Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Secure Rural Schools topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County officials urge Congress to restore Secure Rural Schools funding as schools and roads face cuts
Summary
Deputy county administrator Sherry Lawson told supervisors that loss of Secure Rural Schools funding would hit local schools, roads and emergency services and urged continued advocacy for a permanent funding mechanism.
Deputy County Administrator Sherry Lawson briefed the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors on March 18 about ongoing uncertainty surrounding the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self‑Determination Act (SRS), and the possible local consequences if Congress does not restore funding.
Lawson told the board that the SRS program, which compensates counties and school districts for lost property-tax revenue on federal lands, was not renewed in 2024 and that congressional action is uncertain. “Secure Rural Schools funding is a critical support system for our roads, schools, and emergency services,” Lawson said, urging supervisors to press congressional offices to prioritize the program.
Nut graf: supervisors and staff said loss of SRS funding would lead to layoffs, cuts to after‑school programs and delayed building repairs in county schools, and would force public works to defer large road projects in favor of short-term fixes. Staff described Title 1 funds under SRS as primarily for roads and schools, and Title 3 funds as reimbursements the county has used for search-and-rescue and other emergency services.
Lawson summarized how SRS payments are used locally: county schools apply the funds for facility repairs, instructional materials and technology; the Siskiyou County Office of Education uses SRS for a school psychologist and nurses; public works uses the funds for large projects that otherwise would be delayed. She said Title 3 has paid for search-and-rescue equipment and training for volunteers and that losing that revenue would limit procurement and readiness.
Supervisors discussed past bipartisan support for SRS, outreach to congressional staff and the need for a permanent funding mechanism so counties are not left to seek ad‑hoc renewals. One supervisor recounted meetings with congressional staff who indicated confidence funding would be placed in the forthcoming federal budget process, but Lawson and others said the path to final funding remains uncertain.
Ending: Lawson asked the board to press representatives in Washington to pursue a long-term funding solution; supervisors instructed staff to coordinate advocacy through regional associations and prepare a letter to Congress about the county’s exposure if SRS is not reinstated.
