Prepared Text for Board Meeting –
Marc A. Schare
614 791-0646 Home
614 791-0067 Work
614 791-1779 Fax
First, I want to thank
Jonathan for all of his hard work. Tonight, we meet, just one day before the
statutory deadline, to
approve a new five year forecast. Ideally, the forecast we approve would be the
result of a process that included input by the Treasurer’s Advisory Committee,
vetting by that committee and intense scrutiny by the finance committee of the
Board of Education and ultimately, the entire Board and the public.
Unfortunately, that has not been the case.
To understand why, I want
to lay out a timeline. The Treasurer’s advisory met in late September to start
discussing details of the forecast. The Board of Education received a
preliminary version of the document just one week ago. The finance committee, Ms.
Best and I, met with the Treasurer last Wednesday to discuss policy issues that
were imbedded in the forecast, however, the Treasurer
did not believe he should make adjustments without approval from the entire board.
Indeed, we all received a *final* version of this document, complete with
notes, on Friday Evening. The document does reflect input from the Treasurer’s
Advisory Committee, however, that group received a
copy of the completed forecast for the first time on Friday, with no time to
provide meaningful input, either as to either the assumptions or the raw
numbers. With no ability to make changes before the statutory deadline, either
by the Treasurer’s Advisory or the finance committee, it appears that the
administration is expecting this forecast to be rubber stamped.
Since I’m not a rubber
stamp kind of guy, I went to the Ohio Revised Code and looked at what might
happen if we do not approve the forecast tonight. Here is the penalty:
5705.391(B) The state board of education, in accordance with sections
3319.31 and 3319.311
[3319.31.1] of the Revised Code, may limit, suspend, or revoke a license as
defined under section
3319.31 of the Revised Code that has been issued to any school employee
found to have willfully contributed erroneous, inaccurate, or incomplete data
required for the submission of the five-year projection required by this
section.
Since not submitting the forecast would
constitute “incomplete” data, this is not an option. We must submit a forecast
and therefore, I will be voting in favor of this forecast solely because the
penalties for not submitting a forecast are more serious than the damage that
may be caused by submitting a forecast which has not been vetted by anyone on
the board or in the community and therefore, may or may not reflect our
thinking, our values or the wishes of the community.
That said, in my cursory review of the
forecast, there is a lot to like. Expenses out of the general fund this year
will be fairly flat, a remarkable achievement given average salary increases of
5.15% to certified staff and 5.4% to classified staff. Another surprise is that
the general fund balance, even including the new contingency that we will add,
is positive clear through the 2009-2010 fiscal year.
This implies that it may be possible to delay an operating levy all the way out
until 2008. I’m in no way suggesting that this is the right thing to do, only
that this new forecast suggests it is possible.
All of this good news does not overshadow the
requirement for this forecast to be scrutinized to the detail that the
community expects. Speaking for me, I have questions about approximately two
dozen different line items. I therefore propose the following. Regardless of
the outcome of tonight’s vote, the Treasurer’s Advisory will meet in November
after having sufficient time to review the forecast and the assumptions. In
addition, the board, either individually, as a whole or through its finance
committee, will discuss the forecast with the treasurer and the advisory and
report back on November 27. Finally, the outcome of our bond levy will play a
role in determining the final numbers.
We will then vote to approve a new forecast at either our November 27 or
December 13 meetings. Despite our vote this evening, it is my hope that each of
us affirms to the community our commitment for budgetary scrutiny and public
involvement through the Treasurer’s advisory.
Some say that the 5 year forecast has little
meaning and I’ve been privately urged to not make a big deal about this. I
respectfully disagree. The five year forecast has historically been the single
document that district critics look at when they criticize us for whatever it
is they will criticize us for, so it is a big deal. At the end of the day, the
new forecast, after review and debate, might look exactly as it does now, or it
could be very different, but the community will have confidence that this board
will not be rubber stamping a document with a 5 year expenditure of half a
billion dollars any time soon. Thanks for your indulgence.