Business Services: Growing and growing and growing
While the school board refused last year to get outside advice on the operations of Business Services, the department just keeps growing and growing and growing.
Compared to 2004-2005 budget, the number of Food Service Workers would increase by 11.32 FTE if the board approves the administration’s proposed budget. District enrollment will decline by approximately 336 students between 2004-2005 and next year. Why does it take 11 more people to feed 336 fewer students?
The job category “trades” would grow by 7 FTE from last year to next year, while cutting 1 painter and 1 carpenter, according to the proposed budget.
But what’s really odd, the budget approved by the board in the summer of 2005 shows 27 FTE in trades. Now the administration asserts that the revised budget approved in October 2005 increased the number to 35 FTE. Not! At least not that I can find. No place does the revised budget show an increase in FTEs in trades.
Is someone “cooking” the numbers or padding the payroll to increase the Business Services domain?
I am not certain, but the increase to food workers may be because of a changing demographic in the MMSD. The 2005 DPI data show that the enrollment has decreased by 193 students since 2001. The percentage of students eligible for free and reduced lunch as increased from 6,723 during the same time frame, to 9,187, an increase of 2,464 students. Also, the school breakfast program has been added. Just a thought…
http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/graphshell.asp?fullkey=02326903ZZZZ&CompareTo=PRIORYEARS&DN=Madison+Metropolitan&Group=EconomicStatus&SN=None+Chosen&TYPECODE=6&CTY=13&ORGLEVEL=DI&GraphFile=GROUPS&STYP=9&DETAIL=YES
Troy,
You may be correct, but we can’t tell from the budget document.
I’d like to see the board insist that the administration provide explanations for FTE changes like these and any other significant programatic changes.
Roger Price sent me an unsolicited e-mail to explain why the FTEs keep increasing. I invited him to post his response, saying that I wouldn’t. It’s the MMSD’s responsibility (either his or someone else’s) to communicate to the public. I’m not going to do the MMSD’s communicating for them.
I don’t expect Roger to post. If the superintendent hasn’t outright forbidden staff to post, he must have put enough fear into them that they won’t.
So, you raise a question, find out the answer and won’t post it because of a beef with MMSD? I’m going to start believing the SIS critics if that keeps up.
If Roger wants to post the answer, he can post it as a way of showing the MMSD’s commitment to “be more active in providing accurate and factual strategic information to the public” (page 239 of the undated 2006 publication “Department and Division Detailed Budgets”). I’m calling the MMSD’s bluff on better communications. If Roger and the MMSD don’t post, the MMSD’s better-communication rhetoric rings as hollow as an empty school hallway.
Or, Kevin, you can write to Roger, get the answer, and post it.
Well it seems we have an ethical dilemma here. Are bloggers bound by any journalistic responsibility to report truths that they obtain through legitimate means? Discuss…..
Does the MMSD have a responsiblity to respond publicly to posts on blogs?
The district has public information staff who could coordinate and post responses. With its supposedly new dedication to better communication, you might think the MMSD would want to post.
My two cents–the district could post this on the MMSD website which allows others to link to it and cross-post.
Ed, are there some budget documents from other districts or government agencies that you view as models MMSD might want to consider? Or corporate reports to shareholders that you view as exemplary?
I don’t think MMSD has a responsibility to respond publicly to posts on blogs. That takes staff time (and the attendant costs). Does MMSD have a responsibility to respond to posts on Usenet, or anywhere on the WWW, or, for that matter, any media? Rarely does MMSD respond to WSJ/Cap Times editorials or letters to the editor. We see an occasional guest Op-Ed from Art what, once a year?
I understand that we’d like them to have more back and forth via SIS, but, frankly, they are gun-shy of this site…and other community members have, at times, tried to organize an “anti-SIS” blog site because they see SIS as being too negative…so I just see this as the typical back and forth of opposing viewpoints.
Pure democracy in action..anything we do to stifle the free flow of information only lowers us to their level (if you assume that they are somehow deficient in not communicating here)…which is why I think you should post Roger’s response, Ed. It makes you more responsible than those you question, and it speaks to the credibility of your (or anyone else here) efforts.
Tim,
I’d look to the Milwaukee school district for some ideas. It appears that the district builds the budget from the bottom up, not the top down. Each school’s budget seems to be posted on the district’s Web site, when I last looked, with the budget changes for each school. I’d think that citizens could clearly see how budget decisions influence the education in each and every school.
We might ask Rafael Gomez, forum planner par excellence, to consider a forum on budget making in the coming months.
Would anyone want to help find good examples of budgets and help recruit speakers from those districts for a budget forum?
David,
The MMSD staff don’t even post on its own blog site that it created for the attendance task forces. I believe that it’s a control issue in the MMSD. If the MMSD puts out information for discussion, it loses control of the issue, apparently a very bad situtation in their eyes.
What puzzles me, Roger wrote a response. Why doesn’t he just post it? Does he expect me to post it for him?
But you offer a good argument on the free flow of info, so I’ll post Roger’s response and my response to his.
In response to my questions about the number of FTEs in Food Service and Trades, Roger Price wrote:
First, we explained at the time we presented the budget to the Board the issue with FTE’s in Food Services. This is the first year we have been able to use the new systems in tracking Food Service employees and including them as part of the budget building process. We have not added any new staff and in fact we are continuing to take steps to balance the food service revenues that are received from ticket sales, state revenues, and federal revenues with expenses. It is the goal that Food Services, an enterprise fund, will break even.
Secondly, trades employees have not increased. The title of the category on the analysis that I provided to you includes Maint/Trades. And as the Org chart reflects in the budget materials it includes 24 trades employees. The total of 34 includes “Maintenance” workers who are part of the AFCSME bargaining unit. These numbers have been decreased by 2 for next year, as indicated in the Budget materials.
The implication you make that Business Services is growing is a misrepresentation of the truth. In fact, as we have included in a full report to the Board on Business Services staffing in November of 2005, the total number of employees in Business Services has decreased from 448.58 in 2003-04 to 419.59 in 2005-06. The 2006-07 budget includes 409.14 fte.
In addition the number of Administrators/Professionals in Business Services has decreased from 28 in 1999-00 to 24 for 2006-07, and the number of Administrators/Professional in Business Services charged to the operating budget has declined from 22 to 14 in the same period. That is a 36% decrease in draw on operating funds.
And my response to Roger read:
Roger,
Thank you for contacting me. It really wan’t necessary.
Your response on food service workers just doesn’t make a darned bit of sense. You’re simply saying that the MMSD counts better than it used to, so it only looks like the district has more food service workers. Does this mean that the MMSD previously had food service workers on the payroll and didn’t count them? If the number hasn’t changed, how and where were the uncounted workers previously reported in the attached Excel file which I posted on schoolinfosystem.org?
Your response on the number of trades/maintenance workers again says that the MMSD counts them differently than last year so it only looks like more on the payroll. If that’s the case, how and where are the total trades/maintenance FTEs shown on the Excel file?
To tell you the blunt truth, many of us who follow the budget believe that the administration purposely changes year-to-year counting procedures to befuddle the board and public and to make the budget so obscure that you can say no one understands it and therefore can’t question it. Exactly the thing you do in your e-mail to me. A transparent, understandble budget would ease our concerns.
Also thank you for the offer to answer questions directly, but I got dressed down publicly by Johnny Winston, Jr. for asking for information from staff. Anyway, it isn’t worth my time directing my questions to anyone in the MMSD; I get a quicker and more complete response when I post the issues publicly rather than writing directly.
Ed
First, I don’t have the time to look at the (apparently) arcane details of FTE reporting. I admire and appreciate your efforts here. Thanks, I hope in the end we get some clarity.
Two other things you mentioned don’t ring true to me. First, on the attendance task force “blogs” I saw more than a few staff postings. Second, when as a parent or community member (not anything to do with the Equity Task force and at least some of them years before my appointment to the task force) I have requested information (including unpublished district statistics) from MMSD staff, I’ve always got a good response. At times we have had to go back-and-forth to get at the numbers I want, but they have been cooperative. I’ve always prefaced my requests by saying that I know that this is not a priority for staff. In my cases that was true, with the FTEs maybe it should be a priority.
TJM
Tom,
The meat of the budget lies in the “arcane” FTEs, since salaries, i.e., FTEs, comprise 80% of the budget. You can pick up at copy of the budget documents at the Doyle building.
I recall at least one comment on the task force bulletin boards about people posing questions and no one from the MMSD responding. I tried to verify that recollection by searching the MMSD bulletin boards, but the searches didn’t turn up much, so I went with my recollection. But don’t take anything I say at face value. Always check for yourself. I could be wrong.
On responses from district staff, Art is usually pretty quick, often within 24 hours. Roger isn’t. I don’t even get an acknowledgement of an e-mail from Roger. Nothing like, “I’ll get back to you in a couple of days.” I try to wait at least a week after asking for information and then follow up with another request. In this case, I didn’t even send an e-mail to Roger when I posted the information over the weekend. He prepared and sent an e-mail first thing Monday morning. I must have hit a nerve.
TJM,
In a comment above, you noted that my observation didn’t ring true when I said that the MMSD staff don’t often respond (or at least don’t respond promptly) to my e-mails and posts. I responded that you’re apparently luckier than I am, and here’s an example.
I have not yet received a response to the e-mail below after two weeks:
—– Original Message —–
From: Ed Blume
To: comments@madison.k12.wi.us
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 8:24 PM
Subject: For Art & Roger about Read 180
Art & Roger,
How much money does the proposed budget include to continue or expand Read 180?
Will Read 180 be offered at West next year?
Ed Blume
Ed, I did check out the Milwaukee budget documents and came away pretty impressed. Thanks for the suggestion!
Ditto from me Ed. After I saw Tim’s post, I went to the Milwaukee school district’s website and spent a little time perusing their proposed 2007 budget. It seems to be a very readable and understandable document. And their approach to budgeting is interesting and very different from MMSD. This is definitely an area in which MMSD could use some improvement and could maybe learn something from Milwaukee (gasp!).