No, we don't need any more new taxes. It's already extremely difficult to keep up with the state and federal money grabbers. Maybe it's time to push back on these unfunded state and federal mandates.

Given that the county population is actually shrinking or at best staying even (check out the census data) the school system really needs to look a facilities. Manchester Valley and North Carroll High schools are both half empty and given that the population is not growing there is little hope that those schools will grow. Close one of them and save millions of dollars a year! For some reason the BOE thinks the population is going to suddenly start growing like mad. The birth rate in the US is at historic lows and the new state mandated septic system requirements will make it too expensive for people to build in Carroll so its hard to beleive the school system is suddenly going to be growing again. The BOE needs to take ownership of the poor decision to build Manchester Valley. It was totally funded by the county as the state said it was not needed. (First time any county in Maryland did such a thing in decades) We are paying for it big time now.

A few quick facts from the BoE's own publications online:
The BoE budget in 2006 was $286M.
In 2012 it is $331M.
An increase of $45M in 6 years.

The enrollment in 2006 was 28,579 students
enrollment in 2012 is 26,687.
A decrease of 1,892 students.

So for every one less student their budget grew by $23,784. The state funds education based on the number of students. As our student population goes down, so does the amount of state funding. They set the standard.

I guess my question to Mr. Guthrie is this.....How can you say to citizens that you've cut money from your budget, when it has clearly increased every year as the student population dwindles???

If you ran a small business like this or a household, you'd be seeking bankruptcy advice....

Fixed costs have gone through the roof in the last few years so the lack of funding can't entirely be place on poor budgeting. That certainly is a part of it, but as BC stated, having schools that are nowhere near capacity and will be nowhere near capacity in the foreseeable future is a ridiculous waste of money. The BOE does indeed need to accept responsibility for a very poor decision and decide how to reverse it. Sure, high school students may have a longer commute, but is that any different than it was before a high school that was not needed was built? Stop talking about cutting programs and teachers that the school system desperately needs and wants and hire an accountant who knows what they are doing to run CCPS like it should be run...a business.

Let's remember that the ill-advised decision to build MVHS was in part a negative reaction to the busing of students from Manchester to Hampstead, which was indeed a chore prior to the opening of the $90 million Hampstead Bypass. This situation has been resolved and now the trip is a quick jaunt by comparison. Logically, since the students re-districted from N. Carroll to MVHS represent the excess capacity at both schools, it makes better sense to contemplate closing N. Carroll and moving all the kids into the newer MVHS, than it does redistricting the entire county. Perhaps we could sell N. Carroll to one of the Commissioners developer friends for a tidy profit. Enrollments in the northern part of the county are predicted to continue to decline over the next few years and history shows there should be little confidence in predictions out more than 5 years. Should these Commissioners continue to flat fund education, more people will move out, not in, so the enrollment reductions may actually accelerate, as our schools continue to drop along with our property values. People like Ms. Nicholls would rather not acknowledge public schools as an investment in our quality of life or that education costs have increased irrespective of enrollments, but that's what we're dealing with. A college education is more expensive too, but do you not attend college, because they are not good stewards of the tuition dollars?

I'm not even sure where those $286M and $331M figures come from. It must be operating and capital combined.

And never mind that new schools have been built in that time. And employee benefits laws have changed. And the teacher pension passback has occurred. It's really comparing apples and oranges.

If we look only at operating budget, it's a more reasonable picture. In 2009, the budget was $160.7m. In 2013, it was $164.9m. Up about 2.5% over 4 years. Hardly sucking up all the money!

What has the county operating budget done in that same period? It's gone from $353m to $361.7m. Up about 2.5%. So education's "share" of the budget has remained at 45.5%.

Cindy, are you stating here that these figures are false? are you stating here that the budget HAS NOT been increased every year while the student enrollment has taken a nosedive???? Is that your claim? Are you saying that as the student enrollment declines, BoE budget should remain the same % wise??? That there is never a case for the budget to decrease??

Don't listen to Rothschild & Frazier's deranged minions. If you want information on why costs have gone up every year, go to the Board of Education's website :

http://www.carrollk12.org/Assets/file/Financial%20Services/Fixed%20Cost%20Increases.pdf

This information has been explained to all of the commissioners over and over yet SOME of the commissioners say they don't understand. These are fixed costs that apply whether there are 28,000 or 26,000 students.

The costs have increased in almost all categories; liability insurance, heating oil, gasoline, electricity, water, sewer, textbooks, teaching materials and supplies that keep the schools running like paper and copying, the list goes on and on.

These must be provided. The Board of Eduction can't opt to only run buses 4 days or week, not light the buildings, turn the heat off in some of the schools, stop making copies or drop liability insurance.

It's amazing that we are still having this argument. There are none so blind as those that will not see!

BoE has 11 million in surplus....USE IT!!!

Or, close a school or two.....MOE is what you should get, and not a penny more!!! you got your 5 million last year for your raise news junkie.....what are you so upset about? In the real world most people haven't seen a raise in five years...but that's the mentality of a UNION MINION!!! One that blogs with a fake name so they don't lose their job...BTW, I love it when you all stand up in unison when the CCEA president rises to speak at the school board hearings....It's so brown shirt!!! LOLOLOLOL!!!!

The BOE is not going to close a school, why because they have the good old boys system! They don’t want to put any of the higher paid employees out of work or give them a extra work load. They will move them from one job title to another to make it look like they made cuts. AND THE NEW TITLE pays more ! But if you look on the web and a school calendar from past years they still employ the same number of staff at central office as they did in 2007. “ What they did was cut custodial jobs, over the past 2 years 30 positions have been cut or not filled and used that money for high class job titles .. They have now told the custodians they have to maintain and clean a school even with one evening custodian! So the health standards of disinfecting after little Johnny had rubbed his germs all over the building is now cut in half.

The lighting in the buildings, the heat in the schools is in the plant operations budget if you look and they have cut the timmer / clocks heat does not come on now till 8am it used to come on at 6:30 . where is that saved money ?

I do agree , close a school .. stop sinking money in to these old falling apart buildings !

I suggest that those of you who have not yet attended one of Steve Guthrie's presentations this year go listen to him before making uninformed comments. There is a clear case for why he is asking for this amount of money, and in addition, he has a plan for what to do if he receives only $164 mill or even less. You will find that each situation requires juggling, even the amount he is asking for.

164 million is 3 million over the minimum MOE funding of 161 million as I understand it....I don't know many banks that would lend money as the Superintendent wishes the taxpayer to fork over $$$ to him.

JoAnn, if you are speaking to me, like I said, attend Mr. Guthrie's presentation. It is clear that you have not, or if you have, you were not listening. That is all I am going to say.

I've been listening to the "Steve Guthries" of the world for decades Andrea White...."We need to invest more in our children".....that's a statement I can connect with, but not in the same way the union/government minion thinks.....This school board should get what they advocated for...MOE...which IS $161 million.....the other three million should go to funding for school vouchers....then we will see if you are right or I am right....we will see just how many mothers and fathers line up for a chance to get some help to place their child in another environment othr than this school system in the district they are subjected to.....there isn't ONE of you liberals who would accept when purchasing in a free market an idea which would require you to see a particular dentist, doctor, lawyer or accountant based on where you lived and would raise your property taxes to take your money no matter whether you were happy with the service or not....NOT ONE of you would agree to living under that tyranny, but you force it on the kids....we all know what they are being taught now and it isn't reading, writing and math....it IS your Marxist ideology.....just reading the above statement to Commissioner Howard from school board member Gary Bauer makes me DETERMINED that I will continue the fight to free the public from this atrocity....Bauer sounds like a Chicago shake down artist...DISGUSTING!!!!

I agree with Andrea White - attend one of those meetings and listen to Steve Guthrie. Study the budgets (proposed & past years) line item by line item. MOE doesn't take inflation into account. It was designed for counties whose populations were rapidly growing. We all aware of cost increases of fuel, utitlities, health care, supplies - all the increases we have suffered, so has every entity in the county - including schools. Look at the county's budget and projected income too.

IzzyMD.....you make a good point about rising costs....if the BoE cannot afford to pay heating bills then it appears the schools which are half empty need to be addressed...CLOSE THE HALF EMPTY SCHOOLS!!! consolidate and tighten your belts just like the folks in the real world do...

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and insight on this issue. Patch was built for the purpose of providing a platform for these community conversations to take place. That said, there are terms of use and any comments that are inappropriate will be deleted. Please avoid making personal attacks on other users/commenters and stick to the article topic. These comments should be educational/informational so that others coming to the topic for the first time can actually get a deeper understanding of the issue at hand its impact on the community. Thank you!

There are always simple solutions to complex issues, that are typically wrong. For those who claim that the solution is to just one or more schools, I have to ask: which, what will be done with the closed school, what is the cost implications both in the long and short term, what will the impact be on transportation and most importantly, what will the impact be on the kids? It is extremely easy to pull an answer out of the air. I would hope that our elected officials would embrace a more rigorous methodology of analysis. However, given the sweeping suggestions I’ve heard from some, I’m not confident that this is the case.

some schools are marked to be torn down in the next five+ years....we have a few schools that are only half filled....instead of spending tremendous dollars to keep the schools running and replacing old systems in those marked for being torn down and replaced, why not tear them down now and rebuild later and condense the schools that are at less than 50% capacity? Why would we be spending thousands of tax payer dollars to replace heating systems and other expensive repairs in buildings that are due to be torn down?? That makes no sense at all to me.