I have been trying for weeks to get a handle on how much the MMSD spends on various programs. As I’ve exchanged e-mails with Roger Price and Superintendent Rainwater, it has become clear that the MMSD cannot (or will not) provide figures on how much was budgeted for any particular program in the previous year, how much was spent in the previous year, and how much was budgeted for the current year.
Calculating and providing those three sums creates a “transparent” budget, i.e., a budget that allows the average citizen to see where the money came from and where it went.
Since school board elections began more than nine months ago, various people have called for a more transparent budget process. In attempting to get figures on Reading Recovery, I said to the superintendent in a recent e-mail:
Those of us who follow district activities are looking for some transparency in the budget and administration decision-making, meaning that the budget clearly documents where money comes from and where it goes — a goal that I hope that we all share and will achieve in the next budget.
In response the superintendent wrote:
In regard to your concerns about “transparency” in the budget the Administration operates within the policies and procedures established by the elected Board of Education. I believe that the budget does clearly document where the money goes and where it comes from in a format that meets Generally Accepted Government Accounting Standards and the requirements of the Department of Public Instruction.
Then he hoisted his favorite dismissal of suggestions about how the MMSD might improve operations and information:
Obviously each individual person wants the budget to reflect his/her own individual detailed interest. That is not possible in a document intended for general distribution. The District’s finances are audited every year by an independent auditor.
In other words, “Ed, but you are one individual, and the MMSD is not going to produce a transparent budget.”
Likewise the superintendent is saying:
Thank you very much, Barb Schrank, but you are one individual, and the MMSD is not going to produce a transparent budget.
Thank you very much, Larry Winkler, but you are one individual, and the MMSD is not going to produce a transparent budget.
Thank you very much, Jim Zellmer, but you are one individual, and the MMSD is not going to produce a transparent budget.
Thank you very much, Joan Knoebel, but you are one individual, and the MMSD is not going to produce a transparent budget.
Thank you very much to the 24,360 who voted against the referendum on the operating budget, but each one of you is only an individual, and the MMSD is not going to produce a transparent budget.
I offer this analysis to try to convince the superintendent and board that the majority of voters rejected the current budget process when they rejected the referendum question on exceeding the revenue caps. If the superintendent and the board want the next referendum to pass, they will have to win the confidence of voters with a new budget process that voters can easily understand.
Thanks for trying to reinvent the wheel Ed. The Northside PTO Coalition spent a good part of 2002 and 2003 trying to get the MMSD to present a transparent budget. We decided that this was the only way we could ask other parents to support referenda- if we knew the budget was under control. This culminated in Carol C. hosting a series of budget forums attempting to explain the budget. However, according to a myriad of attendees, the budget simply isn’t that easy to understand. In fact, Roger Price was unable to explain substantial parts of the budget. My recollection from the reports I heard is that tracking a dollar from start to finish is an amazingly tough task. Maybe we have some parents or interested citizens who practice accounting?
I think I would go beyond your comments, and the superintendent’s. Having a clear budget, that is transparent in regards to various programs, is a goal that any enterprise should have. Not so much because the public clamors for it, but because that’s just good management.
I think hiding behind DPI and Board guidelines will keep one safe from a bureaucratic point of view (and I don’t mean to use “bureaucratic” in a cynical way). And that is an approach used by almost all school districts around the country. But if MMSD, and others, are going to get their fiscal houses truly in order, then they need budgets that focus on programs, that do a much better job of answering the question: is this, or that, an effective use of our money? Given we have to cut expenses, where might it hurt less? And I fear drafting such a budget (actually, I think it may be more like a special income statement – but I’m an economist, not an accountant) could be a costly enterprise. Costly because I think ultimately you must do some kind of activity-based costing (ABC) which measures the “true” (or “truer”) cost of running the various programs. And to do ABC costing you need to interview a lot of people (not everyone, but a lot).
But such a budget, such a breakdown, should go far in providing the kind of clarity you seek. And, I would think, would likely bring to light expenses the Board themselves would question were necessary.
Peter Gascoyne