Plastic Football Field for Churchill HS! BOE approval not required, taxpayers will foot bill if needed!

This is is 1 ton of crumb rubber. Each MCPS
football field requires 120 of these bags. More
crumb rubber must be added each year as the
little crumbs wash off the field and go home
with players. 

No Board of Education approval is required for Churchill High School parents to hand over their football field to a private entity and install a plastic field! Plans have already begun!

Observer:  Booster Club beings plans for turf field installation


Remember that at Wootton High School taxpayers were tricked into believing that the "Booster Club" would be paying the balance on the cost of installation of plastic grass.  That didn't happen.  The Board of Education had no trouble at all throwing $205,178 into the project when the "Booster Club" fundraising fell short!  Mold at your school? Sorry, the priority funding in MCPS is for artificial turf football fields, your mold issues can wait 10 or 15 years for funding! 

Here's a delivery of tons and tons (each bag is 1 ton)
of crumb rubber. A pile of crumb rubber was dumped
in the parking lot. 

Here's where the crumb rubber
ends up. It runs off into streams
and storm water.  But, Montgomery
County is "green" so this is OK
with our elected officials. 

Do we get value for our education dollars?

Its not a question of spending money, but spending money wisely.

Are we getting a good return on our precious MoCo tax dollars?

Here is an interesting perspective from today's New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/08/23/spending-too-much-time-and-money-on-education/spending-on-k-12-education-triples-and-results-slide

from the article:

There is a total disconnect of student job expectations, college curriculums, and the realities of today’s labor market.

Something to ponder during the next round of budget discussions. 

Breaking: Board supports litigation against County Council

At today's Board of Education meeting a unanimous Board of Education voted on a resolution to support litigation against the County Council. The resolution was read by Board President Patricia O'Neill.


2.4 Authorization for Legal Action Related to the Board of Education’s
FY 2011 Operating Budget Request


Today's vote comes after Board President O'Neill and Superintendent Weast had already threatened litigation against the County Council in a meeting with Council President Floreen according to The Gazette.


Was there any doubt that the Board would then come out with a unanimous vote today? This Board of Education is always ready to sue parents, litigation is their middle name. What did the Board of Education just vote to do? They voted to spend 1,2 or even 3 teachers worth of salary by an outside (not County) law firm on litigation against the County Council.


How is it that the Board of Education has the funding for this litigation but not for the one teacher at the Einstein Visual Arts Center? Where is the pot of endless litigation funding?


Note that in the discussion of this potential litigation there was no discussion of the cost of litigation.


This discussion showcased the first and foremost problem with the MCPS Board of Education. They have no concept of how much money they are spending and they never discuss or analyze the cost versus the benefit of an action.


Outside counsel could easily end up costing MCPS the salary of a classroom teacher (or more) if this litigation goes forward. Yet, there was no mention of where the funding would come from if this litigation is initiated, and no discussion of a limit on how much could be spent on this proceeding. Superintendent Weast was given a blank check to sue the County Council.


Just one more example of a spendthrift mentality of this Board that diverts funding away from classrooms by failing to exert any oversight over the actual spending that is done by MCPS administrators.

Board wants $67.5 million more for FY10 Capital Budget

This evening a unanimous Board of Education approved the following resolution in a "surprise" meeting at Rockville High School's choral room:

...Resolved, That the Board of Education request that the County Council increase the FY 2010 appropriation for the modernization of Paint Branch High School from $20 million to $87.5 million to allow Montgomery County Public Schools to accelerate the construction bid for this project to take advantage of the present market conditions...

State Audit: Board needs a Policy

In a January 2009 Audit of Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS), the Maryland State Office of Legislative Audits recommended that:

"MCPS should adopt formal policies governing long-term obligations and cash management."

What did that recommendation mean? It meant that the Board of Education should establish policies to govern when leases are used, how much should be purchased using leases (how much of budget), and what type of investments should be used when cash is available.

In your own home these decisions would sound like this, "Should we buy a new car or used, should we pay cash or borrow money, should we put our money in a savings account or buy a lottery ticket?"

The bottom line is that the MCPS Board of Education does not have policies in place for governing these type of long-term debts or investments, and the State Auditor thinks they should.

This is of particular importance as Superintendent Weast is now increasing the annual lease payments, and expanding the use of leases to Promethean Boards and the artificial turf field for Walter Johnson High School.

In January, the MCPS Board of Education increased the amount of the master lease agreement to $133 million without any discussion.

Maybe it is time for a policy to address the ever increasing long term debt of MCPS?

Here is what the State Audit said:

Capital Lease and Cash Management Policies Need
to Be Established

MCPS had not adopted a policy to govern its use of long-term lease
obligations to finance operations. Long-term liability levels and their
related annual costs are important obligations that must be
managed within available resources. An effective policy should
provide guidelines to ensure MCPS manages its long-term liabilities
accordingly. By law, MCPS is not authorized to issue bonds or
similar debt instruments to finance capital or operational needs.
However, MCPS used a capital leases to purchase equipment such
as buses and computer hardware. According to MCPS audited
financial statements, capital lease payments through 2012 had a
present value of $45.9 million at June 30, 2007, with $19.5 million
due within one year.

Although MCPS had cash management policies for areas such as
the pension trust and student activity funds, it did not have a policy
for investing excess cash from routine operations. Cash and
investments from governmental activities totaled $50.2 million as
of June 30, 2007. The notes to the fiscal year 2007 audited
financial statements indicate that MCPS’ deposits had been
sufficiently collateralized so that the deposits were not subject to
custodial or credit risk.

Policies to govern the use of long-term obligations to finance
operations and manage cash and investments are recommended by
the Government Finance Officers Association.

Another $43.2 million in leases = one minute of Board time

On April 15th, this blog contained a review of the leases entered into by the MCPS Board of Education. It turned out that the bulk of the leasing agreements had been executed during the two year term of Board of Education President Nancy Navarro, from December 2006-December 2008. The two year total for leases was over $88,720,855.

Continuing the pattern that had been established during President Navarro's term, in January of this year President Shirley Brandman lead the Board of Education to approve a lease funding agreement that paled in comparison to the prior two years. A lease agreement for $133,022,753 was approved by the Board of Education without discussion. According to the memorandum from Superintendent Weast, MCPS wanted an additional $43.2 million in lease funding for the FY 09 and FY 10 years.

Watch the Board of Education approve this mammoth increase in lease funding on January 13th here. Don't worry, it won't take much of your time. The item starts at 4:16 and is over by 4:17. That's right - one minute of time to incur $133 million in long term debt funding.

The MCPS Board of Education members were apparently so accustomed to approving leases over the last two years, that they didn't even blink an eye at the thought of committing Montgomery County taxpayers to $133 million in debt in January of 2009.

Below is the memorandum from Superintendent Weast on this lease funding agreement.
4.4.1 Master Lease

Publish at Scribd or explore others: startup start

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:

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.

Pres. Navarro didn't sign lease

As reported here, Superintendent Weast is not going to be able to make the FY 10 lease payment on the 2,600 Promethean Boards ordered and delivered in June of 2008 as planned.

How was a lease executed without the funding needed to support the payments?

In Maryland, procurements by a state agency are governed by the State Procurement Regulations. Procurements over $25,000 are to be approved by the Board of Education according to MCPS Policy, MCPS Regulations and the MCPS Procurement Manual.

The Promethean lease(see page 4) called for a signature of the Board of Education as lessee. The Board President is responsible for signing contracts and other documents on behalf of the Board according to the Board of Education Handbook (page 6). The Board of Education President on June 16, 2008 was Nancy Navarro. However, the box that is labeled for the signature of the Board of Education on the lease does not show Board President Navarro's signature.

Why didn't Board of Education President Navarro sign the 4 year lease for $3.3 million per year, for 2,600 Promethean Boards in June of 2008?

Ervin..."not going to beat that horse to death"

At the March 30th, Montgomery County Council Management and Fiscal Policy Committee meeting the discussion turned to the technology budget for the Montgomery County Public School system (MCPS). During the discussion, MCPS Chief Technology Officer, Sherwin Collette described the new "My MCPS" portal* that is in development. Councilmember Ervin interrupted his presentation to ask what the "savings" were for the implementation of this new technology initiative. In her statement, Councilmember Ervin brought up that a lot of money had been spent on Promethean Boards but that she was "not going to beat that horse to death".

Whoa! That horse isn't dead! That horse may be out of the barn but it is far from dead. In fact, it is running wild!

The 2,600 Promethean Boards that were purchased in the summer of 2008 through a lease signed by MCPS COO Larry Bowers** still have 3 payments of $3.3 million each to go! And the payment plan for Year 2 of the lease has already fallen through. There is still plenty of time to pull in the reigns on that expenditure!

And the public still has no idea how the other 700 Promethean Boards appeared in MCPS classrooms.

*If anyone can find reference in MCPS Board of Education minutes to this new "My MPCS" portal including social networking features initiative, please post in the comment section to this article. Thank you!

**The lease has a signature box on page 4 for the Board of Education as "lessee". COO Larry Bowers signature appears there instead.

Weast can't make lease payment on Promethean Boards

On January 7, 2009, Superintendent Weast answered questions from MCPS Board of Education members about the purchase of 3,300 Promethean Boards. In that memo it was revealed to the Board that 2,600 of the Promethean Boards* now in MCPS classrooms were purchased through a lease agreement. The lease calls for annual payments for 4 years of $3.3 million per year. In response to Question #6, Superintendent Weast stated,

"For FY10 we plan to use e-Rate reimbursements to cover the entire $3.3 million obligation."

However, the E-Rate rebates for FY10 aren't going to be $3.3 million. On Monday, March 30th, MCPS will tell the County Council's MFP Committee (see page 55 of the pdf document) that the E-Rate rebates for FY10 will only be only about half of that amount at $1,676,033.

That means that Superintendent Weast is going to be $1,623,967 short in his Promethean Board lease payment for FY10.

What will be cut in the MCPS budget in order to make this lease payment, or will 1,300 Promethean Boards be returned?

*Promethean Boards are a brand of interactive white boards. Cost of system is approximately $5,000 per classroom.