Monday, February 11, 2008

Where Do They Get This Money? (Part 2)

So I hopped up to Hale for a Facilities presentation to the public on the Hale renovation. My main concern was the chimney which either has to be taken down by half or altogether (it's a seismic issue and one of the main reasons that Hale got put forth on this BEX III along with the seismic problems in the library). Well, the chimney is getting taken care of but now, according to the architects, they're taking it all down. The design looks very nice, more natural light, new finishes overall, getting rid of portables, new classroom space.

However, right there, on the cover sheet under Quick Facts, was another amazing Facilities coup.

"Budget - $84.8M"

Whaaaat? Let's go back and double-check that bond language and yes, it says, "$77.6". So where'd the nearly $8M extra come from? Vapors?

Boy, the next time this district cries poor, it should fall on deaf ears. They have more money than they know what to do with.


dan dempsey said...

Boy, the next time this district cries poor, it should fall on deaf ears. They have more money than they know what to do with.

Except no money for reducing class size or adding an additional math teacher at WSHS.

Lots of $$$ for making needless changes that have no positive effect on student academic performance.

Let us order in another round of consultants.

Remeber the Phi Delta Kappa report due in January --- it is now due in February -- It is now February 2008 (could be coming along any day or not).

Anonymous said...

Thanks to Dan Dempsey for the perfect phrasing of a response to a common problem. We may want to borrow your words as we ask about "bricks vs. educational programs" in Charleston when it comes up next fall. Taxpayers will eventually foot the bill, either way. We'd just like to see success in the classroom first and then maybe a reversal in our shrinking public school enrollment might justify a new capital campaign. The issues in Seattle and Charleston appear to be very similar. Thanks for framing them so well.

Anonymous said...

Libertarians have long noted a phenomenon in government: when faced with a shortfall, agencies trim back essential services first, so that when the money runs short for fixing the roof or keeping fire trucks running, they can ask for emergency funds.

On the other hand, cutting money from internal bureaucracy is a lose-lose, because it makes internal enemies and doesn't make emergency funds any more likely.

I have no idea if this is the situation in SPS, but it sure sounds lke it.

See also the Brodeur column today talking about tiles falling on kids' heads.

Anonymous said...

Yes, when you can't afford to live in a big house, its always wisest to get rid of essential services first like water and fire trucks.

The trouble with letting go of administrators in syncratic bureaucracies is they won't leave willingly without a better package of benefits.

Sueing for wrongful dismissful is the easiest way to retire and get paid off by your friends without raising eyebrows.