Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-24-2000-4ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 24, 2000 Action Agenda Item No. SUBJECT: School Funding Options Task Force Report DEPARTMENT: Commissioners/Manager PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): Draft Task Force Report (previously distributed) 4/7/00 Letter with CHCCS Comments 4/13/00 Memo with OCS Comments INFORMATION CONTACT: Commissioners Carey & Jacobs, ext 2125 John Link or Rod Visser, ext 2300 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE: To discuss the report from the School Funding Options Task Force and provide direction to the Manager regarding school funding parameters. BACKGROUND: As one element of their adopted goals for FY 1999-2000, the County Commissioners charged the Manager and staff to prepare a report outlining options for establishing parameters for funding the public schools in fiscal year 2000-2001 and beyond. Staff presented this report in August 1999, and the options therein outlined were discussed in December 1999 in a joint meeting between the BOCC and the two school boards. School board members suggested that a work group composed of school board members and Commissioners be convened to review those options and to make recommendations to the BOCC. In January 2000, the Board appointed a short duration School Funding Options Task Force, consisting of two members each of the Board of Commissioners, the Orange County Board of Education, and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education: The County Manager, the two Superintendents, and appropriate staff have provided support to the Task Force. The Task Force met twice in February. A draft report from the Task Force was prepared and discussed at the joint work session between the BOCC and the two school boards on March 27, 2000. At that time, both school boards indicated the intention to discuss the report at their respective next meetings. CHCCS reviewed the report at their April 6 meeting, and provided comments in the attached April 7 letter. OCS discussed the report at their April 10 meeting and provided comments in the attached April 13 memorandum. 2 The BOCC plans to review the feedback firom the two school boards give direction to the Manager regarding parameters that should be observed in determining the level of school funding to be included in the Manager's Recommended 2000-2001 budget. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct financial impact associated with discussion of the Task Force report. However, the Board's decisions on school funding parameters will have a significant impact on future school funding. Those decisions will particularly affect current expense appropriations, which for FY 1999-2000 exceed $34 million in the .County's General Fund. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board discuss the. task force report and school board comments pertaining to the report, and provide appropriate direction to the Manager and staff. 1~ ~~~~ ,_3" ;~ _ ~ ~ Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Lincoln Center Merritt Mill ' ~~ ~'I Road ; ~ ~~ ~, I 0 ?..n~?t~ , Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516-2881 ~ #~s' ~. s 1~ -. _. The Board of Education Telephone: 919/967-8211 Ext. 226 FAX: (919) 933-4560 Neil G. Pedersen Elizabeth Mason Carter, Chair Superintendent Board of Education Apri17, 2000 Mr. Moses Cazey, Chair Orange County Boazd of County Commissioners P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, North Cazolina 27278 Dear Moses: At its regularly scheduled meeting last evening, the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Board of Education asked that the following feedback be shazed with the Board of County Commissioners regarding the School Funding Options Task Force Report. I have again attached a copy of the February 27, 2000 memo concerning school funding formulas. I believe that consensus was reached by the school board task force members from both districts on the following matters and that these points of consensus have not been adequately recognized publicly: 1. It is not possible to answer the question as to how much of the county budget should be earmarked for education. Factors that impact this issue such as the tax base, anticipated revenues, and the economic objectives for the county as well as an array of needs throughout the county are not known to school board members. 2. It would be more reasonable to sepazate capital funds from operating funds when determining funding allocations because the capital fund decisions are known and predictable. This would lead to a funding approach as proposed by our district in 1VIode16. 3. School Board task force members strongly supported aneeds-based approach to educational funding, as captured in our proposed Mode17. 4. The school boazd members of the task force voiced appreciation for the Board of County Commissioners' consistent struggle and efforts to meet the needs of education in Orange County and acknowledged that the Board of County Commissioners' sound reasoning and good judgment have served education well in the past and will continue to do so in the future. The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Boazd of Education encourages a continuing open dialogue with the Board of County Commissioners regarding its budget issues as well as. other issues of common interest between the Board of Education and the County Commissioners. It is believed that discussions need to occur to determine an acceptable definition of "a mandate" and the approaches each boazd pursues to meet its mandates. In addition, discussions are needed regarding the struggles the Board of Education faces in meeting the demands of continual growth within its school system. 4 The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Board of Education wants to emphasize that it has heazd the voice of the County Commissioners regarding the need for fiscal restraint and it will keep that in mind as it pursues its 2000-2001 budget requests. The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Board of Education wishes to express its appreciation ,for the Board of County Commissioners',consistent support for the education of the student citizens of this county. Sincerely, ~~ ~ ~ r ~ Nicholas Didow, Vice Chair- - Board of Education ND/asb c: Boazd of Education Neil G. Pedersen ®range ~ountp ~oarb of ~bucatiott RANDY BRIDGES, SUPERINTENDENT ~iYr~borough, ,~~ 27278 BOARD MEMBERS SUSAN HALKIOTIS, CHAIR KEFTH COOK, VICE CHAIR ROBERT H. GATEMAN RICHARD KENNEDY DAVID KOLBINSKY DELORES SIMPSON BRENDA STEPHENS MEMORANDUM TO: John Link, Coun~~tSSy Manager FROM: Susan A. HalkioTisC hair Orange County Board of Education RE: School Funding Sessions DATE: April 13, 2000 5 200 EAST KING STREET HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278 TELEPHONE: 919-732-9126 FAX: 919.732-8120 During the April 10, 2000 meeting of the Orange County Boazd of Education, we discussed the proposed funding of schools information that was provided to our Board during the joint meeting with the Commissioners. The Board would like for the Commissioners to consider the following concerns as they move toward reaching, a final decision on these matters: First, the figures that we've used to illustrate the funding percentage that Orange County designates to education continues to lump together local operating costs, capital funding and debt retirement. Certainly the Orange County Board of Commissioners have generously provided consistent funding increases over the last ten yeazs, but it is impdrtant to recognize that capital needs and funding for new schools represented a lazge portion of those increases. Further, given the rate of growth that Orange County anticipates, it is likely that capital and building needs will continue to demand at least a financial allocation for the long term. This means that any target or cap on the percentage of the general fund allocated to education would necessarily put operating costs funding in competition with capital or building funding as facilities are upgraded or built to meet the demands of growth. Our school system has no district tax that could be accessed for the shortage in operating funds that are likely to occur in this event -and it is unlikely that our district would approve adding a district tax if put to a referendum. Although there has been much discussion about the consistency and definition of mandates by the two school systems, there are high cost items like state salary increases, utility cost increases and a growing ESL population that we clearly do not control and that continue to represent a substantial portion of our annual funding requests to you. For example, the above items alone will require a 7% increase in our budget for the 2000-2001 school year. Finally, while we know that Orange County school funding ranks neaz the top as compared with other districts across the state, we also know that North Carolina doesn't compaze so favorably with the average per pupil allocation for the US as a whole. Our students will be competing for colleges and jobs with students from all over the country, not just students from North Carolina, and we need to be aware of how we compaze on a national basis as well. Our Board unanimously agreed that until the above concerns can be addressed or resolved that we keep the current budget process in place. We are committed to keeping all of you informed about new initiatives and programs and to making certain that we provide sound reasoning for any requests for additional funds. /ha c: Orange County Boazd of Education Randy Bridges, Superintendent