This is also on Monday's agenda.
Feasibility Study: RESOLVED, That the Board approves entering into a contract with Pursuant Ketchum for a Campaign Planning and Preparation Study to determine the feasibility of success of a capital fundraising campaign for our high school renovation project at their quoted price of $41,000 plus travel costs.
I will do that study for $40,000 and no travel costs, members of the school board. Are you freakin' kidding? How many people have been saying this for years - FOR FREE? What a waste of money.
Capital fundraising to pay for the reonvation??? What about the bargain price of $18/month?
ReplyDeleteI'm missing something here.
This district can find more ways to burn through cash. Remember DeJong, at a cost of $100,000 tasked with finding out what taxpayers wanted to spend on the high school project?
ReplyDeleteConsensus and findings from those DeJong sessions. Four options for the high school project. Minimum $20,000,000, maximum $150,000,000. Majority of attending resident participants wished for a $60 to $80 million dollar project.
We all know how much influence that had with the outcome.
Now we need to spend $41,000 to study THE FEASIBILITY OF SUCCESS of a capital fundraising campaign. Mind you, not an actual campaign, just a study of whether one would succeed... have the completely lost their minds?
I predict, the study helped most likely by the contracted $15,000 strategic plan facilitator, will find the feasibility of success very, very high.
To which the board will promptly engage some PR firm to start a campaign at a cost of $100,000 or 15% of the gross revenue generated.
Can anyone tell me what the administrators do in this district besides look for ways to spend money... And have lunch with the students?
Dick Bachman
I would be willing to give James Fraasch $15,000 and John Ewing $15,000 out of my $40,000 fee since I remember them talking about this on more than one occasion. In fact, I seem to remember a rather long debate at a policy committee meeting between John Ewing and Mary Birks/Ed Kubit talking about fundraising.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Well, well - $41,000 to study "..the feasibility of success.."! Why spend $41K if you think that there is even the slightest possibility that the answer to the "feasibility of success" question will be no? - if that's the case they shouldn't be doing capital fundraising in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI have no philosophical objection to the MLSD seeking money on a voluntary basis, but why not work up some ideas in-house and skip the study? If that's too hard, ask a few high school kids to help - I'll be they would be great at it. Or assemble a panel of residents, students, business people, local media folks, etc. Maybe start by putting a "Donate Now" PayPal button on the school board web site. Perhaps they could invite some of their pene-rich supporters over for wine and cheese and a hefty donation. Mrs. Posti could sing "The Impossible Dream" for them. I have lots of other ideas, and I'll bet others in the community do too.
See! - it isn't all that hard, and I didn't charge anything!
Look how much was raised for Relay for Life!
ReplyDeleteElaine
Ah yes Richard, with the incredible concentration of advertising, PR, marketing people in the community a sensible, responsible person would think to ask if they might be willing to put their vast knowledge and experienced heads together and formulate a campaign, before spending money they didn't have.
ReplyDeleteNo, the board's knee jerk reaction is... "Let's throw taxpayer dollars at the problem and see if that'll work."
Andy Bradford
Thank you for the offer, Elaine, but I must decline. The drawings and cost estimation should have been done and the capital campaign should have started before the building contracts were awarded. When the money was raised, then let the contracts should be let. Now the incentive to give is gone.
ReplyDeleteI have no doubt a professional fundraising organization could raise the funds before contracts were let but I have low confidence that much money will be raised now because the taxes have been estimated and there is no urgency to give money to a project that is a done deal - not even $18 per month.
Who will want to contribute to an organization that has a $900,000 grievance from a school that hired 19 permanent substitutes because they were "available" instead of hiring the most qualified applicants?
As far as I am concerned the District can save 44 cents by not soliciting a contribution from me until they correct their fund raising practices and their hiring practices. This grievance has killed my enthusiasm for our schools because it proves to me the education complex in ML is run for the benefit of selfish self-serving adults instead of our children.
Besides, if we were going to fund raise why did we waste over $5-Million by issuing bonds two years before we let the building contracts. In fact if we are going to fund raise why not raise the full amount before you build anything and not pay any interest. The answer to that lies with substandard Administrators who are content to raise taxes instead of getting off their duff and doing real fund raising.
Therefore, I will continue to support my own high school and forget about the duds in Lebo.
John
"The horse is already out of the barn !"...."Ready Fire, Aim !" are just two old but approriate sayings for this idea.
ReplyDeleteWonder if they will apply for a PlanCon waiver of max cost limits by permitting funds /donations raised and expended to NOT be counted towards the cost of the project....you all must recall that the PlanCon submissions on project funding was to be by bonds only....I'm sure a mere phone call would result in an immediate waiver approval. Sorta in a category of *off-budget funding* ?
Learn from history ? Nah ! They don't seem to recall a similar effort by the Muni for the Public Safety Center almost 10 years ago...a few local folks asked to be members of the fundraising committee told the organizers that the general taxpaying public would not contribute to a taxing body for a project that would also require added taxation for construction and operation. The committee went ahead anyway, made grand goals and projections, write-ups in the magazine, lots of breast-beating, and fell flat on their faces....yeah, a few poor souls did contribute and their names are posted in the main entranceway....they did receive a State grant at the end of the project for $250,000...but it was a fundraising failure for the $9.5 million project. They also quickly found that some people who were willing to contribute would not do so because the the Muni was not an IRS registered charitable, non-profit entity [i.e. a 501(c)(3)] eligible for donation tax deductability...so the fundraising committee had to very quietly utilize the Lebo Volunteer Fireman's 501(c)(3)status for such prospective doners.
Maybe the District can use the PTA'a 501(c)(3) status...if it has not been removed for prohibited political campaign violations...or the Lebo Endowment as vehicles for donations ?
I'm with John...save $0.44 and don't send me a solicitation letter. But by all means , hit up all the youth sports folks who have have been promising but not delivering funding support...maybe they just need "the ask" to support a District TBD "case", in fundraising lingo.
Bill Lewis
From Bloglebo--
ReplyDeleteThursday, January 25, 2007
Suburban Fans Lack Imagination posted by Mike Madison at 1:49 PM /
Today's P-G South Neighborhoods section features a story on behavior by student fans of men's basketball in the South suburbs, obviously inspired by the recent misbehavior at the Mt. Lebanon v. Upper St. Clair game.
There are some interesting and serious issues lurking in the background here. Unfortunately, the story didn't give them enough prominence. Instead, I came away dazzled by the lack of imagination demonstrated by both Lebo and St. Clair fans:
Student chants range from clever jokes about their opponents' neighborhoods and incomes to more targeted and hurtful taunts about how a player looks.
At a recent Mt. Lebanon-Upper St. Clair game, for example, USC fans chanted: "We have buses."
Mt. Lebanon Blue Devils fans retorted: "We have sidewalks."
Fans of Upper St. Clair are known for waving dollar bills at players and fans from districts that are perceived as less affluent and shouting: "That's all right. That's OK. You're going to work for us someday."
Now the Lebo students will be able to look their USC rivals straight in the eye, take their dollars and say thanks.
Isn't it amazing, affluent Mt. Lebanon, the community that had to borrow funds to pave streets, is discussing building $3.5 million soccer fields is going to stoop to waving tin cups for donations for their extravagant Taj Mahal high school.
How embarrassing, that at one end of the state we have a school district in which the students from poor neighborhoods are lucky to graduate literate, with teachers working for no pay, pleading for help.
While here, cake eating Lebonites are figuring out how to compete for money from the same pot.
What an embarrassment.
Dick Bachman
You're so right Mr. Bachman.
ReplyDeleteWhat an economics lesson for our kids.
Spend like there is no tomorrow.
When you run out of money borrow it.
When you've maxed out your credit cards.
Cry to someone to bail you out.
Oh we're bringing them up right.
Andy Bradford
Remember the Saturday Night Live skit I sent in to Blog-Lebo that my son showed me? It is the one with Steve Martin, Amy Poehler, and Chris Parnell and the one page book, "Don't Buy Stuff You Can't Afford." That economic lesson went right over the board's head.
ReplyDeleteElaine
BTW, I'm sure the $41,000+, in addition to all future considersble fundraising expenses that will be incurred if this scheme goes forward, will be added to and included in the HS project cost...unless of course PlanCon has a form with a check-off box for an automatic waiver approval.
ReplyDeleteThe District needs to develop what is termed a "case" for fundraising to both justify and convince prospective doners to give...let them connect and identify with some aspect of the project. Maybe
Pursuant Ketchum should ask members of the CAC if they would be willing to contribute to the cost of the demolition of building C ? You know, things like that. I know someone who would finance the cost of the new flagpole if he had the right to place it where he thought it to be the most appropriate....on the site.
There are a host of possibilities in naming rights. Local lawyers could cover the cost of the legal & bond counsel fees. Local restaurants could cover the cost of the $900,000 in new HS kitchen equipment. Teachers could cover the cost of their new & renovated parking spaces in the South Lot. The Super and his crew could donate towards the cost for their private parking space construction in the new North Lot...and the Super for his new private WC. Ordinary taxpayers could donate for the permeable pavers and have their names engraved...the pavers may have short useful life spans, but that opens up opportunities for repeat & continued giving !
There could be recognition plaques galore throughout the complex acknowledging the generosity of the public....and they could serve as way-finding guides for directions instead of street signs or building/room addresses, in keeping with a long standing Pittsburgh tradition.
It will be interesting to see how this turns out...and how independent, objective and unbiased Pursuant Ketchum turns out to be....the mere wording in the title "Campaign Planning and Preparation Study" sounds like the District has already decided to proceed and are expecting the consultant to *validate* the "feasibility" of it.
Bill Lewis
This message is for James Cannon, Sr.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather be a tin-hatted crank than a tin-cupped beggar.
Dick Bachman
Here's my prediction. The feasibility study on whether to do the capital fundraising campaign will cost more than the actual money raised by said campaign!
ReplyDeleteAlbert Brennaman
Bill, I think it is wonderful how the muni received a grant of $250,000 for the Public Safety Building. I would consider it a wash now since Steve Feller ok'ed the $250,000 repair bill to cover the poor workmanship from 2003 by the same general contractor that the District chose for the high school project.
ReplyDeleteAlso, your fundraising ideas along with Richard Gideon's are a great start. Just where to place that flagpole [on site] would attract many residents. Also, if we have a fundraiser for Dr. Tim's private bathroom, it would be justifiable to use the crapper for the donation box.
Elaine
Here's a suggestion since the district has discussed various fees for extracurricular activities and student parking.
ReplyDeleteLet's make that private crapper coin operated.
Dick Bachman
This school board has gone beyond what I thought was simple fraud and decpetion straight into sheer incompetence and, frankly, embarrassment. They have now jumped the shark.
ReplyDeleteJust so I'm clear (and someone please tell me where I've missed): In ramming this project through to completion, the board touted support that never existed and ignored opposition that did; ignored the input and advice of actual experts choosing instead to only apply 'facts' that fit their conclusion; presented a plan that demanded top shelf everything but have scaled it back to the same scope as pretty much any other school with the exception of a much larger price tag for the sole purpose of avodiing a vote despite their constant admonition that a majority of the community is behind them; were told repeatedly the project was unaffordable yet chose to proceed anyway without any real idea of how to pay for it; and they are now exploring the option of asking for voluntary contributions to help fund this?? It's too bad mental health evaluations aren't one of the criteria for being on the school board or else none of those individuals would be there. This is like a bad comedy except it's now affecting everyone in the community. Golly, just like us cranks said it would, huh? Man, we were waaaaaaaaayyyyy off...yeah, in fact, looks like things are actually worse than we predicted.
Here's an idea--why not charge students tuition and fund the school that way? Maybe you can budget based on those mysterious enrollment projections from the state. You know, the numbers that went through 2020. Sweet mother of pearl, this whole thing is beyond insane. I can't believe the media isn't all over this. It's gold.
James Cannon Jr. (crank)-
ReplyDeleteThe word of the year for 2010 was fear monger.
In 2011, we were disingenuous.
Now that it is 2012, we're cranks.
The media isn't all over this because of the stronghold that Jo, Tim,Cissy, the junior and senior key communicators have over the media. Now Tim is working on our religious leaders, as mentioned in his blog. I can just imagine how that coffee went. "We feel your pain with your storm water fees. Let's work together and do it for the children. BTW, do any of you need your church parking lots paved in the next four or so years? We can work something out."
Elaine
Let me get this straight---the high school project was not put to a referendum vote of the taxpayers (as it should have been), but now the school board wants to see if those same people would contribute to a fundraising campaign?
ReplyDeleteYOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING!
We're waiting for property reassessments, millage rate hikes are looming on the horizon and now the school board wants MORE?
Keep it up, school board, and you're going to have a taxpayers' revolt on your hands.
Maddie Miller
I sense another poll, Elaine. Counting my... save .44 on not mailing me a solicitation - and your FREE Feasibilty of a Successful Capital Fundingraising Study indicates so far the campaign will be a bust.
ReplyDeleteSo, lets hear it Mt. Lebanon, tell the board not to waste $41,000 of your money on a survey that doesn't help the kids.
Andy Bradford
Sorry Elaine, just realize I stomped on your $40,000 bid.to do the feasibility of a successful fundraising campaign study. But, if the taxpayers do all the work by just posting a message to the board here, would you do it for free?
ReplyDeleteCome to think of it, doesn't the board have to put anything over $10,000 out for competitive bids?
Seems your $40,000 offer best Pursuant Ketchum by $1,000.
Andy Bradford
I just added the poll, Andy. It was difficult for me to keep it G rated. The board will go ahead and waste the money. They have done everything they've wanted all along. At least this "study" doesn't cost a cent.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Wait... you mean this is going to cost more than "$18/month * (or less)?"
ReplyDeleteI'm shocked. Absolutely shocked.
You know, they still have that silliness up on their website. I thought they would have scrubbed it out of there by now.
Typically, there are nine votes supporting the board's actions. (Gee, who could they be?) There are usually twelve or fourteen votes in total in favor of the board. Unfortunately, the poll will still be open after the board votes this through. So vote early and board members, vote often.
ReplyDeleteElaine
OK teachers, those of you that kept quiet during the HS planning and budget discussions.
ReplyDeleteGo to the blackboard and write 100 times- big raises and fringe benefits + an expensive construction project during a recession = some of my fellow teachers will be losing their jobs.
Dick Bachman
Isn't this contract about the same as a starting salary for teachers? So in one breath, the directors talk about reducing staff, and in another, they have no problem entering this contract. I wonder if Pursuant Ketchum will recommend going after that $8 million promise that was found through a RTK for the Master Design Team minutes.
ReplyDeleteI am still waiting for answers to my RTKs that I filed last month.
Elaine