By Alicia Petska

Published: February 15, 2011

In an official opinion issued last month, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli says that an element of “danger” exists when localities and school divisions consider sharing a chief financial officer, as has been discussed in Lynchburg.

Responding to an inquiry from Del. Scott Garrett, R-Lynchburg, Cuccinelli advised that while consolidating health care plans or back-office financial operations is generally safe, relying on the same finance head presents a “greater danger of restricting the independence of the school board in budgetary matters.”

“Budgetary disputes between localities and school boards occur with regularity throughout the Commonwealth,” he wrote. “A shared chief financial officer will find it difficult to act independently with each body. Certainly, the appearance of independence would not be present.”

Cuccinelli stopped short of outright opposing the idea, saying he would have to see Lynchburg’s proposal in order to render a definitive opinion. “In the absence of specific details concerning the arrangement, however, I am unable to conclude absolutely that such an arrangement would be impermissible under Virginia law,” he wrote.

The attorney general’s opinion, dated Jan. 21, was directed to Garrett, who had asked if consolidation of certain city-school functions would infringe upon the school board’s constitutional powers.

Garrett, a former City Council member who supported consolidation, said he decided on his own to submit the question to the attorney general and was not acting on a request.

“I was more just curious than anything else,” he said, adding he didn’t distribute or discuss the report with anyone afterward.

The Lynchburg City School Board has expressed apprehension about preserving its constitutional autonomy as consolidation talks progress. When the school division’s chief financial officer resigned last year, several council members hailed it as a prime consolidation opportunity, but board members consulted with an outside attorney who raised virtually the same concerns as Cuccinelli and advised against creating a shared position.

The board was later presented with a tentative consolidation structure that included a new budget manager position that would remain under the school division’s control. Board members overwhelmingly rejected that plan, saying it offered no clear benefits.

Garrett declined to take a position on the board’s decision, noting he was not privy to the most recent “ins and outs” of the consolidation talks, but he did say that if constitutional concerns still existed they should be given a “further look.”

“Basically, his (Cuccinelli’s) bottom line was it really depends on the specifics,” Garrett said. “… In and of itself, it’s not unconstitutional.”

Garrett, who was in his first term on council when he was elected to the House of Delegates in 2009, said he remains strongly supportive of the consolidation initiative, particularly for certain administrative and maintenance operations that do not contribute to the “first minute” of teaching children.

The Lynchburg City School Board received a copy of the opinion from the city attorney’s office. Chairwoman Mary Ann Barker said it did not appear to offer any new information.

“It sounds like everything we had been told before,” she said.

The joint city-school consolidation committee is currently writing a request for proposals from consultants who could help guide officials through the process. Consolidation efforts are becoming increasingly focused on combining health care plans. Officials on both sides have agreed to complete that project by next year, although at least one council member recently expressed interest in speeding up that timetable.

Staff writer Jessie Pounds contributed.

The News & Advance © Copyright 2011 Media General Communications Holdings, LLC. A Media General company.