School board still pushes teacher raises

The school board is standing by salary increases for the system?s teachers in its 2006-2007 school system budget.

But director of schools Dr. Jerry Hale and board members have come up with a compromise to fund the raises which, if it is workable, may require no property tax increase as far as the school budget is concerned.

The idea was introduced by Dr. Hale at an Education Committee meeting yesterday, and the committee voted unanimously to present the concept to the full county commission.

Committee chairman Bill Zechman explained how the idea works.

?What Dr. Hale has proposed is taking 9 cents of the levy for the county general fund debt service that is the same 9 cents that is being used to repay the bonds for Centertown School,? Zechman said. ?The school board gave up the 9 cents by agreement last year in order to build Centertown School. We made up for the 9 cents by virtue of the fact we got a sales tax increase. It would not have been possible without the local option sales tax increase, because that revenue replaced the 9 cents that we took out of the school levy.?

The raises will still cost around $800,000, which still represents 17.5 cents of property tax under the current tax structure, but if Dr. Hale?s idea is adopted, the school would absorb what amounts to around 8.5 cents of that cost, while the county would take the rest out of a $7 million fund balance in debt service.

However, the idea may meet with some formidable opposition from at least one commissioner, who also happens to be chairman of Budget and Finance, George Smartt. Smartt sees this idea as just another method of robbing Peter to pay Paul, though he admits the $7 million is tempting.

?I knew there would be some people wanting to reach in that cookie jar,? Smartt said when contacted about the idea yesterday afternoon. ?Because they?ve used up fund balance everywhere else, and now one of the most lucrative fund balances is that $7 million just sitting out there. The commission is hearing the Siren call, ?Here, come get this money.?

?It?s been accumulated over the last 25 years,? Smartt went on, ?and I certainly would not be in favor of taking that out for operations. The purpose of the debt service fund is to pay for non-recurring expenses, and normal operation is recurring expenses. If we take it out of debt service we?re taking away from the very thing that is the one strong financial aspect of our government right now, and that?s the fact that we do have a healthy debt service, which is giving us the opportunity to pay $2 million off early on the jail this year, saving a considerable amount of money and giving us more flexibility for other projects, such as the Centertown School.?

However, other commissioners, like Zechman, support the idea, though he is also aware that keeping a healthy debt service fund is important.

?I think that?s worthy,? said Zechman, ?but in the words of Shakespeare, ?Good reasons must give way to better reasons.? And that?s what I?m suggesting. I?m supporting this idea, and the Education Committee did vote to make that recommendation to the Budget and Finance Committee.?

Zechman said the school system is willing to shoulder the rest of the salary increase costs, though it will present a challenge.

?It would take a major struggle,? Zechman said, ?and it would be financially punishing to the school system, but the board and the administration are very strongly determined to fund this pay increase to the teachers.?

?I just thought it might be something that could be done,? Hale said. ?We felt like we could do some shifting around and do some things, and some of it will come out of our fund balance, but the key is to get half of it from the county.?

The idea will have to be approved by the Budget and Finance Committee, as well as the full commission, but if it is accepted, it would amount to 23 percent reduction in the current tax increase of 75 cents.

?It?s just an idea that was presented,? Hale reiterated. ?But it would get us the salary increase, which we need to make us more competitive in attracting and retaining our teachers, and yet shouldn?t be a burden to the county.?

But Smartt says that may be a burden that is just delayed, rather than eliminated.

?It takes a little backbone to do what?s right rather than what?s popular,? Smartt said. ?I wish it was as simple as that, but it?s not.?