Laserfiche WebLink
THURSDAY, APRIL 13, 1995 <br /> <br />additional S496,822. None of the proposed budgets included funding for <br />the "Technology Budget Request" of 81,974,200. <br /> <br />Councilman Crabtree noted that the "zero-based" terminology was most <br />likely a misnomer, suggesting that "level funding" might have been a <br />better term. Mr. Lamm and members of the School Board responded to <br />numerous questions from the members of Council, who were seeking to <br />understand the three-tiered proposal. Councilman Teague noted that the <br />"maintenance" budget plus the salary increases resulted in an overall <br />7.6% budget increase for the School Division. <br /> <br />It was noted the City Manager's budget included level funding for the <br />School Division (which was proposed to.be placed in a separate "School <br />Fund", instead of the General Fund), with the $322,043 in salary and <br />benefit increases contained in the City Manager's recommended <br />Supplemental I budget. <br /> <br />There was then a lengthy discussion of the technology budget request. <br />It was noted the "maintenance" budget included $160,000 in technology <br />spending. The FY 94-95 budget included $160,000 in the School Budget <br />for technology plus $150,000 from the Meals Tax Fund. Councilman <br />Teague asked Mr. Lamm to form a committee, comprised of representatives <br />of government, education, and local industry, to examine funding <br />options and other issues relating to School technology. One function <br />of the group would be to seek private funding for computers and other <br />technological items. <br /> <br />Councilman Crabtree suggested the School Division develop a 5-year <br />capital improvements program similar to the one developed by the City <br /> <br /> <br />