UPDATED: Lancaster school trustees attempt to conceal truth about LISD finances

estherspeaks says:

It is imperative that Mr. Allen and others continue to tell the whole truth about what is happening in Lancaster. The president and the majority of the board continue to put their heads in the sand as to what is happening in the district. Dr. Lewis is the tail wagging the dog. Since the Board president knows so little about parliamentary procedure, he has ridden rough shod over the other board members and their rights to get information or their right to question what is happening with the paid staff.

Dr. King's request to pull an item from the consent agenda concerning finances was voted down by the majority of the board when as a member of the board she has the right to ask any question prior to any vote being taken. Point of order gives a board member the right to ask questions and to debate an issue unless the majority of the members vote to close debate(which was not done). Since the rules of order were violated, Dr. King had the right to question the clear violation in which her item was denied. Since none of the board seems to know the rules of procedure, then these unjustified mistakes will continue.

If the voters really want change, we need to get people willing to run and release the present members from their positions and get people in there who are willing to learn, listen and ask the proper questions. Dr. King and Carolyn Morris cannot do it by themselves.

interestedcitizen says:

Didn't someone point out during budget hearings that ADA revenues were overstated? Didn't someone say that we should budget on actual ADA received in the previous year instead of an optimistic figure? In other words, wasn't an ADA revenue shortfall actually foreseen, or shouldn't it have been foreseen by someone who was acting prudently? Doesn't this reveal a poor approach to budgeting based on optimistic numbers when prudence would dictate a more realistic budgeting approach?

It seems to me that during budget sessions, criticism was lodged at the administration for being so vague in the manner it presented its budget, putting numbers in broad categories instead of the specific categories that it used in the 2006-2007 budget.

This doesn't look accidental to me. It looks intentional. It looks to me like the supt. intentionally overstated the money dedicated to instruction, when the truth was that he overstated that number by over $3 million when he made his 2007-2008 budget presentation. It appears that he intentionally misled his board and the public.

Shoving things under the rug, as they've done for the past three months, over the request of other board members who have the absolute privilege to pull items off the consent agenda, appears intentional to me. Given that kind of intentional behavior to keep information out of the public eye removes the presumption that these are true mistakes. The whole point of keeping it out in the open is to discuss apparent errors and to correct them immediately. Backdating things and amending budgets after the end of a budget year indicates an intent to hide the truth.

He says he never lies. The people under him just make mistakes. If anyone disagrees with him, the person who disagrees is either a liar, a misinformer, or a distorter of the truth. I'm starting to wonder.

OleBurt says:

Mr. Allen is exactly right with his observstions.

The tenor of a school district is set by the board of education and superintendent. There are only two members who advocate openness - Dr. Marjorie King and Ms. Carolyn Morris. The other five members and superintendent Lewis have a fortress mentality and Lewis has been the major factor in developing this atitude. The philosophy of the superintendent has a trickle-down effect. In Lancaster's situation the end result is not good

Thanks to Lewis' inability to provide quality leadership and management the district has borrowed more than $11,000,000 over the last four years to help the superintendent make ends meet. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent on interest that should have been used in the classrooms.

I hear that the Texas Education Agenct is auditing the Lancaster ISD. Keep your fingers crossed, Mr. Allen. Maybe something good will come out of this for the children.

interestedcitizen says:

We need to know exactly where we are financially. To hear Lewis talk, we're getting better every year, with a larger year end fund balance. That year end fund balance is cash in the bank, but it is cash in the bank provided by a short term bridge loan, the principal amount of which has been growing larger and larger every year since Lewis has been here.

That bridge loan must be repaid out of operating and maintenance money, because it is for operations and maintenance. It can't be paid out of debt service money because it is not for capital improvements.

To be honest about it, if we end the year with 3 million cash, but we owe six million in a short term loan that is due in full during the fiscal year, we are really in the hole by 3 million at the end of the year. The truth is, if we end a fiscal year with 3 million in borrowed funds and a 6 million short term obligation, we need 6 million that year to pay off that bridge loan.

True, some of the revenues to pay off that 6 million dollar loan will come from "settle up" funds, but, in our case this year, we were over a million dollars short getting enough "settle up" money to pay back the bridge loan.

Don't just look at the year end fund balance to know where we are. Look at our obligations. We owe $6 million in a short term loan, in addition to classroom instruction, debt service, building maintenance and other operating expenses.

The short term loan is coming due in February. It isn't in the budget. If it is show us the data. Click on the budget in the article above and show us the row and column where the $6 million in revenues comes from to pay back that loan.

In closing, if the data show where the money is, why hide the data behind a consent agenda every month? If a trustee wants it on the table for the world to see, why hide it? It's your duty to be transparent. Be transparent. You aren't being transparent. You put the burden of proof on us to prove you aren't shooting straight. We're showing you the data, and we're showing you that your numbers don't add up.

estherspeaks says:

It is the policy of the administration to hide anything doing with finances and to intimidate anyone (even a board member) if they question why or how things happen in LISD. Lewis continues to lead through intimidation and accusation. It is time for the public to rise up and ask for his resignation as well as those on the board that continue to hide their heads in the sand. It is time for a revolution of ideas in LISD!

interestedcitizen says:

Is there a difference between a "budget adjustment" and a budget amendment? When is it an adjustment and when is it an amendment?