The drama over what to do about aging school maintenance vehicles that unfolded at last week’s E.C.-Pasquotank school board meeting illustrated the choke hold on school funding and how it’s actually costing the taxpayers.

School board members were debating whether to auction or sell for scrap five old maintenance vehicles — trucks and vans. Several board members had high hopes of making a few dollars by advertising and selling the two-decade-old vehicles, while others were resigned to selling the heaps for scrap metal and being done with it. Either way, the difference in cash to be made between the two alternatives on all five vehicles is hardly worth the discussion.

Nevertheless, board members were intent on demonstrating that every taxpayer dollar is worthy of reverent consideration, so the auction sale alternative won out — at least for the moment. Members agreed that if they are unable to get $500 for each vehicle, they plan to sell them to the nearest junkyard for scrap.

This feeble attempt at saving a few dollars contrasts sharply with the expenses the school system has already incurred by holding on to these heaps from yesteryear.

It doesn’t take a finance officer or automotive engineer to estimate the cost of maintaining high-mileage vehicles. Anyone who has owned a vehicle more than 10 years old knows how the costs for replacement parts and fixes add up. Hence, whatever dollars the board makes off the old vehicles, it won’t cover the loss they’ve already taken for not replacing the vehicles on a schedule that would have provided a reasonable trade-in return, fewer maintenance costs and a more reliable vehicle.

Except for three vehicles the school system got from the county in 2009, the average age of the system’s 22-vehicle fleet of maintenance vehicles is 21 years.

Granted, the school system and its maintenance department deserve credit for keeping the fleet operating — minus the five that will go to auction. It’s apparent that the schools have been taxpayer-conscious, but only in a penny-wise way.

What’s also apparent is that the schools have not replaced vehicles on a regular and cost-efficient basis. Three-quarters of the schools’ fleet are aging out at the same time, adding even more to the expense of maintaining them and more still to replace so many in the coming years.

Last week, the board did agree to spend $20,000 on a truck after failing to find a “good” used one for the ridiculous price of $8,000. We applaud the board for taking that step — which will be financed by cutting something else in the schools budget.

But it’s that alternative, unfortunately, that accounts for why the schools are holding on to vehicles for so long.

Funds allocated by the county that could have financed newer vehicles often fund some other education need — things that didn’t get funded for the classroom, or a maintenance project that affects instruction or student activity.

School officials have to chose where to spend available dollars, and what’s been happening is that student and instructional needs have taken priority over maintenance trucks and vans.

That’s led to the current glut of trucks needing to be replaced.

Here’s where the Pasquotank County Board of Commissioners can help in the long term.

Because financing for capital projects such as school buildings and vehicles are a county responsibility, Pasquotank needs — if it does not already have one — a vehicle-replacement schedule that includes a funding mechanism to finance new units. And because school system vehicles are bought with county funds, it follows that those vehicles also should be included under a replacement schedule. There are federal replacement guidelines and other studies that are available to help local governments implement such policies.

In nearby Greenville, for instance, a vehicle replacement fund is part of the city’s Financial Policy Guidelines. The policy requires vehicles to be regularly assessed for mechanical integrity, conditioning and value. Greenville budgets funding set aside each year to replace vehicles that are outdated or financially inefficient to maintain, based on the city’s guidelines.

Pasquotank County may or may not have such a replacement policy. But it seems like a good idea to have one and to include the school’s fleet. The policy would benefit the county, the schools and the taxpayers.