We've learned that what makes a good sound byte: "Let's go through the budget line item by line item!" doesn't make strategic, long-term changes or systematic improvements. Promoting rhetoric about Doomsday forecasts doesn't paint an accurate picture and doesn't develop trust among Board members necessary for the hard work ahead.
Because it's election season, I've heard some rhetoric during the past couple of weeks about how the District's spending is "out of control" and am here to tell you that it's very much in control, less than last year's spending and well-managed as we tackle future challenges such as PSERS and the renovation project. We've also improved budget communication this year, sending information to homes and to employees and provided better information on the District website.
Am I to understand that we will no longer see forecasts - Doomsday or otherwise? Have they gone down the same path as the Audit and Finance Committee? Does improving budget communication this year translate into showing no budget at all? And how is this about developing trust among Board members? Is this another case of the new and improved transparent Board??
10 comments:
Interesting perspective by the board president... "Promoting rhetoric about Doomsday forecasts doesn't paint an accurate picture and doesn't develop trust among Board members necessary for the hard work ahead. "
So I guess in her mind financing rhetoric about 'Rosy' forecast in a taxpayer funded FAQ mailing does PAINT AN ACCURATE PICTURE and DEVELOPS TRUST among board members [what about residents Jo- your constituents!] necessary for the hard work ahead.
And submitting a letter to The Almanac undermining the credentials and professionalism of a Mt. Lebanon structural engineer VOLUNTEERING his knowledge and experience on the HS project "makes an 'OK' sound byte, I guess.
In my opinion if the board spent a lot less time spinning information and creating PR campaigns the community would be a lot better off.
Dick Saunders
Mr. Franklin, I'm submitting a comment here because it pertains to the comment made by SB President Jo Posti, re: "Doomsday forecast, accurate pictures etc."
You wrote back in January 2010 on Bloglebo...
"Lastly, while Mr. Fraasch’s opinions are certainly contrary to the majority of the Board, I’m not convinced that they aren’t shared by a majority of the residents in our community. School Board members don’t take an oath to represent the School Board. They take an oath to represent the residents of Mt. Lebanon. I think we would all agree that a referendum on a $113 million price tag for the high school would fail miserably. So, in reality, aren’t his concerns and opinions more in line with those of his constituents or at least a large percentage of them? And for that he should be censured?
I’m left to conclude that those who would censure or seek the removal of Mr. Fraasch are doing so simply because they disagree with him. I can think of no other reason. Many of you will remember that following Dr. Sable’s termination there was a cry for increased transparency on the Board. “No more hiding the ball,” we cried. “We’re entitled to know,” we shouted. The School Board campaigns that followed even focused on renewed openness and an increase in candid communication with the taxpayers. After all, this is the Great State of Mt. Lebanon! For heaven’s sake, we’re certainly educated and intelligent enough to hear the good AND the bad and decide for ourselves, right?
The irony of the current situation is not lost on me... how about you? I could go on and on regarding the representative form of government, free speech, the emperor wearing no clothes, totalitarianism and a bunch of other obvious things, but instead I’ll close by encouraging those Board members who have received such requests to do the right thing. Regardless of whether you agree with Mr. Fraasch or not, please respond to those residents and explain to them that here in Mt. Lebanon we ARE prepared to accept the good with the bad. Please let them know that you appreciate that others in the community (including other elected officials) may disagree with you, but we don’t need to bury their opinions, silence their voices, or run them out of office... or out of town. After all, the next elected official advocating an unpopular or difficult position might just be you."
Mr. Franklin, this was an excellent commentary [see we're not as far a part as you may think] on public participation in the district's operations. I believe it also parallels Mr. Saunder's comment here.
I for one, if we can get past some of the nonsense that goes on in these blogs, would like to hear your thoughts. Your not a monster or an idiot. And I know you've never been a proponent of the $113 million project. I'd really like to hear your thoughts on the project #1, and #2 how we remain civil with each other?
- Giffen Good
Giffen Good, I am not sure you will be hearing from Mr. Franklin. He is focused on bigger issues concerning Ed Kubit and conflicts of interest. I did not publish another of his comments this morning. As the Real Lebo girls would say, he's been snipped. Ouch!
I did notice that the final budget has been posted on the District website.
http://www.mtlsd.org/district/budget/201112finalbudget.asp
If Elaine elects to post this, I don't think my thoughts on the high school project have changed much.
* I think $113 is too much.
* I think the SB has been tasked with an assignment that they are ill-equipped to perform (as our most of us).
* I think they waited too long to seek out the qualified folks in our community that could help with the task. When they did, it was probably too late or too complicated to go backwards.
* I think the SB waited far too long to engage in meaningful discussions with the Commissioners et al regarding the project and created an us vs. them environment.
* I think as a community we probably spent more time worrying about what we want vs. what we need.
* I think in its efforts include everyone in the process, the SB allowed the process to spiral out of control. Too many cooks in the kitchen so to speak.
* I think there is overwhelming support (still) for spending around $90 million on the high school and they should immediately (if not sooner) decide what critical components (that benefit education and the other components of a quality education) can be completed with that amount, recognizing that we can't afford to be all things for all people. And yes, we should even spend some money on athletic facilities if it makes sense.
* I'm not opposed to the occasional closed door meeting with elected officials because I start from the premise that they are trying to do right by everyone and public meetings are not always the best way to solve real problems.
* I don't think anyone is trying to hide anything from us or has any bad intent. Wanting to do something that I don't like or support doesn't make someone a bad politician. That's the system we signed up for. If enough people don't like it, that politician won't be around long enough.
* Not enough people take the time to learn about candidates and their positions.
* Not enough people vote.
* I don't think anyone who is overly critical of our elected officials in Lebo could ever live up to the standard that they have created.
* I would be mad as hell at Celli and others and I would let my constituents know that I'm mad as hell. I would demand better, and fast. I've said as much to at least 2 SB members in the last 2 weeks.
* Make an effort to talk to SB members outside of public meetings or through snipy emails. You'll discover they are normal people with jobs, goals, fears, families, feelings, morals, etc.
* I think I've always been civil on this blog. Some people just don't like to have their opinions or their accusations challenged, so they accuse me of attacking them. I find that odd and a bit hypocrtical. If you don't like to be challenged, don't make the accusation or offer the strong opinion. For example, I don't believe I "attacked" anyone on the conflict of interest thread. I merely challenged the allegation made by Elaine by offering facts and demanding proof to the contrary.
* The first step in creating a civil, productive environment is to be civil and productive oneself. Don't always assume the worst in everyone or you'll get no where. So the district has the occasional typo on the website or doesn't get information out as fast as a few people expect it. Truth is, I hope they have bigger things to do during their days than worry about pleasing the few residents who simply want to play "Gotcha"
* Is the SB, the Commission, or Mt. Lebanon as a whole perfect? No, but I think we get it right more often than we get it wrong.
Dave Franklin
Elaine, I hope he does respond since I'd really like to hear his thoughts/suggestions on the high school project and board communication with their constituents. The verbal duels on specific people get us nowhere
About Doomsday Forecast...
the district's own 5 year outlook created in April 2009 showed these numbers.
2010 - $72,082,752
2011 - $78,974,704
2012 - $82,876,264
2013 - $95,566,784
2014 - $101,005690
2015 - $104,498,524
So the 2011 budget is pretty close to that forecast being over by only $626,000. Partiall explained by the bond refinance. So if their doomsday forecast holds true unfortunately board members have a lot of hard work ahead in 2012, 13, 14 & 2015!
- Giffen Good
Now that wasn't so hard, was it, Dave?
Elaine
Thank you Mr. Franklin, I agree with every point you made (and very well I might add) except for a couple.
$90 million is still a little high on the HS project in my opinion, but considering the wasted spending to this point its probably a necessary goal.
But this one I really have a problem with.
You wrote: "* I think in its efforts include everyone in the process, the SB allowed the process to spiral out of control."
I actually think the school board went out of its way to divide residents into two camps. They created the divide and resentment that exist now and gets in the way of finding a sloution.
For example, they limited the CAC's agenda to review only their project and when they didn't comply simply refused to delve into their suggestions.
Several board members went out of their way to ridicule Dirk Taylor's professionalism and experience.
I know you'll come back at me on this, but allowing their allies to call HS opponents hijackers and calling for censoring of a board member that aired his opinion did nothing to enhance the conversation. Rather than bringing the groups together they went to extraordinary lengths to keep them apart.
As Mr. Saunder's suggest: Ms. Posti's already painting opponents rhetoric as Doomsday forecast and accusing them of undermining trust. Not a good second start.
So Dave, we concur on most points, especially this one: "I would be mad as hell at Celli and others and I would let my constituents know that I'm mad as hell. I would demand better, and fast. I've said as much to at least 2 SB members in the last 2 weeks."
You nailed it on that one.
- Giffen Good
PS: Yes athletics are important too!
You choose your words carefully, Dave. You never said anything about attacking on other threads. Too bad you have higher expectations of me than you do of the elected officials who take your money. And if all you got from this blog or my website is my criticism of spelling errors or not getting things out in a timely matter, that is sad. On 6/14/10, I asked the school board to get rid of Celli. In fact, here are my exact words:
"In this economy, people are losing their homes and it will just get worse with your current plan. Get rid of Celli and get us an architect who has a plan that we can afford and doesn’t make lawyers rich. Start concentrating on our kids’ educations and get your grades up." You can hear it on the podcast.
I haven't taken any oaths to represent you, Dave. I am a resident, just like you. I am a volunteer, just like you. I reserve the right to publish what I want to publish, but if you are civil, you have a good chance of your comments being posted.
Elaine
Giffen Good,
A few questions. According to the Doomsday forecast (Josephine Posti's choice of words), is there anything the board members can do so that we can call the forecast something more positive? Are we behind the curve of other school districts? Why are districts all around us in panic mode and we aren't?
Elaine
Elaine, I really don't have an answer to that.
I always thought Mr. Fraasch's observations and projections derived from the Audit & Finance meetings were a good starting point.
We know how that information was received!
If the 2009 forecast is even remotely accurate I don't know what will happen when the school budget skyrockets to the cost of a new high school EACH AND EVERY year.
And then what happens in 10 years when the less expensive flooring, roofing an building materials in the high school need replaced.
Painting conversations of "things that may be" as doomsday forecast is negligent in my opinion.
Sorry I don't have an answer and well-intentioned as they maybe, believe there are board members that wouldn't listen if I did.
- Giffen Good
Post a Comment