You are welcome.

I'm not sure everyone likes to hear what I have to say, but my answers come from experience, I am not just making this stuff up. Having a district under supervision of a budget commission is not that bad once all the initial cuts and layoffs are made. After that, there may be more smaller layoffs, but not usually to the extent of the first round.

It will not hurt the kids, but it is not the greatest experience for them to go through, either.

Seasons Greetings to you and yours!

Thank you Seriously,

You are a most valuable source of information and I thank you for taking the time to respond.

I hope you will keep reading our threads and giving us information to help understand many things.

Have a great holiday season and Merry Christmas to you, your family and friends.

Martin Fleming

Hello, everyone.

Martin,

When a budget oversight commission is put in place, they DO NOT run everything, that is a misnomer. All they do is look at the revenues and expenses, they have state auditors come in and go over everything from staffing to what is spent on toothpicks, and then everyone sits down and discusses what the actual deficit is going to be. Once this is done, the state auditors will present their "performance audit". This shows how many FTE's the district has in each area, teachers, aides, cooks, custodians, maintenance, bus drivers, etc. as compared to three or four "peer districts" that have similar demographics.

Now let me make one thing clear, the commission does not "make the cuts". They will study everything, then tell the existing BOE how much they need to cut to bring the budget projection inline for the next year. The determination of what and who gets cut is left to the administration and BOE to determine, then they have to enact those cuts by official action at a BOE meeting. The commission will then meet and either sign off on the economic recovery plan, or they will send it back and say, "try it again, not enough cuts". The state does not control anything directly, only by keeping an eye on purchase orders and personnel actions. For example, if an employee leaves, the board can act to replace that person, but the commission can say no after the fact. They also have to approve purchase orders in excess of $10,000.00

In both situations I have been and still am involved in, the superintendent pretty much decides what is going to be cut and presents it to the Board, then if they are in agreement, the commission approves the plan. There is pretty much one guy who runs everything from the state side, his name is Mr. Wenger. The super is in frequent contact with him, and runs most things by him over the phone, so he already knows that what he is presenting to the BOE is pretty much a done deal when it has to go by the commish.

Now it is almost a guarantee that busing will be cut. I know you think there are other cuts that should be made, but I would bet you they cut busing and it stays cut. The peer audit will show how many administrators and other employees of each type that it should take to run the district, so they will have to make reductions in an effort to reach those standards, which are by the way linked to the state minimum offerings rules.

There are no "rules" that say the staff will have to take pay cuts, but they will be able to freeze wages and raises. They do have the unique ability to supercede negotiated contracts if it is deemed necessary to save money, but I have not seen that happen yet.

I know that you feel the highly compensated administrators should give up their board pick-up and also take a pay cut. So you really think they will agree to a 20% reduction in pay? I have to be frank in my opinion that it will be a cold day in he** before that happens. Pay freezes, sure, but taking voluntary pay cuts of that magnitude, no.

I do read all of your threads daily, most of the time I choose to stay out of it since I don't pay taxes in Streetsboro. I agree with some of your observations, but will pass on others. I think at heart you just want to see financial revolution in your district and that you want the money to go for the kids. I must reiterate that it is absolutely common for 80-85% of a school budget to be spent on salaries and benefits, for that is most of what makes up a school is the employees. 15% is enough to cover the utilities, fuel, supplies, etc. Money for books, equipment, building repairs, buses, etc. usually comes from PI. Not always, but usually.

I truly hope that things work out for Streetsboro schools. I do think you need to also focus your efforts on replacing lackluster board members, not just concentrating on the levy. Is having the state form a commission going to be the best for the kids? I highly doubt it. They WILL see reduced programming, they will LIKELY see reduced busing, they will probably see larger class sizes, and there will overall be less opportunities for students in general.

Rocketsmom41,

No I do not think that the state coming in would help the children. I am in the hopes it would make the BOE realize what and how to spend funds.

I guess at this point it should be put onto the state to give the BOE's a guidelines as to what is acceptable and not acceptable and give them standard by which funds should be spent.

Most of those who become board members are entering into a learning process and when the attend meetings at the OSBA they are instructed to trust the judgement of their Superintendent.

However, when the Superintendent is new in their postition it is still a learning process for them.

Now the problem is when to trust and when you have to say no to an item that the superintendent presents that has a cost to it.

Hopefully your Treasurer of your district, being the one to account for the funds, can give you some insight into what you can spend or what should be put aside for the future.

Mr. Puster gave a 5 year forecast in October of 2008 and even indicated there were tough times coming. The interim treasurer did not have the same responsibilities as Mr. Puster or even Mr. Barnes.

His reports to the board did not elaborate (I would be guessing at this one but is most likely the scenario), on the needs to retain the extra funds that were coming in. His duties did not include projections or forecasts for the future.

Mr. Puster did however include those in his five year forecast.

Now if we look at this levy, and we see the district was going to be short $900,000 at the end of 2010 school year, why did we need a levy that was going to generate $3,111,000 over that amount? Did or has the district elaborated on where they are going to spend the extra $3.1 million? Of course they did. The superintendent stated that it was going to be used for Salaries and Benefits. How many new teachers and administrators are we going to hire with those new funds?

If your son or daughter came to you and said their expense for books would be $50.00 and asked you for $500.00 would you be willing to cough up the extra $450.00? Same concept here. You would tell your child that they better get a hold on their expenses and learn to budget.

In the same note, would you not want to see what they have been spending their money on? Well why doesn't our district do the same thing and tell us where the $1.4 million went that was over their budget?

You can't keep throwing money into the pot without first finding out why the expenses are so high and what we spend them on. That is why I thought it was a waste of money for the Marketing firm. Has anyone even seen anything that was put out by this marketing firm? Do we really need to market the district? Are we selling it to someone?

Wouldn't you think the accomplishments our students receive academically would market the district for us without even having to spend the money to do it?

I have seen quite a bit of the accomplishemts our students have done but I have found that in the local Record Courier. Who is this marketing firm marketing? Shouldn't it be the property owners paying the taxes to fund the district? Is this information only being delivered to parents? Who gets the marketing information?

Programs and contractual agreements that provide little to the district should be eliminated. Especially this Marketing Firm.

I really don't want the state to come in and I was hoping the BOE and Administration would see this and make the necesary changes and cuts that would not drive us to this. The ball is in their court.

The economy is in such a state at this time that a 9.5 mil continuous levy is most likely not going to pass whether I vote no or not. I am not the voice of the citizens that every one thinks I am. I am just a voice. I am an observer. I don't think my thoughts and opinions are swaying very many at all. I think the state of the ecomony is doing that. What I say or deliver will have very little impact at all.

The ones receiving unemployment checks, who have had their hours cut, or their pay reduced are, or their pay frozen, or their benefits frozen or reduced are the ones who are making the determination that they can't afford a 9.5 mil levy.

Unfortunately, our BOE and Administration don't really grasp the economic situation out there and are asking for way more than what the ecomony at this time can sustain.

All the Board members have a stable job, the Administration within our district have a stable job, maybe not the teaching staff or support staff, but let's look at those who have been released by the district. Now that they are out of work do they see how hard the ecomony is? They will in another month or two. Especially when they find out how hard it is to find work.

Now these with those stable jobs, they don't seem to feel the pinch that everyone outside of their realm is experiencing. So they tend to have this fantasy that a 9.5 mil levy will be the cure all when it may take many over the edge and force them to leave.

Now if people begin losing their homes, can't pay the increase in rent then they will be leaving the community. When this happens and you see vacant homes all around you, then the property values will begin to drop. County Auditor has realized this already and has reduced taxes based on the devaluation of homes in the area for just such a reason.

Now, the homes that have been lost to the bank will not generate revenue for the district. Good luck getting the propterty tax from the bank. They have an army of lawyers that will stall the payments for years. On the ones who rented and left, the new problem will be the extra burden on those renters who didn't leave. The landlord has to get the tax money from somewhere. If they raise their rent too much, then the renters will leave, if they don't raise the rent, the landlord will lose the property or won't have the funds to repair the domicile where the renter lives.

It is, in the least a paradox. Darned if you do and darned if you don't.

So in light of this, the board must make cuts, however those cuts can be made in areas where it does not put a child in harms way. What is more important to you, the safety of a child or a marketing firm? Take a look at many of the programs that have been put into place. Take a look at many of the contractual agreements that are in place. Do we really need these and are they valuable enough to risk a childs safety?

The levy will not pass due to ecomonic reasons and the longer the board has their head where the sun doesn't shine, the longer it is going to take to get things straighted out. The BOE and Administration should get over it already, swallow their pride and do what is right by the community and the children.

They will only gain support from the majority if they do the right thing. As I have said before, the right to eliminate busing was introduced at a time when our community was only 5000 strong. Since then our community has increased to over 15,000 and the traffic has increased tremendously. Eliminating busing at this time would be detrimental to not only the children but the families as well. This is not clear and decisive thinking on our BOE's part. They should go above and beyond to insure busing is not a subjet that should be considered.

Administrtation should forego their part of STRS paid by the district, BOE should give up getting paid for attending meetings, we should drop the marketing firm, let our own Psych's do the evaluations just to start. Just that alone would keep us from having to eliminate busing.

Sorry for the lenght but some things cannot be addressed in two or three paragraphs.

So since they botched up the loss of the $1.4 million, I don't reall want to give them an extra $3.1 million for it will drive us to a new levy again in two years. They be knocking at the door again telling me "it's for the children and if you don't do it, I'll take away their busing". They have done it in the past and they most surely will use that again.

Martin Fleming

Understood. However, that is a slippery slope downward once it gets started.

Imagine, if you will, the current district administration and BOE having that authority.

Knowledgeispower,

I am not so sure that the governor is trying to pass this bill to really judge teachers performance persay but to give the district the ability to eliminate those teachers who the district feels is not conforming to their desires or wishes.

I really don't believe they can determine how a teacher is performing or not myself. I just enlightened you on the direction the governor was heading and what was reported in the paper.

Martin Fleming

Martin,

Please be careful when referencing politician's "plans" about something. The Governor has, in the past, been against gambling in Ohio, but then dramatically changed directions.

The plan to eliminate tenure and therefore make teachers accountable for performance is laughable, at best. There is no way to objectively measure an individual teacher's performance that would stand up to scrutiny. The idea that bad teachers would be washed out through some performance metric is a myth.

Martin,

Take a look at an article I found in a Canton newspaper, called the CantonRep earlier this year.

http://www.cantonrep.com/news/x408977493/School-districts-in-fiscal-struggle-try-to-avoid-state-control

Here are a few excerpts from the article:

Beginning of excerpts-

"If you've heard it once, you've heard it twice: If we don't pass a school levy the state will come in and take us over.

What does that mean, exactly?

Superintendents aren't replaced, treasurers aren't ushered out the door, and state officials don't show up dressed in suits and carrying money trees.

"If you are responsible for a school-age child, you could see a lot of changes through his eyes as the district marches toward state minimum standards: For elementary students, no art, music or gym classes. For middle-school students, no foreign language classes. For high-school students, the number of class offerings is reduced, including career and technical courses and even core subjects such as math and science. There are fewer school libraries. And no sports at all."

"When a district is placed in fiscal emergency, a commission called the Financial Planning and Supervision Commission is appointed within 15 days of the declaration.

The commission consists of five people. Four are state appointees; the local mayor or county auditor appoints the fifth one.

Within 120 days, the commission develops a financial recovery plan. The plan is focused on eliminating the district's deficit " by any means possible: Closing schools, reducing teaching staff, sacrificing busing and elective courses, to name a few."

"There are three stages," Hardin said of schools' financial woes. "The first is denial. Nobody wants to admit there is a financial problem. Once they understand, then there is blame. Finally, we come to the realization there is a problem, and we have to do something."

Sometimes, that realization comes too late.

End of excerpts-

So really Martin? You really think that the State coming in would be best for the children of Streetsboro? Really? Please don't try to justify a yes answer. Please, please do research on what would happen to the CHILDREN, not the money or the Administration or the BOE. What will the kids have to sacrifice? The kids are what matters, and there is no way in hell that the state coming in could be a positive experience for our children. Please let go of the negativity you have for the Admin and the BOE. You said that the community has to come together and support the KIDS. The only way to do that is to pass the next levy. If we don't, our kids will lose classes, buses, teachers and friends. People will flee this district. This is not about teaching the BOE and Admin a lesson. This is about our kids. Period. They will suffer. Why can't you see that? Let go of the animosity. Busing being cut is what happens in most districts when a levy fails. Our BOE is not doing something that other districts don't. They aren't being mean or manipulative. They are doing what they have to do to stop the State from coming in. Like I said in my other post, fixing all of this is what matters, not finger pointing. I encourage all of you to look into what happens when the state comes in to a district. It's not pretty and I can't imagine one parent being okay with it once they know what affects it will have on their children. No arts, music, PE, no sports at all. Teachers gone, classes cut. No bussing. Is this what we want for our kids? Our grandchildren?

On the state and technology, the Governor is very strong when it comes to technology. He is all for it. He provides funding to companies like Ecotohio.org to provide chartered home schooling.

There are many charter schools that do home schooling in Ohio with computers that are no cost to the family that signs up for it. Everything is provided for free to the family. I am sure it is not coming out of Ecotohio's back pocket.

The governor is also working on a plan to eliminate tenure in this state. He wants to start eliminating those teachers who are no longer performing as they should but are protected by tenure. This would be the greatest thing our state has ever done. If that did occur, I think you would start to see scores begin to jump higher than we ever imagined. Now your job is on the line if you don't perform. Maybe that is what we have needed for a long time. I don't think the governor would go that route if he didn't feel it was needed. He has a lot of people working for him that get much more information that I don't get.

Martin Fleming

Seriously,

If you are out there reading this, could you please elaborate on whether busing was cut when the state stepped in at your district on both occasions?

Martin Fleming