School Board Newsletter #52, February 9, 1999

Return to School e-mail archive directory

Subj: School Issues Newsletter # 52
Date: 2/9/99 9:15:25 AM EST
From: jklagge@bev.net (Jim Klagge)

Dear Friends,

"Where are we on BMS?"

Since I am hearing that more and more, it is clearly time for an update. We had a joint meeting with the BoS on this issue on January 18th. The media reports about the meeting were not as positive as I had thought it was. Though only 5 of the 7 BoS members were there, at least 4 and perhaps all 5 of them agreed to the following:

-They would consider a "package deal" from the SB, in which we set out a series of steps for dealing with school construction issues in Blacksburg. This is significant because we felt that the BMS issue was most pressing, but they had specifically turned down our request to address that first by building a new MS and renovating the current one. If we go ahead with a new HS there was a concern that the needs of the MS would get lost in the shuffle. If they are willing to accept a package that includes addressing the MS situation, then that concern is allayed.

-They would provide facilities that are new or "like new" to all secondary students in the strand. This is significant because we were concerned that even if renovated facilities are provided for the MS down the road, the renovation might be nothing more than a quick coat of paint. This assures us that our primary concern--facilities for MS students--will be addressed in a serious fashion.

-They would consider speeding up the pace of school construction work in the county. Up till now there has been an unspoken tradition that only one school building project is going on at a time. This is significant because the needs are such that a faster pace is necessary--especially to address the MS situation. If we could begin on a new HS in Blacksburg before the current new HS in the Elliston area is complete, and if we could find ways to begin some of the renovation work before a new HS is complete, we could achieve our goal of getting the MS students into good and sufficient facilities sooner.

At our SB meeting on Feb 2nd we decided to hire a consulting firm to do a feasibility study for us--to be completed in 30 days--that would address the costs of building a new HS in Blacksburg, the feasibility and costs of renovating the current HS as a MS, either for the whole student body, or for a portion of the student body. We already have estimates for renovating the current MS. We should have this information back by early March, and we would then be in a position to make an informed recommendation to the BoS. Probably we will discuss the issue at our meeting March 16th. You are welcome to that meeting (indeed, all meetings). And of course when we do make a recommendation to the BoS, it is important to make your views known to them as well. (The SB only has public address time at the first meeting of each month. The BoS has it at each of its regular meetings.)

I know this situation is disappointing to some people. But the political reality is that we need to let go of the idea of building a new MS in Blacksburg. We put a lot of energy into making that case, and even sticking with it. But I don't think it is productive to get stuck on that.

I think the possibilities we have left before us are good ones, and we need at this point to find the best one and push for it and make sure it happens. And we'll certainly need your help on that.

Budget: Though the SB made some minor changes in the budget proposed by the superintendent, what we endorsed to send forward to the supervisors is similar to what I described in my last message. It seeks a nearly 15% increase in funding. While that is substantial, the needs are substantial as well. Too many things, especially salaries, have been shunted to the back burner through cost-cutting in the past, and it is time to address them. We will present the proposal to the BoS on Monday, February 22nd. Your support would be appreciated. The meeting starts at 7:15pm, and, as always, there is time for public address on any issue. Here is contact information for the BoS:

Montgomery County Board of Supervisors

Dist. A Annette S. Perkins
1407 Valley View Dr., Blacksburg, 24060
Home 552.4706
perkins@bev.net

Dist. B Nick Rush
102 Ellett Dr.,
Christiansburg, 24073
Office 382.7241
nrush@naxs.com

Dist. C Joe C. Stewart
P.O. Box 275, 8919 Roanoke St., Elliston, 24087
Home 268.2303
Office 382.2291
(Thursdays only)
jdjohnson@naxs.com

Dist. D James D. Politis
5629 Brush Creek Rd.,
Riner, 24149
Home 381.2778
Office 381.9764
bcbuffalo@aol.com

Dist. E Ira D. Long
3870 Price's Fork Rd., Blacksburg, 24060
Home 552.2528
jdjohnson@naxs.com

Dist. F Mary W. Biggs, Vice Chair
701 Hutchenson Dr.,
Blacksburg, 24060
Home 951.2906
Office 951.5732
mbiggs@naxs.com

Dist. G Joseph Gorman, Jr., Chair
402 Hearthstone Dr., NE, Blacksburg, 24060
Home 552.2150
jgorman@naxs.net

County Administrator
Jeffrey Johnson
382.6954
jdjohnston@naxs.com

As always, the BoS will have many needs to consider from a fiscally responsible point of view. Generally economic growth in the county provides a couple of million new tax dollars each year without any change in the tax rate. The Finance Department of the county will be making its forecast to the BoS on this sometime in March. Also, as many of you know, there has been a reassessment of property values in the county this year. This does NOT automatically bring in new revenue, because when the reassessment increases property values beyond a certain percentage county-wide, the board is required by law to initially lower the tax rate by a proportionate amount. But then it can raise the tax rate beyond that level as long as it advertises the increase and approves it. I was very pleased to see that this year the supervisors increased the maximum income allowed for a property tax break to retired and disabled people. This is one way of alleviating the burden of tax increases on those who have low fixed incomes.

I think the county has a real challenge this year to meet increasing needs in school construction, school operating budget, and other county needs. But I think the reassessment may provide a way to do that. Although property values (and hence property tax to county government) are not increasing nearly as fast as income (and hence income tax to the state and federal governments), nevertheless we must do what we can to increase tax income at the local level to keep up with the needs of local services. The BoS will have its public hearing on their proposed budget and tax rate on March 23rd. But your input is useful even before that point: Previous to that, they will set a maximum possible tax rate increase (which will be called the "advertised rate"), which the BoS may or may not finally endorse. Since they cannot then go beyond the advertised rate, it is important to let them know what you support, so that the advertised rate can be set at a sufficient level.

As more people are added to this mailing list, I need to remind you that the views expressed here are my own, and not a report of the views of the school board. Nevertheless, I hope you find them helpful in understanding what is happening. Let me know if you want to be taken off the mailing list. And feel free to pass on the addresses of others who would like to be added.

Jim Klagge.
Chair & District F Representative
Montgomery County School Board.

email: admin@gisone.com