Packard/Pickens meeting tonight 3/8

[delilah]

Elphaba65 are you out there?

[Go Plainedge!]

Meeting Minutes "Module" still not working.

It's a good thing there are some people in the community that have already copied the minutes for comparison when that portion of the site is reinstated.

[elphaba65]

Delilah,

Good morning! I will try to answer some of your previous questions concerning the "Packard" fund to the best of my memory.

I guess we somehow have to start on the long journey from the time the bond was first introduced. If you have been around a long time as I have you know the bond failed the first time because of the three board members associated with it and the community's distrust of them. When the three new board members were elected, Don Riccuci, Rich Mallow and Tom Dick, the bond was introduced again to the community. Now however, with a new board the information needed to pass the bond was made available. The hatred between the school board, teachers union and administration seemed to be replaced with a spirit of co-operation. The politics that ran the school board for to many years had changed. Hopefully we will never go back to the days that politics ruled and teachers wore black shirts. I believe that is why the bond passed the second time, but it was several months later and at a higher amount than the original bond.

When the bond was approved and the bids went out ( don't know the time frame) the bids came back over the amount of the bond. We all know that the district can not spend more than the approved amount so all the bids were rejected. Dr. Richman and Jeff Burns discussed with the BOE changes to be made before the request for bids went out again. I remember changes to the floors, a different type of tile, I think the same for the bathrooms, maybe a change in the auditorium, and I really don't remember what else. If I recall correctly it was more of a downgrade in materials than the actual building.

This is where the Packard reserve funds come in. Instead of the air conditioning being part of the bond, the funds to pay for it $600,00 were being used from the "Packard" fund of $990,000. The $390,00 that remained the BOE wanted to transfer into a designated "Repair/Reserve" fund but by not approving the budget the voters rejected this transfer.

As to why we have money left over from the bond we have Jeff Burns to thank. If you attended the meetings there was always an update on the construction and Mr. Burns was on top of everything. If things were not exactly as they should be he would not OK them to be paid. I believe that there is always a percentage built into construction for change orders, and because of the knowledge and background on construction that Mr. Burns and Dr. Richman had most changes were not at the district's expense.

I know Mr. Dowdell is always telling people to go to meetings, being there and hearing the discussions first hand is different from obtaining the minutes from the meetings. I too have minutes, but I attended as many meetings as possible to get the information first hand.

I would hope to see more people at the three meetings advertised for this week.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

[justfacts]

Elphaba65

That's a nice long story you gave delilah about the bond issue and the Packard fund - but you didn't answer the main point of her question.

Since there is still a need for Capital funds to repair the Packard building - i.e.; the need has not gone away - then how could a Capital Fund set up with public money and approved by the voters back in 1999 be spent on any other need than its original purpose? The law and regulations concerning Capital fund creation and maintenance is very clear on that point. Until the original need goes away the money can't be spent for any other purpose (Budget Handbook - NY State Education Department) When the need does go away, the funds are returned to the General Fund Balance.

Next, as noted in the minutes about the remaining amount, $390,00 - the funds in the project can be used five days following a public discussion and vote on the subject, for another purpose - with the restriction that the original fund be repaid in a two year period - 50% the first year, 50% the second year. No such public discussion and vote was held on either transfer from the Packard Fund.

Now we do understand that because of the late filing of the original Bond issue past the State deadline to do so, that less State Aid was available - and the spending level had to be reduced for the construction of the new Middle School. However, one of the items Mr Burn's "cut" from the plans to meet the reduced spending was this air conditioner. Subsequently, it is claimed, that a cost savings amounting to about $1 Million dollars was achieved. If that be true, then why was the still needed Packard Fund balance tapped to buy the air conditioner?

It was tapped with misdirection by putting the issue on the overall Budget issue for that same year and calling the partial $600,000 fund transfer a "Fund balance transfer to reduce Property Taxes". It wasn't until a later meeting that it was revealed that the money actually went to buy an air conditioner for the new school - at the same time it was announced that there would be $1 Million more available in the Bond issue.

Now requests are being made about raising funds to effect repairs on the Packard building - thus proving that need never went away - and the funds should never have been used for any other purpose.

I believe those facts are at the heart of the questions that delilah has asked about the Packard Fund money - a total of $990,000 that is no longer intact and available for its original purpose.

[delilah]

Dear Ephaba,

Thank you for your input. Your gracious response reminded me of Mr. Mallow and Dick when they were first elected. One of the cornerstones of their platform was the Packard Fund.

I have done my own research and yes, indeed the 600,000 went to the New Middle School air-conditioner. You have given me great insight as to the "logic" involved in that decision.

I have also been informed that the "leftover" bond money can not and will not be used to reimburse the now defunk "Packard Fund". So it seems to me with all good intentions the board made a mistake. Because in the end, they had left over bond money that they could have used for the air conditioner.

I don't remember any "hearing" before they decided to spend that money? does anyone?

This brings me the 390,000 left in the "Packard Fund". When the vote went down the ability to move that money became a dead issue. The remaining 390,000 should have stayed in the Capital Reserve Portion of the budget. How were they legally able to spend that? I think we
Should we be looking for a 50% payback this year and 50% payback next, according to the Minutes of Oct 14, 2003. (Fat chance)

I am deeply saddened that 990,000 has been spent and nothing got fixed. And now we need that money because of overcrowding at Eastplain. My kids went to Packard it was old and always leaked. $990,000 could have gone a long way to "fix" it.

I remember an early plan that put Dr. Richman and his Admin. in Packard so "The Kids" could have the offices for classrooms Why can't we still do that?

[rinx]

delilah said:

I remember an early plan that put Dr. Richman and his Admin. in Packard so "The Kids" could have the offices for classrooms Why can't we still do that?

Those offices were once classrooms. When the district sold the admin building on rt.107 they moved into the HS science wing. Even though there was and still is plenty of room in the basement of the HS for offices. They thought of themselves back then as they do now. They screwed us and the kids out of dollars and classrooms.
Admin does for themselves and not for the kids.
THIS YEAR IT (BUDGET) BETTER BE FOR THE KIDS OR THIS PARTICULAR ADMIN WILL NEVER SEE ANOTHER BUDGET PASS.
No more double digit increases for the administration portion. THE MONEY IS FOR THE KIDS!
Budget grades...
F - Richman
F - Richman's mini me (Mallow)
Mallow wants to run again?
This truely shows how out of touch the guy really is.
I don't know of anyone that will vote for him. If Mickey Mouse ran against him, Mickey would win in a landslide.
That's enough ranting on my part.