Rockaway Twp School Board

Things That Make One Wonder.

2011-02-22T11:36:00.002-05:00

It’s kind of funny (peculiar not ha-ha funny).. When asked to document the “many” inquiries from Ted Doty, our school business administrator can quickly retrieve data and create a Power Point presentation illustrating the nasty, vindictive person that is me. But when asked to recall the most recent of those correspondence for response to a Government Records Commission complaint, a time extension is needed.

Originally Verbist was given a deadline of February 25 to present correspondence relating to three records requests; my inquiries as well as his responses but James Verbist found the need to ask for and was granted a 5 day extension..

I understand that administration is busily preparing a budget but James was able to open the data base to show me as a bad person, why can’t he extract information to prove he’s a good guy.

Ponderous

Isn’t little Jimmy cute?

2011-02-19T11:27:00.011-05:00

Verbist just emailed the following; at 7:24 am 2/19/11.

Doty Response Letter 2 19 11 re photographs

Verbist, you've enough trouble keeping accurate records. Now there’s a failed attempt at the legal profession...

First of all , Board Policy does not have the force of law. So stop wasting taxpayer money, your and Chief Ardin’s time by pursuing this folly.

Secondly, there is no date or time stamp on the pictures you reference. So we have no idea what was going on in the room

Finally, I have taken no pictures. I explained that but apparently you refuse to accept what you’re told.

But it is kind of cute that you boldly repeat the phrase “cease and desist” as if you have power, authority and community respect.

Oh Oh A Verbist threat

2011-02-18T20:55:00.003-05:00

I received the correspondence shown below on 2/18/11. Briefly, James Verbist finds me in violation of Rockaway Township School Board Policy 9326.1- Recording and Photographing of Public Meetings. James specifically mentions “unauthorized photography “ and tells me to remove “any and all photographs which were illegally taken…” from my Blog.

Document _4_ -

Well first of all, James omitted a comma between the words “photographs” and “which”. More important however, I haven’t photographed any Public Meeting or closed session ;either legally or illegally. Nor have I posted any photos of public meetings or closed sessions to my blog..

James, I realize you’re upset but you’ll have to be more specific. BTW don’t you have to respond to a GRC complaint by the 25th?

My response to Friedberger

2011-02-18T13:33:00.001-05:00

With any luck it will get published.

Dear Editor,

On a typical Day, the sun will rise, the sun will set and if the Rockaway Township School Board President speaks, his words are at the very least hyperbole.

Neither State nor County Education officials have ruled that my allegation of fund misuse is incorrect. In fact, a department of education commissioner ruled state aid would be withheld for the exact violation committed by the RTBOE. If the board’s year-end chicanery is allowed, RT taxpayers will unnecessarily spend hundreds of thousands I think the situation warrants further investigation.

The State Election Law Enforcement Commission passed no judgment on my allegations but asked for evidence that only last year’s board candidates have. And clearly they won’t self incriminate.

Regarding the solar project, RTBOE President Michael Friedberger wants us all to forget that the project was sold as a revenue replacement not a simple cost saver. But I’m glad the board now accepts my analysis.

Friedberger also loves to talk about School Ethics Commission decision C22-03 but neglects to say that my previous complaints prompted advisory opinion A13-02, which reduced union influence on board members negotiating contracts. .

But studying history is a good thing. With Decision C14-97, the School Ethics Commission found “although he had personal involvement when he…announced that he was not renewing the contract of the administrators”, Superintendent, Gary Vitta did not violate the school ethics act.. Vitta’s personal involvement was that the woman he fired was suing for sexual harassment, religious discrimination and hostile work environment. The decision says a great deal about the School Ethics Commission. And hopefully the RTBOE learns that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Ted Doty

Rockaway Township

Why is Transparency So Difficult for Verbist?

2011-02-17T11:21:00.001-05:00

Slick Jimmy’s avoidance transparency is at a ridiculous level.. This April 27th there will be two open seats on the RTBOE but the district’s News Release provides both misleading and incomplete information…typical Verbist.

The press release isn’t clear as to what seats will be open. For example, are two, three year seats open?. If so, that would mean neither Frank Giarratano and Diane Power are running this year. A second option is that two other members are leaving unexpired terms. The final option is that either Frank or Diane are not running and and some other member will leave an unexpired term. Clarification is important since some potential candidates prefer to fill an unexpired term as Sue Salny did in her first run.

The press release should have explained that candidate kits can be obtained from any district office. Often, candidates prefer a lower profile while gathering petition signatures. Completed petitions however must be submitted locally.

Real Problems and Giarratano’s Avatar, Bertram

2011-02-16T17:57:00.002-05:00

Rockaway Township has at best a mediocre education system. as reported by Deborah Grefe at the December 8 RTBOE meeting.(click for the mediocre presentation)

Our $200,000/year School Superintendent ,who claims he’s worth more in the private sector responded “Well, look at our competition:”: Slide 3 of the presentation shows the competition…Gary Vitta, if you can get a better offer take it…please save us the trouble of firing you.

Superintendent Vitta and Business Administrator, James Verbist.improperly transferred between $212K and $750K; at taxpayer expense of course.(read Siphoning Funds II).

There are other issues as well click here to read about federal grant money. And then there’s the ill fated $2.6 solar fiasco click to read "control costs..."

Amid these important and costly issues, Frank Giarratano and his Communications Committee worked diligently on an internet avatar, Bertram to obfuscate facts and discredit me by miscounting my communications to the RTBOE.. If anyone is interested, click here for the RTBOE communications record. The grand totals are 96 communications, 92 of which were comments, 4 of which were inquiries. For all 96 communications the were 0 responses or answers: the records reflect 20 board meetings. click here for worksheet

Important issues go unresolved while board members play games and swear to Slick Jimmy Verbist’s lie.. Another way to look at it, “ Nero fiddles while Rome burns”.

One Picture Worth a Thousand Words

2011-02-13T12:16:00.002-05:00

Remember January 19 when Slick James Verbist told the world Chartwells donated the board meeting feasts but then on February 9 denied that he had said it?

Well here’s a couple of pictures of the pre meeting feast.. The topic of this session was to count emails from Ted Doty, project future emails and assign a cost.

“Slick Jimmy” who isn’t known for accurate record keeping blew this assignment as well…even as Sue Salny looked on.

Instead of socializing and plotting against one or two whistle blowers, perhaps the board should explain why they defied DOE directives and mismanaged $212,055.47…or even better, work on improving NJASK scores…or explain why they hired a superintendent with a sexual harassment scandal in his past.

Even More Regarding February 9

2011-02-11T17:15:00.001-05:00

Those in attendance at the last RTBOE meeting were mesmerized by the Legend of Ted Doty.Like most tall tales however the story was filled with hyperbole. It’s my understanding that I’ve been credited with around 200 “inquiries” this past year, all of which robbed student programs.

Here are the facts based on a review of the last 22 meeting agendas as well as archived emails. I wrote to the board 98 times not 200. Ninety four of those missives were commentary and links to blogs, news articles or editorials. That is,they were of no cost to the district. Paper copies weren’t even required since all my correspondence was digital.

It should be noted that the 4/14/2010 agenda indicated 18 correspondence between James Verbist and myself. This was a thread initiated by Verbist from his home on Palm Sunday (yes I have copies). The flurry of activity reported February 9 represents 3 inquiries and 7 commentaries. BTW, all other correspondence is either Verbist’s refusal to comply or my clarification of the 3 requests.

Bottom line, we know the board took hundreds of thousands from the students since 6/30/10 and we know the sun rises, the sun sets and if Mike Friedberger’s lips are moving, he’s lying

More On the February 9 Meeting

2011-02-10T16:54:00.001-05:00

Rather than discuss the ongoing complaint regarding denial of access to public records or the RTBoE disregard of a Department of Education directive that cost taxpayers $212,055.47, the board opted to rehash an 8-year-old ethics complaint at the February 9 school board meeting. By the way, my 2002 through 2003 complaints helped prompt Advisory Opinion A13-02, which reduced union influence on board members negotiating employment contracts.

But studying history has its benefits. With Decision C14-97, the School Ethics Commission found that “although he (Superintendent, Gary Vitta) had personal involvement when he…announced that he was not renewing the contract of the administrators”, Vitta did not violate the school ethics act.

What was the personal involvement? A woman Vitta let go was suing him for sexual harassment, religious discrimination and hostile work environment. The decision says a great deal about the School Ethics Commission and hopefully the RTBOE learns that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Circling Wagons: Board’s Defense Strategy

2011-02-10T13:40:00.001-05:00

I guess I should stick with the wagon metaphor but after hearing what occurred during the February 9 RTBOE meeting I felt “Corralling the Rats” would be more appropriate.

Anyway, the board’s current rally cry is: “Ted Doty asks too many questions!”. Think about it, educators opposed to questions. Is it any wonder that our district test scores lag behind the county average? Our supposed leader wants us to “ponder the competition” but my suggestion is: Vitta et al, look at what you teach”

To divert attention from the question at hand , Board President Friedberger once again attempts to make an issue of past questions raised and the expense involved. Well the current issue that gets the board’s collective panties in a bunch is fund mismanagement.of $212K. There is conflict between an assertion made by the Interim School Business Administrator, Ralph Goodwin and directives forwarded from the DOE Commissioner and Director of the Finance Division.

I’ve registered a formal complaint to obtain access to records regarding potential fund mismanagement and requested the DOE Commissioner to weigh in on the apparent policy conflict. However,I should get feedback before sharing those correspondence.

Ignored DOE Advice

2011-02-05T17:26:00.002-05:00

A frequent commenter, Bertram took exception to my suggestion that a federal grant for education jobs in the amount of $122,545 would be spent unwisely and grow future obligations as we face austere days ahead. Bertram commented that he or she was present when Superintendent Vitta warned the board that no future grants exist to maintain staff hired with the jobs fund.

While Vitta drew attention to the jobs fund, Verbist freed up $212,055.47 to be used in any manner the board desires, regardless of future impact. By stealing funds from last year the board is able to pay severance to retiring building administrators, which is a current year expense. As a result, $212k in current year funds are available to hire and sustain staff

Here’s how it works. Because prior year funds are covering a current year expense, the new found current funds remain part of the tax levy and subject to 2% annual increases.

In the past, Abbott districts have been penalized for such chicanery with reductions in state aid but the Verbist/Vitta scam involves the local levy…not a state problem.

Our fist line of defense is elected board members but it appears they lack the technical skill to recognize the problem nor do they really care.

The above explanation shows why improper encumbrances violate GAAP as well as official DOE directives. Sign up for vote by mail and remind your neighbors as well

Some Think I’m Over the Top

2011-02-04T16:02:00.001-05:00

But not everyone. A DVD entitled “The Cartel”, an expose of the education system.is now available. Perhaps we should all view it.

If you don’t get the chance however, at least view this short documentary

If you think corruption can’t happen here, Look what happened in Roxbury.

Make sure you watch,Bertram. You might think twice before trusting the word of school administrators or board members (assuming you’re not one)

OPRA update

2011-02-03T13:57:00.001-05:00

I received a call from the Government Record Commission today (2/3/2010).. I was informed that since my record requests regarding the $212k transfer, calculation supporting the $238k SUI payment and open purchase order register have not been satisfied and there has been no request for clarification or additional time from Verbist, my requests are considered denied.

I’m currently completing a GRC complaint form.

Siphoning Funds II

2011-02-02T22:28:00.001-05:00

What we know is that funds were transferred from the 2009-2010 school year to the current in direct violation of generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) as well as Department of Education directive. What we don’t know is how much was moved or if the DOE will take corrective action.

On How Much Was Siphoned:

I

So far, only the county attempted explanation. Regarding an encumbrance of $212,055.47, Interim County Executive Business Administrator, Ralph Goodwin wrote:

“Severance pay for administrators in the amount of $212,055.47 was encumbered by the district as a result of notice provided by two administrators of their intent to retire as of June 30, 2010. They then changed their retirement date over the summer to be end of this year and the board has taken action to confirm this. The prior year purchase order was liquidated which made the money available to the current year. That account will again be encumbered in the current year for the same purpose”.

In plain English, Goodwin claims Steve Gottlieb and Sylvia Ziegler announced their retirements as of June 30, 2010, which was last fiscal year. As the story goes, the two had a change of heart and decided to work an additional year, which makes their unused sick day payouts a current year expense. Now, prior year funds cannot be used for current employee expense. This a long standing accounting principle reemphasized in two Department of Education memos; one on 9/16/2003 and the other 5/12/2006. .

Of course many residents will say “so what? The district is obligated to pay and it really doesn’t matter which fiscal year is charged” but here’s the financial impact:

Last year’s operating loss of $2.3 million anticipated payment of the unused sick day obligation and it (the loss) was absorbed by RT taxpayers. But since last year’s cash is now covering this year’s expense, $212k of current year funds is free to be spent elsewhere. Thereby increasing future obligations. RT.residents will be taxed twice for the same expense.

II

Another $238,177.17 is currently in question. Ralph Goodwin implied that our district is self insured for unemployment and stated that staff reductions in the 3rd quarter of 2010 depleted our fund. The encumbered reserve of $238k was to replenish it. Well, possible staff reductions were announced on March 10, 2009 but there was no announcement that it came to fruition in fiscal 09-10.. Due to copyright laws.I’m prevented from presenting that Daily Record article written by Rob Jennings but the maximum staff reduction would have been a guidance counselor, education technologist and librarian plus 3 part time aides. Hardly enough to deplete our fund and require a 238K replenishment.

I’ve submitted an O.P.R.A request for documents supporting the calculation but have been denied access without valid reason.

So technically, strong suspicion surrounds the siphoning of $238,177.17.

III

Another $6,000 was siphoned from last to this year showing blatant disregard for established procedure.

IV

Mathematically, this leaves $335k unaccounted for. There’s an accepted method to to test this number for appropriateness (is it all legit or siphoned cash?) . But curiously, school administration has denied access to those records too. I’ll keep you all informed.

What actions should be taken?

As I’ve stated previously the RTBOE has done little more than deny access to relevant documents and threaten legal action. Despite evidence to the contrary, County officials claim correct procedures were followed.

But the state has yet to weigh in and per the referenced 5/12 2006 memo, Abbott districts would have lost state aid for similar indiscretions. I suggest the local tax levy be reduced for every siphoned dollar.

The Budget season Has Begun: Changes for 2011-2012

2011-01-27T17:51:00.001-05:00

As promised by Governor Christie, school districts can no longer apply to the education commissioner for waivers to adjust the local levy by more than the calculated cap; ten loopholes have been eliminated. However, it must be noted that this state-level restriction only shifts cost control responsibility to local voters.

Passage of local ballot questions to increase tax levy has been changed from a 60% affirmative requirement to a simple majority. This change combined with restrictive voting hours and strategically scheduled after school activities gives unfair advantage to those favoring increased spending. The public must take advantage of “Vote by Mail” to level the playing field.. Get to the municipal building and complete an application today!

A new revenue account 18-4522 has been established to record the $122,545 Education Jobs Fund monies from the federal government. The funds must be spent prior to September 2012 and may be used for employee salaries to provide school-level educational and related services. In a September 20, 2010 memo however, the Department of Education encouraged districts to avoid spending that grows future obligations. “they should provide your district with the breathing room needed to plan for educationally sound, balanced budgets in the austere days to come. It is unwise to assume that there will be additional streams of federal jobs money…” Wise advice that will most likely be ignored.

Superintendent Vitta holds budget details close to tis vest but I’ll continue to expose what I can.

Just for You, Bertram

2011-01-23T15:19:00.009-05:00

The below presentation are copies of documents mailed to the Morris County Executive Superintendent of Schools, DOE Finance Division and RTBOE on 1/24/2010. I’m posting it to my blog so that you have specific questions to ask your buddy, James Verbist. and/or the official with whom you spoke at the county office.

A little advice, over $450,000 has been misappropriated and Verbist will evade the intent of your inquiries. James is a bureaucrat who is quite adept at evading truth. So you’ll have keep him on topic and push hard. When caught, James tends to squirm and make an excuse to move on, he’s only confident when he thinks the BS is working…Never mistake Verbist’s confidence as professionalism.

Despite your claimed results from contact with the County I believe that after reviewing evidence, they’ll arrive at a conclusion similar to mine.

Further, I believe the DOE will not take kindly to Verbist’s flagrant disregard of written procedure

Circling the wagons

2011-01-20T14:14:00.005-05:00

After adjournment of the January 19 RTBOE meeting, a member of the public remarked.; “that was quick, I wonder why”. I responded. “It’s called circling the wagons.

District costs are escalating and revenue is shrinking . Also the the board has been caught misappropriating $218,461.27 and likely another $238,177.17. Critical negotiations are underway with the teacher’s union and our lead negotiator, Joe Jackson has attended only 4 of the last 14 board meetings. The rest have conflicts of interest. The RTBOE is drawing close hoping to fend off attacks.

But last night’s meeting did have a few interesting moments:

From the Agenda:

Item 4, Section, D Finance : The district Business Administrator, James Verbist.was “authorized to purchase goods and services without bidding in amounts not to exceed $36,000 in the aggregate” as well as to “ purchase goods and service without quoting in amounts not to exceed $5,400 in the aggregate.”

Analysis:I reviewed all open purchase orders as of 6/30/2010 to put the above referenced resolution in context. There were $749,825.37 open purchase orders of which Verbist misappropriated $456,638.44 without financial oversight. Of the remaining $293,186.93, Verbist would be subject to accounting controls for only $174,723.84. Given the terms of the approved resolution, Verbist would have complete authority over $575,101.53 of $749,825.37 in purchase orders (or 77%).

Conclusion: The resolution places overwhelming control of purchasing in the hands of a district employee who also has control over cash disbursement and the district’s receiving function. The situation requires increased oversight not less.

Why does the RTBOE rely on so little accounting control while hundreds of thousands in district assets are at risk?

Regarding unsolicited email:

Apparently, a member of the public asked Business Administrator, James Verbist how he/she might stop “unsolicited” email. Since it was directed to Verbist, I can only assume the questioner’s email address has been published as a contact on district matters. Therefore I doubt that any email sent to the address can be deemed “unsolicited”.

However, Verbist took it upon himself to provide legal advice. He suggested that a request for removal from the distribution list be sent, followed by filing an harassment complaint with the police.

I’m no lawyer but I would think the content of the unwanted email has to meet some standard for harassment. Further, I understand that a police complaint does not guarantee an investigation and the complainant would be required to file formal charges with the court for legal action. Shame on you James, you have enough difficulty handling your official duties without taking on legal issues.

Regarding Board correspondence:

At the January 5th meeting, a resident asked why correspondence listed on the agenda is not read or available online. It took two weeks but Vice President Sue Salny gathered the nerve to respond. Sue commented that the correspondence in question is addressed to board members and not the public. President Mike Friedberger agreed and added that he doesn’t favor “killing more trees” With further distribution. Killing tress with digital communication? Really?

Until recently, there were two email addresses for board contact. One to contact board members directly and the other to officially contact the board through the administration office. The later contact method disappeared. Public comment is now limited to a brief 3 minutes at the beginning of board meetings.. A fortress of solitude is being built by the board that clearly isn’t of benefit to the community. But I don’t think it will stand too long. Last night, an ardent supporter of the board expressed frustration that she is unable to comment after or during discussion of an agenda item.

Like I said, “circling the wagons”.

How Verbist and Vitta Siphoned $218,461.27

2011-01-14T17:42:00.001-05:00

On November 3rd, the district’s auditor Kathi Mantell, CPA reported an encumbered balance as of 6/30/2010. Simply put, encumbrance preserves cash to cover goods and services ordered in the waning days of one fiscal period but paid in the next (usually within ninety days). For less scrupulous, “creative” accountants however, encumbrances are used to preserve cash that would otherwise be removed, which for school districts means a return of tax levy or transfer to a restrictive reserves.

There are very specific Department of Education rules governing encumbered funds designed to hinder dishonest creativity (Click here to view the rules) but School Superintendent Vitta and Business Administrator James Verbist knowingly broke them.

Through OPRA requests 2010-27 & 2010-28 I discovered purchase order 100001E for $212,055.47, which was written on either 2/24/2010 or 4/22/10 – click here to view the two “official” records. At any rate, on 12/31/2010 the encumbrance was canceled, rendering the cash useable for any purpose.

Initially I believed the RTBOE’S 6/16/2010 resolution to transfer up to $200,000 of excess operating funds was seed money for a solar energy project click here to view 6/16/10 resolution. But since 100% financing was available for solar, the money was improperly transferred for general purposes. My best guess is cash was needed to meet annual payroll increases.

In addition a stale dated purchase order to Verizon for $4,555.10 was encumbered. Since the PO date is 11/20/09 and no activity was recorded, there is no contractual commitment and no funds should have been pushed into the 2010-2011 school year. click here to view details

Finally, two blanket orders totaling $1,850.70 were encumbered. Blanket orders are issued for frequently purchased items and open amounts do not constitute valid orders. Encumbrance for blanket orders are expressly prohibited click here for details

The district auditor, executive county superintendent, Department of Education Division of Finance and RTBOE members have been advised of this accounting control lapse.

My comments from the January 5 board meeting

2011-01-06T14:10:00.000-05:00

I made these comments at the last board meeting. and actually got them all in except for item 11. The superintendent put his head in his hands, gave the board president a high sign and I was gaveled. Superintendent Vitta can't deal with pressure i.e. he has no balls.

1. I have a couple of comments and a quick question. Let me read them through and you can ignore me as you usually do or respond when I’m done.

2. First, I fully endorse Tucker Kelley’s comment regarding board minutes, which he made by at the last meeting. I believe accurate records are essential for decision-making and historical as well as legal reference.

3. For example, I notified the board secretary of an error in the November 3rd minutes. They refer to board approval of a June 10, 2010 resolution. However, neither of last June’s meetings was held on the 10th and since James twice discussed the resolution and received permission to issue a press release, it must be of importance and should be accurately recorded.

4. Also, the 2009-2010 annual report, which was accepted and submitted to the Department of Education, lists Frank Giarratano as board President. So as of now, the minutes of the 9-10 reorganization meeting document Friedberger as president but the annual report, lists Giarratano.

5. These examples may or may not cause problems but they do speak poorly of a board that so often accuses residents like Tucker and me of not having their facts straight.

6. On my blog, I’ve posted a proper analysis of the solar project based on information provided by James Verbist. The analysis clearly shows that the project will not provide the hoped for revenue streams in the first 5 years.

7. And unfortunately many, including this board assumed that high New Jersey SREC prices and implied returns would continue beyond the initial investment period. The economic reality is; legislation that imposed renewable energy standards, created the SREC market as well as the Alternative Payment penalty was designed to help the solar industry reach economies of scale and compete with fossil fuels.

8. That is to say, as New Jersey’s solar capacity increases, the need for incentives will decrease. This is reflected in the legislated 2.5% annual reductions in Solar Alternative Compliance Payments. SREC prices will logically follow suit and long-term profits are not going to happen.

9. But what’s done is done and the real problem, excessive cost still haunts this district. Over the past 5 years payroll rose 4% annually while tax ratable and student enrollments declined.

10. Also, the district just experienced 2 straight years of operating loss totaling $4 million and Trenton as well as local residents are saying they will no longer support your current cost structure.

11. To complicate matters, the salaries of our superintendent, business administrator and two building principals currently exceed the new superintendent salary cap for a district our size. The remaining four principals are dangerously close to that cap. The board needs a plan to deal with this issue before Vitta’s contract expires.

12. On November 17, Mike Friedberger mentioned potential conflicts preventing certain board members from contract negotiations. Has there been some resolution and who will represent the board in negotiations?

For those waiting on Verbist's press release, it won't happen. I'll report why in a few days and here will be more on accounting controls as well as the contract negotiation committee, Stay tuned.

Hey Board Members! Control Costs; Don't spend revenue you'll never see.

2010-12-29T18:34:00.004-05:00

For the past few months the RTBOE focused on a revenue solution to financial difficulties, resulting in approval of a capital project to install 2,493 solar panels with a peak output of 245W –line20 of the below worksheet. Listen to board member Diane Power explain.

After multiplying the average daily sunlight available to a stationary, south facing solar panel at Latitude and Longitude coordinates for Rockaway Township (lat. 40.9, long. –74.5), it appears the system will generate 847 Mega Watt hours and Solar Renewable Energy Certificates annually. (SREC are marketable energy rights). See line23 below.

SREC can be sold in several states but the New Jersey market provides the highest prices (click here for prices on listed markets). So my analysis assumes all will be sold here.

Further, SREC sales prices plus commissions must always be less than the Solar Alternative Compliance Payment that utilities are required to pay if the state’s renewable energy standard is not met through the purchase of SREC.

Finally, the alternative payments (SACP) decrease 3% per year to account for expected declines in the cost of solar going forward.

Given these assumptions, the project’s 5-year revenue stream will be $2.6 million while the project winning bid totaled $2.5 million.

For the skeptical, to yield $1.3 million profit, my price estimates would have to be 50% higher; an impossibility given legislated reductions in SACP.

I also estimate 5-year energy savings of $860,000. Based on 54% of $300,000 electric bill with annual increases of 3% for 5 years – line 30 above. Business Administrator, James Verbist is hoping for 100% electric savings but that seems unlikely since the district’s maximum electricity needs will fall in the least productive months –line 9 above.

SUMMARY
These numbers aren’t dismal but clearly they are not revenue streams for which the board is hoping.

I think it’s time for the board members to address the obvious cost problem and stop praying for revenues that will never receive. Page 2 of the district’s annual report (CAFR), student enrollment has declined an average of 1.6% annually for the last 5 years. On the other hand, payroll cost increased 4% annually over the same period.

In the last two years the district suffered operating losses totaling $4 million (see highlighted numbers below), the governor is unable to support the current cost structure at previous levels and local taxpayers defeated the last budget submission.

To further complicate matters, Salaries for all six principals and the business administrator approach or exceed the superintendent salary cap for a district this size ($155,000).

The board needs to remember these realities as they approach teacher contract negotiations and a new budget season.

As promised, commentary on Deborah Grefe's 12/8 Power Point

2010-12-16T21:14:00.004-05:00

On December 8, 2010 Deborah Grefe, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction opened her presentation by telling the audience that the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) contained four basic education reform principles but then listed only three:

· Stronger accountability for results.
· Increased flexibility and local control.
· An emphasis on teaching methods that have been proven to work.

I’d make an issue of the missing principle but that first PowerPoint slide was the only reference to specific objectives or actions taken by the district to meet them. At program end however there was an overall assessment of progress, which I figure included the three named and one mysterious legislated principle.

In terms of test results for regular instruction Language Arts RT lagged behind all Morris County districts in our socio economic group between 3 an 8 percentage points with six grade Language Arts the most deficient.

In math, the district lags behind our counter parts between 2 and 6 percent with 3rd graders being most deficient.

Now instead of addressing reform principles or a proposed action plan, Superintendent Vitta suggested the public ponder the Morris districts comprising our socio economic group. It was as if he threw up his hands and said “but look at who our competition is”. Well Vitta likes to compare his job with private sector CEOs and we know Sam Walton never complained that Kmart was his competition, he just planned a strategy to succeed. Vitta’s salary is 40k more than Governor Christie and RT deserves something better than lame ass excuses.

The community insult continued with a discussion of how tracking students rather than grade levels would be more beneficial. And I thought, “Quarterly report cards track student progress the goal of NSLB is improvement of the system.

Grefe pressed on stating “what teachers do is less important than what teachers are able to get students to do!” Does anyone know what that nonsense phrase means?

Mercifully, the presentation concluded with a quote by Thomas Friedman:

· When I was growing up, my parents used to say to me; “finish your dinner, people in China and India are starving. My advice to you today is finish your homework, people in China and India are starving for your jobs.”

So I guess that means failing schools is our kids’ fault. But rest assured Grefe and Vitta will ask us to pass the next school budget to maintain our high standards for education.

Another Red Flag

2010-12-10T13:12:00.009-05:00

As I previously noted, there is a danger in combining all district operations under one single authority. Well, another suspicious transaction was brought to my attention. On page 8 of the 12/8 agenda, sealed bids were received regarding the disposal of four district vehicles. Note that Tucker Kelly bid $2,601 for vehicle #26 and Liberty Motors won with a bid of $2,601.99. (see below)

Two bids within $.99 is a bit coincidental and it’s hard to imagine Liberty’s wining bid was submitted without any inside information. Was there collusion between Liberty and someone within the district?

Decide for yourself but it looks pretty strange. Based on this observation. I think a detailed review of the bidding process is warranted.

12.8 trucks

The December 8 Meeting with voice links

2010-12-09T15:25:00.002-05:00

At the December 8 RTBOE meeting, Rockaway Township Advocate, Tucker Kelly rose to ask about submitted bids for the planned solar project. Basically he asked if the bids included all costs such as the $60,000 roof preparation. Well I only worked in construction management for a year or so but I do know each trade (Electrical, Roofing, etc.) submits their own bid. The Prime Contractor compiles total cost adding his/her own fee. It appears in this case, ARMM Associates is the prime contractor. So the correct answer would have been “no Mr. Kelly, everything is not included.”

Actual response was delayed until later in the meeting when Business Administrator, James Verbist sidestepped Kelly’s question about roof prep (and Armm Associates fee) saying “to the best of my knowledge” costs such as roof penetration to secure solar panels was included. James answers questions he wants to be asked but never the ones that were. And what’s this “to the best of my knowledge” crap? Bottom line, the winning bid was Barrier Electric Co., Inc. for $2.4 million but we should expect more.

Okay, we now have a multi million-dollar project. Does anyone know what we’re purchasing? I speculated 540 panels in my blog "The Solar Project Smell Test” but an unsure Verbist suggested we "pick a number" like 600. I’m sorry but wishy-washy answers from guys spending millions of our tax dollars…even if he does expect a good return is maddening.

And about that return. It’ll take 4063 SREC (marketable energy rights) sold at $640 over the next 5 years to yield $2.6 million…. and we have no idea whether it’s even possible or if the district will hire a broker or manage the sales in house (If there’s a God, it won’t be Verbist).

To be fair however, there will be energy savings. It was mentioned in a few meetings that the electric bill for, Stoney Brook and Copeland is about $240,000 per year. At the December 8 meeting, Mike Friedberger mentioned a 54% annual savings for those schools; about $130,000 per year or $650,000 for five years. It seems an almost total reliance on SREC sales so somebody better decide on a plan…quickly.

Finally, there’s still a question of weak accounting control. One employee controls both purchasing and cash disbursement. Past auditors have noted the issue but it was felt that mitigating the problem would be too costly. Besides the school board has to authorize expenditures. But that was before the district decided to incur debt without voter approval and the board blindly accepted everything the business administrator says.

Do Something Puzio, Use Your Investigative Skills

2010-12-05T16:31:00.009-05:00

The RTBOE Facilities Committee Chairman, Frank Giarratano presented a solar project estimate of $210,000, which was a lease purchase with five annual payments of $42,000. Although the estimate wasn’t documented the discussion was noted on page 2 of the September 7, 2010 minutes. On November 3, Business administrator James Verbist spoke of a $3.5 million estimate. Two weeks later solar sales representative, Frank Moore estimated $2.6 million.

At full retail, a Sunforce 39326 260 Watt Solar Kit with Sharp Modules costs $1084.91. If an installation cost of 1.5 times material cost is added, the total installed cost per panel would be $2,712.27. Therefore, the RT school district could purchase and install 500 panels for $1.356,137. To be on the safe side, I’ll even add an error factor of $200,000 making my back of an envelope estimate $1,556,137for 500 installed panels.

Obviously the project Giarratano envisioned on September 7 is far different than the Verbist or Moore plan; there’s between $2.26 and $3.25 million difference. If you accept my calculation, someone should explain the extra $1.1 million dollar in Moore's latest guesstimate.

We’ve heard from Frank Giarratano, the public relations professional on the board but board member Mike Puzio has expertise in instigative science, which I’m sure includes forensic accounting. Let’s hear from him. Puzio likes to question my commentary, why can’t he serve the community by asking where our money is going?

Come on Puzio, do something besides seconding motions to open and adjourn meetings

Financial Condition and the Solar Project - a PowerPoint Presentation

2010-11-28T19:40:00.006-05:00

Please view my presentation. I hope the RTBOE is watching too.

Ted