by Neil Richard
The Lewis Egerton Smoot Library was in the hot seat during the last Supervisors' budget work session with County leaders looking for answers on why the library needed more than the level funding they got last year. This budget work session turned the tables on the Supervisors and put them in the hot seat with a standing room only crowd challenging their previous statements regarding school funding. With educators, paraprofessionals, volunteers, parents, and School Board members in the audience, many of them wearing "Red for Ed," the Supervisors endured an hour of public comment. About twenty people spoke, some crying from raw emotion, stating their support for funding the school's request for more money this year. Several speakers even said an increase in tax was okay with them.
With so many members of the public in attendance, some arriving after the School Board meeting, and many in the hallways outside the meeting room, it was difficult to get an accurate count. My best guess is at least 70 people were there. It was also hard to keep count of how many people spoke during public comment as the simple task of making tally marks couldn't compete with the numerous compelling stories from teachers. A few highlights from the public comment session included a teacher saying they were "fed up with the lip service" and wanted the Supervisors to fund the schools. Many repeated that it was not about dollars and cents, a reference to Jeff Bueche's earlier comments from the joint meeting the Supervisors held with the School Board. Some reminded the Supervisors that the budget presented by Dr. Benson, Superintendent, was already cut and that those cuts were needs, not wants. One teacher said she requested additional positions at each school in the district because they were needed. She had data to validate her request yet the needed positions were not included in the budget that was presented to the Supervisors. One speaker summed things up by saying "as a parent and a para, please fund this."
Having caught wind of a large crowd coming to speak, a Sheriff's Deputy was present. In the last two years, even during last year's shouting match, there have never been deputies present at a budget work session to provide security. Thankfully the crowd was largely polite and professional but it showed that many had not attended a public meeting like this before. With public comment winding down, Jeff Bueche said that the Supervisors had planned to fund both the teacher raises and the requested Special Education positions.
Each Supervisor then commented, starting with Ruby Brabo saying her intent was not to discredit Dr. Benson during his presentation. Cathy Binder commented that she had been in the rooms of many of those that spoke, taught kids from others that spoke, and had done the work of many of them in the room. Richard Granger reminded everyone that the Board of Supervisors has the authority to fund the schools, but does not have the authority to govern how those funds are spent. John Jenkins said his line of questions during Dr. Benson's presentation wasn't intended to be rude but to rather find out the cost of the Special Education positions because he wanted to make sure they were funded. Jeff Bueche encouraged everyone to stay for the rest of the meeting and to attend future meetings to stay involved in the process. None of the Supervisors mentioned that all other County employees received salary raises over the past two years. Although it was included in the handouts during the meeting, it wasn't mentioned by anyone that the Supervisors would also receive a pay raise, going from $10,000 per year to $15,000 per year. School Board members also requested a raise this year in an effort to go from their current base pay $3,000 per year up to $5,000 per year.
After nearly 90 minutes, and a short recess, the Supervisors got back to their Agenda and heard from Dr. Neiman Young, County Administrator. Dr. Young said his revenue projections for next year showed the County's predicted income at $85,242,365. When compared to the County's projected expenses of $85,833,237, this left a gap of $590,872 to cover. Dr. Young gave the Board three options; raise taxes three cents, use the Revenue Stabilization Fund, or reduce the local contribution amount to the schools. Even though a one cent real estate tax increase (per $100 of assessed value) equates to roughly $270,000, the need to raise it to three cents would be cover the full amount and note leave the County short. It was also noted that due to the landfill revenue funding capital projects, the tax rate is artificially 27 cents lower. In addition to that, the County has already leveraged roughly 20 years of landfill revenue out of the remaining 26 years of life. Historically, the real estate tax rate ranged between 72 cents and 77 cents from 1996, roughly when the landfill opened, to 2005, shortly before the housing market crashed. Since 2009, when the tax rate was 50 cents, the rates have seen two spikes; 2014 saw a six cent increase and 2016 saw a seven cent raise.
There was some discussion during the budget summary about raising tax rates versus giving teachers raises. When discussion turned to the need for the schools to separate their Human Resources and Finance Officers from the County, Brabo said that previous Supervisors had forced the school to combine with the County. She suggested writing a letter to Dr. Benson to explain that the County would no longer offer these services to the schools and be penalized on their compliance audit and thus, the schools would need to hire the staff needed to complete the work. Several Supervisors said, at this point in the meeting and earlier in the evening, that the County gives the schools money but it's up to the schools to decide how to spend it. While that may be true, it puts the burden on the School Board for deciding between a pay raise for teachers and funding mandated Special Education positions.
In looking at previous meetings and presentations, it was interesting to find that some Supervisors weren't very supportive last year to fund the schools either. The School Resource Officers (SROs) was a big point of contention during at least two different meetings, even though the schools didn't specifically request them and the funding comes out of the Sheriff's budget, not the school budget. Additionally, the schools had a year-over-year reduction in projected expenditures of about $28,000 and they asked for an incredibly small increase in local funding last year of only $303,728.
At the end of the evening, there were a few topics on the Agenda that were pushed to the next Board meeting. The Personal Property Tax Relief Act funding was cut to 30%. But the key point on the Board fully funding the school funding request was left unanswered. A few Supervisors wanted a few more details to be answered before making a final decision.
The Lewis Egerton Smoot Library was in the hot seat during the last Supervisors' budget work session with County leaders looking for answers on why the library needed more than the level funding they got last year. This budget work session turned the tables on the Supervisors and put them in the hot seat with a standing room only crowd challenging their previous statements regarding school funding. With educators, paraprofessionals, volunteers, parents, and School Board members in the audience, many of them wearing "Red for Ed," the Supervisors endured an hour of public comment. About twenty people spoke, some crying from raw emotion, stating their support for funding the school's request for more money this year. Several speakers even said an increase in tax was okay with them.
 |
| Another 10 or 20 people arrived after this photo. |
With so many members of the public in attendance, some arriving after the School Board meeting, and many in the hallways outside the meeting room, it was difficult to get an accurate count. My best guess is at least 70 people were there. It was also hard to keep count of how many people spoke during public comment as the simple task of making tally marks couldn't compete with the numerous compelling stories from teachers. A few highlights from the public comment session included a teacher saying they were "fed up with the lip service" and wanted the Supervisors to fund the schools. Many repeated that it was not about dollars and cents, a reference to Jeff Bueche's earlier comments from the joint meeting the Supervisors held with the School Board. Some reminded the Supervisors that the budget presented by Dr. Benson, Superintendent, was already cut and that those cuts were needs, not wants. One teacher said she requested additional positions at each school in the district because they were needed. She had data to validate her request yet the needed positions were not included in the budget that was presented to the Supervisors. One speaker summed things up by saying "as a parent and a para, please fund this."
Having caught wind of a large crowd coming to speak, a Sheriff's Deputy was present. In the last two years, even during last year's shouting match, there have never been deputies present at a budget work session to provide security. Thankfully the crowd was largely polite and professional but it showed that many had not attended a public meeting like this before. With public comment winding down, Jeff Bueche said that the Supervisors had planned to fund both the teacher raises and the requested Special Education positions.
Each Supervisor then commented, starting with Ruby Brabo saying her intent was not to discredit Dr. Benson during his presentation. Cathy Binder commented that she had been in the rooms of many of those that spoke, taught kids from others that spoke, and had done the work of many of them in the room. Richard Granger reminded everyone that the Board of Supervisors has the authority to fund the schools, but does not have the authority to govern how those funds are spent. John Jenkins said his line of questions during Dr. Benson's presentation wasn't intended to be rude but to rather find out the cost of the Special Education positions because he wanted to make sure they were funded. Jeff Bueche encouraged everyone to stay for the rest of the meeting and to attend future meetings to stay involved in the process. None of the Supervisors mentioned that all other County employees received salary raises over the past two years. Although it was included in the handouts during the meeting, it wasn't mentioned by anyone that the Supervisors would also receive a pay raise, going from $10,000 per year to $15,000 per year. School Board members also requested a raise this year in an effort to go from their current base pay $3,000 per year up to $5,000 per year.
After nearly 90 minutes, and a short recess, the Supervisors got back to their Agenda and heard from Dr. Neiman Young, County Administrator. Dr. Young said his revenue projections for next year showed the County's predicted income at $85,242,365. When compared to the County's projected expenses of $85,833,237, this left a gap of $590,872 to cover. Dr. Young gave the Board three options; raise taxes three cents, use the Revenue Stabilization Fund, or reduce the local contribution amount to the schools. Even though a one cent real estate tax increase (per $100 of assessed value) equates to roughly $270,000, the need to raise it to three cents would be cover the full amount and note leave the County short. It was also noted that due to the landfill revenue funding capital projects, the tax rate is artificially 27 cents lower. In addition to that, the County has already leveraged roughly 20 years of landfill revenue out of the remaining 26 years of life. Historically, the real estate tax rate ranged between 72 cents and 77 cents from 1996, roughly when the landfill opened, to 2005, shortly before the housing market crashed. Since 2009, when the tax rate was 50 cents, the rates have seen two spikes; 2014 saw a six cent increase and 2016 saw a seven cent raise.
There was some discussion during the budget summary about raising tax rates versus giving teachers raises. When discussion turned to the need for the schools to separate their Human Resources and Finance Officers from the County, Brabo said that previous Supervisors had forced the school to combine with the County. She suggested writing a letter to Dr. Benson to explain that the County would no longer offer these services to the schools and be penalized on their compliance audit and thus, the schools would need to hire the staff needed to complete the work. Several Supervisors said, at this point in the meeting and earlier in the evening, that the County gives the schools money but it's up to the schools to decide how to spend it. While that may be true, it puts the burden on the School Board for deciding between a pay raise for teachers and funding mandated Special Education positions.
In looking at previous meetings and presentations, it was interesting to find that some Supervisors weren't very supportive last year to fund the schools either. The School Resource Officers (SROs) was a big point of contention during at least two different meetings, even though the schools didn't specifically request them and the funding comes out of the Sheriff's budget, not the school budget. Additionally, the schools had a year-over-year reduction in projected expenditures of about $28,000 and they asked for an incredibly small increase in local funding last year of only $303,728.
At the end of the evening, there were a few topics on the Agenda that were pushed to the next Board meeting. The Personal Property Tax Relief Act funding was cut to 30%. But the key point on the Board fully funding the school funding request was left unanswered. A few Supervisors wanted a few more details to be answered before making a final decision.
