UPDATE – More On Local Government Squirreling
Following up on our groundbreaking report yesterday about the hundreds of millions of “surplus” dollars South Carolina school districts have been squirreling away in recent years, we’ve been able to uncover a few updated “nuts …”
Interestingly enough, if the trend we’re witnessing holds true across-the-board for 2008, South Carolina school districts may actually exceed the record-breaking $700 million that they had tucked away in surplus fund balances in 2007.
Which is amazing considering it’s been such an abysmal revenue year …
Obviously, we’re in the process of collecting surplus fund information for all local governments in South Carolina (i.e. cities, counties, school districts, water/sewer districts, you name it), but in the meantime we’ve managed to assemble updated data from three midlands area school districts and one county government.
Specifically, we’ve discovered that Lexington School District One saw its fund balance jump from $16 million to $18.9 million, while Richland School District Two increased its fund balance from $14.9 million to $18.5 million.
Similarly, Lexington County’s fund balance grew from $49.8 million to $53.3 million, while estimates are that Lexington-Richland School District Five will see a jump from $22.9 million to $29 million for 2008.
You can check out the numbers for yourself below, along with a copy of the 1991 law that permits local governments to maintain a “reasonable” fund balance.
Of course “reasonable” is in the eye of the beholder, and with state lawmakers looking for any excuse to trim costs, don’t be surprised if these surplus pots of money become a big issue during the current legislative session …
WEB EXTRAS:
Comments
By El Guapo on January 13th, 2009 at 7:54 am
This the same Richland 2 that just held a bond ref? Hmm…
By Clay Pit Crew on January 13th, 2009 at 9:33 am
The problem with the 1991 Fund Balance Law is that there is no definition of what constitutes a “reasonable positive general fund balance.” Furthermore, the law fails to force the public entities to lower millage rates once said reasonable positive general fund balance is achieved. This law is written like so many others with the sole intent of raping the taxpayer of his hard-earned income. When have you ever heard a government agent lobby for reducing “revenue streams?” Remember, “revenue” is the lawmakers term for the hard-earned income of the taxpayer. Welcome to paradise.
By StupidShouldHurtMore (SSHM) on January 13th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Irony … I swear.
This site preaches over and over again about being fiscally responsible. So you have a number of agencies and school districts that are practicing fiscal responsibility by NOT spending EVERY penny. Somehow this is a BAD thing??
I believe, like the 1991 law states, that reasonable is just that … reasonable. It is REASONABLE for a school district to accrue a “rainy day” fund. It is REASONABLE for a school district to practice fiscal responsibility. It is REASONABLE to save money.
So where is the issue FITS?
The other issue I have with these stories is this: The source of the savings. The implication is that all of this money came from Columbia. That may not be the case and it certainly has not been properly pointed out … until now.
More sources please!
- SSHM
By BIN News Editorial Staff on January 13th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
SSHM is right! Our school districts are doing their jobs! They are being fiscally conservative and responsible! They are clearly working hard to be responsible in everything they do, in spite of politically motivated attacks by sic(k) willie, randy Randy and Howies’ other carpet-buggers.
Our schools know they cannot depend on our Republicrats and Demopublicans to provide stable funding for children. They certainly know the elected officials that Howie has bought with his carpetbugger money will be the first to throw kids under the bus for the voucher scam. Hear us Howie and your children.
In SC, the School Districts that can afford it have saved for this rainy day.
Their chidren are being protected and educated. The taxpayers are protected. Nothing illegal, nothing excessive, nothing wrong.
But that will not stop sic(k) willie. Nor randy Randy.
They will pander their paid politic@L cr@p as long as we let them get away with it. Join us!
Demand sic(k) willie identify the Midlands’ elected official he claims has a Strom problem. Join in demanding sic(k) willie explain his claim that Governor Sanford paid off the family of a “poor little black girl.”
BIN News Editorial Staff
Flaire and Balanced
By GoZilla on January 13th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
Bin:
If you are really serious in your quests, why don’t you commence it with your own web site? It can be done for $6.99 per month:
http://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/registrar/search.asp?isc=goaz2001o
Go Daddy. Go Bin.
By BIN News Editorial Staff on January 13th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
will, use better bait. Go Daddy is so “so so.” You started with them, didn’t you. Learn your lesson? You get what you pay for.
Watch for the same lesson with The Mace Group. You get what you pay for, and it comes back with a bonus when you pay part under the table.
Are you putting all that on your tax returns? Just wondering.
BIN News Editorial Staff
Flair and Balanced
By Wes Wolfe on January 14th, 2009 at 12:47 am
Speaking of squirrels, Colbert says the British are eating them because of low incomes in this, the Greatest Depression.
By BIN News Editorial Staff on January 14th, 2009 at 1:29 am
Silence from sic(k) willie? Stunning.
Trackbacks