Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1956-04-05

liitCilQlIlB AAOiiA NilC
staff, who were fascinated by
the whole procedure.
K. Hancock apparently supports
the McKinsey proposal that
school construction projects
which have not been contracted
for at the end of a fiscal year
"be cancelled" and that the
school capital program be re-
viewed annually
Mr.. Hancock says, II wouldn't
be surprised if T recommend that
all uncommitted projects be
declared lapsed appropriations at
the end of each year"
McKinsey declares, "At no
time is there any deletion be.
cause of changes in plans nor is
there any periodic fiscal review
of the whole capital program"
The School Board was severely
questioned by the County Coun-
Gil on the boards use of capital
funds after Mr.. Hancock
charged, Funds already appro-
priated should furnish sufficient
classroom space for at least the
next two years"
Fund.Shifting Hit
In particular the School Board
was taken to task for its practice
of shifting funds from project to
project. For instance, it was
stated that while more than two
million dollars has been appro.
priated for Poolesville schools
in the past five years, only about
100000 has been spent there.
The rest has been shifted to other
projects.
The County Council usually
approves school projects in ex.
cess of the funds appropriated.
The School Board then decides
which projects should be
priority.
When the cost of a school runs
above the approved level, the
School Board must seek council
approval to reallocate money
from another project to pay the
overrun. The council has seldom
withheld permission.
McKinsey declares that the
practice of including the same
project in several successive bud.
gets raises the possible cost
ceiling. For instance, if a !
school costing 100000 is ap.
proved in this years budget but
not committed to contract this
year, the same project may be
in next years budget. This
would raise the permissible cost
to 100000, says McKinsey.
No Double Funds
Mr.. Benson calls this merely a
bookkeeping illusion. No such
double funds exist, he declares.
One school finance official
points out a little-known fact: if
the complete capital program
for a fiscal year is finished at
less cost than anticipated, the
excess money is returned to the
county. He says $4,000 left over
from the 1928 program may
soon be returned. There was no
excess between 1850 and 1852.
Previous years excuses have al
ready been returned.
Mr.. Benson takes exception to
number of McKinsey state
ments In the capital budget field. |
THE capital budgets of pre-.
vious years have shown the cost
of each project as a single
figure" declare the management
consultants. Considerable data
is furnished for each capital
budget program" states the
school finance head.
No Regular Review
There is no periodic review
of the total capital program and
the program is never brought up
to date. The County Council
may have appropriated funds in
prior years which have never
materialized, yet 1t is never given
the opportunity to re-examine
the current usage of such funds,
other than the piecemeal reallo-
cation of funds" holds McKinsey.
Beginning in October 1855,
the county manager and mem.
bers of the County Council have
received the report of capital
funds. This report furnishes de.
tailed data for each project as
well as a summary of all prof.
ects by years" says Mr.. Benson.
McKinsey recommends the EN-.
ployment of a director of bust.
ness affairs ito assist the super.
intendent with the financial
management of the school sys.
tenn and the management Of non.
Institutional activities other
than personnel and research"
The suggestion was accepted
and a salary Of $4,000 to $1,000
annually approved. No one has