Still thinking about voting for Cappucci, Caste, Remely, and Birks?
This makes my blood boil! Through a Right To Know, Pursuant Ketchum invoices for the Capital Campaign totaling $152,506.55.
Watch Timmy pronounce "Pursuant Ketchum."
30 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Why did they feel compelled to hire an out of town consultant?!? The travel costs alone must be nearly twenty thousand dollars. They really flew somebody in from Texas for months? This is an absolute scandal. Fools and their money!
$152.500? Did that help one student with special needs? Reduce any Lincoln Elementary class sizes?
It wasn’t all that many years ago the administration was ready to eliminate a part-time student aid’s position at the high school until the HS students pleaded for them not too. I think the salary cut would’ve saved the district somewhere around $28,000 or so.
Must have been one of those “hard choices” the board talks about.
The board continually proclaims they try to keep cost cutting as far away from the classroom as possible. Apparently they try to do that with spending as well!
Every year Steinhauer presents a budget that cuts deeply at the elementary school levels. He does this to "shock" the board into scrambling to keep key programs and give them cover to raise taxes. Nobody in board leadership was taking a hard look at any numbers until the past year or two, but even recent scrutiny is done with the headwinds presented by Birks, Lebowitz and, behind the scenes pulling strings, Cappucci. The choice in November is stark. And while voting in Riemer, Strotmeyer and Diamond won't be a magic bullet that suddenly fixes our schools, but it will present an end of the status quo.
Oh, please say it ain't so. I am shocked, and that takes a lot after what I have seen living in this area for the past 6 1/2 years.
I know this business pretty well. You get an educational consulting gig, you can't spend money like that. You get an NSF or an NIH grant, or a foundation grant, you can't spend money like that.
$150K+ for a weak and incorrect study. They didn't need to travel for that study. They could have easily done it all on line, and had a much higher "n" in the process ...
... that amount of money would pay the salary + benefits of 2 teachers for a year, or 1 teacher for 2 years. The study was unnecessary, poorly carried out, methodologically weak, and incredibly wasteful. And also conclusively wrong.
I don't know who decided on this route - but whoever they are, their judgment is obviously impaired. We should expect a resignation letter from whoever they are very soon.
Here are some questions. It appears the consultant flew into town at least once nearly every month for almost two years. Who did he or she meet with? Steinhauer? Bowman? Klein? All of them? How long did these meetings last? Is the cost of their time included in the cost of the Campaign as seen on the financial spreadsheets? Is the cost of Steinhauer's time to then "manage" the Campaign included in the Campaign costs? This would add tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of the Campaign that's already completely broke.
There is a receipt for Panera for a meeting with AD. That is Ms. DeLuca. And where is Alyssa DeLuca now? https://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/potmsearch/detail/submission/6430077/Alyssa_DeLuca Elaine
9:12 AM, to add to your point, what are the legal costs? If you do a RTK for the breakdown of personnel costs and legal costs associated with the Capital Campaign, I am sure they would amount to tens of thousands of dollars more.
I know that people are shocked when I tell them what is going on here. Or they think I am continuing to be that "crackpot from Mt. Lebanon." All they have to do is look at the spreadsheet. You don't need to be a CPA to figure out that the Capital Campaign should file for bankruptcy. It failed. Stop pouring more money into it! Elaine
This is insane. Whoever authorized this needs to be called on the carpet.
While I mostly agree with this statement from another commentator: "...while voting in Riemer, Strotmeyer and Diamond won't be a magic bullet that suddenly fixes our schools, but it will present an end of the status quo."
I think Riemer & Strotmeyer are qualified and well positioned to make immediate improvements. Unfortunately, can someone tell me why Aviva Diamond is even on the ballot? As several others have noted, she seems to be bereft of qualifications or fresh ideas.
We need grownups to address these issues, not wannabee politicians who are seeking to cash in on the coattails of others. Her most loyal supporters all seem to be on the far, far left (who believe raising taxes is the answer to every social ill) and she is closely aligned with questionable candidates like socialist Democrat Craig Grella. She will just add to the swamp, IMO.
Some really interesting stuff from the “The Budget of the Mt. Lebanon School District.”
“Staff Counts Since most of our costs are driven by the number of teachers we have for our students, we carefully consider the number of certified teaching staff on our payroll. Below is a chart of enrollment and certified teaching staff for the past few years.
The estimated number of teaching staff has been stable since 2014-15. Student projections show little change into the future.”
Those numbers should raise a bunch of questions for any thinking person.
#1) How in the world does anyone write “the estimated number of teaching positions has been stable since 2014-15”? Their own damn chart shows the number of teachers hasn’t been stable! There are estimated to be 8.5 fewer teachers in 2016-17.
Lincoln parents, if the number of teachers was stable they should have at least 8 to create another class to put your kids in.
#2) They estimate there will be 59 more students in 2016-17 than there were in 2015-16. Problem is they’re teacher that increase of student with 7.7 fewer teachers!
But all is not lost, they hired a lot of expensive “experts” to work on the fundraising campaign! Plus had nearly a million dollars to loan/invest in it as well.
How about Steinhauer and the Board make a “hard choice” and invest in actually teaching our kids.
One more thing, if the student population is stable why does Mt. Lebowitz claim we need more turfed fields?
“All budgets are managed through a decentralized accounting system where over 3,600 accounts are distributed between 20 administrators and supervisors having budget responsibility. These staff members receive print-outs from the finance office at least monthly to update them on the financial position of each of their accounts. It is their decision as to which items merit purchase and inclusion in budget requests. Budget reductions, when necessary, are prioritized by these staff and then further by the central office administrative staff. The administrative staff maintains effective control over the District's assets as evidenced at the end of each of the past five years, when budget accounts have gone under spent in many categories thus adding to a growing fund balance in the General Fund.”
Wonder who had responsibility to oversee the fundraiser account, where are their monthly reports and why weren’t they alerting the board of the red ink!
They could put mannequins in the two that are available beyond those occupied by Riemer and Strotmeyer and we’d get more intelligent district oversight than what we’re getting now in my opinion.
Unfortunately, 2:07 PM, two mannequins are not running. I absolutely agree with 2:01 PM. The Riemer, Strotmeyer, Diamond ticket would "present an end to the status quo," as 7:53 AM mentioned. Elaine
@1:28 Since I believe the district requires all aides and substitutes to also be certified teachers is that teacher count inclusive or exclusive of those positions? I realize substitutes are not full-time employees, but I thought we did have a handful of permanent substitutes on staff. Also I assume, our administrators still hold valid teacher certifications.
Riemer and Strotmeyer have my vote. Diamond hasn’t given me one iota of information on where she’ll stand on anything if elected. Guess I’ll have to consider writing in the Mannequin twins for the other two spots until Diamond releases some objectives.
2:23 only passing along the info found in the budget report.
Regardless of whether they are aides, subs or administrators the numbers are still down from the the two previous years by 7.7 and enrollments are up by 100.
2:31, voting for two of the Riemer, Strotmeyer and Diamond ticket is not the best way to optimize your ballot and creates a better chance of two or three of Cappucci, Birks, Caste and Remely getting through. You can be sure that their supporters are not going to leave any votes on the table. I understand that you may not know or particularly like Diamond, but not voting for her makes it just a bit more likely that the board will remain irresponsible and impotent. Vote the better ticket and live with one board member or risk living with Club Steinhauer for another two to four years.
3:49 you're absolutely right. Not voting for Diamond puts too much at risk that change won't be able to happen on the new school board. Who cares if she's a no name? Look where we've ended up with people whose names we knew. I've spoken with her. She seemed very eager and willing to listen and to learn about a topic.
3:49, I have a problem voting for a candidate based just on their name on a lawn sign. I do know for certain I won’t be casting votes for any of the Timmy Team. Diamond could convince me to vote for her if she just came out with some info on her position on the budget, turfed fields, the fundraiser, something, anything!
6:41 PM, Aviva Diamond's position is on education. How refreshing! Timmy and the board majority seem to be focused on construction - turf, high school renovation, turf, air conditioning, turf, and did I mention turf? Elaine
It'll be interesting to see if this takes off or not. $800,000 or $900,000 budget for the next 18 months will not be easy for this board to find...especially when they need to fit the second round of bonds neatly in there.
I don't want anyone to take my comment as gloating. I hope nobody here feels like gloating. It would have been great if they found that one or two people that could have funded the whole second bond.
Yes, it would have let the board and their bad decisions off the hook, but it would have tremendously benefited the taxpayer.
Now the board has to decide if they want to take the 13% risk of "failing badly" as PK said in the meeting. By failing badly that would mean paying out the $800,000 fees to PK, hiring staff for the campaign, and then not raising more than $50-100k. While only a 13% risk, it is not a usual occurrence to risk taxpayer money on a bet like this. It's like standing on 19 in blackjack when the dealer has a 7 showing. Decent shot to win, but when the dealer throws over that 4, boy do you throw up a little in your mouth!
If I was on the board, I honestly don't know which way I would vote on this. September 18, 2012 at 4:41 PM
8:08, the difference between the district gamble and playing blackjack is that in the end the school district always has a source for more money. Even if they lose the taxpayers will end up covering their losses and bankroll another game.
With all due respect, you're missing the point about Aviva Diamond. It's not that's she's a "no name" candidate and a newbie. Those types of candidates with platforms and real (not cut & paste) ideas are vital to the electoral process.
It's about meritocracy. She is utterly clueless and shouldn't get a vote just because she's on the Dem ticket and against the current regime. She doesn't deserve the position because she has repeatedly failed to prove to me that she's a quality candidate with a real understanding of the myriad of issues facing the district. In fact, her level of vacuity scares the shite out of me. If you saw her on South Hills Action Day on 9/16 - you would understand.
30 comments:
Why did they feel compelled to hire an out of town consultant?!? The travel costs alone must be nearly twenty thousand dollars. They really flew somebody in from Texas for months? This is an absolute scandal. Fools and their money!
Um. Wasn't it reported by Birks that it was only $50,000 for the feasibility study? What is the rest?
$152.500? Did that help one student with special needs?
Reduce any Lincoln Elementary class sizes?
It wasn’t all that many years ago the administration was ready to eliminate a part-time student aid’s position at the high school until the HS students pleaded for them not too. I think the salary cut would’ve saved the district somewhere around $28,000 or so.
Must have been one of those “hard choices” the board talks about.
The board continually proclaims they try to keep cost cutting as far away from the classroom as possible.
Apparently they try to do that with spending as well!
Every year Steinhauer presents a budget that cuts deeply at the elementary school levels. He does this to "shock" the board into scrambling to keep key programs and give them cover to raise taxes. Nobody in board leadership was taking a hard look at any numbers until the past year or two, but even recent scrutiny is done with the headwinds presented by Birks, Lebowitz and, behind the scenes pulling strings, Cappucci. The choice in November is stark. And while voting in Riemer, Strotmeyer and Diamond won't be a magic bullet that suddenly fixes our schools, but it will present an end of the status quo.
Oh, please say it ain't so. I am shocked, and that takes a lot after what I have seen living in this area for the past 6 1/2 years.
I know this business pretty well. You get an educational consulting gig, you can't spend money like that. You get an NSF or an NIH grant, or a foundation grant, you can't spend money like that.
$150K+ for a weak and incorrect study. They didn't need to travel for that study. They could have easily done it all on line, and had a much higher "n" in the process ...
... that amount of money would pay the salary + benefits of 2 teachers for a year, or 1 teacher for 2 years. The study was unnecessary, poorly carried out, methodologically weak, and incredibly wasteful. And also conclusively wrong.
I don't know who decided on this route - but whoever they are, their judgment is obviously impaired. We should expect a resignation letter from whoever they are very soon.
Well said, Jason.
S.
Here are some questions. It appears the consultant flew into town at least once nearly every month for almost two years. Who did he or she meet with? Steinhauer? Bowman? Klein? All of them? How long did these meetings last? Is the cost of their time included in the cost of the Campaign as seen on the financial spreadsheets? Is the cost of Steinhauer's time to then "manage" the Campaign included in the Campaign costs? This would add tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of the Campaign that's already completely broke.
There is a receipt for Panera for a meeting with AD. That is Ms. DeLuca. And where is Alyssa DeLuca now? https://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/potmsearch/detail/submission/6430077/Alyssa_DeLuca
Elaine
I would love to meet her at Panera! I bet she has some stories to tell.
Elaine
9:12 AM, to add to your point, what are the legal costs? If you do a RTK for the breakdown of personnel costs and legal costs associated with the Capital Campaign, I am sure they would amount to tens of thousands of dollars more.
I know that people are shocked when I tell them what is going on here. Or they think I am continuing to be that "crackpot from Mt. Lebanon." All they have to do is look at the spreadsheet. You don't need to be a CPA to figure out that the Capital Campaign should file for bankruptcy. It failed. Stop pouring more money into it!
Elaine
This is insane. Whoever authorized this needs to be called on the carpet.
While I mostly agree with this statement from another commentator: "...while voting in Riemer, Strotmeyer and Diamond won't be a magic bullet that suddenly fixes our schools, but it will present an end of the status quo."
I think Riemer & Strotmeyer are qualified and well positioned to make immediate improvements. Unfortunately, can someone tell me why Aviva Diamond is even on the ballot? As several others have noted, she seems to be bereft of qualifications or fresh ideas.
We need grownups to address these issues, not wannabee politicians who are seeking to cash in on the coattails of others. Her most loyal supporters all seem to be on the far, far left (who believe raising taxes is the answer to every social ill) and she is closely aligned with questionable candidates like socialist Democrat Craig Grella. She will just add to the swamp, IMO.
Some really interesting stuff from the “The Budget of the Mt. Lebanon School District.”
“Staff Counts
Since most of our costs are driven by the number of teachers we have for our students, we carefully consider the number of certified teaching staff on our payroll. Below is a chart of enrollment and certified teaching staff for the past few years.
Enrollment
2014-15 5,321
2015-16 5,361
2016-17 5,421est
Certified Teaching Staff
2014-15 415.5
2015-16 414.7
2016-17 407est
The estimated number of teaching staff has been stable since 2014-15. Student projections show little change into the future.”
Those numbers should raise a bunch of questions for any thinking person.
#1) How in the world does anyone write “the estimated number of teaching positions has been stable since 2014-15”?
Their own damn chart shows the number of teachers hasn’t been stable! There are estimated to be 8.5 fewer teachers in 2016-17.
Lincoln parents, if the number of teachers was stable they should have at least 8 to create another class to put your kids in.
#2) They estimate there will be 59 more students in 2016-17 than there were in 2015-16. Problem is they’re teacher that increase of student with 7.7 fewer teachers!
But all is not lost, they hired a lot of expensive “experts” to work on the fundraising campaign! Plus had nearly a million dollars to loan/invest in it as well.
How about Steinhauer and the Board make a “hard choice” and invest in actually teaching our kids.
One more thing, if the student population is stable why does Mt. Lebowitz claim we need more turfed fields?
More from the Budget document.
“All budgets are managed through a decentralized accounting system where over 3,600 accounts are distributed between 20 administrators and supervisors having budget responsibility. These staff members receive print-outs from the finance office at least monthly to update them on the financial position of each of their accounts. It is their decision as to which items merit purchase and inclusion in budget requests. Budget reductions, when necessary, are prioritized by these staff and then further by the central office administrative staff. The administrative staff maintains effective control over the District's assets as evidenced at the end of each of the past five years, when budget accounts have gone under spent in many categories thus adding to a growing fund balance in the General Fund.”
Wonder who had responsibility to oversee the fundraiser account, where are their monthly reports and why weren’t they alerting the board of the red ink!
Consider this 10:57. Consider Ms. Diamond as a place holder, a body if you will - to keep the others out.
Aren’t there four seats open for the board?
They could put mannequins in the two that are available beyond those occupied by Riemer and Strotmeyer and we’d get more intelligent district oversight than what we’re getting now in my opinion.
Unfortunately, 2:07 PM, two mannequins are not running. I absolutely agree with 2:01 PM. The Riemer, Strotmeyer, Diamond ticket would "present an end to the status quo," as 7:53 AM mentioned.
Elaine
@1:28 Since I believe the district requires all aides and substitutes to also be certified teachers is that teacher count inclusive or exclusive of those positions? I realize substitutes are not full-time employees, but I thought we did have a handful of permanent substitutes on staff. Also I assume, our administrators still hold valid teacher certifications.
Riemer and Strotmeyer have my vote.
Diamond hasn’t given me one iota of information on where she’ll stand on anything if elected.
Guess I’ll have to consider writing in the Mannequin twins for the other two spots until Diamond releases some objectives.
2:23 only passing along the info found in the budget report.
Regardless of whether they are aides, subs or administrators the numbers are still down from the the two previous years by 7.7 and enrollments are up by 100.
That’s far from stable.
2:31, voting for two of the Riemer, Strotmeyer and Diamond ticket is not the best way to optimize your ballot and creates a better chance of two or three of Cappucci, Birks, Caste and Remely getting through. You can be sure that their supporters are not going to leave any votes on the table. I understand that you may not know or particularly like Diamond, but not voting for her makes it just a bit more likely that the board will remain irresponsible and impotent. Vote the better ticket and live with one board member or risk living with Club Steinhauer for another two to four years.
3:49 you're absolutely right. Not voting for Diamond puts too much at risk that change won't be able to happen on the new school board. Who cares if she's a no name? Look where we've ended up with people whose names we knew. I've spoken with her. She seemed very eager and willing to listen and to learn about a topic.
3:49, I have a problem voting for a candidate based just on their name on a lawn sign.
I do know for certain I won’t be casting votes for any of the Timmy Team.
Diamond could convince me to vote for her if she just came out with some info on her position on the budget, turfed fields, the fundraiser, something, anything!
Could DeLuca already be out at Presley Ridge?
https://apply.hrmdirect.com/resumedirect/ApplyOnline/mobile/JobDetails.aspx?req_id=enc-16.4563300360132914
6:41 PM, Aviva Diamond's position is on education. How refreshing! Timmy and the board majority seem to be focused on construction - turf, high school renovation, turf, air conditioning, turf, and did I mention turf?
Elaine
There also seems to be a lot of focus on tailgate parties, pizza lunches, and beerfest as well as turf.
It'll be interesting to see if this takes off or not. $800,000 or $900,000 budget for the next 18 months will not be easy for this board to find...especially when they need to fit the second round of bonds neatly in there.
I don't want anyone to take my comment as gloating. I hope nobody here feels like gloating. It would have been great if they found that one or two people that could have funded the whole second bond.
Yes, it would have let the board and their bad decisions off the hook, but it would have tremendously benefited the taxpayer.
Now the board has to decide if they want to take the 13% risk of "failing badly" as PK said in the meeting. By failing badly that would mean paying out the $800,000 fees to PK, hiring staff for the campaign, and then not raising more than $50-100k. While only a 13% risk, it is not a usual occurrence to risk taxpayer money on a bet like this. It's like standing on 19 in blackjack when the dealer has a 7 showing. Decent shot to win, but when the dealer throws over that 4, boy do you throw up a little in your mouth!
If I was on the board, I honestly don't know which way I would vote on this.
September 18, 2012 at 4:41 PM
Interesting comments from 5 years ago.
8:08, the difference between the district gamble and playing blackjack is that in the end the school district always has a source for more money. Even if they lose the taxpayers will end up covering their losses and bankroll another game.
3:49
With all due respect, you're missing the point about Aviva Diamond. It's not that's she's a "no name" candidate and a newbie. Those types of candidates with platforms and real (not cut & paste) ideas are vital to the electoral process.
It's about meritocracy. She is utterly clueless and shouldn't get a vote just because she's on the Dem ticket and against the current regime. She doesn't deserve the position because she has repeatedly failed to prove to me that she's a quality candidate with a real understanding of the myriad of issues facing the district. In fact, her level of vacuity scares the shite out of me. If you saw her on South Hills Action Day on 9/16 - you would understand.
Post a Comment