Neither big businesses nor the state unions are doing Schools any favors. I just wish the OEA & other teachers unions would realize the State Unions are ready to sell the entire school system into the Pacific Ocean, while simultaneously making a hypocritical argument that Teachers Unions shouldn’t complain because that would hurt State Employees.

Wish they cared 1/2 as much about the schools as they do about State Govt. Same with Big Business.

If you look at the video of the most recent Finance and Human Resources Committee meeting, you will hear the administration explaining how the $60 million borrowed from school construction funding last school year will be repaid this school year.

According to Budget Department administrator Mr. Coleman the District does temporary borrowing. It has borrowed from construction fund and is currently speaking to the County about borrow temporary funding to have flexibility to make payments across each month. According to Mr. Hal temporary borrowed money is schedule to be repaid with $50 million scheduled in December and $10 million in April. In December property tax collected in November is distributed.

What I am trying to understand is the reference by Mr. Coleman to property taxes includes Measure G’s approximately $20 million and then is the District borrowing in part against Measure G to repaid school construction money borrowed last year. Enough to make my head swim because decentralized expenditures of Measure G money is being spent at the school sites.

Borrowing against existing money doesn’t cause interest to be charged. Borrowing from the county, or privately, will. But without internal borrowing we are singing 16 tons and another day older and deeper in debt.

As for the State auditor, I don’t think borrowing usually comes to the auditor’s attention unless short term borrowing isn’t repaid.

Jim Mordecai

Thank you for clarifying.

It would greatly increase the cost to the state; but, if the state by statue, or better yet by constitutional law, was required to deliver payment for the school year in a lump sum at the school year start, the need to borrow would be less and add stability in school district’s finances.

I am not clear that Federal money could be required delivery in the same fashion.

Jim Mordecai

I did not mean that the District borrowed the money permanently from its set aside of Construction bond money. Nor did I mean that the Board prior to the state take-over was trying to use construction bond money and not pay it back with future attendance earnings.

I did mean that the borrowing was to deal with the cash flow problem districts have when they don’t have sufficient cash to cover payroll but have attendance that would support borrowing until the state pays up.

This borrowing is necessary even when the state isn’t delaying payment because payroll and other bills are often due before the state makes entitlement payments that are not given as a lump sum at the beginning of the year but delivered in so many payments per year.

I don’t know how many times a year the state is scheduled to pay a district. I suspect that the delayed payment(s) are usually after the Governors May revise in recent years.

The state crisis has just compounded a continuing problem that all districts have to face. The two or three percent required reserve may be able to be touched for cash flow payments but I am only guessing in that regard.

Jim Mordecai

If you’re right, this is a disaster waiting to happen to schools scheduled for construction that haven’t received funding yet. If you’re wrong, then you should be checking your facts before putting them out there.