Re: UNnecessary middle school
Posted by:
School Funding At Issue
()
Date: April 30, 2008 08:57PM
So the people of SOCO want a reason why they should not get a middle school?
How about a school budget that is short 55 million.
How about teachers not getting their three percent cost of living pay raise.
Save 60 million and give the teachers their pay raise
FYI
Teachers Criticize Fairfax Budget
School Funding At Issue as Plan Wins Approval
By Amy Gardner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 29, 2008; B01
In affluent Fairfax County, it's never enough. That was the lesson yesterday for the county Board of Supervisors, which approved its annual budget amid criticism -- not for raising taxes but for inadequately funding the public schools.
Supervisors gave final approval yesterday to a $3.1 billion spending plan that raises the property tax by three pennies, to 92 cents per $100 of assessed value. Most of the new money, about $45 million, will go to the public schools. But it was less than the School Board had asked for -- and that drew a rebuke from teachers, who sent out a sharply worded postcard over the weekend in anticipation of the supervisors' vote.
The card, mailed to the Fairfax Education Association's 6,500 members, said supervisors have placed "your promised 3 percent raise in jeopardy." The card was referring to the likelihood that the School Board will trim teachers' cost-of-living increases to 2 percent to balance the school budget in the wake of the county's action.
Supervisors protested the criticism as they prepared to vote on the county budget yesterday. They noted not only that every two of the three pennies in new tax revenue will go to the school system, but also that it is the School Board's job, and not theirs, to decide how to spend the money.
"To suggest that this board has placed in jeopardy the compensation of teachers is disingenuous and unfair," said Gerald E. Connolly (D), chairman of the county board. "It's disheartening, because we're doing everything we can in a deteriorating revenue situation."
Leonard Bumbaca, president of the Fairfax Education Association, said the card was not intended to criticize supervisors but to point out where the budget fell short.
"They have done a lot," Bumbaca said. "But it doesn't change the situation that they didn't go all the way."
Supervisor Sharon S. Bulova (D-Braddock), chairman of the board's budget committee, said school supporters have always wanted more than the county has given them. She said it's a function of living in an affluent county with a vocal community of parents and teachers, many of whom would rather pay higher taxes than jeopardize school class size, teacher pay and other education programs.
Bulova recalled a year when supervisors gave the schools all the money they asked for, and still the School Board asked for more. "No matter what we give them, it's never enough," she said with a smile.
School Board member Phillip A. Niedzielski-Eichner (Providence) said the teachers' group is right to assume that cost-of-living increases could be reduced to 2 percent to balance the school budget. Eligible teachers will still receive step increases, which average 2.7 percent, he said.
"Employee compensation makes up 87 percent of our budget," he said. "So to realize a significant reduction in cost, we have to reduce people." Other likely consequences, he added, include increasing class size, delaying the county's expansion of full-day kindergarten to all elementary schools and postponing expansion of elementary foreign-language instruction.
Niedzielski-Eichner noted that the School Board reduced its budget proposal by $33 million before making its spending request to the county board. He also noted that projected enrollment increases and rising fuel costs eat up much of the new money that supervisors are providing. It's also critical, he said, that Fairfax keep its teacher salaries competitive with those in neighboring school districts to be able to attract the best applicants.
The School Board will hold a budget hearing in mid-May. It is scheduled to approve a final school budget at the end of May.
Supervisors struggled this year with their toughest budget cycle since the mid-1990s. Declining property assessments pinched projections of property tax receipts, federal interest-rate cuts squeezed county investment income, and inflation in gasoline prices pushed operations costs upward.
Supervisors rejected several cuts proposed earlier in the spring by County Executive Anthony H. Griffin, including reductions in performance-based pay raises for county employees and a market-rate pay adjustment for public-safety officers.
They also reduced from 12 cents to 11 cents Griffin's proposal to impose a property tax surcharge on commercial parcels, citing the softening of the commercial real estate market. The surcharge, authorized by the General Assembly last year as part of landmark transportation legislation, is dedicated to road and transit improvements.
Finally, the supervisors found $1 million to create a third "strike team" to police code violations in older neighborhoods, where crowding and property neglect have contributed to blight and a decline in property values.
What supervisors did not do is tap into the county's reserve fund -- because of what they fear could be an even more difficult budget season next year.
"We have to make the prudent decisions," said Supervisor Penelope A. Gross (D-Mason). "They're hard. We have to look at the next year rather than the one that's happening right now. It's not just what's in our pocket right now. It's what might not be there the next time we look."