By Antonio D. French
Filed Saturday, July 1 at 10:15 AM
Superintendent Creg Williams told reporter Steve Giegerich of the Post-Dispatch that he has prepared a balanced budget and it is ready for the board's approval.
That revelation is buried at the end of a story in today's paper about a court ruling that the state does not owe St. Louis Public Schools $120 million relating to the voluntary desegregation program.
At their last meeting, the Board of Education rejected Williams' proposed 2006-2007 budget which added nearly $4 million to the estimated $50 million debt the district is projected to face by the end of next year.
16 Comments:
And now the sales and layoffs begin.
Saturday, July 01, 2006 11:20:10 AM
Ok a few questions here. How can not re-couping $120 million not effect the bottom line, regardless of being bankrupt. By my math, if you apply the $85 million left over (after giving the county schools their share) to the $50 million debt, that should put you $35 million in the black. If we've spent dollars on the desegregation program that the State did not give us, then those dollars came from somewhere. And, if had an additional $35 million to put back in to te programs from which it came, the schools just might be a little better off.
Ok, the deseg money aside, I am glad to hear that the administration has comprised a balanced budget. I wonder how long it has had one, when it made the Board aware it had one, when it will be available for public review, and when the Board will vote on it.
Saturday, July 01, 2006 11:25:21 AM
The question is not whether the budget is balanced now but how long will it stay balanced given the number of things that were left up in the air. Most good budgeters add in monies for contingencies based on what has happened in the past. Here, they seem to think that since they can't absolutely quantify a number, they can just leave it off. The other thing is that the presentation given on the proposed budget and the actual reporting done during the year use different cost breakdowns, so it is impossible to conpare what is being proposed versus what is currently being spent.
Saturday, July 01, 2006 4:11:24 PM
Anon #2:
You are exactly right. Last year there were budget over-runs of roughly $7 million. So, to your point, a balanced budget is truly worthless unless the administration sticks to the budget. Further, Cedric Lewis, interim CFO for the District, has said that estimates for variable cost items, such as gas, are wild guesses and, in his opinion, underestimated.
Saturday, July 01, 2006 5:28:18 PM
It is perfectly clear to me that there is absolutely nothing new here. It matters not, how many superintendents we go through or who leaves or gets hired downtown at 801, one word comes to mind...... Titanic. All we seem to do with our schools is just rearrange the deck chairs of a doomed ship.
Saturday, July 01, 2006 10:11:08 PM
I watched the clip of the Superintendant again and this point jumped out at me. He further said that there is a need to sit down and work to solve the financial problems in the school district. I would think that by this time, he would have explained what the plan is to get this ship turned around and that would be a big part of the budget for FYE 2007. But then I thought, what about the strategic plan that was presented in February (that's just four months ago.) According to it, this fiscal year the district will:
1. completely replace the windows in 10 schools;
2. replace the roofs on 15 schools;
3. replace the furniture in 200 classrooms;
4. complete lead abatement in 15 schools (how long have we been talking about lead abatement. There are at least 60 schools that will still be waiting to have this done;)
5. Convert 18 elementary schools
kitchen and cafeterias to allow
service of prepared food;
6. Acquire space, technology and
develop video conferencing
infrastructure and pilot program, pilot elementary and middle school retraining SLPS/UMSL Program, add 15
schools for video conferencing
capabilities;
7. Implement soccer at elementary level, football and golf at middle school level, and boy's volleyball at the high school level;
8. Establish and equip drivers'
education classroom with simulators in 3 high schools; and
9. Upgrade music and art in K-8
schools to include 6th, 7th, 8th
grade textbooks, K-8 bands and choirs, equipment replacement, technology development, establish 25 new modern art classrooms to
include smart boards and related technology, updated equipment, and supplies.
Boy, that's a lot of work to do with no money. In fact, the strategic plan shows a $44,097,942 shortfall in monies to do these items.
And lest we forget, according to the strategic plan, in order to meet the goals of bringing the student acievement levels up, there is a $21,586,484 shortfall in funds available.
But, maybe the strategic plan and the budget don't have much to do with each other. I don't have degrees up the ying-yang or a fancy title. I just have my super sensitive nose that knows that someting stinks around this district and it ain't the garbage from the lunchroom.
Sunday, July 02, 2006 7:32:24 AM
Currently the lead abatement is only being considered for the elementary schools. The lead on the fences at the middle and high schools is a danger to the community that uses school yards as playgrounds when school is not in session.
Tear those old buildings down!!!!!!!!!
Sell Cleveland to the parks department for $1 and let parks department save Cleveland.
Sunday, July 02, 2006 10:51:14 PM
All, thanks for letting me know the budget was balanced. I have spoken to the supt. almost everyday and I hadn't heard this.
Monday, July 03, 2006 12:46:30 AM
Veronica, So you're saying Williams hasn't balanced the budget? Why do you refer to all? Steve Giegerich of the Post is the one who wrote it on 6-30-06. You can follow the link on the original post to read it. By the way, did everybody finally get the pay?
Monday, July 03, 2006 8:19:25 AM
I would be driven to believe that "veronica" is leading us to believe that she is Veronica O'Brien, School Board President. So, either the post is a hoax, or, if it is truly her, a very troubling sign that the administration is not communicating with the Board. Could this be why the Board has finally hired an independent auditor?
Wednesday, July 05, 2006 12:07:30 AM
Travis, you hit the nail on the head. He only recognizes certain people as elected board members. Someone said he's the most corrupt superintendent the district has had yet and that person has worked in the corporate world and recognizes corruption when he sees it.
Don't worry; history will eventually allow the genuine truth to get out.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006 6:41:40 PM
15 new roofs? HIDE THE CHECKBOOK! The board of education couldn't afford to keep a maintenance roofer so they put their misguided in a contractor at the recommendation of Sodexho. PLEASE TAKE A MINUTE AND READ THE REST OF THIS Check out these links. http://www.sfweekly.com/Issues/2003-02-26/news/feature_full.html and the Wisconsin link http://www.wals.lib.wi.us/ocnn/blogs/oshblog/archives/2006/04/ whose 4-7-06 entry reads "I have been researching Sodexo and Tremco (who will be doing the roofs), both have numerous
lawsuits in more than one country. Tremco is under investigation by the state of New Jersey for messing up school district roofs across the state and charging more than they should have and claimed they would."
Wednesday, July 05, 2006 10:18:13 PM
Do not forget about air conditioning the rest of the schools as well. Why is it that the surrounding school districts have bond issued to do major building projects? If SLPS ever wishes to be like their counterparts then they need to stop gambling their money away and start spending their money on the students instead of layers of superintendents and lazy administrators and teachers.
Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:31:38 AM
The air conditioning is in fact being provided for by a bond issue, and I would guess we are likely to see another on a future ballot to address repairs, but I wonder if voters will go for giving additional mismanaged dollars to the district.
Thursday, July 06, 2006 10:13:16 AM
I doubt the voters will approve another bond issue. I am not alone with this opinion. I would like to think that conventional wisdom would try to do some planning based on that we are NOT going to get more money rather than the other way around.
By reading the Human Resources page it is evident that SLPS is (wisely)trying to rebuild the A & E department that they couldn't wait to get rid of a couple of years ago. It was a good system that worked for eons here and still works at other school districts. Sure they had some personell issues that no one wanted to address due to Human Resources insisting that the "inmates run the institution" to keep nepotism alive and well. David F tried to straighten it out so they ran him out on a rail.
I don't know if anyone down there is aware that there was (maybe still is)a lot of money waiting to be used out of the Deseg fund. I've read the report that basically says (among other things)that the money is to be used for buildings to accomodate the influx of students. The past (mis)Director of Planning purposely misinformed everyone that the money could only be used for "new" buildings. The word "new" is not in this part of the deseg order.
I hope they have the wisdom to pick A&E and construction people to run A&E and construction.
Thursday, July 06, 2006 12:59:44 PM
When things are this bad with the board, something has to give, at some point something is going to break.
Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:28:41 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home