Wednesday, May 14, 2003
|
Wednesday, May 14, 2003 |
|
School budget may get $3.6 M tax hike By J. FRANK LYNCH
Fayette County homeowners may face a 1-mill increase in school property taxes to make up for the $2.2 million shortfall Fayette schools still face for next year. That was one of the likely scenarios spelled out for school board members in a called meeting Monday afternoon, where comptroller James Stephens confirmed the district was still shy about $2 million of meeting its $146 million budget goal. Stephens said a 1 mill rise in taxes, generating an extra $3.6 million in revenue, will be enough to put the school system over the top in replacing state cuts with local money. Superintendent John DeCotis said the other alternative would be to dip into reserve funds, a reality that might come to play even with the tax increase because the state's cuts have remained so fluid in recent months. "That $2.2 million is on top of what they had already told us they were going to cut, including nearly $4 million in annual growth funds," DeCotis said. "So right there, that's about $7 million more we had to find locally." Stephens said the school district's share of good faith funds, the amount it has to put up to get the bulk of the state money, has risen as well to about $17 million annually. This year, well over half the total school budget will be funded locally. Details of the budget were withheld from the public and the media Monday, but the largest chunk of it,some $118 million,will go to pay salaries and benefits, Stephens said. Work to tighten the budget further will continue over the next couple of weeks, Stephens said, as he laid out a timeline for approving the plan. The tentative completed budget will be ready for board review by June 2, he said, and a period of public disclosure must follow. The board will give final approval to the spending schedule, and any change in the tax structure, by June 23. The fiscal year begins July 1. In other called business Monday, the board approved the hiring of 14 new teachers and the reassignment of another 24. That's a scattered few compared to the near 150 job reassignments made last month, necessitated as the district opens two new schools next fall while keeping staffing levels near even with current levels. Also Monday in a work session, board members heard a proposal from DeCotis to adhere stricter policy to "surplus" teachers, or those certified in a particular area but employed at a school that doesn't need them. For a variety of reasons, it has been difficult for teachers to ever return to their original school assignments once they've volunteered for surplus status, even when a job that meets their qualifications becomes available back at the first school. Board members generally felt the policy was unfair to the originating school and principal, who had no choice but to let the teacher go and then search for a replacement. "Either way, somebody has to lose somebody," said Board Member Janet Smola. "It's just putting the work off on somebody else." Though most teachers volunteer for the transfers and end up happy at their new schools, there have been examples of teachers who felt mistreated and principals who felt dumped on, several board members reported. Most centered on the "stay put" dates written into the policy. Teachers who seek transfers on their own have a much narrower window in which to make that decision, while administrators can pretty much choose to make transfers for the coming year right up until the end of post-planning. The board recommended making the day after the end of post-planning the deadline for making any transfers, no matter the reason.
|
||