The Fairfax County School Board voted to approve a $2.4 billion fiscal year 2013 advertised budget at its meeting Thursday, forwarding a plan to supervisors that asks for $202.3 million more than last fiscal year
The budget asks the supervisors for a transfer increase of $135.4 million, While some board members said the strategy allowed them to be upfront about the school system's priorities and needs, others called the approach backward and disrespectful of what supervisors
"This is an incremental budget. That’s one approach. I would advocate for a zero-based budget. Lets start from the bottom up, what's in the classroom and what's needed to support the classroom? This is a fundamentally different strategy and approach," said Patty Reed (Providence), who said she agreed with several of the amendments made to the budget but could not support it as a whole. "This is not a dance, this is not a game. This is about doing good business with our county’s dollars and with our partners on the Board of Supervisors."
"To my mind the tactic of asking high for fear of leaving money on the table has not had much success," added Ted Velkoff (At-large), who also voted against the budget, recalling flat transfers in the last several years. "By approving this budget I believe we fall short of our responsibility to govern. We neither offer expenditure reductions nor explain how expenditure increases would ultimately be funded. We risk raising false hopes among some stakeholders and leave the hard choices to the appropriating body ... I believe we may have a trust gap with the Board of Supervisors and arguably with the public."
After hearing five members speak against the budget proposal, Budget Chair Ilryong Moon (At-large) said he had not seen any meaningful discussion or motions addressing a reduction to the transfer before Thursday night, and without an amendment to work with "there's nothing to discuss."
"There hasn't been anything to let me see what they're really thinking — how will you reduce the budget?" Moon said. "Talk is cheap. Everyone talks about fairly compensating employees but where will it come from?"
Dan Storck (Mount Vernon) spoke in support of the budget proposal, saying it is important for the school board to convey its priorities to both the public and the Board of Supervisors.
"Part of the transparency issue is that we need to make sure people understand things we don’t feel were adequately addressed in the superintendent's budget or even things that are in here that we want to highlight because we think it's important for the community to understand," Storck said.
The board added eight amendments to , which focused largely on increasing teacher compensation, better managing teacher workload and reducing classroom sizes.
covered a range of goals and priorities, from finding $600,000 to create ombudsman and auditor positions and adding school board support staff to eliminating athletic fees — a cost of $1.7 million — and funding an estimated $200,000 consultant study of ways to make FCPS school food healthier.
Other amendments included:
- Requiring an evaluation and teacher survey of the eCART system before the system's previously planned expansion of the program
- Adding 20 field custodian positions at a cost of $1 million
- Providing $0.1 million to revise and reproduce the Parent Advocacy Handbook
- Providing funding of $19,590 to record (audio and video) all school board work sessions of the full board, including forums
- Providing funding of $0.1 million for a best practices study to increase early literacy skills and kindergarten readiness for all children
Together, the amendments did not increase the transfer request to the supervisors, board members said. For a look at full amendment language and funding source information,
A motion by Kathy Smith (Sully) to vote on each amendment separately failed, which she said was a transparency issue and unfair to taxpayers who have not heard full discussions from board members on their positions.
"We’re telling the superintendent to cut [what we need for these amendments] and can we really sit here and say we think he can find a way to do it that’s not going to affect student achievement and support to schools?" Smith said. "I will not make that decision now because it’s not an informed decision. A lot of people say this doesn’t really matter right now, we’re going to have to make cuts, we're putting out markers about what we believe in, but what this board member believes in is putting support in our teachers and supporting our students and not expanding things we can do ... We have to be careful about what markers we put out and what we don't."
The board has a joint retreat with the supervisors at 10 a.m. Feb. 25, three days before County Executive Anthony Griffith unveils the county's fiscal year 2013 budget.
There will be "many more discussions" among school board members and between the two governing bodies before the county votes on its budget and schools transfer May 1, and the school board finalizes a budget of its own May 24, board chair Janie Strauss (Dranesville) said.
Steve Greenburg, president of the Fairfax County Federation of Teachers, said members who voted against the budget "care just as deeply" about their teachers, schools and children; their position didn't indicate a lack of support of the system's needs, he said.
"Sometimes politics is not a perfect science," Greenburg said. "The budget that went through addresses the true needs of the school system, but there was a real voicing of being fiscally responsible and working with the supervisors and I think that's good politics in the long term."
"It's a part of making that relationship better," said Fairfax Education Association President Michael Hairston. "That's the start."
Thanks for highlighing this issue. It was brought up by community members at our budget dialogues in late January, as well. We are are aware of the issue, and there is interest among board members in asking for a systemwide survey of all the fees charged for both curricular and extra-curricular activities. As we move forward, we will hopefully find ways to address any inequities.
Pat Hynes FCPS School Board Member from the Hunter Mill District
I would suspect that the major reason the music organizations is so expensive is because of the trips the groups take.
Good people will still differ on the budget, but they would be disagreeing on facts and stated assumptions and not pure emotion. Too often the school budget debate involves meaningless statements, such as "schools are too expensive" or "it's for the children." How about this new school board members?
State and local politicians like to set rules, but consistently fail to make the investment. To see a plan increasing federal investment in FCPS by $324 million please check out our website at www.VA8.com. Thank you. A. Will Radle, Jr. www.VA8.com
Bottom line: is it good value for the money? Maybe, maybe not. What stuns me more is the projection for 2013 of 3979 new students with the requirement of 662 professional positions (teachers, IA's, asst. principals) which translates to 6 students per. Add in the additional office staff projected and the custodians and you get an even smaller ratio. Where is the common sense here? Money is tight. How many of these projected teachers will really work with kids and how many will become "staff"?
Copy and pasted from that article: Approve: Evans (Mason) Derenak Kaufax (Lee), Hynes (Hunter Mill), McElveen (At-large), Moon (At-large), Storck (Mt. Vernon), Strauss (Dranesville) Oppose: McLaughlin (Braddock), Reed (Providence), Schultz (Springfield), Smith (Sully), Velkoff (At-large) Thanks for reading, Erica
If more money equalled better schools, I think most people would be in favor. Before we add more money, how about we give better stewardship of the money we have. No where is this more evident than in the Education Department in our federal government. The funding increases over the last decades have not resulted in better schools.
Let's turn to assistant principals. If the SOQs require one assistant principal for each 600 students, that is the mandate. FCPS should calculate the base budget as one AP for every 600 students. Now if the Administration or the School Board wants to go beyond that, it should state the additional costs and set forth the benefits expected to be derived from the additional staffing. The we can debate this issue. There are some areas in the SOQs that are fuzzy, but even the Special Education mandates have instructor-aide-student ratios specified. FCPS does not want the public to know what is required; what is additional; and the costs and benefits for going beyond what is required. My proposal would also expose potential inequities among students. Do the kids in the middle get the least? I think most people would support providing more than the bare minimum, but it is simply dishonest to attempt to mislead the public on the true costs of mandates. We need an Administration and School Board that will explain the costs and benefits of doing more.