How is the budget and what is their goal?
School board will try to cut budget again
By STEVE WELKER
swelker@morganton.com
Thursday, May 8, 2008
MORGANTON - Squeezed between rising costs and falling enrollment, the Burke County Schools Board of Education will wrestle with its proposed 2008-09 budget during a special Finance Committee meeting at noon today in the central office.
The school board, by law, must present next year's budget to the Burke County Board of Commissioners on or by May 15, just six days from now.
Urged to adopt the budget at Monday's regular meeting, the board balked.
"I'm not going to support this budget," declared Board Chairman Tim Buff. "Enrollment has dropped every year that I've been here. Every year we've added employees....
"We're dipping into the fund balance again. We just cannot continue this.
"We've got a responsibility to the people of Burke County. Let's roll up our sleeves. Let's get down to this" even if it takes more meetings.
Board member Tracy Norman also questioned drawing down the "fund balance" ? the schools' version of a citizen's savings account ? to cover expenses.
The proposed budget's introductory paragraphs supports their concerns: "It is important to note that using fund balances is treacherous, because we are using non-recurring revenue to fund recurring expenses."
Norman said repeatedly tapping the fund balance to make up for shortfalls in revenue is "kind of like putting a BandAid on a dam."
And she seemed neither satisfied or reassured when school officials said it's not unusual to tap the fund balance when other revenue sources don't meet the district's needs.
Associate Superintendent Randall Brackett explained, "I would say to you the problem we have is the large fund balance we've committed to opening two high schools. We created a large amount of fund balance" in anticipation of opening Patton High School last year and Draughn High School this summer. "We had $3.8 million. We need to keep $1.2 to $1.5 million. We're drawing down $750,000.
"This is a pretty good budget, despite cutting into the fund balance."
The "Local Current Expense Budget" ? so-called because it doesn't include state funds for certified personnel (pri-marily teachers) ? totals $16.45 million. That's about $350,000 (2.1 percent) lower than the 2007-08 budget.
"It has been a particularly difficult budget to balance," admitted Finance Director Keith Lawson.
He said school administrators started work on the budget in February. The Finance Committee had at least four full meetings leading up to this week's presentation, as well as many smaller or informal sessions. Superintendent David Burleson said dozens of people, including department heads, principals, teachers and outside advisers, contributed their input.
One problem in the budget-making process, Lawson noted, is the state legislature has yet to approve its education budget. The school system won't know until later this year how much it will need for non-certified personnel, whose salary increases tend to track along with those the state gives to teachers.
Another unknown is the cost for energy: transportation, heating and cooling.
Utility expenses in the proposed budget jump $300,000 (8.4 percent) to $3.86 million.
"My biggest concern has to be the loss of some positions," said board member Sam Wilkinson who, with Norman and Rob Hairfield, sits on the Finance Committee. "We're going to be roughly 27 positions lower."
The reduction in salaries, supplements and benefits amounts to $858,000 (8.7 percent) from 2007-08 to 2008-09.
Superintendent Burleson hastened to assure people that there will be no layoffs. Instead, the staff size will be re-duced through retirements and by not replacing people who leave voluntarily.
"What we have concentrated on is not affecting the classroom situation," he added. "There will be a little change in class size in the lower grades (through third grade)," but the district will still meet state requirements for allowable class size.
Like Buff, Burleson noted the district is losing students.
At the same time, of course, the district is opening another high school. In 2000, when planning for the new schools began, Freedom High was bursting at the seams, carrying a pupil load of roughly 1.5 times what it was designed to hold. Based on the district's experience opening Patton High School in 2007, the proposed budget for 2008-09 anticipates spending an additional $762,000 for Draughn High School.
"With the exception of the expenditures for Draughn, the proposed budget is a continuation budget with no expan-sion. It'd be nice to have an expansion budget," Burleson said, but he doesn't expect to see one any time soon.
21 comments:
After listening to the audio from Monday's meeting, I'm betting today's goal was to re-instate the Associate's position while cutting other positions to pay for it.
The new majority want that other superintendent to come back to the county no matter what it costs our kids' education.
If you recall, Tim and Tracy voted against filling the position when Andy Anderson was recommended saying the job was unnecessary. And they voted against Andy's renewal contract. Buff didn't care then that the Superintendent was overloaded.
Why the sudden change of heart? With the reduction of over 20 teachers in next year's classrooms, Mr. Burleson said he did not think it would be right to fill the Associate's position at the cost of more lost jobs. I agree.
Wait just a minute, how hypocritical does that make Burleson,Wilkinson,and Armour sound?
Burleson in my opinion, has no choice and should not. The person who wrote the above article is a moron if they think this position will cost their child's education.if Burleson knew he could pick say a Robert Murray to be the associate it would be no problem.Who would take over if something happened to Burleson? Randall is not qualified by the the state's standard. The minority now cry fowl but to no avail. I thought the teaching positions were retired personel and they just would not fill those positions. I for one believe the energy resource manager and custodial supervisor position are no longer needed and they need to be done away with.Also, I would block any attempt by Burleson to put Charles Cook or Robert Bonner at Draughn as head custodian. I hope Board members will start to cut Armour and Wilkinson to shreads in the next meetings about the budget.
Why is it Armour and Wilkinson now try to save money when for years they did every behind the seens trick to get the administration everything they wanted. David Burleson you now have Bosses who do not cater to you and to continue to undermine them is insobordination and you need to be written up. Im am tired of this and this board needs to cut snakes heads off.
Why is the board all intent on getting an Associate's position when they had no interest in filling Anne Stephens position which would have greatly benefited Draughn. Instead we have Betty Terrell covering middle school and high school and not doing a good job at either. All of you so intent on cutting Robert and Charles seem to have no problem adding an Associate to the budget. Let's say you get your way and both positions are cut, what have you saved if you turn around and add an Associate's salary plus benefits to the budget. If you are all about saving money as you claim, how can you support the Associate's position. As someone pointed out earlier, if twenty teaching postions are not filled, Mr. Burleson would not seem to need additional help.
A good reason to have an associate is to have someone to take over for Burleson. No one care about Robert or Charles and they will not be missed.Yes the salary will be high but so is Randall's and the old board brought in a finance officer and now we have that extra salary while Brackett does nothing. Buddy is stupid and everybody knows it.
I just read in the News Herald about the budget meeting on Friday. Why the insistance on funding for an associate's position. Mr. Burleson did not have one from 2000 until 2004 and has not had one since Mr. Anderson left. Why spend $160,000 unless you have some ulterior motive. Word is that fraud five want Rick Sherrill in as associate so they can more easily move him into the super's position. So in order for them to do that, we must pay $160,000 per year until they can get their plan in place. Now don't get all bent out of shape and start in on how Burleson needs to go. Maybe so, but why not fill his position when he does go rather than pay Rick Sherrill in the meantime. If your intent is save money, this move does not make any sense.
If something happens to Mr. Burleson, hire another super. It happens all the time. If a teacher leaves in the middle of the year, a new one is hired. We don't pay an assistant all year so they can take over if somehting happens to the teacher.
I do not work or live in Burke County but I must say that from the audio of the BOE, News Herald, and this blog, it sounds like this school system is being run into the ground. It is a joke to the people in my county and the only thing I ask is that none of the board members move out of Burke County. At least I know that the county I live in will never be the worst in the state. The agenda of the new board appears to have nothing to do with the students of BCS, but more of their own boring lives and power hungry egos.
YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD!!!!!!!!
It has never been about the children in bcps. Geraldine rector may have been the only board member to have truly cared about the education of the children. David Burleson needs to move on and show bcps what he can do. He would not have to play good ole boys politicslike in bloody burke.
To the 7:46 self-proclaimed brainiac:
Keith Lawson replaced Cathy Carswell, the previous finance officer, who went to Newton-Conover as Finance Director. No new position was created. And Finance is just one area of Mr. Brackett's responsibility. But of course you knew that already because apparently everyone but you is stupid. Or is Armour the only one you can confirm as stupid? And since you seem to be an expert on recognizing stupidity, what does that say about you?
I know how to cut cost don't let maintance drive county vehicles home. I work for the state and I don't drive a state vehicle home.
I know how to save money don't let maintance drive county vehicles home. I should'nt have to pay for their ride to and from work.
Squeezed between rising costs and falling enrollment, the Burke County Schools Board of Education will wrestle with its proposed 2008-09 budget during a special Finance Committee meeting at noon today in the central office.
The school board, by law, must present next year's budget to the Burke County Board of Commissioners on or by May 15, just six days from now.
Urged to adopt the budget at Monday's regular meeting, the board balked.
"I'm not going to support this budget," declared Board Chairman Tim Buff. "Enrollment has dropped every year that I've been here. Every year we've added employees....
"We're dipping into the fund balance again. We just cannot continue this.
"We've got a responsibility to the people of Burke County. Let's roll up our sleeves. Let's get down to this" even if it takes more meetings.
Board member Tracy Norman also questioned drawing down the "fund balance" ? the schools' version of a citizen's savings account ? to cover expenses.
The proposed budget's introductory paragraphs supports their concerns: "It is important to note that using fund balances is treacherous, because we are using non-recurring revenue to fund recurring expenses."
Norman said repeatedly tapping the fund balance to make up for shortfalls in revenue is "kind of like putting a BandAid on a dam."
And she seemed neither satisfied or reassured when school officials said it's not unusual to tap the fund balance when other revenue sources don't meet the district's needs.
Associate Superintendent Randall Brackett explained, "I would say to you the problem we have is the large fund balance we've committed to opening two high schools. We created a large amount of fund balance" in anticipation of opening Patton High School last year and Draughn High School this summer. "We had $3.8 million. We need to keep $1.2 to $1.5 million. We're drawing down $750,000.
"This is a pretty good budget, despite cutting into the fund balance."
The "Local Current Expense Budget" ? so-called because it doesn't include state funds for certified personnel (pri-marily teachers) ? totals $16.45 million. That's about $350,000 (2.1 percent) lower than the 2007-08 budget.
"It has been a particularly difficult budget to balance," admitted Finance Director Keith Lawson.
He said school administrators started work on the budget in February. The Finance Committee had at least four full meetings leading up to this week's presentation, as well as many smaller or informal sessions. Superintendent David Burleson said dozens of people, including department heads, principals, teachers and outside advisers, contributed their input.
One problem in the budget-making process, Lawson noted, is the state legislature has yet to approve its education budget. The school system won't know until later this year how much it will need for non-certified personnel, whose salary increases tend to track along with those the state gives to teachers.
Another unknown is the cost for energy: transportation, heating and cooling.
Utility expenses in the proposed budget jump $300,000 (8.4 percent) to $3.86 million.
"My biggest concern has to be the loss of some positions," said board member Sam Wilkinson who, with Norman and Rob Hairfield, sits on the Finance Committee. "We're going to be roughly 27 positions lower."
The reduction in salaries, supplements and benefits amounts to $858,000 (8.7 percent) from 2007-08 to 2008-09.
Superintendent Burleson hastened to assure people that there will be no layoffs. Instead, the staff size will be re-duced through retirements and by not replacing people who leave voluntarily.
"What we have concentrated on is not affecting the classroom situation," he added. "There will be a little change in class size in the lower grades (through third grade)," but the district will still meet state requirements for allowable class size.
Like Buff, Burleson noted the district is losing students.
At the same time, of course, the district is opening another high school. In 2000, when planning for the new schools began, Freedom High was bursting at the seams, carrying a pupil load of roughly 1.5 times what it was designed to hold. Based on the district's experience opening Patton High School in 2007, the proposed budget for 2008-09 anticipates spending an additional $762,000 for Draughn High School.
"With the exception of the expenditures for Draughn, the proposed budget is a continuation budget with no expan-sion. It'd be nice to have an expansion budget," Burleson said, but he doesn't expect to see one any time soon.
Post a Comment