Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Of Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County reviews Board of Education FY2016 capital submission; state recommends partial funding for Spring Ridge
Summary
County staff reviewed the Board of Education's FY2016 capital submission and state staff's initial recommendation to fund part of the Spring Ridge request; an appeal of the state recommendation was under way.
Get email alerts on the Board Of Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ST. MARY'S COUNTY, Md. — During the Dec. 8, 2014 budget work session, county staff summarized the Board of Education’s FY2016 capital submission and the state’s first-phase recommendation on the Spring Ridge school project.
The Board of Education submitted a multi-year capital plan that the county used to prepare a letter of support for the state submission. K., a county finance staff member, said the submission process began in the fall and that the county and Board of Education coordinate on timing and county funding impacts.
Why it matters: state funding decisions affect the timing and county contribution for school construction and major school facility improvements. Commissioners saw a phased state review that includes an initial staff recommendation, an appeals process, and a later award phase.
Spring Ridge ask and state recommendation
- The board requested $7,103,000 from the state for the Spring Ridge project as part of its FY2016 submission. - The state’s initial staff recommendation dated Nov. 18, 2014 recommended $3,550,000 in that first phase; county staff noted the board submitted appeals the previous week.
Staff noted it is unusual for a request to receive 100 percent of the state recommendation in the first phase and that later actions and appeals with the Board of Public Works may change the award. "It’s been rare, I think, that this process and them not funding something has caused us to delay a school project," K. said, adding that once planning approval is granted, the state typically funds the project through the phased processes.
County and school budget interactions
Staff provided a two-page comparative worksheet showing the FY2016 plan and the county funding impact. The county-side numbers showed year-by-year changes to county funding needs tied to the board’s request and the planning assumptions. Commissioners were given project detail sheets and told the board of education’s timing may shift with enrollment or state funding decisions.
Next steps and appeals
Staff said appeals were already filed last week and that subsequent state phases in the spring could modify awards. Commissioners were advised that final capital funding and county budget decisions will be considered during the regular FY2016 budget work sessions and the county’s public hearing schedule in April.
Ending
The board of commissioners provided a September letter of support for the board’s state submission; staff said they expect further state action and will return to commissioners with any material changes to the school funding picture.

