During their April 6 budget sub-group meeting, four members of the Signal Mountain School System Viability Committee tackled what they called the "single most important driver of financial viability" for a separate school district: managing administration costs.
The group met last week to discuss a proposed budget submitted by the ad hoc group of parents and education stakeholders that independently researched the feasibility of launching a separate school district. That budget suggests a lean central office with only a few administrators.
If the town launches a new district, its schools would receive nearly the same amount of per-pupil funding from the state and county, amounting to about $20 million, as education funding is based on per-pupil allocations.
Nearly $2.5 million of that $20 million is currently contributed toward county central office costs, and ad hoc group members argued that with their proposed administrative staffing costs - estimated at $740,000 - the three schools would have $1.7 million left over to spend in the classrooms.
But viability committee chair John Friedl cautioned against sacrificing what could be vital administrative positions to trim costs, referencing his own experience as an administrator at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga.
"A lot of the best intentions don't work because you find that you need another person," he explained. "You can't just keep dumping new tasks on a person without increasing their salary and their staffing. I think this is something we need to look at very, very carefully to make sure that we're not ignoring the realities of administrative cost."
Committee member Tom McCullough said the presented model was similar to what he had while serving as superintendent of two small school districts in Georgia. He added that many large, longstanding school districts have positions that should have been eliminated throughout the years but which still exist.
"So when you start [the school system] from scratch, you've got the opportunity to start with a lean structure and keep it lean," McCullough said.
Signal's proposed central office consists of a superintendent, administrative services director, instructional services director, special education director and three secretarial support positions. According to the proposed budget, these seven positions would be supported by several positions which already exist within the local schools.
In subsequent discussions, McCullough recommended adding a director of finance, and replacing the special education director with a director of student services who would also oversee such programs.
McCullough was expected to present an administrative list he thinks will be both cost effective and cover all necessary responsibilities April 10. Mayor Chris Howley suggested McCullough compare the proposed structure to the administrative staff of other small school districts and counties in the state.
In contrast to the proposed budget submitted by the ad hoc group, the sub-group opted to keep supply fees from parents and funds from the Mountain Education Foundation separate from the budget.
MEF has contributed more than $6.5 million to Signal schools since it was developed as a fundraising organization in 1991. In addition to technology and professional development opportunities, the foundation currently funds 11 teacher and staff positions across Signal's three schools, including a college access adviser, an art education teacher and a reading interventionist, among others.
Howley insisted the budget be balanced using only revenue expected from the county and state to determine whether the town would be able to fund a school district on its own.
After some debate, committee members ultimately agreed.
"I think that it would be irresponsible for us to count [MEF] in our budget that we present," said member Melissa Wood.
The separation will mean making up the funds allotted for MEF-funded teaching and staff positions by looking for cost savings in other areas, Friedl said.
But it will also mean that contributions from MEF can be set aside for educational enhancement instead of operational costs, Howley noted, allowing Signal schools to go "above and beyond."
Committee member Charles Spencer, who attended the first budget work group session but was not present Thursday, said the committee is moving too fast.
"I very much hope that we slow down the review," Spencer wrote in an email read at last week's meeting. "I really think that we are moving too quickly."
Friedl said he suggested forming the working groups in the hopes of shortening a process that could easily take a year to complete if confined to two-hour meetings twice a month.
"We can certainly have a discussion about it, and we can vote on it if he wants to vote as to whether we continue [the] working groups or not," Friedl said.
The committee planned to have a more in-depth discussion on the matter during its meeting Wednesday, April 12 at 7 p.m.