Thursday, May 24, 2007

Beware of "Savings"

Many have asked the question. If the PBCG consultants have saved $20 million, why do we need a referendum? Mystery solved.

Today's article in the JT inadvertantly provides the answer. The savings from changing health insurance providers went directly into teacher salaries. Thus, "savings" are not savings at all, at least not in the way ordinary people understand the word. "Savings" are merely transfers. The only difference is that now transfers cost taxpayers an additional 20%.

So, Unified could eliminate spending on textbooks, transfer the "savings" into an upgraded teachers lounge, and charge the taxpayers an additional 20%.

Thus, if the alleged "savings" of $20 million identified by PBCG is in fact merely a transfer of funds with a 20% surcharge, then the cost of the "savings" to taxpayers is $4 million.

Please Unified, we can no longer afford your "savings".

1 comment:

Clint said...

I continue to be skeptical that anything RUSD does will improve much in the schools until the trend towards dysfunctional families gets fixed.

This is not to condone fiscal mismanagement. Even with great management and leadership student performance isn't going to improve much with a large dysfunctional student population.

Last time around on the referendum we were on the verge of loosing sports. This time, after an intruder assaulted a student, we need $9M for security - does that seem a bit much to you? The Outlaw Josie Wales said it best, "don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining."