Manchester Struggles With Reconfiguration Of Schools
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
NORTH MANCHESTER - Concerned parents and taxpayers at the school board meeting Tuesday scrutinized the board members about the "primary" intention of the controversial reconfiguration issue.
Educational benefits are "the primary objective of the board" in reviewing reconfiguration, school board member Thom Frantz said.
"Is that true?" Pam Higgins asked the board. "I thought it was for financial reasons." The audience of nearly 65 people agreed with applause.
Financially, "we are in a heap of trouble," acting superintendent Kim Thurston said about the corporation.
The school board has taken actions "that eased the financial pressure," he said.
Seven elementary school teacher positions were cut in April. Now the focal point of the reorganization is educational benefits.
Amy Lybarger, a parent, said cutting seven teachers hurt educational benefits.
Board president Sally Krouse did not give a date when the reconfiguration decision will arrive. But schools will not be reorganized next year.
Although still strapped for funds, reconfiguration would not save much money, according to the finance committee's report.
Dr. Robert L. Boyd, Indiana State University professor who conducted the report, wrote: "The school corporation could achieve improved efficiencies and program effectiveness" with reconfiguration.
The task force's report found the efficiencies would not be financial.
"Elementary school reconfiguration will not play a significant part in addressing the ongoing financial concerns related to the general fund. ... The main cost of reconfiguration would be additional yearly transportation expenses, funded by an increase in annual tax levies," the report said.
The increase in transportation with reconfiguration "would require the transportation fund tax levy to increase to 19.3 cents from the current 17.2 cents."
Costs would jump in transportation funds, too. School buses travel 926 miles daily, according to transportation director Jim Schuler.
Schuler expects a 50 percent increase with reconfiguration.
With the 50 percent increase, transportation costs go up $51,500 annually and $25,750 with a minimal 25 percent increase.
Next year, transportation may need to be increased anyway, Perrott said.
Richard Nichols said the board should find "compelling evidence" before moving toward reconfiguration.
"You have to look at the big picture," vice president Virginia Gunter said. "That's a tough thing to do."
No matter what the situation's result, someone will be disappointed, she said. [[In-content Ad]]
NORTH MANCHESTER - Concerned parents and taxpayers at the school board meeting Tuesday scrutinized the board members about the "primary" intention of the controversial reconfiguration issue.
Educational benefits are "the primary objective of the board" in reviewing reconfiguration, school board member Thom Frantz said.
"Is that true?" Pam Higgins asked the board. "I thought it was for financial reasons." The audience of nearly 65 people agreed with applause.
Financially, "we are in a heap of trouble," acting superintendent Kim Thurston said about the corporation.
The school board has taken actions "that eased the financial pressure," he said.
Seven elementary school teacher positions were cut in April. Now the focal point of the reorganization is educational benefits.
Amy Lybarger, a parent, said cutting seven teachers hurt educational benefits.
Board president Sally Krouse did not give a date when the reconfiguration decision will arrive. But schools will not be reorganized next year.
Although still strapped for funds, reconfiguration would not save much money, according to the finance committee's report.
Dr. Robert L. Boyd, Indiana State University professor who conducted the report, wrote: "The school corporation could achieve improved efficiencies and program effectiveness" with reconfiguration.
The task force's report found the efficiencies would not be financial.
"Elementary school reconfiguration will not play a significant part in addressing the ongoing financial concerns related to the general fund. ... The main cost of reconfiguration would be additional yearly transportation expenses, funded by an increase in annual tax levies," the report said.
The increase in transportation with reconfiguration "would require the transportation fund tax levy to increase to 19.3 cents from the current 17.2 cents."
Costs would jump in transportation funds, too. School buses travel 926 miles daily, according to transportation director Jim Schuler.
Schuler expects a 50 percent increase with reconfiguration.
With the 50 percent increase, transportation costs go up $51,500 annually and $25,750 with a minimal 25 percent increase.
Next year, transportation may need to be increased anyway, Perrott said.
Richard Nichols said the board should find "compelling evidence" before moving toward reconfiguration.
"You have to look at the big picture," vice president Virginia Gunter said. "That's a tough thing to do."
No matter what the situation's result, someone will be disappointed, she said. [[In-content Ad]]