All that DRAMA and now a $34M slush fund at FCPS

[Anonymous]

If the students feel that strongly about it, and given the history of Stuart himself and the timing of the decision to name the HS that, it's very possible that they do, then I'm not going to tell them no.

Have you followed this at all? Most of the students do NOT want the name change.

The community does NOT want the name change. When that was the first result, the SB changed the rules and brought in people from outside of the community.

go to Stuartfacts.com There is a lot of information there--especially under the tab that is mythvs facts or something like that.

As for the money, the agenda on the work session says that they hope or expect there will be outside funds. Nothing about all the money boosters have raised to support purchases that will now be extinct.

NO Common sense on this School Board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:08 So you think spending on a name change is more important than restoring the teacher positions that are being eliminated at that same school?

If the students feel that strongly about it, and given the history of Stuart himself and the timing of the decision to name the HS that, it's very possible that they do, then I'm not going to tell them no.

What about the students and parents that want teachers instead? Or the fact that the school board isn't even looking into private money for this change? How strongly can they really be about it if they aren't willing to raise any funds?

Is that even an option? I know some districts are happy to allow rich parents or wealthy PTAs to provide funds for school services including paying for additional teachers, but that's prohibited in FCPS, rightly IMO.

Private money for the name change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:08 So you think spending on a name change is more important than restoring the teacher positions that are being eliminated at that same school?

If the students feel that strongly about it, and given the history of Stuart himself and the timing of the decision to name the HS that, it's very possible that they do, then I'm not going to tell them no.

+1000.

The people lobbying against the name change didn't say anything about teacher salaries when money was being spent on turf fields around the county. And that was before the last round of teacher raises. Few of them supported the meals tax, either.

But they are more than happy to put a price tag on correcting a social injustice and expect others to foot the bill.

They'd have more credibility if their "Stuart Facts" site wasn't such an obvious compilation of "Lost Cause" myths. They are very much in the tradition of those who claimed we couldn't afford to desegregate the schools, couldn't afford to educate black kids, and couldn't afford to abolish slavery - after all the Southern economy depended on it.

You are making assumptions that aren't true. People were mad about the turf fields although not as upset since those were to balance out schools around the county. How can you not understand that the very schools that are not doing well are losing teachers and that is a bigger problem than this name change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:08 So you think spending on a name change is more important than restoring the teacher positions that are being eliminated at that same school?

If the students feel that strongly about it, and given the history of Stuart himself and the timing of the decision to name the HS that, it's very possible that they do, then I'm not going to tell them no.

+1000.

The people lobbying against the name change didn't say anything about teacher salaries when money was being spent on turf fields around the county. And that was before the last round of teacher raises. Few of them supported the meals tax, either.

But they are more than happy to put a price tag on correcting a social injustice and expect others to foot the bill.

They'd have more credibility if their "Stuart Facts" site wasn't such an obvious compilation of "Lost Cause" myths. They are very much in the tradition of those who claimed we couldn't afford to desegregate the schools, couldn't afford to educate black kids, and couldn't afford to abolish slavery - after all the Southern economy depended on it.

You are making assumptions that aren't true. People were mad about the turf fields although not as upset since those were to balance out schools around the county. How can you not understand that the very schools that are not doing well are losing teachers and that is a bigger problem than this name change.

How can you not understand that leaving the name in place would be a type of neglect and that there are teachers and families who don't want to be associated with schools named after Confederate figures?

[Anonymous]

How can you not understand that leaving the name in place would be a type of neglect and that there are teachers and families who don't want to be associated with schools named after Confederate figures?

This was drummed up. Evans created a monster and now will make us all pay for it.

Read the myths about this. Read the truth--not what you have contrived.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/vpublic?"

"expect" that they can get private funding.......


and, you ask why people voted against the Meals Tax?

They have now set a precedent. Here comes Lee and Woodson--even though the Woodson issue is a myth.

This link no longer has the information posted this morning with the recommendation to go forward with renaming. Wonder why? Afraid of transparency?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why class sizes must be increased but now FCPS reports that there is $33.9M "left-over" at the end of the year (June 30). I also don't understand how FCPS can retain these funds as per VA law it must return unused funds to the County for them to be reallocated. So, as usual, we have FCPS crying about their need for more money and then we find they are simply hoarding cash to spend without oversight or public attention. It's particularly bad this year as they decided to increase class sizes, ostensibly to save money.

To see the document go to: http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/goto? and look in the agenda for the Final Budget Review - see Kristen Michael's comments or open the pdf (at the bottom) for the full variance report.

There is a full day work session of the School Board tomorrow at Gatehouse and this subject is scheduled from 11 - 1pm..

In budgeting, the goal is for each entity to be at the budget. However, they are not allowed to overrun. Because emergencies happen, the schools must hold back for them. At the end of the year, you should always expect a 1-3% return of unspent money at about 2.5 billion, that means that the 34 mil is about 1.4%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why class sizes must be increased but now FCPS reports that there is $33.9M "left-over" at the end of the year (June 30). I also don't understand how FCPS can retain these funds as per VA law it must return unused funds to the County for them to be reallocated. So, as usual, we have FCPS crying about their need for more money and then we find they are simply hoarding cash to spend without oversight or public attention. It's particularly bad this year as they decided to increase class sizes, ostensibly to save money.

To see the document go to: http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/goto? and look in the agenda for the Final Budget Review - see Kristen Michael's comments or open the pdf (at the bottom) for the full variance report.

There is a full day work session of the School Board tomorrow at Gatehouse and this subject is scheduled from 11 - 1pm..

In budgeting, the goal is for each entity to be at the budget. However, they are not allowed to overrun. Because emergencies happen, the schools must hold back for them. At the end of the year, you should always expect a 1-3% return of unspent money at about 2.5 billion, that means that the 34 mil is about 1.4%.

The complaint is more about the spending choices for the overrun after the budget was approved than the overrun.

[Anonymous]

The complaint is more about the spending choices for the overrun after the budget was approved than the overrun.

Spending choices, period.

Listen to the workshop from July 10. Schultz pointed out that we are bussing tons of kids from outside the boundary for a special program at Rocky Run--and yet, nearby Liberty is underserved. It makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you're an idiot. Get your calculator out.
The FY2017 budget was $2,665,000,000. At the end of the fiscal year on June 30, there was $33,000,000 left over. That was due to things like energy costs not being what they predicted they might be.

So let's see by what percentage of the total budget did FCPS miss the mark? Type in 33,000,000. Now hit the divide button because you're trying to figure out what part of the entire budget was not spent. Now type in 2,665,000,000.

Multiple that answer by 100. That is the percentage of the budget that FCPS has leftover and will carry forward to future budgets. That is the percentage by which FCPS missed the mark.

For those playing along at home without a calculator, the grand total is a whopping ONE PERCENT.

In layman's terms, that would be the same as if you budgeted $1000 to go on your family vacation, and at the end of the trip, you laid out all your receipts and realized you'd actually underspent by $10. TEN DOLLARS. That is ONE PERCENT of your total vacation budget that was leftover.

That's nice, but FCPS continually whines that they are underfunded.

They clearly aren't.

In fact, it appears they are very good at estimating.

So, they should stop crying wolf, because they end the year with surpluses year after year.

You want them to budget the money they have this way. We want them to have a very small surplus like this. It shows excellent money management. We are underfunded because they have cut in places that I and many others feel need to be funded.

So, fund them. Send in your check right now, they will happily spend it.

Send it to the Fairfax County Treasurer or the link below. Put your money where your mouth is.

https://fcpsfoundation.z2systems.com/np/clients/fcpsfoundation/donation.jsp

You're missing something. When PP says "I and many others" she means you. Bureaucrats spend other peoples money, no their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:08 So you think spending on a name change is more important than restoring the teacher positions that are being eliminated at that same school?

If the students feel that strongly about it, and given the history of Stuart himself and the timing of the decision to name the HS that, it's very possible that they do, then I'm not going to tell them no.

What about the students and parents that want teachers instead? Or the fact that the school board isn't even looking into private money for this change? How strongly can they really be about it if they aren't willing to raise any funds?

Is that even an option? I know some districts are happy to allow rich parents or wealthy PTAs to provide funds for school services including paying for additional teachers, but that's prohibited in FCPS, rightly IMO.

Why should poor folks be forced to pay when rich folks are willing to? Spite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:08 So you think spending on a name change is more important than restoring the teacher positions that are being eliminated at that same school?

If the students feel that strongly about it, and given the history of Stuart himself and the timing of the decision to name the HS that, it's very possible that they do, then I'm not going to tell them no.

What about the students and parents that want teachers instead? Or the fact that the school board isn't even looking into private money for this change? How strongly can they really be about it if they aren't willing to raise any funds?

Is that even an option? I know some districts are happy to allow rich parents or wealthy PTAs to provide funds for school services including paying for additional teachers, but that's prohibited in FCPS, rightly IMO.

Why should poor folks be forced to pay when rich folks are willing to? Spite?

Because that is not what happens. What happens is you end up with a two-tiered system, where the rich areas end up with smaller class sizes, newer schools, etc. Instead, the most that can be done is to improve the facilities: better play ground, better computers, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:08 So you think spending on a name change is more important than restoring the teacher positions that are being eliminated at that same school?

If the students feel that strongly about it, and given the history of Stuart himself and the timing of the decision to name the HS that, it's very possible that they do, then I'm not going to tell them no.

What about the students and parents that want teachers instead? Or the fact that the school board isn't even looking into private money for this change? How strongly can they really be about it if they aren't willing to raise any funds?

Is that even an option? I know some districts are happy to allow rich parents or wealthy PTAs to provide funds for school services including paying for additional teachers, but that's prohibited in FCPS, rightly IMO.

Why should poor folks be forced to pay when rich folks are willing to? Spite?

Because that is not what happens. What happens is you end up with a two-tiered system, where the rich areas end up with smaller class sizes, newer schools, etc. Instead, the most that can be done is to improve the facilities: better play ground, better computers, etc.

I don't know what you're talking about. Poorer schools are now receiving about 3 times the amount that wealthy schools are receiving. Maybe it's justified, but it is an imbalance in the opposite way you describe even though wealthy schools are also the ones paying higher taxes. In addition, the school board regularly seems to try to segregate poor and wealthy students for what reasons I don't understand. The move Wakefield from Annandale to Woodson was unnecessary and created a further imbalance between those two high schools. They continue to allow or even encourage gerrymandering to produce school boundaries of unequal personal wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:08 So you think spending on a name change is more important than restoring the teacher positions that are being eliminated at that same school?

If the students feel that strongly about it, and given the history of Stuart himself and the timing of the decision to name the HS that, it's very possible that they do, then I'm not going to tell them no.

What about the students and parents that want teachers instead? Or the fact that the school board isn't even looking into private money for this change? How strongly can they really be about it if they aren't willing to raise any funds?

Is that even an option? I know some districts are happy to allow rich parents or wealthy PTAs to provide funds for school services including paying for additional teachers, but that's prohibited in FCPS, rightly IMO.

Why should poor folks be forced to pay when rich folks are willing to? Spite?

Because that is not what happens. What happens is you end up with a two-tiered system, where the rich areas end up with smaller class sizes, newer schools, etc. Instead, the most that can be done is to improve the facilities: better play ground, better computers, etc.

I don't know what you're talking about. Poorer schools are now receiving about 3 times the amount that wealthy schools are receiving. Maybe it's justified, but it is an imbalance in the opposite way you describe even though wealthy schools are also the ones paying higher taxes. In addition, the school board regularly seems to try to segregate poor and wealthy students for what reasons I don't understand. The move Wakefield from Annandale to Woodson was unnecessary and created a further imbalance between those two high schools. They continue to allow or even encourage gerrymandering to produce school boundaries of unequal personal wealth.

Please provide proof of this. In everything I have researched concerning the budget for FCPS indicates that this assertion is patently false. Yes, Title 1 schools do get a few more dollars per student but it is not nearly the amount that you are suggesting. Plus Title 1 schools get federal money (not local dollars) and that accounts for quite a bit of the difference.

[Anonymous]

Please provide proof of this. In everything I have researched concerning the budget for FCPS indicates that this assertion is patently false. Yes, Title 1 schools do get a few more dollars per student but it is not nearly the amount that you are suggesting. Plus Title 1 schools get federal money (not local dollars) and that accounts for quite a bit of the difference.

Another poster here:

It is more than a few more dollars. There is also some sort of FCPS policy that provides more teacher per class in addition to the Title I money.
I don't have it right here--and don't have time to research it right now. Anytime you spend money on personnel, the expense is very great.

Do you know that there are classrooms in FCPS that have more than 30 students?