Minutes - 20050609 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

is trying to paint regarding not meeting the 48.3°~ target, but he asked him to please not lump the County with the State, because the County has exceeded this target five of the last eight years and more than 49°~ of the County budget has been dedicated to education. The County's commitment has remained constant. Commissioner Jacobs said that it sounded like the school board was supportive of the tiered approach. He asked why they would be supportive if, per-pupil, Tier I gives less money, but Tier III gives an equal amount for each school system. Superintendent Pedersen said that there was logic to the tiers that the Manager laid out, which was to make sure that the fundamental needs are met first. He said that he was trying to say that these were fundamental needs that should be addressed first. He thinks that Tier III is the process for addressing equity after the other needs are met first. Commissioner Jacobs asked if CHCCS pays a living wage and Superintendent Pedersen said that they were at the last living wage level. Elizabeth Carter said that they use the County as the basis when they look at their living wage. Superintendent Carraway did not know if OCS pays a living wage or not that is comparable to the County's living wage. Commissioner Gordon asked for an explanation of how the County is funding for fewer students if CHCCS is going to have mare. Steve Scroggs said that because DPI projects growth based on a cohort survival methodology, it looks at growth through the previous 3-4 years. The projection two years ago was for a substantial number, well over 300 students, of increase in growth. They did not get to this growth. When their real numbers were put into the projection methodology, the next year's projection was lower than the previous year's projection. Consequently, they have fewer students today than was projected two years ago. Next year, they will have more students than they have this year. Chair Carey asked about expenses for transportation to transport students across district lines, exclusive of those in the Middle College program. He asked if OCS did any projections for this transportation. Superintendent Carraway said that they did not have a way of coming up with a number. Chair Carey made reference to the letter that Lisa Stuckey wrote about High School #3. The letter was addressed in the Board's budget ordinance adoption last week, and the school board will be receiving a letter from him. Also, he said that the County Commissioners had a discussion about a County school district tax and a countywide supplemental tax as options far passible inclusion on the November ballot. The school boards will also be receiving a letter from him asking for comment. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the budget scenarios and said that they include reductions in recurring capital. As the County Commissioners work through the alternatives far possible modification, she would like to know if the school systems have any comments. The entities all have different increases in their capital appropriations, with the CHCCS receiving considerably less than OCS in overall capital funding increases. 4. Update on Development on Orange CountylAlamance County Line Commissioner Jacobs said that there is a 214-acre development in Alamance County that is on and overlaps the County line. There is also a phase 2 in Orange County, and he does not know anything about it. This will have a major impact on the western edge of Orange County. This development has just been approved within the last month. The Orange County Planning Department does not even know anything about it. He found out about this at the Efland/Mebane Small Area Work Group and one of the Mebane City Council members mentioned it in passing. He wanted to bring it to the Board's attention. Economic Development Director Dianne Reid is working on getting the information. With no further items to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m.