Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-23-2000 - 4
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2000
>
Agenda - 03-23-2000
>
Agenda - 03-23-2000 - 4
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2013 2:35:26 PM
Creation date
4/19/2010 9:56:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/23/2000
Meeting Type
Work Session
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
4
Document Relationships
Minutes - 03-23-2000
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
SCHOOL FUNDING OPTIONS TASK FORCE <br />MEETING SUMMARY <br />February 28, 2000 <br />Schools feel they have been providing heads -up of major new initiatives through the <br />semi - annual joint BOCC /school board meetings and monthly County <br />Manager /Superintendent meetings. Schools ask their staffs to itemize budget <br />elements in priority order, but want administrators to tell the school boards exactly <br />what's needed — wouldn't want to squelch administrators with some percentage <br />figure. <br />■ OCS expressed concerns that there should not be any expectation that the BOCC <br />must endorse their initiatives, e.g. teacher supplement funding or class size reduction. <br />They feel they have to match what Wake, Durham, etc are doing - Chatham doesn't <br />do that, so their teachers will come to Orange County. <br />■ CHCCS indicates they decided not to aggressively pursue class size reduction this <br />year, as they wouldn't have money to do that. Like OCS, they are not necessarily <br />seeking BOCC endorsement and feel they should be able to make decisions (e.g. <br />Scroggs class structure) without BOCC consultation. <br />■ CHCCS sees value in last bullet on County list, giving County Manager direction on <br />the formulation of school funding in the County budget, while allowing schools to <br />make their cases for more funding during the budget review process. <br />■ CHCCS acknowledges that BOCC is not talking about a cap on funding, but notes <br />that it feels like a cap because they wouldn't be able to do some things they want to <br />do. <br />■ County acknowledges that it is not in their purview to dictate what schools spend <br />money on and understands school boards' frustrations that they don't control the <br />money. For the last 5 years, schools have averaged about 48.12% of County's <br />General Fund - that's right about where we are and why 50% range is a possible <br />target. We're in an enviable position, even if we're not doing all we might like to do. <br />■ Discussion about what kind of rigorous, non -staff review of budgets is done, both for <br />County and schools? Mention of CHCCS 1995 Pannesi report, 80% of which has <br />been implemented, with the balance waiting on State to upgrade SIMS. <br />■ In reviewing task force appointment resolution, it appears that we have done most <br />things BOCC asked, except for a recommendation. Don't plan to meet again, but <br />County representatives will draft something, and circulate it to other task force <br />members for comment before taking a formal report to the BOCC. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.