THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, October 2, 1996 TAG: 9610020648
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY ALETA PAYNE, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: VIRGINIA BEACH LENGTH: 67 lines
A divided School Board voted Tuesday night to defer any decision on combining some financial services with the city until next summer.
The board voted 6-5 on a compromise resolution by member Neil L. Rose to put off until July 1, 1997, further consideration of consolidating payroll, purchasing, accounts payable and accounting. Board member Nancy D. Guy had proposed a deferral until after Oct. 1, 1997.
With the same motion, Rose, Guy and fellow board members Tim Jackson, H.L. ``Les'' Powell, Daniel J. Arris and Chairman Robert F. Hagans voted to rescind a Feb. 20 agreement by a previous board supporting consolidation.
Opposing the motion were board Vice Chairwoman Delceno C. Miles and board members Arthur T. Tate, Paul J. Lanteigne, Donald F. Bennis and Rosemary A. Wilson.
``I am interested in consolidation where consolidation makes sense,'' Rose said. But he said he had not seen proof that it would save money or improve services.
``Taking time to make thoughtful, informed decisions is not procrastination to my mind,'' said Guy, who serves on the division's consolidation committee. ``It's good government.''
Although consolidation has been discussed in the past, some city officials have pushed it with particular fervor since the discovery of a $12.1 million budget shortfall at the end of the 1994-95 fiscal year.
The previous board authorized the superintendent to look into consolidation, but was reluctant to commit completely because those board members said they did not want to lock their successors into an agreement.
Virginia Beach Vice Mayor W.D. Sessoms Jr. said he was frustrated that the School Board and the council couldn't agree on consolidation.
``To get this response is just very disappointing,'' he said.
According to a city study, consolidation would result in a net savings in the first year of about $76,000, with additional savings in later years. The School Board would maintain its policy-making authority and responsibility to develop and control the division's budget.
Some school officials question, however, how much those future savings would be. Some have also questioned whether consolidation could create policy and budget problems.
Sessoms said he thinks the School Board has the mistaken impression that the city is trying to take over the board's authority.
``Maybe somehow we haven't gotten through to them that it has nothing to do with control,'' he said. ``It just has to do with saving money and being more efficient.''
Lanteigne, who offered a substitute motion to move consolidation along more quickly, said that students are not the board's only customers; parents and taxpayers without children are as well.
``To me, savings are savings, whether they're minimal or not. If it's $30,000 a year, that's a teacher's salary,'' he said.
Tate said some members elected in May had said they supported consolidation while running. Now, he said, they were not keeping their word.
Arris, who was appointed to the board last spring, said he might have favored consolidation then, but that close scrutiny had left him with doubts.
In other action, the board unanimously approved a resolution to have the superintendent and city attorney's office prepare a report on what the division can and cannot do in the area of student drug testing and searches.
The board asked that that report be completed by Jan. 1.
MEMO: Staff Writer Karen Weintraub contributed to this story.
KEYWORDS: CONSOLIDATION by CNB