HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 01, 2004 Work Session
546
A Worksession ofthe Frederick County Board of Supervisors and Frederick County School
Board was held on Tuesday, June 1,2004, at 4:00 P.M., in the School Board Conference Room,
1415 Amherst Street, Winchester, Virginia.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Chairman Richard C. Shickle; Gary W. Dove; Bill M. Ewing; Gina A. Forrester; W.
Harrington Smith, Jr., and Lynda J. Tyler.
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT
Vice-Chairman Barbara E. Van Osten.
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT
Gary Lofton.
STAFF PRESENT
John R. Riley, Jr., County Administrator; Kris C. Tierney, Assistant County Administrator;
Jay E. Tibbs, Deputy Clerk; Cheryl B. Shiffler, Finance Director; Ellen Murphy, Commissioner of
Revenue; and C. William Orndoff, Treasurer.
OTHERS PRESENT
Dr. William C. Dean, School Superintendent; Lisa Frye, Frederick County School Board
Director of Finance; Robert W. Cleaver, Assistant Superintendent for Administration; Patricia
Taylor, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction; Al Orndorff, Administrative Assistant; School
Board Chairman Patricia Stiles; School Board Vice-Chairman John Lamanna; and School Board
Members Richard Howett; David Zerull; Lawrence VanHoose; Don Butler; and Stuart Wolk.
Chairwoman Stiles convened the worksession to discuss the FY 2005 Budget.
DISCUSSION OF FREDERICK COUNTY SCHOOLS FY 2005 BUDGET
Dr. Dean thanked everyone for coming and for the work of staff in preparing this
presentation. He advised that the presentation was very important for understanding the topic as the
material was very complex. He stated that he thought the presentation captured all of the questions,
which had been submitted.
Chairman Shickle advised that his questions were in the materials faxed and e-mailed from
V ACo (Virginia Association of Counties).
Dr. Dean then asked Assistant Superintendent Taylor to go through the Standards of Quality,
Minute Book Number 29
Board of Supervisors Worksession with School Board 06/01104
547
Standards of Learning, and Standards of Accreditation.
Assistant Superintendent Taylor cited Virginia Code section 13.2, which deals with the
Standards of Quality for public schools. She then reviewed the eight standards, which include: basic
skills, support services, accreditation, diplomas and certificates, training and professional
development, planning and public involvement, and policy manual. Assistant Superintendent Taylor
advised that the Standards of Accreditation are required for public and secondary schools in Virginia.
She then reviewed the regulations for establishing the standards for accrediting public schools and
advised that graduation requirements were also included in the document. She further advised that
Frederick County has been meeting the minimum requirements for Standards of Quality and
Standards of Accreditation as set by the state and the County is required to attest to every document
related to this. She concluded by reviewing the four core areas ofthe standards oflearning as well
as other co-curricular and extra-curricular activities.
Finance Director Frye reviewed the local wealth and required effort. She advised that the
Frederick County composite index is 37.56% with a State share of62.44%. She advised that these
were the required shares for any standards of quality or program or position. With regard to local
effort, Finance Director Frye stated that almost all school divisions across the state fund education
above the required level, with Frederick County funding 147% above the required percentage ($42
million), which ranks 20th in the state. In response to a question submitted by Supervisor Dove,
Finance Director Frye responded that Frederick County Schools have been paying for all state
mandates in the standards of quality.
She then discussed staffing issues and the use ofteacher aides versus teachers and the cost
savings to the Schools. She advised that Frederick County ranked in the bottom quartile of state
averages with regard to staffing with 98.5 positions per 1,000 instructional students. The state
average is 99.18 positions per 1,000 instructional students. Finance Director Frye then reviewed the
recommended ratios and their relationship to class sizes in Frederick County. She advised that an
additional 26.3 full-time employees would be needed to manage the increased enrollment. She
concluded by reviewing the per pupil expenditure of $7,677, which ranks Frederick County 69th.
The state average is $8,186.
Dr. Dean explained the return on investment. He advised that Frederick County has the
Minute Book Number 29
Board of Supervisors Worksession with School Board 06/01104
548
lowest drop out rates in school division history at 1.37%. The statewide average is 4%. This was
made possible by additional local funding, which helped fund additional staff, maintain class sizes,
etc.
Assistant Superintendent Taylor reviewed the standards oflearning test results for Frederick
County schools.
With regard to the middle school plarming period, this is something that many potential
middle school teachers look for when seeking a job. Assistant Superintendent Taylor advised that
this was something that made a difference in the County's ability to hire, ifit was not available.
Assistant Superintendent Taylor informed the Board that there will be six new state required
tests added in 2006, which results in an enormous burden for the schools.
Dr. Dean distributed a document discussing prevailing costs and prevailing practices. He
advised that the State should be funding schools in the amount of an additional $1 billion, but they
are not. He advised that the level of funding received is "no where near what we do here". He cited
the agriculture programs, which allowed students to go from school directly into the job market.
A discussion followed regarding the closure of Gainesboro Elementary School and what
programs these monies funded. Finance Director Frye responded that the monies were used to
partially fund lines 6-22 of the budget work paper, which included:
Required increase in expenditures for restricted programs.
Increase in services since adoption of 2004 budget.
VRS retirement contribution.
Group Health Insurance premium.
Staffing for 4th middle school.
Inflationary increases for materials/supplies/services, etc.
Continued leasing of modular units at James Wood Middle School.
Special Ed: instructional staffing.
Salary increases for all staff.
Phase-in of middle school team plarming period - Grade 6.
Class size: instructional staffing - regular, vocational resource.
Infrastructure staffing.
Instructional staffing requirements for federal and state standards.
Bus replacements.
Technology plan, funding.
Additional health care benefit to professional retirees.
Board member VanHoose stated that the money was used for a reallocation of funds;
however, when the state funding came through, the School Board was able to fund areas that were
previously cut.
Finance Director Frye advised that anticipated increases in next year's funding includes the
Minute Book Number 29
Board of Supervisors Worksession with School Board 06/01104
549
opening of the new middle school and VRS insurance, for example, with a total increase of$12
million. It is anticipated that the state will provide another $3.2 million, which would leave a local
additional contribution of approximately $9 million.
Treasurer Orndoff asked the School Board ifthey were in a position to project budget needs
for a couple of years out, because the County needs to see where the schools are headed.
Dr. Dean responded that the School Board was ready to discuss its five year plan and project
a five year budget.
In response to Supervisor Dove's question concerning budgeted funds in 2004-2005, which
were grant money or non-ongoing expenses that would not be recurring in 2005-2006, Finance
Director Frye advised that there would be no expenses that are one time and/or on-going through the
2005-2006 budget.
Dr. Dean stated that this concludes the School Board's presentation.
Supervisor Forrester asked ifthe additional full-time staff positions were for high school or
middle school.
Dr. Dean responded that the five positions included in the budget were high school positions.
Supervisor Ewing asked why these positions, ifthey are so important, were over ridden with
a large salary increase for existing staff.
Board Member VanHoose stated that Frederick County was behind other jurisdictions with
regard to 5, 10, 15, and 20 year salary levels. He advised that the School Board was playing catch
up this year.
Supervisor Ewing stated that it would appear that the needed positions are more critical than
a salary increase.
Board Member VanHoose responded that 85% of the school's budget is personnel and the
School Board felt it was a priority to first take care of what they have.
School Board Chairwoman Stiles advised that the average salary increase was 5%, but the
Board would not find too many teachers getting a 5.6% salary increase. She stated that most ofthe
money would go to those who are farthest behind.
Supervisor Forrester asked Board Member Butler how he felt about this, after having been
a member of the County's Finance Committee and now serving as a School Board member.
Minute Book Number 29
Board of Supervisors Worksession with School Board 06/01104
550
Board Member Butler responded that after being on the School's side, he could see all ofthe
demands being placed on them by the State; especially the unfunded mandates.
In response to questions concerning local funding effort and composite index, Finance
Director Frye explained that the higher the composite index, the higher the wealth factor. The higher
the wealth factor, the lower the amount of state funding received by the locality.
Dr. Dean stated that he believed there was a history of the community having high
expectations for the schools and the Board of Supervisors being generous with funding.
Supervisor Tyler expressed her concerns as both a member of the Board of Supervisors and
a mother of children in school. She stated that funding had been pulled back the last two years and
she did not want to see it pull back more.
Supervisor Forrester asked for the opportunity to recap some ofthe information previously
reviewed. She stated that Frederick County Schools are below the state average in per pupil
expenditures and per pupil staffing; however, we have a one percent drop out rate and are fully
accredited. She thought that was outstanding.
Supervisor Ewing stated that he would like to see the percentage of the budget that supports
the various SOL programs and the percentages that each program requires.
Assistant Superintendent Taylor responded that staffing costs could be done, but the
remainder was shared resources and would be difficult to determine.
Dr. Dean stated that staff would make an effort to get that information to the Board.
Treasurer Orndoff asked if the middle school planning period was back in place for fiscal
year 2005.
Dr. Dean responded that they have been partially phased in for fiscal year 2004, with the
balance to occur in fiscal year 2005.
Treasurer Orndoff asked that the School Board provide the County with a rough list of
projects for fiscal years 2006, 2007, and 2008 before the Board of Supervisors makes their decision.
A discussion followed regarding the use ofteacher aides versus hiring full-time teachers in
order to meet requirements without enduring the added cost. Superintendent Taylor advised that a
teacher's aide in each kindergarten class allows a teacher to work with 40 to 50 students and parents
per day.
Minute Book Number 29
Board of Supervisors Worksession with School Board 06/01/04
551
Supervisor Ewing asked for a copy of the categorical budget showing prior years, year-to-
date, and anticipated fiscal year 2004-2005.
Dr. Dean responded that the County had been provided with that information previously, but
staff would provide it again.
A discussion ensued concerning fees for programs. Dr. Dean advised that a fee program was
in place, but it was not sufficient to meet the costs.
Dr. Dean concluded the meeting by saying at issue is $2.1 million forwarded to the Board
of Supervisors from the state. Part ofthat money would be used to keep Gainesboro open; however,
there are other places said money could be used. He advised that there was a huge need to offer
programs for students with special needs, etc. and that a lot of these programs and Gainesboro
Elementary are on "the chopping block". He concluded by saying that the main issue isn't just
Gainesboro school, but the lives ofteachers working extended hours, technology, summer programs,
and supplies. He implored the Board to considered these items, which are needed to meet the
community's needs and expectations.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:45 P.M.
,
Q~3i c~_.LG
Richard C. Shickle
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
Minutes Prepared By: ~sE ~ tj?1.
Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Minute Book Number 29
Board of Supervisors Worksession with School Board 06/01104