What a school board spends money on is always fodder for a great deal of armchair quarterbacking by local residents. Seems everyone has an opinion on what the school board and administration should - and should not - be funding.
Monroe's certainly not immune from this: Several residents have contacted the Times recently with questions and complaints about how the school district is spending - or supposedly spending - taxpayers' hard-earned money.
Here's a couple of questions that have arisen lately:
• Why do student athletes take a limousine service to out-of-town events rather than school buses?
The Monroe School District does not use limousine service for student athletes, Monroe Athletic Director Kevin Keen said. Typically, students are transported to games via school bus.
Occasionally, a team may take a coach bus for a longer trip, he said. The Booster Club or fundraising pays the difference in the cost between these buses and a regular school bus - the district only pays the cost of a regular school bus.
Conversely, teams may also travel by smaller bus or van when the situation calls for it. Transportation decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, Keen said.
• How come the district doesn't use those surplus funds in the food service account?
It's true the food service account currently has a surplus. That surplus allowed the district to hold lunch prices this year and only raise milk prices by a nickel, to 30 cents for a half-pint, despite rising food prices.
District Business Manager Ron Olson explained there are very clear rules about how school districts handle food service accounts. Food service accounts must be kept separate, and extra money cannot be transferred into the district's general fund. Should the fund come up short, the general fund is obligated to subsidize it, Olson said, but excess food service funds cannot be used to make up shortages in the general fund.
The current surplus will likely be used up this year, as the district's food services expenses rise, he said. The district's goal is to keep a surplus in the food service account so it can cover expenses, but not charge so much as large surplus accumulates.
• Why is the district using referendum money for a climbing wall?
Part of the referendum passed in spring 2007 was for curriculum upgrades. Olson said budget cuts several years ago had slashed several hundred thousand dollars for curriculum. Curriculum throughout the district hadn't been addressed in two years when the referendum was approved. The referendum provided funds for new curriculum, with an additional $100,000 for last year and this year to "catch up," he said.
At the end of January, the school board approved $82,000 in physical education equipment across the district. Among other items were a traverse climbing wall for Parkside and a vertical climbing wall for Monroe High School. The physical education curriculum had not been revised in 10 to 15 years, and is not scheduled to be reviewed again for seven to eight years.
But the second answer to the question addresses the issue of "referendum money" which in reality, doesn't really exist. All district money is in one big pot.
To explain: The state dictates how much money a school district can levy, or charge, its constituents to pay for schools. The actual dollar amount is derived from actual student enrollment - a formula that's widely criticized for being outdated, unfair and impractical. In order to go beyond that dollar amount, a school district has to go referendum and ask voters to approve a measure that allows the district to levy more than what the state allows.
All money levied is used for various expenses: salaries, curriculum, facilities, etc. There's no way to differentiate if, for example, referendum dollars and regular dollars are paying for the phy ed curriculum.
"You really can't say which is which," Olson said.
Hopefully, this will help clear up any misconceptions about what the school board is doing. It's not our job to defend the school district, but we also would be remiss if we didn't set the record straight. Have more questions about school district issues? Contact me at mgrenzow@themonroetimes.com
Monroe's certainly not immune from this: Several residents have contacted the Times recently with questions and complaints about how the school district is spending - or supposedly spending - taxpayers' hard-earned money.
Here's a couple of questions that have arisen lately:
• Why do student athletes take a limousine service to out-of-town events rather than school buses?
The Monroe School District does not use limousine service for student athletes, Monroe Athletic Director Kevin Keen said. Typically, students are transported to games via school bus.
Occasionally, a team may take a coach bus for a longer trip, he said. The Booster Club or fundraising pays the difference in the cost between these buses and a regular school bus - the district only pays the cost of a regular school bus.
Conversely, teams may also travel by smaller bus or van when the situation calls for it. Transportation decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, Keen said.
• How come the district doesn't use those surplus funds in the food service account?
It's true the food service account currently has a surplus. That surplus allowed the district to hold lunch prices this year and only raise milk prices by a nickel, to 30 cents for a half-pint, despite rising food prices.
District Business Manager Ron Olson explained there are very clear rules about how school districts handle food service accounts. Food service accounts must be kept separate, and extra money cannot be transferred into the district's general fund. Should the fund come up short, the general fund is obligated to subsidize it, Olson said, but excess food service funds cannot be used to make up shortages in the general fund.
The current surplus will likely be used up this year, as the district's food services expenses rise, he said. The district's goal is to keep a surplus in the food service account so it can cover expenses, but not charge so much as large surplus accumulates.
• Why is the district using referendum money for a climbing wall?
Part of the referendum passed in spring 2007 was for curriculum upgrades. Olson said budget cuts several years ago had slashed several hundred thousand dollars for curriculum. Curriculum throughout the district hadn't been addressed in two years when the referendum was approved. The referendum provided funds for new curriculum, with an additional $100,000 for last year and this year to "catch up," he said.
At the end of January, the school board approved $82,000 in physical education equipment across the district. Among other items were a traverse climbing wall for Parkside and a vertical climbing wall for Monroe High School. The physical education curriculum had not been revised in 10 to 15 years, and is not scheduled to be reviewed again for seven to eight years.
But the second answer to the question addresses the issue of "referendum money" which in reality, doesn't really exist. All district money is in one big pot.
To explain: The state dictates how much money a school district can levy, or charge, its constituents to pay for schools. The actual dollar amount is derived from actual student enrollment - a formula that's widely criticized for being outdated, unfair and impractical. In order to go beyond that dollar amount, a school district has to go referendum and ask voters to approve a measure that allows the district to levy more than what the state allows.
All money levied is used for various expenses: salaries, curriculum, facilities, etc. There's no way to differentiate if, for example, referendum dollars and regular dollars are paying for the phy ed curriculum.
"You really can't say which is which," Olson said.
Hopefully, this will help clear up any misconceptions about what the school board is doing. It's not our job to defend the school district, but we also would be remiss if we didn't set the record straight. Have more questions about school district issues? Contact me at mgrenzow@themonroetimes.com