Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance And Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Caldwell Parish board reviews test scores, hears financial update and ratifies election results
Summary
Board heard assessment and accountability results showing mixed school performance, received a financial report noting $77 million in cash and pending Tax Commission litigation, and voted to accept recent property‑tax election results and approve minutes.
At its December meeting, the Caldwell Parish School Board reviewed district assessment results, received a finance report that outlined cash holdings and ongoing property‑tax litigation, and voted to accept the results of a recent property‑tax election.
District staff reported assessment and accountability data showing mixed results across sites: junior high has shown growth and left urgent intervention for students with disabilities, Union Central increased its assessment index by seven points though it remains in comprehensive intervention, and Columbia’s reported drop was tied to a restructuring that left only third‑grade scores counted. The district’s overall score was reported at 5.82, above the state average of 5.49. Staff noted a new accountability system scheduled to begin in 2025–26.
A finance presentation detailed the district’s year‑to‑date sales‑tax collections by category and explained timing differences that produced a roughly $90,000 decline on an adjusted basis while the cash‑basis figure showed a $728 increase. Finance staff reported approximately $77 million in cash holdings, with about $45 million in certificates of deposit and roughly $2 million in sales‑tax/property‑tax items currently pending. The presentation flagged a Tax Commission matter involving a Scott case (a sum near $966,000 was mentioned as part of the pending rulings) with a January Tax Commission ruling expected and the prospect of District Court and state supreme court actions on appeal.
On motions, the board approved the minutes from the prior meeting by voice vote after a motion and second. Later the board voted to accept the result of a property‑tax election, which the presenter said had passed; the board approved acceptance by voice vote ('all in favor'). No roll‑call vote tallies were recorded in the transcript.
Finance staff projected the general fund position, noting a $622,000 deficit position that should improve after January property‑tax receipts and could finish the fiscal year near $900,000. Staff attributed some year‑to‑year differences to timing of expenditures (for example, higher supplies expense this year) and to vendor payment timing for sales‑tax receipts.
The board took no further formal actions on the assessment or finance items at the meeting; presentations were informational and the meeting moved on to routine holiday scheduling and adjournment preparations.
