Illegal and Shady Moves at City Hall
City funds used to move city hall offices without necessary approval? Shady funding tactics for such a move? The legislative body outraged at such tactics?
If you think I am talking about the judge's decision against the Mayor yesterday, you would be incorrect.
While looking on Style's web site for an update on the decision, I found this article about the Richmond Public Schools administration's questionable actions in moving their IT department.
I am not the one questioning them, but two members of the School Board - the elected body that is supposed to represent the citizens and keep the administrative head in check - are doing so. Sound familiar?
In fact, try reading the whole article but insert "City Council" where you read "School Board "and replace "Mayor" where you read "Sherman" or "Administration" and tell me the situations are not frighteningly similar.
Schools auditor Debra Johns has found that the school system’s June relocation of its information technology department from City Hall cost more than $700,000. That’s higher than earlier estimates of about $540,000 and twice the cost of Wilder’s aborted move of the School Board offices out of City Hall Sept. 21.
The June move included costs to move the computers and 15 employees who occupied about one of the five floors in City Hall. That is a bad deal in any language.
School Board members say Johns’ audit reveals worrisome holes in the schools administration leadership and confirms a disturbing trend of administrators circumventing the School Board’s budgetary process.
What? Going around the established process of law? Surely, you jest.
“This is a pattern,” says School Board Member Keith West. “If [Jewell-Sherman] were willing to buy an aircraft carrier,” he says, “then she could do that, right? You keep extrapolating and it means that the budget is an advisory opinion of where we think they should spend the money -- and not an order.”
Excuse me? The school administration massaged the budget so regular procedures are avoided and thus become "advisory" actions which run an end around Board approval?
Johns’ report seemingly gives administration carte blanche in certain decision-making areas, some on the board complain. The report says the superintendent has purchasing authority and can delegate that authority to an agent.
The board inadvertently authorized many of the IT budget transfers, West says, after the administration asked permission to make some fund transfers in order to “balance the budget” at the end of the 2006 fiscal year.
“Who knew they were just trying to sneak something by the board there?” West says. “It seems pretty clear to me that that’s what was going on.”
What? You mean the shenanigan's and distrust exist on the higher floors of City Hall, too? I thought only angels were up that high?
School Board member Carol A.O. Wolf bashes administrators, referencing an angry letter Mayor Wilder sent to Jewell-Sherman a few months prior to his attempt to push schools out of City Hall: “It brings new meaning to the term ‘duplicitous.’”
The near $700,000 to move 15 people and a computer bank was paid for with small transfers of money, assembled into one big pot apparently behind our elected representatives' backs.
Not to be outdone by the Mayor's move, the RPS wants to prove they can waste and misappropriate /lose money, too.
The audit "also provides a list of bills from outside vendors involved in the move. Not all have been paid in full, and Johns’ total also does not account for nearly $49,300 in outstanding invoices from vendors."
I wonder if proper moving procedures were followed to protect the computer records' confidentiality? Were the movers interviewed beforehand? Do any of the questions asked of the Mayor's actions in handling his attempted move apply to the RPS themselves?
Disappointingly, Board Chairman Braxton tap dances in defense of the RPS administration and claims they did not violate the letter of the law, just the spirit.
That's ok, right?
West, thankfully, puts it a bit more bluntly, without being ugly. "The administration is willing to do whatever it wants to do, and two, there’s money there when they want to find it.
“If we can’t trust the school administration to do what they’re supposed to do, that’s a big problem.”
It's good to see the Board - at least some of them - call out the RPS administration on such tactics. We'll have to wait and see if people (a) find out about this and (b) if they have as big a snit as they did about the Mayor's actions.
Weren't the schools recently screaming about how they were not receiving all of their funding recently and how terrible it was? I guess it is hard to operate "for the children" when you are taking bits and pieces of their entire budget to pool together for such an operation as this, not to mention running up the cost so blatantly (see time line below).
Talk about shallow and two-faced. Hell, this is Rubik's Cubed-faced.
To cap it off with whipped cream, Style also lists a time line of considering the schools IT move.
The cost estimates done by Plant Services in June 2006 totaled $183,000. By February 2007, the RPS administration's estimate presented to the School Board committee was a whopping $483,000.
The audit also claims the Board was notified of the pending move on a date when the School Board did not meet.
So, the move went ahead anyway and went from $483,000 to about $700,000 with out anyone batting an eye, and the Board, when finally presented with a report of the move, asked for an audit.
Duplicitous. Shady. Underhanded. Wreckless disregard for public monies. These terms now apply equally throughout City Hall.
Will you read about it any of this in the paper? Will they obsess on the conflict between this administration and this legislative body? Probably not.
Will Council work itself into a lather with investigations and proclamations over this matter to get to the bottom of it? Doubt it.
Will the RPS administration continue to act without accountability, do as they please, and always claim they are the victim? Most definitely.
If you are looking for a trifecta bet in Vegas, safer odds you can not find.
~
If you think I am talking about the judge's decision against the Mayor yesterday, you would be incorrect.
While looking on Style's web site for an update on the decision, I found this article about the Richmond Public Schools administration's questionable actions in moving their IT department.
I am not the one questioning them, but two members of the School Board - the elected body that is supposed to represent the citizens and keep the administrative head in check - are doing so. Sound familiar?
In fact, try reading the whole article but insert "City Council" where you read "School Board "and replace "Mayor" where you read "Sherman" or "Administration" and tell me the situations are not frighteningly similar.
Schools auditor Debra Johns has found that the school system’s June relocation of its information technology department from City Hall cost more than $700,000. That’s higher than earlier estimates of about $540,000 and twice the cost of Wilder’s aborted move of the School Board offices out of City Hall Sept. 21.
The June move included costs to move the computers and 15 employees who occupied about one of the five floors in City Hall. That is a bad deal in any language.
School Board members say Johns’ audit reveals worrisome holes in the schools administration leadership and confirms a disturbing trend of administrators circumventing the School Board’s budgetary process.
What? Going around the established process of law? Surely, you jest.
“This is a pattern,” says School Board Member Keith West. “If [Jewell-Sherman] were willing to buy an aircraft carrier,” he says, “then she could do that, right? You keep extrapolating and it means that the budget is an advisory opinion of where we think they should spend the money -- and not an order.”
Excuse me? The school administration massaged the budget so regular procedures are avoided and thus become "advisory" actions which run an end around Board approval?
Johns’ report seemingly gives administration carte blanche in certain decision-making areas, some on the board complain. The report says the superintendent has purchasing authority and can delegate that authority to an agent.
The board inadvertently authorized many of the IT budget transfers, West says, after the administration asked permission to make some fund transfers in order to “balance the budget” at the end of the 2006 fiscal year.
“Who knew they were just trying to sneak something by the board there?” West says. “It seems pretty clear to me that that’s what was going on.”
What? You mean the shenanigan's and distrust exist on the higher floors of City Hall, too? I thought only angels were up that high?
School Board member Carol A.O. Wolf bashes administrators, referencing an angry letter Mayor Wilder sent to Jewell-Sherman a few months prior to his attempt to push schools out of City Hall: “It brings new meaning to the term ‘duplicitous.’”
The near $700,000 to move 15 people and a computer bank was paid for with small transfers of money, assembled into one big pot apparently behind our elected representatives' backs.
Not to be outdone by the Mayor's move, the RPS wants to prove they can waste and misappropriate /lose money, too.
The audit "also provides a list of bills from outside vendors involved in the move. Not all have been paid in full, and Johns’ total also does not account for nearly $49,300 in outstanding invoices from vendors."
I wonder if proper moving procedures were followed to protect the computer records' confidentiality? Were the movers interviewed beforehand? Do any of the questions asked of the Mayor's actions in handling his attempted move apply to the RPS themselves?
Disappointingly, Board Chairman Braxton tap dances in defense of the RPS administration and claims they did not violate the letter of the law, just the spirit.
That's ok, right?
West, thankfully, puts it a bit more bluntly, without being ugly. "The administration is willing to do whatever it wants to do, and two, there’s money there when they want to find it.
“If we can’t trust the school administration to do what they’re supposed to do, that’s a big problem.”
It's good to see the Board - at least some of them - call out the RPS administration on such tactics. We'll have to wait and see if people (a) find out about this and (b) if they have as big a snit as they did about the Mayor's actions.
Weren't the schools recently screaming about how they were not receiving all of their funding recently and how terrible it was? I guess it is hard to operate "for the children" when you are taking bits and pieces of their entire budget to pool together for such an operation as this, not to mention running up the cost so blatantly (see time line below).
Talk about shallow and two-faced. Hell, this is Rubik's Cubed-faced.
To cap it off with whipped cream, Style also lists a time line of considering the schools IT move.
The cost estimates done by Plant Services in June 2006 totaled $183,000. By February 2007, the RPS administration's estimate presented to the School Board committee was a whopping $483,000.
The audit also claims the Board was notified of the pending move on a date when the School Board did not meet.
So, the move went ahead anyway and went from $483,000 to about $700,000 with out anyone batting an eye, and the Board, when finally presented with a report of the move, asked for an audit.
Duplicitous. Shady. Underhanded. Wreckless disregard for public monies. These terms now apply equally throughout City Hall.
Will you read about it any of this in the paper? Will they obsess on the conflict between this administration and this legislative body? Probably not.
Will Council work itself into a lather with investigations and proclamations over this matter to get to the bottom of it? Doubt it.
Will the RPS administration continue to act without accountability, do as they please, and always claim they are the victim? Most definitely.
If you are looking for a trifecta bet in Vegas, safer odds you can not find.
~
posted by Jon Baliles | 8:25 AM
<< Home