MCPS Got $539,842 from Cell Tower Leases and Distributed it Directly to Principals and Staff without Council Appropriation

Wheaton High School cell tower

$539,842* 

That is how much money MCPS receives in one year from the leases for the cell towers you see on public school property.

At this link is the list of public school property with cell towers and the number of leases at each location.

The lease payments are made to MCPS, but the money received does not go to pay teacher salaries, buy classroom materials, or build classrooms.  When the money is received by MCPS it is immediately funneled to local principals for deposit in their local school bank accounts.  We refer to these accounts as slush funds because there is no public accounting for how these funds are used.  In the past, investigations of principal bank accounts have shown all sorts of uses for these funds.

Check out the MCPS Operating Budget. You won't find any mention of this revenue, nor will you ever hear the Board of Education discuss these funds.  Remember recently the Board of Education voted to not install water bottle filing stations at all secondary schools because they couldn't find the $200,000 needed for the project. The Board said that voting to install water bottle filing stations would involve a "trade off," but they never mentioned the $539,842 they get every year from cell towers as a possible source of revenue.

Does the Montgomery County Council even know the Board of Education receives this money? The revenue is not listed in the Operating Budget and isn't brought to the Council for appropriation.

What could an extra $539,842 in the MCPS Operating Budget buy?  A few more teachers? HVAC repairs? ADA compliance? Water bottle filing stations?


http://audits.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploads/boe/20190214_Cell%20Tower%20Revenue.pdf

Actual revenue was $539,841.99

TODAY: Board of Ed. Slips $1.45 MILLION Plastic Football Field in BCC Construction Contract as Change Order #artificialturf #landfill #nobid

FYI: $1,450,000 for an artificial turf football field is an outrageous price! 

But, this is on the Board of Education's Consent Agenda for today's meeting.

Here's how this will go:

• One Board member chosen in advance will ask that this Consent Agenda item be removed from the agenda for discussion.   
• A MCPS staff member will then take a seat at the Board table and give a predetermined statement to cover for this outlandish price.  
• There will be no explanation of why the purchase of this artificial turf field is being slipped into the Hess Construction Contract.  
• There will be no explanation of why this purchase is not going to be bid out separately. 
• There will be no discussion of the useful life of this plastic field or how in 10 years it will join other plastic fields in Brunswick, Virginia to sit for the next 1,000 years.
• There will be no discussion about where the MONEY for this ONE artificial turf field is coming from.  Based on previous statements by MCPS COO Andrew Zuckerman, MCPS does not have enough money in the budget (Capital or Operating - depending on which one Mr. Zuckerman discusses) to pay this much for ONE artificial turf football field.  Spending at this level on ONE field is not sustainable based on the existing funds for new artificial turf fields. 
• Board members will be silent.  They will nod their heads.  They will not ask questions or demand documentation. They will unanimously vote for this exorbitant expenditure without ever seeing contracts or any details about the plastic field to be installed.

$1,450,000 should have been enough money to pay for 3 new artificial turf football fields.  

   Chg Order Bethesda Chevy Chase HS Add Proj Artificial Turf Football Field by Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County, Maryland on Scribd

Board of Ed. Used Money for NEW Artificial Turf Fields to Pay for RMHS REPLACEMENT Field

At this evening's Board of Education meeting MCPS Chief Operating Officer Andrew Zuckerman explained to the Board of Education that the money that was going to be spent for the replacement of the Richard Montgomery football field had already been approrpiated by the County Council. He said the money was coming from the Artificial Turf fund. 

Here is the Council's PDF form for the MCPS Artificial Turf Program (See page Circle 8)  The description of the fund is shown in the image below.  

The Artificial Turf Program was set up to fund the installation of NEW artificial turf at the 19 high schools that did not have artificial turf.

Richard Montgomery High School was the very first high school to have an artificial turf football field installed and is one of the six schools mentioned in the Description above.  

The Artificial Turf Program was not set up to fund the replacement of artificial turf fields.

If the Board of Education is using this fund to pay for the replacement of the RMHS field they are using funds that were appropriated for another purpose and they are taking away money meant to put in a new field at a high school that currently does not have an artificial turf football field.  

Board of Ed. Needs Council Approval to Spend Nonlocal Funds Received. On Eve of Primary Election, BOE Poised to Spend $500K without Council Appropriation

(c)  Expenditure of nonlocal funds received after adoption of budget. --  Except as provided in subsection (d) of this section, nonlocal funds received by a county board after the adoption of the annual budget by the county fiscal authority may be spent by the county board if the county fiscal authority is notified and approves of:

(1)  The source and amount of the funds; and

(2)  The manner of spending the funds.

******************

However, the Board of Education has been quietly holding back revenue received from cell tower leases, field trip fees among other unknown sources of revenue and is now going to use those funds to pay for a new artificial turf football field at Richard Montgomery High School without bringing those funds to the County Council for appropriation. 

**BOE Finds $562,721 for Plastic Grass at RM High School.** Not Money for Teachers, Classrooms, Lead Remediation, Mold Remediation, Repairs, Grass Seed... BOE Intentionally Let Warranty EXPIRE! Did Council Appropriate these Funds for this Purpose?: Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County, Maryland

**BOE Finds $562,721 for Plastic Grass at RM High School.** Not Money for Teachers, Classrooms, Lead Remediation, Mold Remediation, Repairs, Grass Seed... BOE Intentionally Let Warranty EXPIRE! Did Council Appropriate these Funds for this Purpose?

The Montgomery County Board of Education intentionally let the warranty on the defective Richard Montgomery High School artificial turf field expire and now they are going to use $562,721 of Operating Budget funds to replace this one plastic football field. 

The MCPS Real Estate department has been squirreling aways cash.  This money will be used to buy a new plastic field for Richard Montgomery High School.  Those funds are not listed in the MCPS Operating Budget documents in any discoverable location.  The image to the left shows the only mention of this fund in the FY19 MCPS Operating Budget.

Note that the Resolution (below) before the Board of Education on June 25, 2018, does not mention any approriation of these funds by the County Council.

The money in this "fund" has allegedly come in to MCPS through outside sources and is being immediately diverted to pay for plastic football fields without any discussion of the best use of these public school dollars. 

Probably the biggest source of cash for this fund is coming from Cell Tower revenue. 

That means that the high FARMS rate schools that have cell towers on their playgrounds and fields are paying for the plastic grass purchase at Richard Montgomery High School.  

In addition, MCPS has used Field Trip fees to fund Artificial Turf purchases. 

Remember that the actual Artificial Turf PLAN was that these fields would pay for themselves through field rental fees.  That has not happened. 

The Board of Education has not provided the public with an accounting for the funds being used to pay for the Richard Montgomery High School artificial turf field replacement nor are they bringing these outside funds before the County Council for appropriation. 

The failure to present a transparent budget Resolution to the public is on the Board of Education members four of whom are candidates in this year's elections. 

   Award Cont Replace Turf Richard Montgomery HS by Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County, Maryland on Scribd

Jerry Weast's Cell Tower Leases

When did the Board of Education vote to place all of these cell phone towers (and antennas) on public school playgrounds?


They didn't.


Here are just some of the Leases that Jerry Weast signed in the name of the Board of Education while superintendent.


Where does the money from these leases go? Anyone seen an accounting? Imagine how these funds ($700,000 +/-) could help after school athletic programs that have now been cut.


When are these funds taken to the County Council for appropriation? Oh, they aren't. Just another revenue stream with no oversight. 


And...have the taxes on these cell tower compounds been paid yet?


June 24, 2005 ~ Wheaton High School ~ Omnipoint Communications CAP Operations, LLC

June 24, 2005 ~ Einstein High School ~ Omnipoint Communications CAP Operations, LLC

May 26, 2006 ~ Magruder High School ~ T-Mobile Northeast, LLC 

June 6, 2008 ~ Springbrook High School ~ T-Mobile Northeast LLC

November 11, 2008 ~ Watkins Mill High School ~ T-Mobile Northeast LLC

June 19, 2009 ~ Wheaton High School ~ Cricket Communications, Inc. 

July 26, 2010 ~ Springbrook High School ~ Clear Wireless LLC

August 12, 2010 ~ Wheaton High School ~ Clear Wireless LLC

August 31, 2010 ~ Einstein High School ~ T-Mobile Northeast LLC

September 22, 2010 ~ Wheaton High School ~ T-Mobile Northeast LLC

Weast reveals $320,000 stash!

Remember when Superintendent Weast said he was going to close Monocacy Elementary School?

Remember the $205,259 for Media Assistants and the $342,240 in Building Maintenance positions that Superintendent Weast is cutting from the Operating Budget?

Remember when the students and parents from Einstein High School's Visual Art Center lobbied for the return of one of their two teachers?

Remember when Superintendent Jerry Weast said "We are broke"?

Would you be surprised to find out that all that time Superintendent Weast was holding on to a $320,000 pot of money?

Well don't be surprised.

On June 8, 2010, those funds were put on the Board of Education's "Consent Agenda" and the Board voted to spend those funds on . . . not classrooms, not maintenance, not media assistants.

No, instead of spending the funds on classroom teachers the Board approved Superintendent Weast's plan to spend the $320,000 to develop an Online Curriculum! You know, the one that is going to be sold by Pearson Education, Inc.

According to Superintendent Weast's memo to the Board, the $320,000 is needed to pay for "contractual services".

So where did this $320,000 stash come from? More on that here . . .

MCPS $1.4 million short for Year 4 Promethean lease payment

As readers may recall the thousands of Promethean Boards that landed in MCPS classrooms at the start of school in August 2008 weren't free or from a "grant". In fact, through a Maryland Public Information Act request the public learned that thousands of Promethean Boards had been purchased through a Four Year Lease plan. Not only weren't the Promethean Boards from a grant, they weren't paid for.

The press release put out by Superintendent Jerry Weast at the start of the 2008-09 school year only noted a "$3.3 million expansion" but neglected to state that $3.3 million was only the first year lease payment on 2,600 Promethean Boards, not the total cost for 2,600 boards.

Next, the public learned that MCPS had been holding on to federal rebates received for installing internet access to schools for the last 10 years. More on those funds here and here.  MCPS stated they would use those rebate funds to make the lease payments on the 2,600 Promethean Boards. (There is no connection between the rebates and the Promethean Board purchase. The rebates come back to the school system and into the general fund to be used by the governing authority as they desire. The rebates could have been used for school construction or teacher salaries, however, Superintendent Weast made the unilateral decision to use the rebates to purchase Promethean Boards.)

The final payment on 2,600 of the Promethean Boards in MCPS classrooms is due in 2011. (We don't know how the other thousand + Promethean Boards are being funded. That information remains out of the public view.)

There's just one problem. There isn't enough money in the rebate fund to make the full Year Four Lease payment on 2,600 Promethean boards in 2011.

On March 11, 2010, the Montgomery County Council's Education Committee (page 11 at link) discussed the $1.4 million dollar shortfall in funds needed to make the Year Four Lease payment on the 2,600 Promethean Boards.

They had a little chuckle about this. Here's the video:

Stranger Danger: Cell Towers on School Grounds

In case you haven't noticed, Daly Elementary School currently has a T-mobile cell tower in the back of the school. (See photograph.) MCPS wants to add additional devices from Clearwire, onto the tower and within the fenced in area at the base of the tower. There are some facts you as community members, parents and tax payers need to know about.

While you read these facts, consider the following questions: What benefit is it doing to our children? What benefit does it bring to our community?Why are other schools benefiting from the cell tower in our backyard? How is this tower helping the value of our homes? When did a public school become a profit generating business?

1. Since the erection of the tower, Daly ES has received a total amount of $31,442.68, each year the amount increases based on the CPI (Consumer Price Index) not to exceed 5%.

2. The cell tower funds the school receives are not appropriated by the County Council and are separate from the approved MCPS budget. Daly ES basically has a slush fund that can be utilized, and not be penalized, for use as the principal wishes. This authority of funds of a non-elected official is, in my opinion, not in the best interest of the school, the community and tax-payers.

3. The majority of this money is still sitting in an account for Daly and has not been used for anything to help improve our school. What good is this money doing if still sitting in an account? There should be a process in place in implementing these funds into the school year that they are received that would benefit the whole school if not the community.

4. Daly currently receives a yearly third of the total amount of $24,000 from T-mobile, as stated in the contract (that is up for renegotiation in approximately a year). MCPS gets a third and then the schools within our cluster receive the other third. Why are school within our cluster benefiting? It is not in their backyard or neighborhood!

5. Clearwire wants to put additional communication devices onto the cell tower to the tune of $24,000 split three ways as stated above.

6. T-mobile frequently visits the cell tower site and until recently when a group of parents brought it to the attention of the school, were not checking into the school as required by their contract.

7. MCPS does not require the employees or subcontractors of T-mobile to have background checks. If anyone, like me, who has a child in the trailers with no barriers, this is a MAJOR concern!

8. Since the erection of the cell tower, the driveway has been an eyesore for the school and the community and needs to be installed properly.

We as parents and tax payers need to demand that the money being brought into our school is used appropriately and for all children.

MCPS and Daly want the PTA to vote on the additional Clearwire devices but at what cost to our school and especially for our children?

Do we want or need more communication devices on school property that will in turn allow more unchecked workers on school grounds?

In my opinion, No.

Jennifer Kerchaert
MCPS parent

Knapp: MCPS "has locked us into expenditures we couldn't afford"

The Gazette is reporting that Montgomery County Councilmember Mike Knapp has said that Montgomery County can't afford the 4 year lease on Promethean Boards that was entered into by MCPS COO Larry Bowers without Board of Education or County Council approval.

Open question to Councilmember Knapp: Why doesn't the Council void the lease, instead of cutting essential county services to pay for a Larry Bowers MCPS procurement that wasn't approved? The lease specifically required Board of Education approval and that wasn't obtained.

Gazette: Officials want more authority over police spending

... Councilman Michael J. Knapp (D-Dist. 2) of Germantown said he supports the review and that the council would not feel the need to have more control over the funds if they were being spent appropriately.

The council has faced a similar issue previously, Knapp said. He cited a situation last year in which the council learned Montgomery County Public Schools was spending money it received through technology rebates on classroom technology that required three-year contracts, which the council would be asked to subsidize subsequently.

A school system official did not respond to a request for comment.

"It's for any department or agency that gets resources as a result of their ongoing activities," Knapp said, referring to a possible policy change or clarification. "How do those dollars get spent? How are they reported?

"At a time when we have limited resources, the school system had locked us into certain expenditures we couldn't afford," he said. "That's the reason it's a policy issue. The executive is doing the same thing in this case (with the helicopters)."

__________

Clarification to Gazette article:

It appears that Councilmember Knapp is referring to one of the Promethean Board leases that has been made public. If so, what MCPS "locked" the county into was a 4 year lease for Promethean Boards, not a 3 year contract as stated in article.

However, this lease does not cover the entire Promethean Board procurement.

How the additional 700 Promethean Boards were purchased or paid for remains a mystery to this day.

Cash for Clunkers (MCPS-Style)

American Express cards are the method of choice for Montgomery County Public Schools employees to treat themselves to taxpayer-financed restaurant lunches, dinners, and catered get-togethers.

The Parents Coalition has uncovered the fact that with every purchase made by MCPS employees using these cards, a rebate accrues.

Over the last two years, these rebates have amounted to tidy sums. According to a letter from Katherine D. Harrison, Acting Director of Public Information, for calendar year 2008, the rebate amount to MCPS was $15,784. For calendar year 2009, the rebate amount was $13,550. The total rebate for the two calendar years was $29,334.

Show me the money! I realize that almost thirty thousand dollars is chump change in MCPS-land...but where did it go? What did MCPS spend thirty thousand dollars on? Lemme guess: security cameras? payment on rent-to-own electronic whiteboards? litigation against special education children and families?

Doesn't the County Council have to appropriate rebates that come in to MCPS? Did MCPS report this "found money" to the County Council or did they just go ahead and spend it? Inquiring minds want to know.

In any event, the whole idea of letting public employees use publicly-financed credit cards to treat themselves to lunches and dinners is a CLUNKER. And the fact that MCPS gets "cash back" for these transactions that goes unreported, unaccounted for, and un-appropriated makes this "purchasing card program" even worse.

Navarro Board: $88 million in lease commitments

As MCPS Board of Education President, Nancy Navarro lead the Board to approve leases totaling $88,720,855. The leases commit MCPS to lease payments in some instances through the year 2014.

Run a search for the word "lease" in the MCPS Board of Education minutes archive to find out how many leases the MCPS Board of Education has ever approved. Why is this of interest? Last fall, Montgomery County citizens learned that 3,300 Promethean Boards were appearing in public school classrooms, and it turned out that at least 2,600 of them were purchased on a 4 year lease. That meant that the boards were in classrooms, but weren't paid for, and taxpayers were on the hook for 3 more years of payments at $3.3 million per year.

A search of the word "lease" in Board minutes turns up 38 instances when the Board of Education has approved the leasing of MCPS equipment. 30 of those 38 leases were approved by the Navarro led Board of Education from December 2006 to December 2008, for a total lease commitment of over $88 million. 25 of those leases have terms of 4 years or longer.

The terms of the leases are not disclosed and it is not known if Ms. Navarro actually signed any of the leases as required by her position. What we do know is that she did not sign the $5 million per year for 4 years Dell lease for 2,600 Promethean Boards, even though the Board President and the Superintendent were the only people authorized by the Board to execute these documents.

Can the Board of Education incur long term debt? Why the sudden explosion in lease commitments during Nancy Navarro's two year term as Board of Education President? Do these long term debts need to be approved by the Montgomery County Council as the appropriation authority?

Below is the list of leases approved by the MCPS Board of Education during President Navarro's term. Source: MCPS Board of Education minutes.
NavarroBoardLeases

Publish at Scribd or explore others:

Weast Slush Fund Revealed

Did you know that Superintendent Weast has a separate source of income from the funding appropriated to the school system by the County Council? Did you know that the Superintendent had been carrying a surplus in unappropriated funds? An April 7th letter to the Council's Education Committee reveals the existence of some of the "slush fund" that is available to the Superintendent. There are two other potential sources of "slush fund" cash.

Below is testimony delivered to the Montgomery County Council on April 13th discussing these three sources of non-County income to MCPS. Will the Council seek out these funds and control their use and appropriation, or will the Council ignore these funds and continue to cut from other county requests?

April 13, 2009 - Testimony to Montgomery County Council

I may be the only person to sit before you during Operating Budget testimony and not ask for any money. Instead, I am going to tell you how to hunt down some cash. I am bringing you over $5.5 million in unappropriated funds. It will be up to the Council to bring these funds to the Council table for appropriation, or in the alternative to simply ignore their existence.

Where is all this cash?

1. MCPS has entered into a contract with Wireless Generation. The contract has not been made public but a paper on the relationship between MCPS and Wireless generation has been published by the Harvard Business School. I can’t attach a copy because the article belongs to the Harvard Business School. But I can tell you that this article gives a first look at the terms of this agreement citing specific terms of the contract. We learn in this Harvard publication that MCPS is collecting a per student royalty on every mCLASS: Reading ED software sold around the country. Click here to read about this contract.

Where are those royalties? When have they been brought to the Council for appropriation? Councilmember Marilyn Praisner had been following this partnership, but with her passing did all oversight of this arrangement also disappear? Click here to read about missing royalties.

2. MCPS has also entered into a partnership with TrueNorthLogic to develop a Professional Development online system. What are the details of this partnership? Is MCPS reaping any royalties or income from this partnership? Sorry, I can’t help you out on this one. The details of this agreement aren’t public. But take a look at the TrueNorthLogic advertisement available online to see the MCPS logo proudly displayed. Click here to see the TrueNorthLogic advertisement.

3. The last place you might want to check for unappropriated funds is the e-Rate surplus that Superintendent Weast has been carrying. In an April 7, 2009, letter to the Education Committee, Superintendent Weast reveals that he is carrying $3.9 million in unexpended e-Rate rebates. In addition, MCPS will be receiving another $1.6 to $1.8 million in e-Rate rebates this year. That’s $5.5 million in funds that are not coming to the Council table for appropriation this year alone. Why do I say that? Because in an April 2, 2009, memorandum to the Council’s Education Committee Superintendent Weast makes clear, once again, that he will not be bringing e-Rate rebates to the Council for appropriation. So if the Council wants these funds, they are going to have to go and fetch them.

See below for April 7, 2009 letter from Weast to Education Committee revealing surplus unappropriated funds that have been carried from previous years.

Click here for April 2, 2009 letter from Weast to Education Committee where he tells the Council he will not be bringing e-Rate funds to the Council for appropriation. (See what the Council President said about these funds here.)

I will end with a quote from Superintendent Weast:

"Nothing builds trust like transparency."

Jerry Weast, foreword to Getting it Right-

Why Good School Communication Matters, 2008.

April 7, 2009 Weast to EdCo.

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Magazines & Newspape Business & Law 2008 newsletter

Examiner: County on the hook for Promethean Board payment

The Examiner's Leah Fabel reports on the Promethean Boards now present in MCPS classrooms and MCPS' inability to make this year's lease payment.

...Though the interactive “smart boards” are already in the classrooms, members of the council say the schools acquired them without permission, leaving the county on the hook for the funds...

...“This is an ongoing problem,” Ervin said. “This is why [Montgomery County schools get] looked at sometimes with a jaundiced eye — they’d rather ask for forgiveness than permission.”...

Ongoing problem? Only because the County Council allows it to be an ongoing problem! When will former Board of Education member, and now Councilmember Ervin, Chair of the Council's Education Committee do something about this "ongoing problem"?

How long will Montgomery County taxpayers have to support a spendthrift Board of Education and Superintendent that shops without competitive bids, buys without contracts, and spends money without appropriation?

Note: The Promethean Boards are on a 4 year lease payment plan. If the lease payment cannot be made, the Promethean Boards can be returned and the county will be "off the hook".

Read all about the taxpayer paid for trip to London during a travel freeze here, see the hotel here, and see the video here.

WTOP is also running the story.

Missing Royalties

As reported here, in January, Superintendent Jerry Weast told the MCPS Board of Education:

"All of our technology partners know they are not permitted to use MCPS testimonials in advertising." Superintendent Jerry Weast, January 7, 2009 answer to Question #9.

In response to the report on this blog, the MCPS logo was removed from the IQinVision advertisement. The testimonial remained, but the logo disappeared.

But this isn't the first time that the MCPS logo has been used in the advertising of a technology partner. Below is the Wireless Generation press release from 2005. Note the prominent MCPS logo. And note this sentence:

In addition, MCPS also will receive royalties on all sales of the software to other school districts nationwide.

Royalties? How much has MCPS received in royalties since 2005?

Multiple inquiries by national education activist Peyton Wolcott to Superintendent Weast as to the details of this royalty agreement have gone unanswered.

Have these funds been brought to the County Council for appropriation?

Anyone at the County Council, Inspector General's office, or State Attorney General's office paying attention?
Montgomery County Schools Partnership Rls 6.3.05

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Presentations & Spre

Andrews: "This is a serious mistake...the law is clear...crystal clear..."

The County Council Education Committee's February 23, 2009 meeting on Promethean Boards and E-Rate rebates was captured on video. The video is in two parts. See quotes from each video below and click on the videos to watch the meeting.
Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County uploaded a new video.
Hear Councilmember Ervin, "...The issue is that the Council has appropriation authority. Going forward we need a reporting mechanism by MCPS to capture these E-Rate dollars and rebate dollars for all funds. So we need to know what we are getting for our dollars. We need all the data that staff requested prior to budget disclosure. And in this case, there are many that believe that MCPS is taking on ongoing expenses that we are going to have to fund over the long term...."
Councilmember Andrews, "...it's about openness, accountability and authority...we weren't notified about the commitment to contract for this additional expenditure and so we didn't have any opportunity to approve it...This is a serious mistake in my view..."Councilmember Knapp, "When I look back...the magnitude of the purchase of this size never came up..."

Feb. 23, 2009 Part 1 - Promethean Board Discussion
*** *** *** *** *** ***Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County uploaded a new video.

Councilmember Andrews, "...I am concerned about the single commitment that was made to, for these funds of $13.3 million...through FY12, but Council has approved only $698,000 for this purpose...rebate funds aren't sufficient to pay for this...have to come back to public funds...that is tying the hands of both bodies...it's not the way to run things...the law is clear...crystal clear"Superintendent Weast, "...we want to be open and transparent and accountable...not any intent to deceive..."

Feb. 23, 2009 Part 2 - Promethean Boards Discussion

700 Promethean Boards - procurement still a mystery!

Examiner: Council panel questions schools’ spending on high-tech chalkboards

By Leah Fabel Examiner Staff Writer 2/24/09

Leah Fabels reports on the February 23, 2009, Montgomery County Council Education Committee meeting. 

Of note, is the misconception that only 2,600 Promethean Boards were purchased. That is not correct. According to MCPS, there are 3,300 Promethean Boards in MCPS classrooms. The only reason 2,600 Promethean Boards are being discussed is because that is the number that were purchased in the lease that a parent was supplied in response to a Maryland Public Information Act request to MCPS. That lease, signed by MCPS Chief Operating Officer Larry Bowers, has been made public via the Parents' Coalition website, not via Board of Education minutes or the MCPS website.

The purchase of the additional 700 boards still remains a mystery and MCPS Board of Education minutes do not reflect bulk purchases of Promethean Boards. An additional procurement of 700 Promethean Boards would represent an expenditure of approximately an additional $3.5 million.

From the article:

Councilwoman Valerie Ervin, chairwoman of the education committee and a former school board member, said the council lays out clear rules regarding when the school system needs funding approval from the council, and those rules were circumvented in this case.

“The way they went about this was not transparent,” Ervin said, adding that increased expenses are especially unwelcome in a time of economic calamity.

The school system “is taking on long-term expenses that will have to be funded in the long term,” she said. “And it’s not chump change.”

*****

Council panel questions schools’ spending on high-tech chalkboards

by Leah Fabel  | February 23, 2009

 The Montgomery County Council’s education committee said Monday morning that the county could be on the hook for millions of dollars in spending on classroom technology never approved by the council.

The expenditures — about $13 million during four years despite council approval for less than $1 million for one year — were used for the lease of 2,600 interactive online chalkboards that cost about $5,000 apiece. Portions of the cost will be covered each year by federal rebates for school district connectivity.

The lease expands the much-vaunted “smart board” technology to 65 percent of the county’s middle and high school classrooms. When the council approved the fiscal 2009 capital budget, it approved about $700,000 to install the boards in select middle schools.

Councilwoman Valerie Ervin, chairwoman of the education committee and a former school board member, said the council lays out clear rules regarding when the school system needs funding approval from the council, and those rules were circumvented in this case.

“The way they went about this was not transparent,” Ervin said, adding that increased expenses are especially unwelcome in a time of economic calamity.

The school system “is taking on long-term expenses that will have to be funded in the long term,” she said. “And it’s not chump change.”

Sherwin Collette, the district’s chief technology officer, said his department has made clear that the council wouldn’t be pressured into funding the initiative should county money come up short in the third or fourth year of the lease.

“If there were to be any shortfall, we’d reprioritize the existing tech budget to cover the costs,” Collette said.

But that, for example, could mean delaying the purchase of new school computers.

School system spokesman Steve Simon called the issue a case of differing interpretations of the council’s rules regarding financial appropriations and said there was never an intent to go behind the council’s back.

“We have a very strong commitment to transparency,” Simon said. “When you’re operating a two-plus billion dollar school system, there’s an awful lot of business being conducted every day, and we’re always happy to look at our procedures and make sure they’re as transparent as possible.”

Government - Quick Refresher on Appropriations

I've said before that Montgomery County School System appears to no longer teach government in the schools. This was reinforced after reports of this morning's Ed Committee Meeting for the County Council.

For those of you in need of a refresher, here is a definition of public appropriations law that I like from Answers.com:

The grant of money by a legislature for some specific purpose. The authority to grant appropriations, popularly known as the power of the purse, gives legislatures a powerful check over executive branches and judicial branches, for no public money can be spent without legislative approval. Congress, for example, can approve or reject the annual budget requests of the executive branch for its agencies and programs, thereby influencing both domestic and foreign policy. (See also checks and
balances and pork-barrel legislation.)

Thank goodness government was still part of the curriculum when Phil Andrews attended school in MCPS. I look forward to a follow-up when we find out exactly how those lovely 3,300 fancy whiteboards wound up in classrooms across the county, and whether anyone other than Dr. Weast and those invited to "the table" had a say on whether these tech toys were more beneficial than, let say, special education programs, science labs, textbooks, or teachers.

BusRadio Rides Again!

Did you think BusRadio was removed from Montgomery County Public School buses in December?
Think again.

Did you believe Superintendent Weast when he told WTOP's Kate Ryan that BusRadio was turned off for good? He was quoted on air as saying that "not everything they were listening to was appropriate?"
Did you believe the Gazette article that reported, "... Weast confirmed the cancellation of the radio service."
Did you believe the Washington Post article that said, "School officials said yesterday they have abandoned a trial of the radio service..."
Did you believe MCPS Chief Operating Officer Larry Bowers when he wrote to former Rockville Mayor Larry Giammo and said, "...a decision has been made to terminate the use of BusRadio."

If you believed the above statements, then you might like to listen to the Friday, February 13th BusRadio broadcast when the driver of MCPS Bus 5115 called in to the BusRadio on air show and gave a "shout out" to the kids that ride his bus from Richard Montgomery, Julius West, Ritchie Park and College Gardens schools. The driver of MCPS bus 5115 was entering a BusRadio "Love the Bus" contest to win a $200 gift card.

If you read the entire Washington Post article you will see that the BusRadio devices were NOT going to be removed from MCPS buses. In fact, the devices were going to be left on the buses and with just a flip of a switch....BusRadio can ride another day!

So now that we know BusRadio is still in use in MCPS, where are the proceeds from this commercial "partnership" going? BusRadio pays school systems a portion of the advertising profits to keep their system in use. Just like the E-Rate Rebate funds, these outside funds are a source of revenue to Montgomery County. When have these funds been brought to the Board of Education and County Council for appropriation?

$21,684,092.59

Montgomery County Council
Capital Budget Testimony
February 10, 2009

Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Capital Budget. This evening I would like to speak to a source of revenue for the County Capital Budget. The source of revenue is the rebates that Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) receives through the E-Rate rebate program. MCPS has been participating in the E-Rate rebate program since 1998 and in that time has received $21,684,092.59 according to the Universal Service website. The E-Rate money is not required to be used for Capital Budget expenditures, but as that is the focus of this hearing I will point out the benefit that those funds could have on this budget.

$21,684,092.59 is the equivalent of modernizing an elementary school, or 2 or 3 school additions or, an unknown number of bathroom renovations, window repairs or HVAC repairs. At present Appendix G of the MCPS Capital Budget lists 47 schools that needed bathroom renovations. That list represented only HALF of the schools in need of renovations. Any school that was anywhere on the modernization list was deleted from the list of bathrooms in need of renovation. No doubt, $21 million could have completed the listed renovations and those of the schools deleted from the list, giving all students access to workable bathrooms today.

The rebates that MCPS has received over the last 11 years are available to the public on the UniversalService.org website. A search of that site shows that MCPS received the following amounts in each of the following years:

1998 $1,500,617.92
1999 $2,425,319.57
2000 $1,535,174.02
2001 $1,434,388.33
2002 $1,756,316.93
2003 $1,902,003.78
2004 $1,731,744.92
2005 $1,497,545.12
2006 $1,760,241.90
2007 $3,459,021.34
2008 $2,681,718.76

http://www.universalservice.org/sl/
Attached is a Universal Service report for 2008 payments to MCPS.

Superintendent Weast maintains that he is not required to bring these funds before the Council for appropriation but can spend these funds without Board of Education or Council action. See the November 26, 2008 Memo from Superintendent Weast to the MCPS Board of Education. Available at the following link: http://www.parentscoalitionmc.com/MCPSExpenseReports.html

Council staff, however, in a January 29th memorandum, recommends that E-Rate Rebates “come to the Council for appropriation when they are received.”

http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/council/pdf/agenda/cm/2009/090202/20090202_ED01.pdf (See Page 4)

I urge you to support the recommendation of Council staff. Bring these funds to the Council table so that the use of these funds can be discussed and appropriated in public. The Capital needs of our public schools are great, and every dollar is needed. If for nothing more than to make sure that every child has access to a usable bathroom.

Thank you.
~~~~~~~~

UPDATE 4/8/09: $21,684,092.59 represents the total amount of rebates that MCPS could have received under the e-Rate Rebate program. The Universal Services website also shows how much has been disbursed to MCPS under this program. An updated disbursement number will be posted soon.