In concert with creating communications materials that explain the strategic vision, the School District must heighten the community’s awareness of the importance of philanthropy, now and in the future. An integrated and multifaceted Awareness and Cultivation Program should be planned and implemented as an integral part of pre- campaign activities and procedures.To initiate a Targeted Awareness-Building and Cultivation Program, I am asking those four individuals to send an email to schoolboard@mtlsd.net explaining that you were in the 7% of the Lebo Citizens poll and would like to donate. Thank you so much for understanding the importance of philanthropy. With your help, it could mean only $18 a month for me. If those 7% do come forward, I just identified four donors for free. That is my donation - that and heightening the community's awareness.
To read more about this in the School Board President Reports, don't go here. Go here. Or here.
9 comments:
Oops, I had to change it already! Another vote dropped the four to 7%, down from 8%.
Elaine
Wait, doesn't the philanthropy initiative need to be voted on by the Board?
What color is the light?
Great news, there are now eight donors. I hope you take the time to email the school board directors and let them know about your generosity. Of course, the philanthropy initiative hasn't been voted on yet, but that shouldn't stop you, should it?
As far as the color of the light, look at the presentation. I see green squares in the footers.
Elaine
I vote to name fundraising cheerleader John Ewing as the fundraising mogul for the $30, whoops no, $15, whoops no, ohh $6 million fundraising campaign for bricks or something for which a compelling and definitive case has not yet or cannot be made.
Donations can be made to or deposited into either the MLFE, MLCE or Jan's slush fund accounts, whatever turns you on, and are tax deductible in some yet to be defined cases, and proceeds will be spent long after our kids have matriculated out of the system or have enrolled in a cyber school, or a private school.
John will hopefully donate his salary to the cause, cause he doesn't really seem to need it.
Pursuint Ketchum's "SPECIAL STUDY AND REPORT ON THE FUNDRAISING POTENTIAL OF MT. LEBANON SCHOOL DISTRICT" makes for interesting reading. That said, I have a few observations:
1. This planning study was conducted by Pursuant Ketchum to assess the feasibility of a $15 million capital fundraising campaign on behalf of the Mt. Lebanon School District, and to develop a plan for such a campaign. This should answer the "chicken or egg" question of whether P-K was hired to see if a certain solicitation goal could be met, or whether they were hired to see how much money might be raised.
2. It would have been nice to see the graphs, "Chart of Standards," and other supporting documents referenced in the executive summary.
3. Under "Positive Indicators," P-K lists: "There is adequate wealth in the community to support a campaign of this magnitude." How was this determined? Using the Municipality's 2011 Comprehensive Financial Report (which is more accurate than the District's equivalent), the reported earned income and profits out of which EIT is payed shows our residents earned $1.3 billion in calendar year 2011. Since EIT is not calculated against interest, dividends, or non-taxable sources of income, it is certain that the total income of the residents of Mt. Lebanon is likely much higher. But what portion of reported income is from civil servants? Since taxpayers who are themselves paid by taxes cannot, by definition, be net producers, this is a serious consideration.
4. Under "Positive Indicators," P-K lists: "There is a strong feeling that the local economy can support the proposed campaign." See point #3 above. Again, I would like to know how this "strong feeling" was determined.
5. Under "Challenges," P-K lists "Many of those who expressed support for the project and who praised the school district, indicated they are not prepared to provide significant financial support to this campaign relative to the Chart of Standards." This seems to contradict the two points listed above. It was my understanding, from listening to the P-K podcast and reading the executive summary, that "There is adequate wealth in the community to support a campaign of this magnitude." Is P-K saying that their 27 person sample is not indicative of the "adequate wealth" in this community? One may recall Mr. Remely questioning the size of the sample, and P-K responding that both the size and those comprising it was adequate, and the opinions of those 27 people represent the bulk of the community. Also, in the study up to this point the phrase "of this magnitude" is referring to $15 million. That is about to change.
6. Under "Recommendations," P-K lists: "1. Proceed with Campaign Planning and Set a Goal of $6 Million for a combined Capital and Endowment Campaign
While a $15 million campaign seems to be beyond the reach of the Mt. Lebanon School District at this time, a major philanthropic initiative for both capital and endowment will be well received by a segment of the donor population, and a goal of $6 million is recommended as challenging but attainable." This statement leaves one confused. If $15 million is "out of reach of the Mt. Lebanon School District at this time," why go to all the trouble of writing that "There is adequate wealth in the community to support a campaign of this magnitude?"
Finally, with respect to Elaine's current poll: Perhaps the people who are checking off the "How much do you need?" box are the ones identified by the 27 people sampled by P-K as being able to ante up!
One correction Mr. Gideon.
PK admitted that the sample was supposed to be of people who would likely support the high school project and who would likely give.
If was a representative sample of the people that they were told might be willing to give. They purposely did not interview people who were either poor or were opposed to the project.
That would have defeated their purpose which was to gauge the willingness of those who are sympathetic to the board and the high school project to give monies above and beyond their tax bills.
Due to their reduction of the goal (from a $30 million capital campaign to a $3 million capital campaign to last five years) one might conclude that even those who are sympathetic to the school board and the high school project wish not to have their names associated with such support.
So if the people who opposed the project are still opposed and the people who were "suggested" by the board as possible donors are unwilling to donate (outside a single person promising a $50,000 donation) then can we now counter Kubit's claim that the community is evenly divided?
How much more evidence do we need to support the conclusion that this project was supported by a vocal, connected, and elected minority?
Elections matter.
Mine of 2:30 PM contained a little tongue in cheek concerning the fabled "27." That said, you have to hand it to P-K; they have a real grasp of "public relations." They took disappointing data and sold it as a win for the District.
This whole thing reminds me of what my favorite story teller, James Burke of the BBC's "Connections" fame, said about scientific discoveries, which I shall paraphrase: "Scientists know what it is they want to discover, so they build instruments to find that thing; and when those instruments find it, they announce that they have made a significant discovery!" Unfortunately, sometimes those "discoveries" don't live up to expectations. I think that's what we have here.
Come on, Folks. Three hours left to vote. We need one more vote and then we will have John Ewing and the entire School Board voting yes. (10 votes in total.)
RG, check out my latest post, if you want to see graphs from PK.
Elaine
Post a Comment