Review of the proposed budget, public hearings regarding the proposed budget and other comments from the public prior to the final adoption of the approved budget for the 2015-2016 (FY2016) at the Board of Education Meeting on June 17, 2015.
Tenative FY2016 Anticipated Funds and Budgeted Expenditures
Proposed FY2016 Budget Summary
Proposed FY2016 Lowest Paid Employees Budget Recommendation
Advertised Property Tax Increases
DeKalb Schools 2015 Evaluation of Digest
Supporting Detailed Budget Excel Docs
<dir> 010-SUPERINTENDENT <dir> 015-SCHOOL BOARD <dir> 020-COMMUNICATIONS <dir> 030-CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION <dir> 040-FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS <dir> 050-FINANCE <dir> 060-HUMAN RESOURCES <dir> 070-INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY <dir> 080-LEGAL AFFAIRS <dir> 090-SCHOOL LEADERSHIP AND OPERATIONAL SUPPORT <dir> 100-STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY <dir> 110-CHARTER SCHOOLS <dir> 115-SYSTEMWIDE <dir> 120-SCHOOLS
Codes, Forms, etc …
DCSD Charge Codes.xlsx DCSD FY2016 PROPOSED DATA FROM FORMS SUMMARY.xlsx Federal R and X FY 14 and FY 15 and FY16 Budget .xlsx GEORGIA STATE CHARGE CODES (asof 03-10-2015).xlsx
Preparatory Q&A with DeKalb Schools
Question: What percent of the employee’s earned annual income is proposed to go to board TSA contributions?
Answer: (MICHAEL BELL) Board TSA contributions for employees under PSERS (custodians, bus drivers and monitors, food service assistants, etc.), are included in the proposed budget. These employees get a TSA of 8% of their salary. There are approximately 2,170 individuals, per HR, under this status.
Question: What percentage of the proposed operating budget is proposed to be spent on direct classroom expenditures as calculated by the state?
Answer: (MICHAEL BELL) As calculated by the State, based upon the Proposed FY2016 Operating Budget, the projected percent expended would come to 63.64% (assuming a 100% expenditure rate). Expenditures less than 100% impacting the numerator and the denominator proportionally could still result in the same percentage. Under the State’s formatting of the report in question this (63.64%) would roll-up to 64%.
|Classroom||$ 519,389,964||$ 549,876,910||$ 598,678,971|
|Operating||$ 843,716,713||$ 893,149,340||$ 959,363,447|
|Percent In Classroom||61.56 %||61.57 %||62.40 %|
Question: (MARSHALL ORSON) How much would it cost to give all employees a 4% increase
Answer: (MICHAEL BELL) Please note that it is estimated to cost an additional $4,851,209 to give all employees a 4% salary increase.
Question: Given the 2015 Evaluation of Digest produced by the tax assessor, how do you get from $450.245.723 in the digest to $427,865,868 in the budget?
Answer: (MICHAEL BELL) It should be noted that the $427.8MM contains more than ad valorem taxes, which the answer to no.1 relates to. The specific components are:
Prop. Taxes – 401.365.868
Achol Bev. Tax – 5.000.000
Intangible Rec. Tax – 4.300.000
Title Ad Val. Tax – 15.700.000
Real Estate Transf. Tax 1.500.000
Therefore, the ad valorem property tax amount relating to the tax levy amount indicated on the bottom right of the attached file ($450.245.723) really relates to the 401.365.868 + 15.700.000 = $417.065.868.
Question: How do you anticipate how much will actually be collected?
Answer: (MICHAEL BELL) It should be noted that the Tax Commissioner’s Office retains 1.25% (by State law)of total ad valorem taxes collected to pay for the expense of the collection process (her County Office).
Therefore, we reduce the $450.245.723 by 1.25% resulting in $444.617.651. If our ad valorem projection is $417.065.868 / $444.617.651 the projected collection rate (which also has to account for property tax appeals) = 93.8%.
This reduction is commonly called “erosion” and generally accounts for (a) digest reductions based on property tax appeals lost and (b) tax collections of less than 100 cents on the dollar billed.