At the April 7, 2015 School Board meeting, the School Board discussed the 2015-2016 Proposed Final Budget. School Board President Larry Lebowitz asked Board members to share their thoughts on the parameters for the millage rate and use of fund balance for Dr. Steinhauer to use to develop the Proposed Final Budget. During the Board Meeting, the consensus of the Board was to direct Dr. Steinhauer and the administration to develop a budget with a .42 mill increase (or less, if possible) to cover the Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System (PSERS) rate increase, use $750,000 of the fund balance, and make approximately $582,000 in budget reductions to balance the budget. A .42 mill increase is $42 a year on a home assessed at $100,000.
The challenge in developing this year’s budget is to maintain the school district’s excellent programs and keep budget reductions as far from the classroom as possible. As was discussed at previous School Board meetings, the limitation on the millage rate due to the Act 1 of 2006 Index is 1.9 % or .44 mills, without the use of exceptions. In addition, the District, along with all other districts across the state, is faced with a large increase in the mandated contributions to PSERS. The District’s PSERS rate will increase from 21.40% to 25.84% which is a 21% increase. This rate increase alone translates into a .42 mill increase.
An added challenge in developing the budget is that the state has not passed its budget and won’t have one finalized by the time the District's budget must be approved in May, so we will not know what the District's funding from the state will be until that time.
The Board will vote on the Proposed Final Budget at the April 13 School Board meeting at 7:30 p.m.in the LGI Room D205 in the high school.
The Almanac reports:
Superintendent Dr. Timothy Steinhauer explained that cost savings would be realized primarily by not replacing retiring staff. He said it may also be possible to pay for certain capital items included in the operating budget, such as new textbooks and computers, from the district’s capital projects fund.
Update April 10, 2015 6:17 PM Mt. Lebanon school board agrees on maximum tax increase
Don't be surprised if you start seeing a lot more "For Sale" signs popping up in Mt. Lebanon.
ReplyDeleteNick M.
ReplyDelete"He (Dr. Steinhauer) said it may also be possible to pay for certain capital items included in the operating budget, such as new textbooks and computers, from the district’s capital projects fund".
The Broken Window Theory tells us if we address the “little” infractions, there is a good chance the “big” problems will occur with much less frequency.
Capital project funds to buy text books. Would you like some Caribou coffee with your humble pie, Dr. Superintendent?
ReplyDelete"Finance director Jan Klein advised that adopting such a strategy could eventually put the district in a precarious financial position, damaging its bond rating and increasing borrowing costs."
ReplyDeleteAs always our award-winning finance director is always good for a laugh. Never mind that way back when, then School Board Director Fraasch warned her in an Audit & Finance meeting that the Taj Mahal high school project would put us exactly in the position we are today.
Klein's response to him was there are always exemptions and exclusions that allows us to exceed the Act 1 limits on raising taxes.
It's easy to balance the books, Jan, when you have a bottom well to pull tax money from.
Sorry to break the news but the well's going dry.
Correction @8:03
ReplyDeletebottomless well
As a cost-saving measure, let's send the rifle team out into the wilds of Mt. Lebanon to forage for game to put on the high school cafeteria tables!
ReplyDeleteHey, they don't have a shooting range to practice in any more.
It's a joke folks, sadly one we should've seen coming.
When you read the administration blaming rising cost on PSERS, think about what retirement payments are based on.
ReplyDeleteThe book below explains a lot on why school taxes are rising exponentially.
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/government-against-itself-9780199990740?cc=us〈=en
"DiSalvo, a third generation union member, sees the value in private sector unions. But in public sector, unions do not face a genuine adversary at the bargaining table. Moreover, the public sector can't go out of business no matter how much union members manage to squeeze out of it. Union members have no incentive to settle for less, and the costs get passed along to the taxpayer. States and municipalities strain under the weight of their pension obligations, and the chasm between well-compensated public sector employees and their beleaguered private sector counterparts widens. Where private sector unions can provide a necessary counterweight to the power of capital, public employee unionism is basically the government bargaining with itself; it's no wonder they almost always win. The left is largely in thrall to the unions, both ideologically and financially; the right would simply take a hatchet to the state itself, eliminating important and valuable government services. Neither side offers a realistic vision of well-run government that spends tax dollars wisely and serves the public well. Moving beyond stale and unproductive partisan divisions, DiSalvo argues that we can build a better, more responsive government that is accountable to taxpayers. But we cannot do it until we challenge the dominance of public sector unions in government."
This two-faced hypocrite kills me every time he says something like this:
ReplyDeleteDan Remely preferred to keep the tax increase under .42 mills, reducing it to .25 mills if possible.
“This should be the year of the taxpayer,” Remely said
Dan, EVERY YEAR should be the year of the taxpayer. I think you have forced enough tax increases on the taxpayers through your mismanagement of the $75 million, er, $90 million, um, I mean, $95 million, wait, $113 maximum, well maybe now $120 MILLION boondoggle of a high school project.
Stop saying you care about the taxpayer. If you did, you would have stood with previous directors that opposed instead of supported the very boondoggle you have led every step of the way.
Using Capital Project Funds to buy books?
ReplyDeleteIn the 100 year history of the school district when did it have to resort to such tactics as raiding Capital Project Funds, rattling donation cups, charging participation fees, etc., etc.?
Could it be that public education in Mt. Lebanon has lost sight of its primary function?
Should districts be making pension promises it has no hope of keeping?
Having Capital Fund Raising and PR Directors making salaries far above what teachers make? Is the district so inept at educating kids that they need a spinmiester to toot their own horn? Or are they so full of themselves that they need to see their names in print all the time.
Want to make cuts far away from the classroom, Dr. Steinhauer, cut the Capital Campaign Chair position - $100,000 right there - and start writing your own PR releases (you're an educated man) - another $100,000 saved - instead of taking pizza lunches with the kids.
Who knows himself a braggart, let him fear this, for it will come to pass that every braggart shall be found an ass.
ReplyDeleteWILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, All's Well That Ends Well
That would make a great post-it note for somebody's wall.
Yep, Remely's long on spiel and short on performing, but we keep elect him don't we!
ReplyDeleteRather than setting the increase at ".42 - less if possible" (don't you love that phrase) the board draws a line in the sand and tells the administration '.25 is all you're getting and if you don't deliver you can find work elsewhere!'
12:19 pm I agree wholeheartedly with your ideas for cuts. With the number of students in Mt Lebanon, I cannot see how a pr person can be justified. Likewise, why should a non-educator campaign fundraiser be employed by the district.
ReplyDeleteThe superintendent uses the PR person to respond to challenging inquiries when he doesn't want to answer the question himself. Even with the deflection, she doesn't get it right.
How about 3 YEARS OF THE TAXPAYERS:
ReplyDeleteWe should demand a millage freeze for three years, and in that time, force a re-alignment of priorities that will lead to a more SUSTAINABLE AND MORE GREAT school system.
- Jason M.
Almost anyone can write press releases, so why do we need two PIOs... one at the school district and one at the municipality?
ReplyDeleteIf the municipal one has time to publish residents pesto sauce recipes and the like, they certainly have the free time to put out school district information.
So there's a place to start cutting that doesn't harm the kids education.
1:14, thanks for agreeing, but the number of students has no bearing on the need for a PR director.
ReplyDeleteIt would be interesting to see exactly when the district first created a PIO position. Somehow for the better part of a century everyone knew what a great district without the need of a PR person.
The school district has English, Math, Science and Industrial/Fine Arts educators, many with Masters or better and every time something comes up... we need a consultant, a hired gun to figure something out for them.
ReplyDeleteThese are the people that are training our kids for life? Really?
When do you read about any school district restructuring when faced with budget shortfalls?
ReplyDeletehttp://americasmarkets.usatoday.com/2014/08/01/33-big-u-s-companies-still-cutting-jobs/
1:40 pm I was just anticipating what I would think the push-back is from the school district. I can see Steinhauer saying that with the complex tasks he has on his desk due to XYZ, he needs an assistant to communicate with the public. However, I know of superintendents serving much larger, more complex districts with out a pr assistant.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the district and muni could both cut their PR staff. If Mt Lebanon weren't so obsessed with image, they wouldn't need go between staffers to spin things.
Steinhauer's task are so complex he has time to have pizza lunches with 10 kids or so!
ReplyDeleteWith a $2.4 million budget hole maybe it's time to take lunch at his desk. Now he doesn't even have to run out for a latte.
Deja Vu!
ReplyDelete"Mt. Lebanon school board eyes property tax increase"
March 20, 2014 12:00 AM
"Mt. Lebanon School District residents could face a property tax increase of about 0.55 mills for 2014-15.
School board members discussed potential ways to close a $2.6 million gap to balance next fiscal year’s budget Monday, using a combination of more tax revenue, reduced expenditures and some of the district’s surplus money. Not under consideration is closing schools."
"Mt. Lebanon eyes options to limit millage increase"
By Matthew Santoni
Wednesday, April 3, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
"The Mt. Lebanon School Board is weighing student activity fees and potential concessions from unionized employees as a means to reduce a 0.55-mill tax increase in next year's budget.
District staff are working on an $84.47 million preliminary budget that would be balanced with the tax money and about $515,000 from cuts in non-instructional areas. At a special meeting on Tuesday, board members listed about 20 potential cuts or sources of money to gauge support.
“We'll continue to work on bringing the millage increase down,” said Superintendant Timothy Steinhauer. “By the time we hit (final budget discussions in) May, it's likely you'll see reductions in that.”
The board approved doubling the $50 per semester fee for students to park at the high school, and is considering whether to charge a $50 fee for students participating in after-school activities.
The proposed tax increase would bring the school district's tax rate to 27.68 mills, or $2,768 for every $100,000 of a home's assessed value. Neighboring Upper St. Clair and Bethel Park have rates of 25.78 and 25.49 mills, respectively."
KDKA 2012
"35 Local School Districts Permitted To Raise Taxes"
" (KDKA) — Spring time is great for kids on the school playground, but not always good for taxpayers as many school districts look for ways to raise property taxes for the coming 2012-2013 school year.
Under current state law, school districts can only raise taxes by an inflation adjusted amount, usually around 2 percent.
If they go up more than that, they have to get voter approval in a referendum.
But there is a way around that law, and 199 school districts just got approved by the state’s Department of Education to do just that.
Some 35 local districts can raise taxes more than normally allowed including Bethel Park, Franklin Regional, Gateway, Mt. Lebanon, North Allegheny, North Hills, Peters, Seneca Valley, Uniontown and Upper St. Clair."
Jason, you're an educator so I'll ask it again - what should be cut?
ReplyDeleteDave Franklin
Not Jason, but I'd suggest entertaining any ideas to turf Mellon or the Rock Pile would the first thing to be cut Mr. Franklin.
ReplyDeleteCongrats 7:21, you've cut $0.
ReplyDeleteDave Frankli
Dave Franklin:
ReplyDeleteI will make you a deal. You get me the line-item planned spending budget for AY15-16, and I will report back to you within 3 days with cuts of 5% that will that will not hurt the district academically--or really, in any other way. That would be about $4.5M.
Alternatively, get me THIS year's AY14-15 budget -- with line-by-line ACTUAL spending -- and I will find 5% of superfluous niceties.
... This will not be hard. We had to do this in the 90s in the NYC Public Schools, several times recently at Duquesne, and by the way, my family has had to do several times over the past 10 years.
You get leaner, you are forced to really think through priorities, and the next time extra funds come your way, you treat them with more respect.
- Jason M.
Over the years, I have been surprised to see how few projects in mt lebanon schools and muni were funded by available grant money from a wide variety of sources (not state only). I have gone so far as to send links to staff and they have said they were great finds and they will look into them but they didn't. In fact, one such idea was shared when a "grant writer" was on board with the muni.
ReplyDeleteI read widely on education and I feel fairly confident that mt lebanon could spend less by taking on things that they have the funding planned for before initiated -- communities that do so don't have rising taxes and disgruntled residents.
Dave "Frankli" we'll remember you wrote that.
ReplyDeleteMr. Franklin:
ReplyDeleteDo you suffer from "Napoleon Complex"?
Just exactly what is it that makes you think that unlimited spending will make Mt. Lebanon a community that is superior to ALL others?
Your thinking and people that follow your thinking are doing nothing but sending the community farther into debt and destroying it; just to try and "keep up with Jones's".
When I look at the school rankings all I see is a list of excellent schools to choose from in different areas. Are you really naïve enough to think that the differences between first and tenth would have a significant impact on a child's chance of success in the future? I think not. There are many more variables in that equation.
I would like to submit that your position is ego centric and misguided.
If one cannot find areas in any budget to cut then one is not dealing in reality! TO summarily say that there is NO EXCESS in the budget to cut then you are IN DENIAL!
My father taught me humility, prudent spending habits and ignoring what others are doing. I, like him, have been quite successful following that wisdom.
All of the superficial things like 1.2 million dollar turf fields for kids, 100+ million dollar schools (mostly a glorified sports complex)does NOTHING to guarantee the success of child in life. I would even suggest that it adds to the "sense of entitlement".
Mr. Franklin YOU and people like YOU are the scourge of this community and likely downfall of this community.
Well-said, 12:05am. Please run for Commissioner or School Board.
ReplyDelete- Jason M.
12:05, what is my line of thinking? Because I support the turf project, in your mind that must mean that I support the high school project, the budget, the change orders etc. Ask a school board member my opinion on the project from start to finish. Ask them if they ever hear from me about change orders.
ReplyDeleteYou know nothing about me, except my name.
My question for Mr. Margolis was sincere. While I don't support every decision of the SB, I also don't see any value in posting comments that simply say, "Cut, cut, cut!" Cut what? Cut when? Cut who?
Do I think we need foreign language in elementary school? No, but many might. Do I think we need to take a harder line with the teacher's union? Yes. Others may not. Do I think that the high school project in many respects is a sloppy, disjointed puzzle that looks like we tried to do a bunch of things halfway instead of fewer things very well? You bet. Others may disagree.
However, when I ask the question of the vocal blogger all I get is the stale refrain of cut spending on fields, get rid of sports, etc. It seems that Mr. Margolis believes that cutting 5% would be easy and have no detrimental impact on anyone or group of people, large or small. Yet he hasn't even seen the budget. He may be right, but I doubt that a 5% reduction in spending would come without some angst for someone. Some program, some position, some group needs or at least wants that 5% (or a portion of it). Who loses and why? If you have the answers 12:05, let me know. Heck, let us all know.
Dave Franklin
Mr. Franklin, you conveniently ignore the suggestion to do away with the Capital Fund Chair. That is a position that DID NOT exist until two years ago and as far as we know, to date hasn't delivered anywhere expectations.
ReplyDeleteSo there's a budget saving suggestion of $100,000 that we could be discussing.
Then there is the suggestion of consolidating the two PIO positions. The school district is loaded with many talented, well-trained educators in English, Fine Arts, Science, Math and one would think should be able to convey information in a concise, easy to understand manner. The municipal PIO should then be able to put the polish to their press releases.
So there we have another $100,000 savings suggestion you choose to ignore.
But as always you run in, play your little game, make innuendo and attempt to marginalized the cconversation.
You sir, with your holier- than-thou attitude is one reason this community is divided as it is.
Why is it you never answer any of the questions put to you in other recent post? No answers, you don't like the director of the conversation?
I'd suggest Mr. Franklin, rather than telling other people to run for office... you do so. I think it would be enjoyable to see how many votes "Mr. Lebo" would capture.
For starters, cuts should start at the top. Why didn't Timmy and Jan voluntarily freeze their salaries several years ago, as their USC counterparts have done? How can anyone, in good faith, negotiate with the teachers' union, without willing to do the same?
ReplyDeleteWill Timmy be exposed for what he really is when the construction is over? Will people realize that he is not an educator, but a puppet for the school board and finance director?
Didn't Jo Posti say several years ago that they trimmed all the fat and now they were cutting muscle? How many cuts were taken since that time? How many tax increases since that time? Cut the bullshit and make the necessary cuts without the drama.
I read in this month's issue of In Mt. Lebanon, that the Mt. Lebanon Council of Republican Women hosted a "State of Mt. Lebanon" event. Steve Feller and Tim Steinhauer were invited. Here is what was written about the school district:
"Steinhauer emphasized the great challenges and great opportunities for students attending Mt. Lebanon schools where there are 128 new students from all over the world this year. SAT scores were number one in four categories and in the top two across all categories. He spoke of safety efforts being made to teach students how to respond to crisis situations using ALICE: Alert, Lockdown, Investigate, Communicate, Evacuate, and explained the plan. He spoke of Lebo recreation and sports being top tier and said if you are a swimmer, there is no better place to be given the new eight-lane pool. As for the challenges that may arise, it is the last year of the teachers contract."
The only challenge that Timmy sees is the teachers contract.
Elaine
Mr. Franklin, why not chime in on the PIO, Fund Chair suggestions? That's what this blog is about in my opinion. Open conversations, brain storming, finding solutions.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the above suggestion morph into just recommending a pay freeze for these two employees, but no, you Dave have to rush in and play your little people bashing game.
The first two suggestions for budget cuts had nothingto do with sports, Dave. Maybe you should pay closer attention. They are far from the classroom and areas this taxpayer would gladly give up.
The reason Tim sees the teachers contract as a problem is because he hasn't cleaned the house yet.
ReplyDeleteMr. Franklin, you write: "Do I think we need to take a harder line with the teacher's union? Yes"
ReplyDeleteSaints be praised, something we agree on! So how do we get that message across to the board and administration before they act on the teacher contract?
What do we do if they don't listen?
You tell me, Dave, I'm all ears... errr, eyes.
Interesting item in today's Trib- "Consol Energy is blaming the slump in gas prices for an undisclosed number of layoffs in its shale operations, a move that may indicate the company is sour on the near-term prospects for a turnaround in the industry.
ReplyDelete“This workforce realignment is intended to ensure that the company remains strong through this challenging environment, and is best positioned to emerge even stronger when the market turns,” the Cecil-based company said Friday in a statement."
http://triblive.com/mobile/8147291-96/consol-gas-company
So what is Gov. Wolf's big idea to send more money to school districts. Tax shale!
So where do the school administrators and the sleeping taxpayers think companies like Consol are going to get the money to pay those new taxes?
Mr. Franklin:
ReplyDeleteYou state, ".. I doubt that a 5% reduction in spending would come without some angst for someone." I agree! In fact, I'll go so far as to say that a 0% reduction in spending would cause angst for some people. But let us assume, for the sake of argument, that Mr. Margolis gets the figures he needs and identifies 5% worth of cuts that do not impact the basic mission of "public" education here in Mt. Lebanon. In your opinion, would the current school board pay any attention to them?
Richard Gideon
While the Board's claim that the PSERS crisis lays entirely at the state legislature's doorstep historical facts speak otherwise.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.moonarea.net/203/psers-funding-crisis-frequently-asked-questions
"what caused the funding crisis?"
"A variety of factors, including legislative action, stock market volatility and a poor economy led to the system breakdown. This is not a teachers’ union versus taxpayers or school boards issue. Some will have you believe that PSERS is broken because school districts have not been making their fair share of the payments to the system. Despite the rhetoric, school districts have been paying into the system what they are required to pay according to law. While legislation passed in 2001 and 2003 lowered the employer contribution rate, school districts are mandated to make the payments as determined by the PSERS board. Since 60 percent of the PSERS system is funded by investment returns, the stock market crashes after Sept. 11, dot.com bust in 2003 and the down economy the past two years have been the primary factors in the PSERS scenario. Investment earnings are the primary source of funding for PSERS benefits, dwarfing the contributions from both school employers (taxpayers) and its active members. School employee organizations quote employer and employee contributions over the last 12 years, showing they have paid more into the system than employers, which is true. What they fail to cite are the historical contributions from 1955 to 1997 - a 42 year span, when employer contributions were at least double, and from 1974 to 1994 more than double the employee contribution rate. Additionally, there have been several statutes enacted by the state legislature to enhance member benefits over the years. Typically, these bills allowed individual school employees to retire and receive full benefits before the required age. The theory behind these bills was to replace more senior and higher paid employees with newer and lower paid employees, which produces short-term savings but creates additional long-term costs. All of these increased benefits were approved by the legislature for public school employees, without the "approval" of local school boards or taxpayers. The increased benefit makes prior year’s actuarial assumptions meaningless and causes an imbalance in the system’s funding that can only be corrected moving forward. More importantly, once the increase in benefit is given, it cannot be taken away. Consequently, the defined benefit "promise," which employee organizations continually cite, was broken when employee benefits were increased without the approval of the school district employer and the taxpayer."
The above fails to mention that in 2001 or 2002 the number used to calculate employee benefits jumped from its 2% rate to 2.5%.
I don't remember the board, administrators or teachers' union protesting that the impact of the rate hike would cause the crisis we are now in. No it was gimme, gimme, gimme, we're getting ours!
Now that theirs isn't there to get, it's the taxpayers (thru Harrisburg) fault!
Sorry, teachers, while you enjoyed you nice above CPI pay raises and cheap health insurance the private sector has been taking it on the nose.
It's your turn now.
http://wesa.fm/post/makings-pennsylvanias-pension-funding-crisis
ReplyDelete"The Makings of Pennsylvania's Pension Funding Crisis"
"To get a handle on how Pennsylvania’s two public pensions ended up in their current funding crisis, one has to look more than a decade into the past.
A Big Commitment
It started in the spring of 2001. The Clinton years had just ended, the U.S. economy was on a roll, and September 11 was supposed to be just another Tuesday.
At that point, Pennsylvania’s pension funds for public employees were not just healthy – they were robust.
“Our system was about 123 percent fully funded, which means we had 23 percent more than all the liabilities on the books at a certain point in time,” said Jeff Clay, who’s been at the helm of the Public School Employees Retirement System for nearly 10 years.
In May, with the pensions flush with cash, the state Legislature passed Act 9 of 2001. Clay said in short, this bill raised benefits for public employees by about 25 percent in exchange for an increase to employee contributions.
Not only did Act 9 increase future benefits, but also it worked retroactively for then-current employees, instantly giving a major boost to the benefits they’d already earned. The state’s pension investments and the bigger employee contributions were predicted to cover the costs.
But a few months later, something went very wrong.
The First Recession of the 2000s
“We know what happened on September 11 of 2001. What that did was send a shockwave through the financial markets,” said Jay Pagni of the Governor’s Budget Office.
He said the ensuing financial mess led to a steep decline in investment returns for the state’s two pension systems.
Suddenly, just a few months after committing to much larger pension payouts, the state couldn’t rely on its investments to bring in the cash for employees’ retirements. When that happens, the employer — in this case the commonwealth — must make up the difference.
That was a problem for Pennsylvania. Feeling fiscal pressure of its own, the state couldn’t afford to cover the underperforming investments. In 2002 and 2003, the Legislature put constraints on the government’s maximum share of pension funding with Act 38 and Act 40.
Pagni said legislators were hoping to pay less in anticipation of a market turnaround, which did happen to a degree, but it wasn’t enough.
“You’re artificially underfunding the system," Pagni said. "Your market returns aren’t keeping up with expectations, and you’ve increased benefits. You’re creating the perfect storm, if you will, for a pension crisis."
On a line graph, the Public School Employees Retirement System took a sled ride down a pretty steep hill. The PSERS went from 123 percent funded in 2000 to an 81 percent funding level six years later. Its little sister, the State Employees Retirement System, went along for the ride as well."
Dave - I can't hear you refuting these facts. You must have turf ear...
ReplyDeleteDave is probably desperately paging through his thesaurus searching for gutless synonyms.
ReplyDeleteIsn't funny that he puts up a shield, claiming that "you know nothing about me, except my name."
Yet he can dismiss anonymous post as unworthy of consideration just because they are anonymous.
How does he know that comments here aren't from teachers, municipal employees, active residents that talk with officials regularly?
He doesn't because he has no idea.
The teachers have better health care coverage with minimal out of pocket expense than any other group I know of....
ReplyDeleteFrom, health care provider
This article "Ticking Time bomb: Crisis looms in PA's dwindling pension" explains succinctly why we're in the mess we are in with pensions.
ReplyDeleteIt is a pretty good read for board members and taxpayers alike, but as the saying goes- "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink."
http://www.delcotimes.com//general-news/20100228/ticking-time-bomb-crisis-looms-in-pas-dwindling-pension-plans
Here is another stupid thing the board approved. One of the arguments for tearing down the newest building (Building C) was that it contained asbestos. This letter was sent out by the high school principal.
ReplyDeleteFrom: Mt. Lebanon High School
Date: Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 1:00 PM
Subject: High School Renovation Update
To: high school parent
Dear Parent/Guardian:
Please see the attached letter regarding upcoming asbestos abatement work which will occur in the now closed and soon to be demolished old A and old C buildings.
Sincerely,
Brian R. McFeeley
Principal
This is exactly what we were trying to explain when we were being called fear mongers. To tear down Building C, the asbestos must be abated first. Then you have a perfectly good building. But nooooooo. Elaine Cappucci, who is running for school board again btw, said no way. Our school board wanted to be green and go for Leed Certification, which we didn't end up doing and now will be tearing down a perfectly good building. I never did get my question answered about who was getting the scrap.
Elaine
Yes, had we followed the advice of the CAC we probably wouldn't have gone over $100 million, but Cappucci, Kubit and pals knew better.
ReplyDeleteMr. Franklin, still waiting for your ideas concerning this comment you made yesterday. "Do I think we need to take a harder line with the teacher's union? Yes"
ReplyDeleteAgain, what do we do if they don't follow your advice? You were Johnny-on-the-spot criticizing Jason and others on their ideas on cost cutting ideas.
Now you made a good one, but talk is cheap, how do we make the board take a harder line, Dave?
To the elementary teachers I'd say:
ReplyDeleteLadies and gents: The fact that we have created indoor-no talking-video watching-recess is, um, well, evidence we've become too fat and happy. We're docking your pay this year.
Mr. Franklin, you wrote here earlier: "Do I think that the high school project in many respects is a sloppy, disjointed puzzle that looks like we tried to do a bunch of things halfway instead of fewer things very well? You bet."
ReplyDeleteCan I infer from that comment that you now agree with the 4,000 petition signers that tried to warn the board before they started that their plan was "sloppy, disjointed" and half-assed?
Do or don't Dave, the $113+ million boondoggle is almost finished and the people that bought it for us are still running things.
Do we let them create more sloppy, disjointed, halfway projects or do we work together to do things right?
So far, except for your critique of things already in the works your comments here seem to favor going with the status quo.
I'm sorry for singleing you Dave, but you seem to have a lot of influence, sitting on advisory boards and all so I imagine your thoughts carry a lot of weight within the MTL hierarchy.
1:12
ReplyDeleteI am no fan of Dave Franklin on the turf but I will never say that man supported the high school project. Not once. The "original" bloglebo will have a lot of his history on it and he has been steadfast from the beginning on opposition to the boondoggle.
People tend to carry more weight when they have friends on boards/commissions/etc that actually agree with them.
The pro-turf group was quite connected in the same way the pro-kill deer group was much connected. You have seen the questionaires sent out by the sports groups, right? You know about the money and influence Barbara Logan carries in the Democrat committee, right? She friggin hosted Bob Casey at her house when he ran for Senate.
As is the case here, it is almost always easier to be in the "for" camp than in the "against" camp.
Could you prove the deer management killing program was going to be a disaster before it actually was?
Could you prove the high school project would be a disaster before it actually was?
Can you prove the turf is going to be a disaster before it actually is?
Again, it is much easier to promise the dream than to deliver it. People want to be positive, they want hope. When you stand against the tide and preach about the negative outcomes, you risk looking like the guy on the corner with the sign that says, "The world will end tomorrow". Sometimes we need those people to point out the risks and other possible outcomes.
I didn't support any of these things but lost each one. My hope is the commissioners/school board has learned their hard lessons.
See, "hope" is such a terrible thing!
3:51, you are correct when you write that Mr. Franklin did not support the HS project,
ReplyDeleteThe question posed at 1:12 didn't mean to infer that he did support the present plan, but was asking if maybe we should change the way we plan.
The high school is over budget, the pool is over budget, the turf is over budget and the deer cull reaped only 6 deer for an expense of $15,000.
You ask if we can predict things like the turf being a disaster.
No, we can't, but we can reasonably predict somethings. Like the turf is going to cost a lot more than a grass field long term.
Could we predict the deer cull was going to be a dud. Seems some people did just that.
Are you going to deny that truth, 3:51?
I'll be at the front of the pack to say absolutely "yes", most of the folks who spoke against the deer management program knew ahead of time that it would be a dismal failure. My first inklings that it was headed toward utter failure came from watching the discussion sessions and watching how Mr. Benner handled himself as an expert (not to be though) coupled with the fact that he had absolutely no experience whatsoever in using corrals and sharpshooting of deer which was primarily designed for feral hogs. Other factors are too numerous to mention here. You sure as heck didn't need a degree in rocket science to figure that one out.
ReplyDeleteNick M.
I seem to remember a certain school board director predicting we'd be exactly where are now in an audit & finance meeting.
ReplyDeleteSo you can predict outcome if you weigh all the evidence.
Maybe none of this would have ever happened if MtL still had an audit committee. Every time an effort that permits transparency is squashed, you can bet that the outcome will be negative.
ReplyDeleteApril 12, 2015 at 10:09 PM,
ReplyDeleteWe had an Audit reviewed by the Finance Committee (back when we had a Finance Committee).
The auditor gave the board members a copy of the Audit to review at the meeting. He collected all the copies of the Audit from the Finance Committee members and walked them out of the building.
The Audit was not available for RTK requests until the Board voted to file the Audit.
Dr. Margolis,
Ask for a copy of courses offered students just in the High School. Perhaps that list might help you decide what to cut.
Better yet, look at the Case for Support for the Capital Campaign and notice what other districts are cutting is what we are trying to save.
"The reason Evans' fees aren't broken down into simple itemization is a fact of public education: The costs are mostly due to staff, or "personnel," with teacher salaries dependent mostly on the number of years worked. And thanks to prevailing union rules requiring less experienced teachers to be fired first, average salaries tend to go up the more districts cut positions. The Wall Street Journal says that 80% of expenses in many schools are personnel costs. That $65 fee per student, for a typical 450-studentelementary school, works out to be almost $30,000 -- roughly the average pay of a school secretary."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/16/the-rising-cost-of-public-school-fees/
http://www.edchoice.org/Research/Reports/The-School-Staffing-Surge--Decades-of-Employment-Growth-in-Americas-Public-Schools--Part-2.aspx
ReplyDelete"Between Fiscal Year (FY) 1950 to FY 2009, the number of k-12 public school students in the United State increased by 96%, while the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) school employees increased 386 percent. Public schools increased staffing at a rate four times faster than the increase in students over that time period. Of those personnel, teachers' numbers increased 252 percent, while administrators and other non-teaching staff experienced growth of 702 percent, more than seven times the increase in students."
Could this be why the state pension plan is in trouble and driving up school expenditures?
There are some interesting numbers in the above article, I wonder how our district compares.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5672571
ReplyDelete"There Are A Lot More Adults Working In Schools Lately, And Most Of Them Are Not Teachers"
""At a time when budgets are tight and achievement weak, it’s unthinkable not to consider what personnel shifts might strengthen both performance and efficiency," the report says.
And unless more attention is paid to this issue, Richmond hypothesizes, the numbers of non-teaching staff in schools will continue to rise, a trend that may not be sustainable.
"You can't just continually keep increasing the number of personnel you have in schools," he notes."
I'd go a step further and question the number and amount of spending on paid consultants as well!
I know of schools that don't pay "lunch ladies" or "playground staff". Parents actually volunteer for these jobs.
ReplyDeleteExtra staff cut.
Of course, these trained volunteers could only work after the 10 step security procedure employed by the district.
Dave Franklin said: Do I think we need foreign language in elementary school? No.
ReplyDeleteAre you serious? Really? Then should we include all kinds of sports in the regular curriculum?
At the rate ethnic groups are growing, we may need to think about teaching English as a second language.
ReplyDeleteBefore anyone jumps on the above do some research and find out which ethic groups are growing the fastest in this country. That not a slur or insult.
ESL services aren't optional -- they are mandated.
ReplyDelete