Laserfiche WebLink
b <br /> in excess of $900,000. A surplus of approximately $400,000 has been <br /> reported. How will the remaining $500,000 be spent? How large is the <br /> actual surplus? We have heard over and over again that this is a bare- <br /> bones budget. It is difficult to understand how a budget which absorbed <br /> more than $160,000 in pay raises and still has a surplus of at least <br /> $400,000 and probably more can be considered barebones by anyone's <br /> definition. This budget is fat, and unless there is an explanation <br /> forthcoming relative to the $500,000 in question, it may, in fact, be <br /> obese. <br /> Possible Courses of Action <br /> No one can tell the School Committee how they can spend school funds, <br /> but it seems to be reasonable to be provided with an accounting of how <br /> funds have or will be spent. The Chairman of the School Committee <br /> stated at Monday's Selectmen's meeting that the School Committee has <br /> never had any intention of spending the budget surplus and that the pre- <br /> purchasing this year is no different than any other year. I know that <br /> Jim Conery was not in attendance at the March 22nd School Committee <br /> meeting. But two members of this sub-committee were and we know what we <br /> saw and what we heard. Page 18 of the School Committee packet for that <br /> date clearly indicates that their action approved the spending of the <br /> budget surplus for FY92 supplies, equipment and building repairs. If it <br /> was not the intent to spend the surplus then why, when School Committee <br /> member Marianne Gibbs made a motion at the last School Committee meeting <br /> to revert the surplus to the general fund, did no one second her motion? <br /> It seems clear that it was the intent to spend the surplus. A comparison <br /> of purchases between FY90 and FY91 indicates that the spending pattern <br /> during the month- of April in FY91 is double that of April in FY90. This <br /> certainly suggests that the pre-purchasing this year is very different <br /> than in the past and that the surplus is being spent. Another example <br /> of pre-payments being used to expend the surplus is the highly unusual <br /> payment request submitted for approximately $57,000 to pre-pay for next <br /> year's services of the Cape Cod Collaborative. We have not been able to <br /> find any information which indicates such a pre-payment was made in the <br /> past. In fact, the invoice was sent by the Cape Cod Colloborative at <br /> the specific request of the Mashpee School Department even though pay- <br /> ment is not due. No other school department on Cape Cod has made such a <br /> request. <br /> It is a serious concern that perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars of <br /> FY91 funds have been or will be used to supplement the FY92 school <br /> budget. We acknowledge that some pre-spending is a common practice. <br /> Government does not simply cease to function on June 30th and start all <br /> over again the next day. It is legal for the School Committee to pre- <br /> spend, but pre-spending of this magnitude makes a mockery of the legiti- <br /> mate budget process and erodes the authority of the Town Meeting to <br /> determine the FY92 school budget. <br /> 6 <br />