Get Schooled

By V for Vendetta

February 4, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this

Asking if I think school boards use SPLOST money correctly is like asking me if I think rabid jaguars would make good pets.

Um, no.

I’m not saying I don’t approve of SPLOST; I think the money is a good thing. But when the coffers are full to the tune of 750 million, a little “oops” spending is bound to happen. Or a lot, especially if you live in Clayton. The track records for the metro disctricts are not good — they’ve ALL had their fair share of screw ups when it comes to money mismanagement. Heck, a few years ago, in my district, they were all excited about giving teachers lap top computers. Oh the freedom, oh the conveniance, they said.

Bollocks.

The computers suck, they were outdated within the month, and once they were loaded up with all of our school software they ran dreadfully slowly. Pathetically so.

I don’t even want to know what it cost to put all of those computers in the hands of all of those teachers, and I don’t want to think about what it will cost to replace them or update them (which won’t happen until it takes us ten minutes or more to log into anything). The point is, it was a stupid idea. An ill-informed idea. An asinine idea!

Paid for in full by SPLOST. Well done!

By jim d

February 4, 2008 8:43 AM | Link to this

Thanks Laura.

Correctly?

We will speak at the polls tomorrow. Thurbert Baker has already said that the way it is being spent was not in accordance with our sunshine laws. The question now is will voters have the courage to put a stop to a few egomaniac politicans that think they know what is best for everyone?

A great opinon letter in the AJC sunday addressed this issue.

See School bond should be rejected

By gwinnettt educator (formerly dekalb)

February 4, 2008 8:54 AM | Link to this

This is a quick run through..but I have a question. What sense does it make to build new buildings and still have to use trailers? I am going into a new building in the fall and all grade levels will have trailers except for Kindergarten.

Half of my grade level will be in trailers. What is the point???

By jim d

February 4, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this

Here’s the thing.

Voters in Gwinnett have more than generous, passing several SPLOSTS in the past to build badly needed schools.

Our BOE then see’s fit to do this buy-sell-lease back crap that actually indebts taxpayers without a constitutionally required referendum. They do this on a multi-hundred million dollar building, that resembles the taj mahal, for an administrative building rather than spending the money on schools for which it has been ear-marked. They refuse to heed our A/G’s warning that their continued voting behind closed doors to purchase properties is in violation of Ga. Sunshine laws.

Taxpayers SHOULD BE UP IN ARMS!!

By Joy in Teaching

February 4, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

I’ve been teaching in a trailer for the past two years and it seriously bites. On rainy days such as today, kids come in dripping water everywhere. When a kid gets called to the office, has to go to the restroom, etc, I have to send another kid with them with my key in order to let them in the building. And when there are 28 sixth graders in a single wide trailer, group work is almost impossible not to mention deafening. (I do let them work outside on warm days which can be nice at times.)Managing the class itself is much more difficult in a trailer because there are only so many ways that one can arrange the desks…and separating students who shouldn’t be together is just about impossible.

By Joy in Teaching

February 4, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

Jim D…I so agree with you. SPLOST money should be monitored closely in order to make sure it is spent the way it was intended…on buildings that house kids and NOT on admininstrative offices with marble floors like we have out here in Walton.

By Ernest

February 4, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

Laura:

Welcome as the new GetSchooled blog mistress! I look forward to many interesting topics.

There needs to be greater transparency in the overall process. What happened in Cobb County a few years ago with their ‘laptop’ issue put a bad taste in the mouths of many citizens. Nonetheless, I can not think of a better way to fund new construction unless we increased property taxes. With a SPLOST, some of the revenues could be generated from those that live outside of the county.

The only possible downfall is a situation like today with a looming recession. The school system should not obligate to projects that can’t be paid for with the revenues generated. DeKalb got in trouble with that with SPLOST 2 and it caused many hard feelings in the community.

At the end of the day, stakeholders also have a responsibility to ensure the construction needs are clearly identified and there is a prioritized plan in place to address them.

By jim d

February 4, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

Ernest,

I guess I just have a problem with borrowing against unknown future revenues.

As a businessman, any lines of credit are generally secured by my Accounts Recievables.(earnings already on the books)

The system on the other hand appears to only be offering the ability to raise taxes as security on a loan. Which—-truth be told—I object to.

By jim d

February 4, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

Oh and BTW Ernest,

The very first time I addressed our BOE in public (many years ago) I made a comment regarding poor planning on their part.

I still stand by that comment! Things have not changed.

By Tater

February 4, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this

jim d

I still stand by that comment! Things have not changed.

Going to go back on my rant :-))

Give the money to the taxpayers, open up school choice and watch private industry pick up the slack.

$750 million and you don’t think there will be a tremendous amount of waste??

Hello McFly…

By Ernest

February 4, 2008 12:17 PM | Link to this

JimD:

Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t governments plan their budgets based on anticipated property and sales tax revenues, primarily based on prior history? When I look at what happened in DeKalb (and perhaps other counties), the markets were extremely good and sales tax revenues came in on target. For SPLOST 2, projections were based on the successes from SPLOST 1. They failed to realize market adjustments, i.e. the recession. Based on lessons learned, they obligated of portion of anticipated revenues for projects for SPLOST 3. They explained what happened, laid out a construction plan for all to see, then requested we support the continuation of SPLOST. If spending picks up and we generate more revenues than obligated, more can be done. If revenues do not come in as anticipated, I expect the latter projects on the list to be in danger.

At the end of the day, we the citizens ‘own’ the infrastructure of the school system. Ultimately we determine how/whether to continue to make investments in that infrastructure.

Between you and me, I’m a little ‘jealous’ of Gwinnett. I visit your fair county many times in the spring for AAU/YBOA Basketball tournaments. You have the infrastructure in place to bid/hold them. As a result, this DeKalb county citizen is spending money in your county, while utilizing an otherwise idled infrastructure. I call that ‘genious’. I also wonder, ‘Why not DeKalb’?

By jim d

February 4, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this

Ok Ernest,

Here we go.

Yes budgets are calculated based on past expierence and future needs. However what we are talking about in this instance in for construction. Now, Gwinnetians have approved several SPLOST’s that have failed miserably to live up to the schools expectations. Why? you might ask. Well so that they could continue unbridled spending.

As for our infrastructure? You are aware of course that some of what appears to be ours is anything but, Right? No? Oh OK, let me explain how it works. We purchase a property for let’s say 300million—sell it for a minor profit to investors who in turn rent it back to us on a lease purchase plan that ends up costing much more than the origional purchase price. Now, the explanation being that we can walk away from the lease at anytime. However, while this may be true enough, we’ve invested a couple million more into improving the property.

Are you beginning to get over your envy yet or should I continue?

By jim d

February 4, 2008 1:51 PM | Link to this

Sorry Ernest,

Did I mention that a system that has been able to predict attendance and school growth for the past decade with uncanny accuracey can’t seem to come close on projected SPLOST revenues? Ironic isn’t it?

By jim d

February 4, 2008 1:59 PM | Link to this

Tater,

To be quite frank, 750 million is a drop in the bucket when one has an anual school budget (well over a billion $$ a year) equal to what it costs to operate the rest of the county government.

By Ernest

February 4, 2008 2:00 PM | Link to this

JimD:

Our conversation reminds me of that famous quote, “The grass always seems greener on the other side”. I guess we need to take a look at the ‘fertilizer’ that gives it that color….. :)

By Tony

February 4, 2008 2:04 PM | Link to this

Each district must provide for their own needs. The voters of the district have their voice to accept or reject the proposals. The proposal for Gwinnett sounds like one that is backed by property tax revenue as opposed to sales tax. The voters have to decide whether that is the best way to build the schools needed for their county.

In high growth areas, it is nearly impossible for a school district to keep up with the growth. So, Joy, I’m sorry, but someone will always be in a trailer.

As for the secret property votes that jim d has raised questions over, I think the government should be more transparent. The current laws allow for negotiations of property behind closed doors. However, the final vote on a contract for the property is supposed to be in the open. The down side of this is that property values skyrocket when government gets involved in purchasing tracts of land. It is probably in the best interest of taxpayers in Gwinnett that there is some secrecy involved in land purchases. Where to draw the line? By your vote when electing school board members.

By jim d

February 4, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this

Indeed Ernest,

When we roll back the green to look underneath we discover “BROWN”! lol

By jim d

February 4, 2008 2:15 PM | Link to this

Tony,

Funny thing about that is that when our BOC was confronted over the very same prectice “they stopped doing it” and it really has had no adverse effect on what we pay for property. It is only our school system that refuses to comply with this sunshine law.

And while you bring up transparency—I’d advocate that our school system place their checking account ledgers on line so we can see daily how our money is being handled. In certain areas of the country this has been found to be a helpful tool in keeping the school systems in check.

By Tater

February 4, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this

jim d

You are correct about the billions spent on education in Gwinnett. Their website has the following statistic:

85 of Gwinnett’s 101 schools made AYP for the 2005-06 school year

I don’t think that my boss would continue to let me be employed if I performed at the same level as the Gwinnett school system.

You are correct about the money, hence my continued support of private enterprise and school choice.

I don’t know how long we have to “study” this issue. Bond referendums sometimes don’t pass because of the trust the taxpayers have in their government. We need a plan B, in case the taxpayers refuse to support it.

By Tater

February 4, 2008 3:20 PM | Link to this

Made a mistake.. It’s not billions its only:

Total budget: $1.703 billion Projected cost per pupil: $7,705

By jim d

February 4, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this

Tater,

Here’s the entire thing if’n yer intrest’d.

http://www.cpoga.org/img/GCPS_fy08.pdf

By jim d

February 4, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

BTW Tater,

This is plan “B” since the SPLOST has failed to provide the over-projected returns made by the same folks that are now asking for more.

By jim d

February 4, 2008 4:01 PM | Link to this

Tater,

Did I mention these are the same folks that promised no tax increases if we would only pass the last SPLOST proposal?

Might be a tuff promise to keep!

By Ernest

February 4, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

JimD:

Based on your 2:15 post, let me ask you a ‘devils advocate’ type of question. I’m strong proponent for greater transparency and utilizing technology to increase overall operating processes. For a system the size of Gwinnett, could doing so turn around to ‘bite you’? You mention having checking account ledgers online which has merit. What if you get an over zealous community advocate that files FOI requests for every other check? You could end up hiring staff to simply address that thus spending more on ‘non instructional’ staffing. How do we find that balance?

By Buckeye

February 4, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

Gwinnett and other metro Atlanta counties need to RAISE property taxes. There are so many transplants that move here for a cheap cost of living. There is no way around it. The local economies are being drained because because of the ridiculously low taxes.

We moved here several years ago for that low cost of living. We are now moving back to Ohio for better schools - and our taxes overall are atleast being spent more wisely. The grass was not greener here - especially for schools.

You get what you pay for!

By Buckeye

February 4, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

Gwinnett and other metro Atlanta counties need to RAISE property taxes. There are so many transplants that move here for a cheap cost of living. There is no way around it. The local economies are being drained because because of the ridiculously low taxes.

We moved here several years ago for that low cost of living. We are now moving back to Ohio for better schools - and our taxes overall are atleast being spent more wisely. The grass was not greener here - especially for schools.

You get what you pay for!

By jim d

February 4, 2008 5:29 PM | Link to this

Ernest,

The truth is this information in fact is a matter of public record. Where this has been done in parts of the country it has resulted in fewer open records requests. Think about it, who needs to know when a check is cut? Does subcontractors come to mind? It does to me. Subs are always getting a run around from GC’s saying they haven’t been paid. This practice would eliminate subs from making requests because it would be an open book.

Let’s face it we can already go online and find what every educator in Ga.is making-(name and amount of salary)-why not make the rest available if they have nothing to hide? These records already exist electronically so why not post them?

By jim d

February 4, 2008 5:33 PM | Link to this

Buckeye,

That my friend is why we missed the boat by implementing impact fees on all you damn yankees to pay for our schools.

By Tater

February 4, 2008 5:42 PM | Link to this

Buckeye

I am glad that you are doing what is best for your family. I don’t agree with you on the property tax issue, but that is just my opinion.

By Tater

February 4, 2008 5:51 PM | Link to this

jim d

I will not vote for any tax increase SPLOST or not until the local government entities provide details about where the money is going.

I’ve about had it with the “we need it for the children”. Until we see some kind of results, I will continue with my privatization mantra.

Government and schools just don’t mix.

You have to look at the results of all the funding that has been provided so far. What has that gotten us, 41st out of 50th in education. Absolutely unacceptable.

By Lee

February 4, 2008 6:01 PM | Link to this

I agree with posting the check ledger on-line. Fresh air and sunshine are wonderful disinfectants. How many times have we read about a municipality bypassing procurement bid rules by splitting transactions? Competitors would be better than auditors in detecting this type of monkeyshines, IMHO. I would advocate making even more information available, specifically, purchase orders and budget to actual info.

Jim D, re the purchase/sale/lease/buyback transaction. I can think of only one reason why a government agency would want to do that - to keep a transaction “off the books.” Of course, there are a few more disclosure requirements in recent years. Still, I cant help but think back to Enron and their “synthetic leases.”

By John

February 4, 2008 9:13 PM | Link to this

How about this for a shocking idea; setup the school system for students that actually want to learn. The rest can go to tire retreading school or learn how to wash dishes or serve French Frys. Think of the money we would save.

By Formerly of Gwinnett

February 5, 2008 1:11 AM | Link to this

Wow, what a surprise: The exalted leaders of GCPS have already blown through the billion dollars that voters awarded the district less than two years ago? I’m shocked.

By the way, how much is IBM going to collect this year for technology consulting? Also, how much is the system paying for each new computer? That new central office sure sounds to be top notch.

Finally, I leave with one last thought. Why does Wilbanks need a $700 million bond referendum to make up for a $250 million shortfall in projected SPLOST funding? What exactly is the additional $450 million for?

By Katie

February 5, 2008 6:16 AM | Link to this

No, I will not support this and I will be voting today. There are enough schools. First, get rid of the students that don’t belong there to begin with (illegal ones), then let’s look at our school needs. Until this is done I will not support any more of my tax dollars going to teachers or new schools.

By Mark

February 5, 2008 7:15 AM | Link to this

The world will always have skeptics and I suppose that is good. Gwinnett grows…a lot….and the people who move to Gwinnett have babies. Gwinnett will need more schools. It’s that simple. We can avoid building them and then end up with 125 trailers at a school as we did at Dacula Middle a few years back…or we can bite the bullet, pay the price for living in Gwinnett and build more schools. There is no painless solution.

For those of you pushing the privatization route…Let me remind you that a greater percentage of Gwinnett graduates enter college without needing remedial courses than graduates entering college from Georgia’s private schools. Ouch.

By Mark

February 5, 2008 7:22 AM | Link to this

I read the letter in Sunday’s paper, referenced above, that urges voting against the SPLOST referendum. It should be pointed out that the writer lives in Lilburn…a low growth, aging area of the county. I wonder how the gentleman would feel if he lived in northern or eastern Gwinnett and his children attended a school that had 50 - 100 trailers. How would he feel if his child attended a school with 18 kindergarten classes? How would he feel if his child attended a high school of 4200 students, and the projection would be for it to grow to over 6000 if a new school isn’t built?

Just wondering…..

By WFC

February 5, 2008 8:34 AM | Link to this

If you want insight into how Boards of Ed spend money, simply watch the Fulton Board meetings on Comcast. Long on pomposity, short on ability.

By Anon.

February 5, 2008 9:15 AM | Link to this

Katie, The bottom line is that kicking illegal aliens out of our public schools is not legal. Until the law changes to allow for that purging, to vote against school expansion for that reason alone is really pretty ignorant. If it was a choice that schools could make and you were voting to show your disagreement with the choice they made, then I think it would make a whole lot more sense. But you’re trying to send a message to the schools over an issue they can’t control. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t vote against the SPLOST; but your reason is not sound. A better avenue is to pester your legislators and make your voice heard that way — they are the ones who can affect that policy.

By jim d

February 5, 2008 9:34 AM | Link to this

Mark,

I do reside in the very area you have described and I think I’ve made my position on this issue quite clear.

If they are asking for more money, I demand more transparency before I’ll freely give another dime.

Yes sir, Dacula Middle (I was there).

A HS with 4200 students? I’m there now.

My point is simply that taxpayers in the county have held themselves accountable for providing for our childrens education and have willingly footed the Bill for years.

Now it is time to hold the system accountable for how they have handled that which we have given. Without that accountability, I don’t feel obligated to continue giving, and would fault no one else for feeling the same.

By jim d

February 5, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this

Mark,

BTW friend,

It is not a splost that they are seeking it is a bond referendum—what they want is for us to authorize going into debt. Personally not what I’d consider a good idea in this economy.

By Mark

February 5, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this

As I said earlier, there will always be skeptics and naysayers. Progress, and the world, will continue to move on….with or without them.

By jim d

February 5, 2008 2:01 PM | Link to this

ok mark,

gotta run, time to cast my naysayer vote.

HAGD

By Ernest

February 6, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

According to reports, 73% of Gwinnettians that participated in the referendum approved the SPLOST continuation. I didn’t realize the county projected an increase of 24K students by 2011. It goes back to Laura’s original question, is there a better way to pay for school construction? It looks like the voters have answered that question. It is now up to the voters to hold their BoE accountable with respect to the planned projects.