AG 2010 05 17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PUBLIC EDUCATION •/-PUBLIC SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE FUNDING -Support legislation to provide state assistance to meet public school and community college construction needs caused by increased enrollment, mandated reduction in class size, and other factors through a statewide referendum on a bond issue and/or through authority for counties to raise additional revenues to meet facility needs, and to fund expansion budget requests of the community college system to meet demands resulting from increased enrollment and to train and retrain workers responding to a changing economy. • $58.1 million was appropriated for community college enrollment growth and $9 million for community college equipment; however, $125 million incorporate income tax receipts for public school construction were lost to the state's general fund due to the negative budget position. ./-EDUCATION CURRENT EXPENSE FUNDING -Support legislation to assure that the state define and support an adequate ba- siceducation in all local school systems and appropriate adequate operating funds to fully fund its education initiatives with revenue that is earmarked to pay the costs of those initiatives. The state should fund programs that continue to engage young people, pro- vide individualized options that eliminate arbitrary barriers and provide students a range of opportunities through which they can gain the credentials, skills and education they need to function in the modern economy of the 21st century. Specifically, the state should: • Continue to fully fund the Low Wealth School Fund; and • Appropriate funds for school resource officers on the basis of one position allotment for each middle school and high school building for all school systems across the state; • Appropriate funds for career technical (vocational) education in high schools. • Expansion funding limited • Funds for vocational education were appropriated to community colleges rather than high schools ~% PUBLIC SCHOOL CAPITAL BUILDING FUND -Support legislation to assure that the Public School Capital Building Fund remains intact and to direct the State Treasurer to report on long-term commitments that are dependent on this fund. Counties and schools should not be deprived of these resources as they were deprived of state support for school utility costs in 1991-92. • The budget preserves the 40 percent of net lottery revenues for school construction, budgeting $147.2 million for 2009-10. • While the budget did not change the statutory school construction lottery distribution formula, the technical corrections act provided that any net revenues in excess of approved levels will go to those counties whose effective tax rates are below the statewide average. • The budget does, however, suspend for two years the automatic distri- bution of the ADM Fund. The automatic distribution will resume in 2011-12 unless further legislative action is taken. X COMMUNITY COLLEGE GOVERNANCE -Support legislation to re- view the process through which members of the various boards of trustees of the several community colleges are appointed to determine whether the system provides for adequate representation from counties responsible for supporting multi-county campuses. X SALES TAX REFUNDS -Support legislation to allow public school systems to regain access to sales tax refunds. • There were many bills introduced that would have accomplished this goal, which was also a primary goal of the NC School Boards Association However, because it would have negatively impacted the state's budget position, none of the bills were adopted. LEGAL The Board of Directors authorized the Asso- ciation to participate in several amicus briefs (Friends of the Court) during the past year. • N.C. Insurance Guaranty Association v. Board of Trustees of Guilford Technical Com- munity College involves an effort by the Guar- anty Association to obtain reimbursement from Guilford Technical Community College. • Union County Landowners Association et. al. v. Union County involves a challenge to the county's School Adequate Public Facility Ordinance (SAPFO). • Tonter Investments Inc. v Pasquotank County involves a challenge to a county's abil- ity to regulate development. • Paddock v. Wake County involves an inter- pretation of N.C.G.S. §1-77 (venue) -the juris- diction in which a public officer can be sued. G-4 Page 141