Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19850311o2i MINUTE S ORANGE CWN1'Y BOARD OF C(1"IP'lISSIONERS SPECIAL MF~'PING MARCH 11, 1985 The Orange County Board of Commissioners held a special meeting on 2+iarch 11, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. at the Grady A. Brown Elementary School in fiillsborough, North Carolina for the purpose of receiving a report from Darrell Spencer, Director, Division of School Planning on the subject of merger. CQ~'i15SIONERS PRESENP: Chair Don Willhoit, and Commissioners Sha.rley Marshall, Moses Carey, and Ber- Lloyd. CQ~Il~iISSIOI~R ABSENT: Commissioner Norman W"alker. STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Assistant County Managers William T. Laws arx~ Albert Kittrell and Clerk and Administrative Assistant to the Board Beverly A. Blythe. ~iP,DIGE' COUN:EX SCHOOL BOARD w~~.as PRESENT: Chain Norman Haithcock, aix~ members Bob Bateman, Lindsay Efland, Walter Fairbault, June Haas, Max Kennedy and Frank M~.ller. HAPEL NSI,L~ARRBORp SCI3O0L BCl§~2D MII~ISERS PRFS~' Ghair Theodore Parrish arr3 members Dorothy Sue Baker, Carolyn Born, Verla Insko, Barbara Thornton and Edith Elliott [n7iggins. Phyllis Latchin was absent. Norman Haithcock ca].1ed the meeting to order and welcorc~d those in attendance. June Haas gave the invocation. Haithcock stated the purpose of the meeting was to receive information from the Department of School Planning relative to the study of a merger between Orange County schools. Ted Parrish stated the information received on the topic of merger will enable the respective Boards to make a decision on proceeding with a school merger study. Dr. Dan Lansford, Superintendent of the Orange County Schools, introduced Dr. Darrell Spencer, Director in the Division of School Planning from the Department of Public Instruction in Raleigh. Dr. Spencer proceeded with the history of the Special Chartered School Districts in North Carolina stating that discussions on how to deliver services to children has never been more prevalent than at the present time. The way in which schools are organa.zed is the question. The first special chartered school district was chartered by the General Assembly in 1881. Some of the special chartered districts serve iroanicipalities; others include only a part of the County. From 1881 to 1957 a total of 74 special chartered school districts or city administrative units were added through the General Assembly. In 1960 the first merger took place between Charlotte and Mecklenburg. Since the urban areas waned a higher education arr3 had a higher tax base per child it was easa.er to upgrade the city administration than to upgrade the entire wunty. Qat of the a2 city administrative units today only 29 have a supplemental levy. In 1963 the sewnd merger took place between Winston and Forsyth County. Pitt County and Greenville City have already been approved by the General Assembly and will merge in July, 1986, reducing the number of special districts to 40. During the process of merger there is not complete satisfaction with the results in every case. However, no efforts have been made to recluster an administrative unit which has merged. Dr. Spencer stated that 22 merger studies have been conducted sa.nce 1968 with the most recent study in Robeson County which has 5 administrative units o~~ and 24,000 students. Although all five (5) Boards have agreed with the r~rger there are qualifiers attached which need to be worked out. Dr. Spencer outlined the position of the Division of School Planning and the State Superinterr7ent on merger. He feels that the Department of Public Instruction can best serve the two Boards of Education through looking at merger implications rather than merger feasibility. He identified several changes among the school districts in North Carolina. They are as follows: 1. Citizens i.n rural areas have increased their level of expec- tations regarding schools where there is little difference between county and city school"systems. 2. There is still a tradition with city school districts for pro- grams such as art and music which may not be present in the county because of the lack of funds. 3. There is a growing belief that the total zesources of the county should support every child in the county. There is a belief in North Carolina that the education the child receives should not be dependent upon where that child lives. 4. Statewide, the tax base per child continues to grow in city administrative units faster than in the county. Aye reason is that the federal government provides money for water and sewer. 5. Student population is decreasing in most school systems, particularly at the high school and middle school level. Projections for the next five (5) years indicate that 30 out of the 42 special districts will decline faster than their host county. 6. there are eight (8) chartered school districts which have less than 2,000 students. Minority students are increasing in the school population. The decline in student population has caused an underutilization of facilities. Dr. Spencer distributed a report entitled "special Chartered School Districts in North Carolina" dated March, 1985' published by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, Division of School Planning. Ne highlighted certain areas of the report. (A Dopy of the report is on file in the office of Clerk to the Board.) Dr. spencer indicated there seems to be an assumption that merger will save money. From a study of six (6) school systems, four (4) spent considerably more dollars after merger than before; one system spent about the same, while one system spent fewer dollars. The conclusion suggests that following merger more dollars will be spent. Merger, in most cases, will give more education for each dollar. BREAK QUESTIONS AMID ANSWERS 1. Dr. Parish questioned the reason for there not being a stror~ advocacy position in the General Assembly and if a change may be forthcoming. Dr. Spencer stated that only in recent years has the State Department believed that education would best be served by 100 or fewer units. There is a growing concern about merger and how services are delivered. 2. Lirx3say Efland asked for comments on the statement that Orange County does not fit the mold. Dr. Spencer referred to the document that listed eight characteristics for city school systems. The only characteristic that fits Chapel F~.11 Schools is that they are projected to have a greater decline in enrollment than Orange County (which may or may not be the case). 02~ 3. Sue Baker asked if after merger any of the syst~ns used transportation to transport students back and forth to different programs instead of duplicating the programs. Dr. Spencer indicated there has been very little success in getting students to transfer to other schools for a two or three hour block. 4. Walter Fairbault asked if student achiev~nt had been studied before and after merger. Dr. Spencer indicated that achievement tests had not been adminis- tered because the scares are greatly influenced by what parents want for their children. Where merger has occurred there has been a renewed enthusiasm and optimism. 5. Max Kennedy asked about the length of time it would take the State Department to do a study for orange County-Chapel Hill/Carrboro Schools arx~ the cast. Dr. Spencer stated a typical study takes approximately one year and cast the County nothing. 6. Verla Insko inquired if the study would look at programs acid project a cost to upgrade both systems equally to preserve the best of both systems. Dr. Spencer indicated that generally the programs are reviewed. Program differences and special subjects are identified in addition to a staff review. The organization of the central office is reviewed and a suggested reorganization for the central office if rcerger occurs. 7. June Haas asked about the time that would be required of the school administrative staffs. Dr. Spencer indicated that is generally not a problem. The team would spend approximately three days with each superintendent. 8. Dr. Parrish asked about the procedure for gathering information about the differences in the County and the attitudes of the people. Dr. Spencer indicated information will be solicited from people in the County through interviews. 9. Commissioner Marshall inquired how the State Department worked with the Blue Ribbon Caarnnittee. Dr. Spencer cited the situation at Robeson County where a blue ri}r- bon committee was in place. The State Department worked with the .Committee, meeting with them six tines, and provided the Blue Ribbon Committee with a full report of the State's findings. 10. Commissioner Carey asked about the difference between feasibility axd implications study. Dr. Spencer noted that an implications study could also identify pra~bl~ created by the merger that need to be dealt with. I1. Max Kennedy asked Dr. Spencer for his suggestion for the situation in orange County. Dr. Spencer suggested that both School Boards aril the County Commis- sioners look at the opportunities that are a~rai].able to the child based on where that child lives. Fie encouraged the three boards to Look at the situation in a comprehensive way to determine what is best for all the children in Orange County. 12. Verla Tnsko asked about the survey with regard to attitudes. Dr. Spencer explained the State Department is interested in Con[~nity response, particularly fraun constunity leaders. He explained that most mergers have a transition board which operates for six months or one year that is responsible for building facilities and signing contracts. This mutual 024 board would also select the superintendent for the merged system. The board would deal with attitude, concerns and taxes. 13. Lindsay Efland asked about the average state expenditure per pupil. Dr. Spencer indicated the state average for 1982-83 was 5523 which does not include food service receipts. Chair Willhoit pointed out that Orange County ranked second in the state for the percent of funds going toward the school budget. Dr. Spencer noted this figure represents the percent of the funds accessible (as Conmiissioners for the schools) but i.s not related to the effort being made. 14. Edith Wiggins asked how an interim board is constituted and designed. Dr. Spencer explained the interim board would be part of the plan that the Commissioners would agree upon. The two school boards would need to agree and present the plan to the State for their approval. They would take .. office one year prior to merger and would be dissolved upon merger. 15. Commissioner 11oyd referred to Ashehoro and the county school and the difference in the cost as related to the situation for Orange County and Chapel Iii.ll/Carrboro Schools. Dr. Spencer noted there are a lot of issues that stand i.rt the way of looking realistically at the question of merger, with the most important issue being expenditures and how to provide quality education in the future that these extra dollars are buying now in Chapel Bill. 16. Dr. Parrish asked if Dr. Spencer ever had a situation where irxli- cators up front point out that it is impractical to do a study. Dr. Spencer indicated that bigger does not necessarily mean better and cited Wake aryl Mecklenburg school systems as being too big. There are reasons when merger is not the best alternative, but when you consider other alternatives, merger is the oN.y way to go. 17. Norman Haithoock asked about the cost per child in Wake County after the merger. Dr. Spencer indicated that in 1976, prior to merger, it Est 5225 per child and in 1981, after the merger, it cast 5619 per child. Following merger Wake County spent 142 more per child while the state average increased 104 during that same time period. 18. Norman Haithcock irx~uired about administrative problems. Dr. Spencer irrlicated most administrative problems were related to size. 19. Norman Fiaithcock asked if the study would be more feasible after I-40 was i.n place. Dr. Spencer noted that the implications are unknown. 20. Walter Fairbault asked about the implications of the career ladder. Dr. Spencer indicated there should be no problems. The implications will be seen in the basic education which depends upon state funding. 21. Norman Haithcock asked why a study should .be done on merger since this is not a pressing issue in Orange County. Dr. Spencer explained that this issue could polarize counties. It should be reviewed and a determination made about the good that could corm from merger as well as the problems. If merger becomes manatory by the state, the County would be better able to deal with it if a study had been c~rnpleted. 22. Verla Insko asked if most of the studies come at a time when there is pressure or a need to consider merger. Dz. Spencer noted that generally there is some motivating factor. The pressure may come from F!?A groups, Conunissioners, Chamber of Comrrezences, Q `~ a~, etc. Recently, there have been more objective studies to gather the information and implications associated with merger. 23. Max Kennedy noted that Orange County would need to increase its per pupil cost by 51.6 to be the same as Chapel Frill and asked how systems had dealt with increases of this magnitude. Dr. Spencer stated that generally. the amount does increase signifi- cantly in the County. Usually the Countywide levy is increased to take care of the difference. 24. Mr. Murphee asked what unique procedures have been followed. in elect- ing the board for a merged system, and tk~ malc~p of the board. Dr. Spencer indicated most study corcani.ssions elect according to districts. 25. Gary Muirhead, UNC student, asked about the differences and emphasis on the different programs offered and how this would be taken into account. Dr. Spencer indicated that the programs would be reviewed in terns of what constitutes a good education -- course offerings. staffing, etc. 26. Martha Cleary asked if the special program entitled TEACH, which is located at UNC in Chapel Hill, would be studied. Dr. Spencer indicated it would be studied. 27. Dr. Mayer, Superinterx3ent of Chapel Hill~:arrboro Schools inquired if each system would maintain their own policies or if policies would be combined. Dr. Spencer irr]icated this would be resolved before merger or during the transistion period. Norman Flaithcock thanked Dr. Spencer for his presentation and the infor- mation he shared. ~ adjourned the meeting at 9:45. Don Willhoit, Chair Bevelry A. Blythe, Clerk