JD Malone has an article on the release of the NASD's fiscal forecast (read the article here - view the forecast here) that includes quotes from both Brad and I among others, including Dr. Lesky and Board Members Maher and Butz.
The forecast is referred to as "scary" by Butz, but it should come as no surprise. Last year prior to approving the building the finance committee showed a powerpoint with two lines indicating revenues and expenses. The expenses line was higher on the grid and the gap grew with each year.
This was before the MS building and re-orientation were considered.
What amazes me is that now the Board and Admin are looking around saying "Wow" when they knew about the problem and compounded it by adding $50-60 million in debt plus a few million in increased annual costs.
This numbers aren't 'scary' they are the result of irresponsibility.
Even more amazing is that not one school official mentions budget cuts only how they can raise more revenue (read taxes) and when they've maxed that stream out, alternative revenue.
I guess that is the scary part.
4 comments:
I do recall being at a meeting and seeing the vast differences on the powerpoint in the past before new building ms or mention of a future library/media center/gym campus. At that time the projected future monies coming in and those projected to be paid out steeply head in opposite directions as the years projected. I guess we will repeat the past hardships as taxpayers and NASD paid with the auditorium. I am not sure if it is scary or irresponsible or both. But it comes as no surprise.
after reading the article all I could think of was a person christmas shopping like mad, using their credit card for all their purchases and then come january when the bill comes in being shocked and surprised at their own irresponsibility
I mean come on, the board and admin knew about this for a long time, budget projections were provided last fall---
what "scares" me is the cuts we will see in 2012--and they won't be admin jobs you can bet on that
JMO -- what you said there is EXACTLY what we are dealing with.. New Schools, Pools, Astro-Turf fields, etc etc. Its really sad when a blogger like Ross and a few others like us can sit on here and forecast these problems and the financial nightmares that lie ahead, but the people who should be on top of this (with the exception of Mr.Maher) have no clue..or just dont care
As bad as it is to say, the people who- want- want- want- build, build build, worry later attitudes are the same ones who have brought basically the rest of the country into the shape it is right now. Unfortunately its the people who watch there money, spend wisely and dont overdue it with the "wants in life" that are now left to pay..and pay..and pay even more
its very sad that i know a few senior citizens in the area, that right now pay there school tax the last day they can because frankly it takes them that long to get the money together.. there on fixed incomes and can only afford so much! i know its a small group, but at some point you have to look out for the people who lived here there whole life, and there families who have lived here there whole lifes.. when your making these idiotic decisions, think of things like this.
Youve created a complete mess, congrats!!
What is irresponsible is the fact that this Board and Admin refuses to evaluate positions (and I'm talking all of the Director of this and that positions) and determine the value added of each. I've said it before, and I'm saying it again....there are a few positions at the top I think NASD can eliminate and save us taxpayers some cash......which equates to budget savings.....which then reduces and maybe eliminates the need for a tax increase. It is possible. Just last year they created a 'new' director of transportation position and these responsibilities were previously handled by the director of personnel. Now, when you take 1/2 the responsibility from one person, I think you should reduce salary by same. That was not done. So I wonder what keeps both of these directors busy as useful full time employees when this was done by one person in the past.
Post a Comment