It's not looking good that Wake County commissioners will increase school funding as they're casting their eyes on the district's undesignated fund balance.
During today's retreat, County Manager David Cooke told commissioners that the school board's undesignated fund balance, a.k.a. rainy day fund, stands at $25.2 million. Commissioners say they'll know where to look if asked to increase funding for the 2011-2012 school year.
"If we wanted to find additional money for the schools, the quickest place to go would be to their fund balance, which is our money anyway," said board of commissioners chairman Paul Coble
The unspent money consists mostly of about $7.3 million in instructional services, attributed to lapsed salaries and hiring freezes, and $15.5 million in system support -- everything from special population support to public relations. County officials said the fund balance is the largest it's been in seven years.
GOP commissioners have tended to look more at the school district's fund balance. Some in the past have questioned the need for the school board to have one, saying that the commissioners can cover any emergencies.
The last time the fund balance became an issue was the previous time the GOP was in the majority on the board of commissioners.
Historically, the school board has been resistant to the idea of surrendering its fund balance to the commissioners. To build up the fund balance, the old school board passed a policy saying the school system would only spend half its undesignated fund balance each year to balance the budget.
Comments
Neighborhood Schools In
Mon, 02/07/2011 - 23:19 — magnetParentNeighborhood Schools In Charlotte -- 10 Years Later
http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2011/feb/07/neighborhood-schools-charlotte-10-years-later-ar-763038/
Current Charlotte-Mecklenburg School Board member Joyce Waddell says Wake County’s school board needs online to look at Charlotte to see the effects of community schools.
"You've voted to dismantle integrated schools, and that’s what you need to focus on," Waddell said.
Echoing Waddell’s sentiments, Woods warns the Wake County School Board to put more value in its currently lauded assignment policy.
"You have created a system that is the envy of people across the nation," Woods said. "Keep the tenets of that while you look at what changes need to be made."
Charlotte schools - detailed info
Mon, 02/07/2011 - 14:54 — magnetParentChar-Meck Schools Open Their Books to the Web
http://lincolntribune.com/?p=4995&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LincolnTribune+%28Lincoln+Tribune%29
Provides links to Char-Meck info, including the per-student cost at each school:
http://www.cms.k12.nc.us/sites/agenda/Lists/Agenda%20Items/Attachments/355/3%20-%20Per%20Pupil%20Expenditure%20Report2.pdf
The spreadsheet (in .pdf) spans two pages so its a little hard to match up, but you can see the per student cost of each school and the demographics of those schools. More detail on schools profiles is at: http://apps.cms.k12.nc.us/departments/instrAccountability/schlProfile05/profiles.asp
Will they?
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 09:15 — Bob_SconceSome in the past have questioned the need for the school board to have one, saying that the commissioners can cover any emergencies.
Aahh... But, will they?
Is there
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 09:02 — occum_sharpeany way of keeping municipalities from putting in all kinds of extra zoning requirements once building authority is handed over to the county? For example, can a city have a requirement that a new school have X amount of acres of green space per every 500 students or could they have an occupation ordinance that would require larger classrooms than the county plan would call for? I'm just wondering. Don't know much about this.
municipalities
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 15:00 — stan_norwalkIn the past Wake Forest required a double deck parking garage and Rolesville require a change in the HS desgn that added about $500K to the cost (elimination of exterior stairs). Raleigh required improvement to an access road ro Forest Ridge. Without further research, it sounds like the answer is "yes".
Are these changes required
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 17:40 — starsonoursAre these changes required by the municipality or changes required by the building site and topography? I do not believe the Town of Wake Forest has a written ordinance requiring 2 story parking garages, this sounds like a limited space to build on issue. Nor does Rolesville have a no exterior stairs ordinance, this sounds like a change due to safety concerns. Sometimes the building site dictates what you can and can't do, this doesn't make it the local municipalities fault.
We Know The Answer
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 11:53 — chaboard..to that. They're not even willing to cover everyday operational costs - much less emergency costs.
The County Commissioners are also looking at this......
Fri, 02/04/2011 - 21:16 — nancyncRaleigh, N.C. — Twenty-five schools will need to be built in Wake County over the next decade to meet projected enrollment growth, officials said, and some county commissioners want to take control of the process from the school board.
Paul Coble, chairman of the Board of Commissioners, said Friday that the county could save money by handling school construction.
"It's actually cheaper for us to do it, when you look at the bottom line. We even get a tax break when we do it. We don't pay sales tax on materials," Coble said, noting that the school board isn't eligible for the same tax break.
Past school boards have resisted suggestions to cede control of school construction to the county, maintaining design and quality of infrastructure are tied to student learning, which is their domain.
The idea resurfaced during a Board of Commissioners retreat on Friday when some commissioners bristled at the school district placing $12 million in county funds last year into a reserve fund.
"What they're saying is perhaps they did not need as much money as they thought they needed," Coble said. "If there's a call for additional funding, we will point them to their reserve balance."
School board members said they need the reserve fund to handle unexpected expenses.
"I think the idea of us having a sound fiscal policy, of having a fund balance, should not be held against the school system," school board member John Tedesco said.
Despite the friction, Tedesco and school board Chairman Ron Margiotta said they support the idea of the county handling school construction so they can focus more on educating students.
"I'd love to see the Board of Education spend more quality time focusing on student achievement than on construction," Tedesco said.
School board member Keith Sutton said that, if the board relinquished that control, he would like to see county commissioners increase school funding whenever there's an enrollment increase.
Some county commissioners said they want more time to study the school construction issue before any changes are made.
"When you talk about purpose and function and accountability, I just think we need to sit down and have more dialog," Commissioner James West said.
-----------------------------
I could not agree more! Let the commissioners handle the growth they approve, without adequate public facilities needs being met as has been the past. There is no ordinance that requires schools, roads, water and sewer be adequate before building all these new subdivisions all over the county.
So, let them try to keep up with the approved building that causes the dramatic increase in school construction and everything else.
Should the County build schools?
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 13:15 — stan_norwalkRepeating what I said at the meeting: I agree. Mainly because I am concerned that the BOE, with so many other things on its plate, is not giving sufficient attention to managing (i.e. reducing) the high cost of new schools. I would like to see the potential savings be used for teaching and learning.
But there is a long road ahead. First, I'm told the statutory responsibility for building schools lies with the BOE. Will a majority agree this should be given up? Will the majority on the BOC agree to earmarking any savings for teaching and learning?
Note that the instant issue of a ballooning WCPSS rainy day fund is interfering with the more fundamental issue of the use of any savings.
Then there is the responsibility for the number, design, size and location of schools. Should schools be built for YR use or for the sandard calendar. I believe these issues have to be a shared responsibility.
This will require a lot of dialog. There has been little dialog between the two boards over the past year. The few meetings we have had have been largely a one way sharing of information.
As noted in the retreat, the 2006 bond money will be completely spent next year. A long range plan for school construction is needed. This could be the framework to address the above issues. An open and transparent process is vital.
So...
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 17:26 — Bob_SconceI don't know that $25M out of a $1B+ budget is "ballooning." The problem with spending it all immediately is that doing so increases the county commission's power over the school district. I'd like to see that power decrease.
It's likely, they'd
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 15:14 — KeungHui (author)It's likely, they'd recommend using half that $25 million to balance the upcoming budget. To do more would require them changing or suspending board policy.
So
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 14:50 — stan_norwalkPast BOE's have defended a $6M fund balance - rightfully so, to account for unanticipared expenses. What is the justification for a much larger balance?
If I could be assured that it would only be used for advancing teaching and learning and thus address coming cuts from the State, I would be comfortable with it. Other uses...hmmm
So...
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 17:42 — Bob_SconceThe position is just that it's too big -- something about 1/2 that size would be appropriate?
I don't know enough about the district budget to know what makes sense. Surely somebody's done a risk analysis. What if the price of diesel goes to $5/gallon, for example, or some other risk that wasn't covered by insurance? The district should have enough money in the bank to cover that without having to risk going to the commissioners and being told "No, you need to cut somewhere else."
I believe a majority of the
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 15:53 — CaryCurmudgeonI believe a majority of the county commissioners favor the commission assuming responsibility for school construction. Do you need BoE majority approval to get this done? Is this something the GA needs to approve? If that is the next step, then I'd like to see the proposal move forward.
I am a big fan of having "one throat to choke" and this would eliminate at least some of the finger-pointing between the two boards.
My sense is that you need
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 22:08 — stan_norwalkMy sense is that you need BOE agreement and continuing cooperation. Unless some statutory issues arise, I don.t think you need the GA. The next step is to discuss the basic terms of the agreement and see if agreeemt can be reached .
A written agreement between
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 13:58 — KeungHui (author)A written agreement between both boards would likely be needed. One of the stumbling blocks in the past was over how to transfer the school employers who handle construction and maintenance over to the county. Most of the school people are either state funded or are paid from the CIP funding. There were questions about how they could be turned into county employees.
I'm Kind Of Curious How
Sun, 02/06/2011 - 15:31 — chaboardsuch a switch could be binding on future boards (either side) without being codified into statute at some level.
quit your pontificating
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 13:20 — AngelaWthis has HISTORICALLY been the case between BOTH the BoE and the CC's...the time to stop throwing blame, Stan, is NOW.
yes
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 14:28 — stan_norwalkI tried not to play the blame game. I'll try harder next time.
...
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 16:01 — SideburnsNext time?
Great, we're down from 30 to 25
Fri, 02/04/2011 - 23:13 — FSandYOUI say give it more time and we'll be down to 20, maybe less. We're saving money every time Meeker, Barbar and Brannon's gangs say a word.
WRAL Investigates at 6: N.C.
Fri, 02/04/2011 - 19:30 — AngelaWWhen I saw that on WRAL.........
Fri, 02/04/2011 - 21:12 — nancyncI just about screamed out loud. How pathetic that stimulus monies are given such a narrow use, instead of helping all students, only those who already get federal help are supposed to benefit.
So much for those who have been responsible all their lives......yes, I'm mad.
Care to Restate This?
Fri, 02/04/2011 - 22:49 — chaboardSo much for those who have been responsible all their lives.
Perhaps it sounds a whole lot worse than you meant it to? I certainly hope so.
?
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 00:10 — nancyncHow it's meant is this. We continue to pour money into FRL students at higher and higher rates, and we know that many of the FRL are not even qualified to receive that benefit, but they do because the feds don't allow a full audit by a school system to be sure that those receiving FRL qualify.
Then we see this nonsense, where fed money is again targeting those FRL (Title 1) students, of which we know that some do not legally qualify for and if the schools use it to benefit anyone other than those students, shame on the school district.
Yes, it makes me mad, those that are not eligible get nothing, again. In fact, the system will be punished if a drop of that federal money goes toward anyone but those in Title 1 - how wrong is that? What kind of message does it send to those that don't qualify and indeed, those that don't qualify and are getting FRL to boot?
Cheat the system, it pays - that's the message. Work hard, you get nothing, that's the message.
Is that not working against what we're trying to teach?
So...
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 09:13 — Bob_SconceThe problem with F&R fraud is the direct issue -- people who should be paying for their own lunches aren't, and the rest of us are stuck with the tab. That's a good enough reason to try to reduce the level of fraud.
I don't think there's an actual significant problem with instructional resources, though. We use F&R status as a proxy for family income, because family income tracks with performance. I suggest that even fraudulent F&R status is probably still a good proxy for family income. After all, who are the people committing the fraud? It's most likely people right around the cut-off who claim a bit less income than they actually get, just to get the F&R lunch. It's not going to be an upper-middle class family. And, even if there are a handful of upper-middle class families who do get F&R lunches fraudulently, their neighbors won't. As a result the effect on their node's F&R numbers will be negligable.
I read that randomly picking
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 10:57 — user12345I read that randomly picking affluent families and auditing their taxes returns 10X the investment in back taxes ... that is the real money maker ...
...and that money goes to
Sat, 02/05/2011 - 16:49 — woodstock...and that money goes to the schools? Really? Hmm, I don't think so. Also, how does that stop the fraud that creates the false data that is used to make decisions?
But if they take the rainy day fund
Fri, 02/04/2011 - 18:20 — FSandYOUwhere will Haydon pull from when fuel hits $4+ a gallon? What about when it hits $4.50 and $5 a gallon? Does that mean we'll finally be able to end bussing because we won't be able to afford to run them? :c)
Wonder what the CCs think is
Fri, 02/04/2011 - 16:53 — woodstockWonder what the CCs think is a higher priority than education? Education is the key to almost everything good and meaningful in our lives. Look around the world, most of the hardship and conflict you see is directly related to a lack of education. It is a shame our politicians don't see that.