The issue at the time of the Chaconas administration was whether or not it could borrow from its construction bond accounts to cover its deficit. The Alameda County Superintendent Sheila Jordan ruled that it could not.

Faced with the deficit that will be addressed when the Governor releases money it is obligated to pay the District, the present State Administration can borrow using “Temporary Borrowing Between Funds”, statue 42603, according to Troy Flint of the District.

Without knowing if 42603 existed in 2003, the ruling of Superintendent Jordan lacks context. However, if the law did exist then, I am sure that the Chaconas Administration would not have been silent and therefore doubt it was in existence at that time. Since other districts practiced using borrowing from other funds, including construction funding, it would not be surprising that districts successfully lobbied to get the right to borrow short term. And, my guess is that after Oakland was forced into receivership for lacking the power to borrow, that is what happened.

The down side of a district having the flexibility to borrow is that structural problem could go years not addressed while a hidden deficit continues to grow.

Jim Mordecai

Oakland school district’s chief financial officer says the deficit will be close to $40 million as a result ($30 million from the deferred state payments, plus the newly uncovered negative cash balance).

So in answer to your question about whether 1) the state bailed out the district and whether it 2) cleaned up the deficit, I suppose the answer would be “yes” to the first part and “no” to the second.

Some board members said last week that this fiscal situation sounds remarkably similar to that which the district faced in 2002-2003, before the state takeover — a comparison I plan to research further.

The REGULATIONS are not part of the ED Code. If you have ever tried to figure out how to staff an SSC, you might not think the Ed Code is full of “easily understandable regulations” because, they are not regulations (they are statutes) and not written in plain languages.

Moreover (a big word meaning “and”) The Education Regulations are here: http://www.calregs.com/linkedslice/default.asp?SP=CCR-1000&Action=Welcome.

Finally, here is great link on how in the eyes of the CDE the OUSD has been failing over the last three or four years under the AYP standards. I wonder if the district really sent the letters to all the parents letting the parents know the LEA PI status. I doubt it.. Please see: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ti/piyr3c1t3yr4.asp

Please for the love of God hire someone COMPETENT to run the distict.

Sadly, I think Jack O’s final gift to the OUSD will be its dismemberment. OUSD will not be “unified” within three years.

42603. The governing board of any school district may direct that moneys held in any fund or account may be temporarily transferred to another fund or account of the district for payment of obligations. The transfer shall be accounted for as temporary borrowing between
funds or accounts and shall not be available for appropriation or be considered income to the borrowing fund or account. Amounts transferred shall be repaid either in the same fiscal year, or in the following fiscal year if the transfer takes place within the final 120 calendar days of a fiscal year. Borrowing shall occur only when the fund or account receiving the money will earn sufficient income, during the current fiscal year, to repay the amount transferred. No more than 75 percent of the maximum of moneys held in any fund or account during a current fiscal year may be transferred.