Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Board weighs future of Fremont County BOCES: hire a director or absorb duties into districts
Loading...
Summary
With the current BOCES executive director leaving, board members debated hiring a new director, appointing a stipended district administrator to manage BOCES duties, or rethinking the cooperative; the decision hinges on reserve funds, shared priorities among districts and the ability to find an experienced grant‑writing director.
Board members spent an extended period Nov. 11 discussing the future of the Fremont County BOCES cooperative after the executive director announced plans to leave. The BOCES — originally created to coordinate career and technical education (CTE) programs and other cooperative offerings — has drawn down reserve funds and now faces a choice between recruiting another executive director or changing the administrative model.
Speakers reviewed the cooperative’s history: earlier leaders had actively pursued grants and expanded programming; more recent staffing changes reduced active fundraising and program development. One board member said the BOCES reserve peaked in 2017 at more than $1 million and that the cooperative now has “just under a million.” District 25’s own mill/reserve balance was cited as roughly $200,000.
Options discussed included: (a) posting for and hiring a proactive, grant‑focused executive director (which would require increased administrative dollars), (b) assigning BOCES administration to an existing district with a stipend, or (c) continuing the current caretaker model and accepting limited cooperative activity. Support for each option varied by district depending on which services each uses most actively (CTE, pre‑K or alternative placements).
Board members noted practical tradeoffs: a high‑energy director could rebuild programming and attract grants but costs money; a stipended district model could preserve program dollars but requires tighter cooperation among districts to spend reserves equitably. The board agreed to discuss details further and asked administration to prepare options ahead of an imminent deadline for a required decision.
No hiring decision was made Nov. 11; several trustees stressed the need for additional analysis of budget impacts, likely candidate availability and how reserve dollars would be allocated across participating districts.
