Agenda - 03-13-2006-1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

a auwry. ~~ ~ ®r~nge ~Cour~tp ~c~joo~~ ' a 200 (~a~t ~iug street ., .~ ~ ~ ~iCCgborougCj, ~~ 27278 ar g,t=~ r~. Dr. Shirley Carraway (919) 732-8126 Telephone Superintendent (919)732-8120 Fax www,orange.k 12.nc.us March 10, 2006 Mr. John Link, County Manager Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC .27278 Dear Mr Link and Board of Commissioners: For the past several years, our community has presented, researched, and discussed the issue of funding equity between Chapel Hill-Cazrboro City Schools and Orange County Schools, Once the discussion of merger ended, the Board of County Commissioners asked each of our school districts to address several questions still remaining about funding equity. AC our regular meeting on Monday, March 6, we discussed these questions and came to consensus on our answers. 1. What is your definition of equity? Our discussion of this question focused on the issue of fairness, Perhaps the following question best illustrates our Board's sentiments about equity and fairness: If the Board of County Commissioners were to suip away the district tax from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro system, world the per-pupil expenditures alone equip the school districts to meet the needs of a!l students in both districts? If the answer is "yes," then there is funding equity between the districts; each school system gets what it needs from per-pupil funding. If without the district tax, Chapel Hill- Carrboro Schools could not meet the needs of its students, then there is not funding equity. It would be evident that the district tax is providing essentials that should be provided through per- pupil funding. 2. What school programming aspects would you be most interested in having funded outside the per-pupil allocation for school current expenses? For several reasons, we are relucCant to venture outside the per-pupil funding mechanism. First, it is Che statutory responsibility of the Board of Education to make spending decisions I'or our schools; the BOCC has always been careful not to infringe on this responsibility. We also believe ChaC stepping away from per-pupil funding may set a precedenC from which it may be difficult Co retreat.. In addition, funding programs outside the per-pupil allocation would not address the gap the Chapel Hill-Carrboro disllict tax creates. And finally, we aze concerned that, over time, this type of funding might result in reduction of per-pupil funding, Having expressed these concerns, we would be open to further discussions about funding health and safety programs, such as SROs and school nurses, outside the per-pupil mechanism - as long as educational programs are addressed in the usual manner.