her struggle

that she’s not sure she has the majority support in this decision and hers is a majority

position.

            Mr. McGlohn addressed the Board and advised that he appreciated the Board

of Supervisors time and the School Board would be welcome to dialogue.         Further, Mr.

Glohn advised the he agreed with Ms. Altemus that this discussion was too late in the

budget process and these discussions should be held earlier.

            Mr. McGlohn thanked Mr. Bland for sending him his comments in response to

the letter he sent the Board of Supervisors members.

            There being no further business to come before the Board, on a motion by Mr.

Bland, seconded by Ms. Theberge, the Board adjourned its meeting until April 25, 2005 at

7:00 p. m. in the Colonial Courthouse for a budget work session. The motion was carried

by the following vote: Mrs. Ressler, yes; Ms. Altemus, yes; Mr. Bland, yes; Mr. Rilee, yes;

Mr. Allen, yes; Ms. Theberge, yes; Mr. Adams, yes.



__________________________________        ___________________________________________
John J. Adams, Sr., Chairman              William H. Whitley, County Administrator

				
Fighting Yank Fighting Yank
About These documents were primarily taken from government websites as part of a personal project to archive political and governmental documents on Docstoc. Please email gov.archive.project@gmail.com for prompt removal if you discover a copyrighted document. Thank you!