School funding comes from three sources

Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 08:19:07 -0400
From: Mia Munn
Subject: school funding

On Mr. Manning’s question and Chathammatter’s response.

School funding for current expense (excluding capital) comes from 3 sources. For 2011-12, about 55% comes from the state, about 38% from the county, and about 5% from the federal government. For the past 2 years, the federal number has been significantly higher due to additional stimulus and jobs funding. Our district chose to use that stimulus funding offset state budget cuts to keep existing jobs, so we have had few reductions in positions over the past 2 school years. Most districts in the state used the federal money in different ways, and have had much larger personnel cuts over the past two years, including some districts that have virtually eliminated teacher assistants. For the those 2 years, the superintendent and board have been talking about the “funding cliff” that would occur in 2011-12, when the federal stimulus money ran out. We banked about $1M of federal money from 2010-11, and that money is helping with the 2011-12 shortfall but does not cover it all.

Our state funding has actually increased for 2011-12 (over 2010-11), but below the level of combined state and federal stimulus funding over the past 2 years. In addition, some costs (fuel, utilities, insurance, personnel supplements based on highest degree earned and longevity) increase each year. Our county funding also increased for 2011-12. The school board asked for $500K additional from the commissioners, which would keep the per pupil funding flat, covering anticipated additional enrollment. That request had a number of line items describing how the money would be used. The commissioners funded the one line item that was for classroom staffing, two teachers at SAGE for $110K. So both state and local funding is increasing for 2011-12, but not enough to make up for the loss of federal stimulus funds. Local funding is essentially flat to 2008-2009 (before the recession), but state funding is 11% lower.

Here is the link to the complete budget (local, state, federal, capital, and child nutrition) approved June 20
http://www.chatham.k12.nc.us/board/meetings/2010-2011/boemtg_06_20_11/Agenda%20Item-%202011-2012%20Budget%20Resolution%206%2020%202011.pdf

Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 06:55:15 -0400

From: chathammatters

Subject: Response to Al Manning

To Al Manning:  Al, there is no contradiction:

The County provides funds for school infrastructure such as property and buildings, the state provides funding for operating expenses like teacher and administrator salaries.

1) Our new Chatham County Commissioners kept funding to our schools exactly the same (no cuts), and did not raise our property or sales taxes.

2) The State, however, did cut funding.  Unfortunately, under prior leadership, our state legislature relied on “Stimulus” money instead of making necessary changes.  Well now the “Stimulus” money is gone, now we have to make the changes, and we are left with an enormous Debt hangover from the “Stimulus.

RE:

Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:40:07 -0400
From: “Al Manning” <
Subject: Which is it?

In the June 23 edition of the Chatham Record, there is a letter to the editor from Cathy Wright, Chairman of the Chatham County Republican Party that states, in part, “The Chatham Board of Commissioners recently passed a budget …[that] does not raise property taxes or reduce funding to core priorities such as schools…”

In the same issue, on page 1, there is an article with the headline SCHOOL SYSTEM FACES CUTS, which states some 29 positions will be lost.

Is there not a contradiction here?  If funding is not being reduced, why is the School System losing positions?

Al Manning

The Resident Curmudgeon