Return to School e-mail archive directory
Subj: Issues Update
Date: 97-02-21 11:13:21 EST
From: James.C.Klagge@bev.net (James C. Klagge)
To: school issues list@vt.edu
Dear friends,
I hope the promise of spring is keeping your spirits up.
Some people have asked for a "Table of Contents" for my mailings, so: This mailing has comments on County Zoning Hearings, Superintendent Search, School Budget, and Building Program.
* County Zoning Ordinance Revision: Many people complain about how Montgomery County never does any planning for the future. Here's your chance to do something. The Planning Commission has begun a comprehensive revision of the county zoning ordinance. The revised ordinance will address issues such as residential growth in rural areas, standards for commercial development, and the placement of communication towers. The ordinance will have a major impact on the future growth and development of the county. Community meetings will be conducted to solicit public input on these issues from every part of the county. Dates and locations are: Feb. 26th at Blacksburg Recreation Center; Feb. 26th at Kipps Elementary School Cafeteria; Feb. 27th at Auburn HS Auditorium; and Feb. 27th at Shawsville HS Auditorium. All meetings will start at 7pm. For further info call 382-5750. These plans are still at the grass roots level and are not a done deal. It's a good time to learn and put in your 2 cents. The schools will be quite affected by future growth in the county. Please participate. If you have questions you might also contact Mike Ewing who is on the Planning Commission and their liason to the school board. His e-mail is: admin@gisone.com
* Superintendent Search: We recently hired Sockwell, a search firm from Charlotte, NC to help us with the search for a new superintendent. While this is expensive (perhaps $40,000 for the whole process including travel), I have already been impressed with the value of their assistance. They were in town for two days this week and they met with individual board members, the whole board, and MANY individuals and interest groups. There are also questionnaires available for anyone who would still like to have input. However, since they are on-line, you can send your opinions about what we need in a superintendent directly to them by e-mail (JESockwell@aol.com) and (if they can get through to aol!) they will be compiling and summarizing this information for us so that we can use it in setting a list of priorities for what qualities to look for in our search. They also will be saving all this input to give to the person hired as our new superintendent so that he or she knows what kind of concerns and expectations there are in the community. Please take advantage of this opportunity or forever hold...
* School Budget: Last mailing I gave a summary of the superintendent's budget proposal and rationale, and my viewpoint on it. At the end of January we passed a budget proposal that was slightly larger than the superintendent's. After public hearings we were convinced of the need for additional reading teachers at the elementary level. So we added 6.5 additional teaching positions (at a cost of $260,000) to the budget to ensure an additional half of a reading teacher at each elementary school. We also added $42,000 to be used to help with at-risk students in the elementary schools with the greatest needs. We have worked hard over the last few years to reduce class size in the elementary grades. In virtually all cases it is now below 25, and on the average it is below 20. Now we are trying to address needs at the middle and high school level. The budget proposal calls for 19.5 additional positions (other than the reading teachers), mainly to try to keep core class sizes below 30. The budget also calls for an average salary increase of 3% for all employees. In total the budget asks for $53.3 million, which is a 7.37% increase over last year. (Much of this will come from the state. The rationale in terms of local finances was given in the last mailing.)
This budget produced much disagreement on the board--some feeling that we should not have increased any beyond the superintendent's proposal, others felt we fell far short of what we should have been asking for, especially in terms of salary. While I am impressed by the concerns on both ends of this spectrum, I felt that this was a legitimate compromise. I think it is important to try being cooperative with the supervisors in the interest of cultivating a better long-term working relationship. (However, I know others call this "selling out". Perhaps politics has made me more pragmatic than I used to be.) The fact that it seems too big to some, and too small to others suggests to me that perhaps we got it right. While funding this budget (while giving other parts of the county budget their due) may require a couple of cents in tax increase, I believe that is a politically realistic request. And I hope this realism makes it more possible for citizens to speak up plainly in favor of the proposal. I and other school board members are willing to speak to PTA's and other local groups concerning the budget. Please contact me or your representative if you are interested.
The supervisors have their next meetings Mondays, 2/24 & 3/10, and
take public comments at the beginning of their 7pm meetings in the county
courthouse. They will set a maximum possible tax rate increase for the
sake of public comment by 3/7. And then they will have their official
public hearing on the tax rate and the county budget (including the school
budget) on 3/20 at 7pm at Shawsville HS. I encourage all of you to let
your views be known to the supervisors either publicly, at those meetings,
or privately by letter, e-mail, or phone. If you wish to write a letter to
your supervisor or the whole Board of Supervisors, it can be sent to Box
806, Christiansburg, VA 24073.
(If you don't know what district you live in, call the voter registrar at 382-5741.)
The last 2 years I have been pushing for more preparation time for elementary teachers. In the effort to keep the budget as small as possible the administration looked into ways of doing that which would not entail hiring additional aides, and has proposed to the calendar committee that there be only 3 early release days next year for all students, but 12 additional ones only for elementary students. I hope the community is willing to accept this as an experiment and a step toward providing more adequate prep time at the elementary level. (From what I've heard, middle and high school teachers are supportive of this adjustment.)
* Building Program: We just approved plans for an architectural firm (Mills, Oliver & Webb) to go ahead and make "conceptual drawings" and cost estimates for the renovated and expanded BMS, and for a new high school in the Shawsville area. The supervisors want these so they and the public have some idea what they would be "buying into" if these are funded. These wouldn't be construction drawings, but if we like them and the projects are funded, they would be the starting point for the construction drawings. These drawings will be done based on the educational plan that has been developed for those schools, and will be done in consultation with the committees that drew up those educational plans.
The Christiansburg Middle School was not included because there is not yet agreement between the supervisors and the school board on a site for that school. There is at least one supervisor who favors keeping that school on its present site and renovating the current buildings. The school board does not support this and there does not seem to be a movement within the community, as there was in Blacksburg, to keep it on the current site. Other sites are being investigated however, and when some decision has been reached, conceptual drawings and cost estimates will be done for that as well.
The supervisors have not yet settled on a method to fund any of these projects. They could simply vote to seek bonds to do this, but at least some supervisors are uncomfortable committing the county to that much debt without voter approval. Those supervisors favor putting a referendum to a public vote in November. There is nothing wrong with this in principle, but it will require an enormous effort of voter education prior to the election. I'm willing to do that, but frankly I can think of better ways to spend time and money. If you have an opinion about this--whether to fund the projects, or how to decide whether to fund the projects--please let your supervisor know.
Last week we finally broke ground for the new elementary school being built behind Auburn HS. I'm glad that is underway. Though some of this happened before I came on the board, my understanding was that the Auburn area elementary school was started before the other three projects only out of convenience and that the other three would follow and be funded in turn. If the supervisors insist on a bond referendum for the other three, then I think in fairness we should have included the Auburn area elementary school funding as part of that vote. It seems rather unfair for them to say--we'll give money for the Auburn area school--but then require the other projects to go before the voters for a referendum. My preference is certainly for them simply to approve bonds for all three remaining projects in Phase I just as they did for the Auburn school.
Since there have been many changes in local internet access, please try to keep me informed of your or your friends' current e-mail addresses. And, as always, please let me know if you want to be deleted from my mailing list.
Sincerely,
Jim Klagge
© Copyright 2004 by Graphic Information Sciences
All rights reserved worldwide.
email: admin@gisone.com