Montgomery County sentinel., 1962-07-26

themselves right about wher
Clearly, some type of adjust
ment is needed" was their less
than-earthshaking finding on
how the Council can best re.
lieve its situation of being zone
elected body being held respon-
sible for the financial programs
and actions of another elected
body"
To county residents concerned
over rising costs of a school
system currently devouring
close to 80 cents of every prop
erty tax dollar they pay, PAS
stand on school budget control
stands out one of the weakest
chapters in an otherwise i'm
pressive study.
About as close as the experts
came to a solid suggestion in
this vital area was one for the
employment of qualified budget
examiners by the County who
may - or may not - be better
able to identify questionable ex-
penditures or fund requests
than the county's present budg-
ct staff is.
The experts failure to pro.
vide firm guidelines for con-
troll of school expenditures
leaves both the County Man.
ager and the County Council
still stuck with the RESPONSE
bility for the amount of the
school tax without any Ger.
tainty it is needed.
While recognizing the Coun-
Gil is the only body which can
levy school taxes and that it
"can and has reduced and de-
leted major and minor items
from the school budget" PAS
found the present budget review
and adoption process "leaves
much to be desired"
Here's the way it sums up
the spot the Council is and has
been in for years:
"The Council must rely on in.
adequate and incomplete infor-
nation upon which to base its
decisions.
Although the Board of Edu-
cation budget is basically a
complete, understandable and
apparently well-conceived docu-
ment, many of the premises and
policies upon which its formu-
lation Is based have been
adopted by the board and, in
most instances publicized, in
stalled and the County all but
committed to them prior to the
budgetary approval of the Coun-
ty Council"
Observers were reminded of
the well-publicized plan for re-
organization of the school sys-
TEN, agreed upon by the School
Board before budget time this
spring. Although school Off
cials stressed the new admins
trative set-up involved few new
positions and little additional
expense, County Council mem
bers were stopped in their budg-
ct considerations several times
by aspects of the plan unclear
to them.
Political expediency rears
It's head In this continuation
of PAS comments:
ITO make the councils pre-
dicament even more untenable,
the board and school admins
tration have excellent rapport
and relations with the taxpayers
due to q combination of admin
istrative cultivation and citizen
interest.
From a series of pre-budget
hearings with PTA's to mass
distribution of the proposed and
adopted document, the school
budget process is geared to in
form and gain support for the
financial requests"
Interested taxpayers may be
informed, says PAS, but neither
the County Manager nor the
Council now get enough detailed
information on what's going on
or will be going on in the school
system to justify some budget
requests, and their budget re-
view because of "a number of
reasons" which PAS doesn't go
into, "has had to be cursory."
The Councils views, PAS
points out, are usually shaped
by recommendations of the
County Manager who, in turn,
is in the position of reviewing