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

Browse Search

In years past, the Commissioners bad a goal of the two school districts' total per- pupil fiuiding being within 5 percent of each other. That goal was achieved, but when the Chapel Hill- Can-bor~o City Schools began building schools (six since 1994), it became necessary to rely on the district tax for the added, ongoing costs associated with the operation of new schools. Since then, the disparity between the two school districts has steadily gtrown With CHCCS likely to open three new schools within the next six years, this scenario is likely to play out again. Consequently, it is unlikely that this definition of equity will be met. If also is um-ealistic to thiiilc that every opportunity in each school district could be made available to students in the other district who desire to participate in the program, Initial efforts last year to permit students Co attend programs in the other district did not prove to be attractive to students. It also would not be desirable oi° i°easonable to try to mandate that both school districts offer the same prog~°ams. This compromises the authority and responsibility of each of the Boards of Education. Defining, let alone achieving, equity has proved to be an elusive goal for more than a decade. As long as there are two school districts serving different populations with different expectations and priorities, it is unlikely that equal funding or equal access to programs will be achieved, It is the responsibility of the CHCCS School Board to set policy and broadly direct its superintendent to achieve our mission: "to enable all students to acquire, through programs of excellence and fairness, the la7owledge, skills and insights necessary to live r°ewarding, productive lives in an ever-changing society." At its March 2 meeting, the Board of Education discussed funding equity generally. Members expressed concern about a lack of full knowledge of conditions outside ou~° district. They noted the defeat of the OCS special district tax referendum, the need fm• 6iglrer taxes if funding is to increase, and that both districts are among the highest fmtded in the state. The Board concluded that one of its primary rotes is to advocate for the ~°esources necessary to provide the educational services to achieve its mission and drat its constituents expect for the children of this community. We greatly appreciate the Commissioners' steadfast support for education in the County. We also ~°ecognize that with a growing population and increased academic expectations from the national, state, and local levels, we will need additional funding to meet all of om- challenges. Therefore, we can neithe~• p~°opose nor support any approach toward equity that would ,jeopardize the increasing resom-ces that we will need to maintain and enhance the quality, of education.