What happened to the big debate over the money that the school board says the county owes?

After all the hubbub about the county commissioners failing to do right by the school system, school officials have been strangely silent in recent days.

We are not sure if the issue is dead — or like an old soldier, has just faded away.

The quiet stoicism is quite a sea change from earlier this month when the school board requested a joint meeting with Scotland commissioners to find out why the county was not living up to its end of a pretty clear deal.

School officials had proposed to forego more than $344,000 in local funding, if the county would adopt a budget that included an equivalent drop in the tax rate.

On June 18, the county board proposed a budget that included the decrease in local funding, but failed to honor the stipulation that it reduce the $1.02 tax rate.

School officials were pretty vocal that such an arrangement was not going to stand.

School Board Attorney Nick Sojka Jr. informed the county that school officials were aware that "the commissioners attempted to pass a budget which purported to accept the reduced funding level ... but apparently rejected at least the second condition incorporated in that motion. Such a result is not allowed under the Revised Funding Law because in the absence of mutual agreement between the two boards, the mandatory funding provision of the law apply."

In other words, the county would have to reduce the tax rate or cough up the $344,000.

But in a lengthy joint meeting on July 16, county commissioners said that they would be hard pressed to come up with the money short of a tax increase or dipping into reserve funds.

After that same meeting, the school board met in closed session, but no action was taken on what to do next. The school board met the following Monday and again nothing was decided — at least publicly.

There has been some talk that school officials are hoping to use the issue as leverage while the county decides what to do about the school board's newest request — to support the $3 million expansion at Wagram Primary School.

We hope that is just conjecture because the school system may not have much of a carrot or a stick to barter with.

Under state statue, if the school board determines the amount of local funding is insufficient, the chairs of the board of education and the county commissioners are suppose to arrange a meeting to be held within seven days to talk about the funding.

The school system sent a letter on June 26 requesting the meeting for June 29. The boards actually meet on July 16 — almost a month after the budget was proposed.

The law also requires that a mediator be appointed to preside at the joint meeting. That did not happen.

If the two boards cannot reach an agreement, then they are enter into mediation. No movement there either.

While a judge may view the facts differently, it does not appear that the school board has pursued the issue with the sort of diligence that officials purport that it deserves.

So it begs the question, is the $344,000 needed or not? Was the school board just using the request to curry favor with the taxpaying public? If not, why did the matter seem to just dissolve?

As long as school board members keep silent, the funding request remains the elephant in the room.

We all know what a mess an elephant can cause.