Category — Construction Bond

Recently, I requested public records on the Marysville fire situation because I wanted to know why the district wasn’t moving forward on rebuilding the school. It’s really pretty simple. PPS has already spent the insurance money.

Records show that PPS has collected $3,084,040 in insurance recoveries but they’ve spent $3,539,002 for a net loss of $454,962.

What did taxpayers get for that? Very little.

PPS has paid $368,309 for security services at the school since November 10,2009. That’s $682 per day.

PPS claims that they’ve made $1,160,059 in repairs. Architects and engineers were paid $576,315.

The most surprising expense is $454,553 for transportation from Marysville to Rose City Park. The reason that it’s so surprising is that it’s vastly different from the transportation costs associated with school closures.

Last year, I requested public records detailing the district’s savings from past school closures. The “report” was bullshit. It looked like someone spent 20 minutes creating a spreadsheet to satisfy my request. You would think that since the district has been talking about the need to close schools for so long that they would actually track the savings but it’s clear that they don’t.

I’ve created the table below to show the difference between what PPS reports transportation costs to be for the purposes of school closure “savings” and an accounting for how Marysville money was spent:

Why would transportation be so much more expensive for Marysville students?  Marysville to Rose City Park transportation costs break down to about $1600 per day.

I’d like to know how much of the bond campaign has been charged to Marysville.  There’s no way that PPS has spent $3 million on the school already.

This is a repost.  Unfortunately, my web host updated their system last night so yesterday’s posts were lost.

I received the following email yesterday from somone named Jim Williams.  Although the authors want to remain anonymous because of fear of retaliation, I find the email to be believable.  It’s consistent with what I saw and experienced in my 4 years of working at the PPS Central Office.  It is also consistent with some of the findings of an audit conducted by KPMG after the last PPS construction bond.  Read it and decide for yourself whether the allegations have merit:

The purpose of this email is to shed light on the many dysfunctional and inappropriate actions of some Portland Public Schools Administrators. While we are not openly identifying ourselves (professional suicide even with whistle blower laws) at some point it may become necessary.

F.A.M. STAFF INTIMIDATION
Efforts to intimidate and quiet staff concerns violate labor laws and allow inappropriate actions to continue.

POOR STEWARDS OF OUR SCHOOL BUILDINGS
Our schools are in poor condition as a result of intentionally deferring maintenance. Building new schools without correcting the process that resulted in the premature deterioration of existing schools will result in a similar fate for the new buildings.

COVERUPS AND MALFEASANCE
Financial mismanagement, cover-ups, and other selfserving behaviors result in students and teachers suffering.

FISCAL MISMANAGEMENT
Intentional and inept mismanagement of tax payers money results in less available for the classrooms.

DISREGARD FOR SCHOOL STAFF AND STUDENTS
Administrators who don’t have to work in the school buildings may have little regard for the health and safety of staff and students.

ASK OTHERS
Resources to verify statements below and identify other problems and concerns.

CONCLUSIONS
A bond levy in some form needs to pass for the sake of our students and the future of Portland, but house cleaning, accountability, fiscal responsibility, and modification of the “business as usual” model needs to occur first!

* * * * * * * * * * * *

F.A.M. STAFF INTIMIDATION

“The Final Straw”

At a recent Facilities and Assets Management (FAM) staff meeting involving Project Managers, associated staff members, FAM Director Tony Magliano and Ast FAM Director Randy Miller, we were scolded for “airing our dirty laundry” outside the department, and informed in a very intimidating manner that if we continued to discuss our concerns outside the FAM Department there were plenty of people looking for work that would be willing to comply!

The main reason we began to talk about concerns outside the department was the frustration of problems we identified not being properly addressed and in many cases being covered up, then back to “business as usual”.

It is plain wrong and demoralizing to face intimidation and threats for doing your job and reporting defective work and other improper actions by administrators, contractors, and volunteers that cost our school district funds that could be used more effectively, and results in a reduced capacity to deliver services to students.

Some of us are discouraged to the point of doing the minimum necessary to get by and abandoning efforts to get administrators to hold others accountable. Others are quietly marking time while looking for work elsewhere as the stress is ceiling level and morale is at rock bottom. Many of us are considering getting a lawyer and suing the district.

POOR STEWARDS OF OUR SCHOOL BUILDINGS

Buildings don’t magically fall into disrepair without clues that it is occurring. It’s a result of inadequate and intentionally deferred maintenance against all good judgment and recommendation of experts (what happens when you don’t maintain your home?).

On many occasions Heidi Franklin, and other administrators still with the district, admitted that, “we are intentionally allowing the schools to deteriorate by not properly maintaining them.” “We can then justify the need for a bond levy to build new schools.” These statements were made in meetings attended by multiple people including some from Maintenance (Randall Johnston for one) and other departments.

Intentionally preventing maintenance to critical areas like the exterior building envelopes including roofs and window frames, results in extensive damage to those parts and interior structures and systems. Ultimately the repair costs can exceed replacement costs. This action is very irresponsible as repairs done to critical areas when the problems are small or minor will cost much less, prevent additional damage to other areas, and preserve our investment.

A small sample of the many examples present in all of our school buildings excluding BESC (take a look at the front of BESC where the News Cameras set up) are —

Benson High School
Daylight coming in through large rotted voids in the window frames on the South side and other areas allow heat to escape and rain in to further damage the interior. These window frames are historic in nature and a little paint would have prevented costly custom fabrication of replacements.

Clarendon
A newer closed building with roof leaks allowed to go unrepaired for a long enough period of time that mold (Adams H.S.), damage to framing supports, and other systems make the building unsafe to enter, use for education, or lease to others. The building is not currently usable, and if sold would return a fraction of its value if it had been maintained minimally.

All Schools
It would be difficult to find a school that has not been impacted by this intentional lack of maintenance. Leaks, equipment allowed to deteriorate to unsafe conditions, and health hazards exist in all school buildings. Almost universally failure to perform industry standard preventative maintenance leads to premature loss of structures and equipment.

The simple lack of oil and grease lubrication of large Air Handlers and motor bearings continually result in costly failures of equipment that could have remained serviceable for decades.

In more than one instance walls have or will require demolition or holes punched in them to allow removing large main building ventilation fan shafts for repair or replacement due to premature bearing failure from failure to lubricate regularly. In some cases these bearing failures have resulted in fires (recent fire in Woodstock Main Ventilating Unit).

Passing a bond levy will not automatically solve our problems. The last two schools built in Portland, Forest Park and Rosa Parks, received little oversight and in many cases used low quality or outdated materials, little input was allowed by district or school staff before and during construction, and school district Project Managers and maintenance workers were ordered to stay away after discovering problems further limiting oversight.

Both schools currently take more resources to maintain than any other school, with major systems failing at each, Boilers needing premature replacement at Forest Park, and continued limited maintenance delivering additional blows.

These claims can be easily verified with open access to our old and new Maintenance Work Order Systems.

COVERUPS AND MALFEASANCE

Some Portland Public Schools administrators have a long history of financial mismanagement, cover-ups, and other selfserving or inept behaviors.

During the last major bond levy many contractors and Project Managers lined up for the “feeding frenzy” that can occur when a public agency with a history of not holding people accountable and paying for services without verifying completion or quality of work.

The final insult occurred when a group of inhouse Project Managers were gathered up, fired, and escorted from the building without being allowed to gather their possessions. Their crime was refusing repeated requests from administrators to approve projects as complete and ready for payment when they clearly were not.

Even more disturbing was the actions of a contracted management firm, Heery International, hired to oversee much of the bond process. After many indications where it appeared that proper procedures were not being followed, administrators reluctantly dismissed the firm only after it was discovered funds up to seven figures were unaccountable for and no reasonable explanation was ever uncovered.

One chance at such an experience would be enough for most, but it appears that this same contracted Project Management firm is being groomed for a second “feeding frenzy” chance for the next bond levy by being allowed to manage the Summer 2010 Modular Building installations and possibly those scheduled for 2011. Many of us are wondering what the administrators are thinking or possibly not thinking of.

FISCAL MISMANAGEMENT

A little over one year ago a portion of the BESC Central Office was flooded when a Fire Sprinkler head was replaced with the system still pressurized. Many areas suffered heavy damage and required complete replacement of furniture, carpets, and office equipment.

One senior administrator openly bragged how she had the school board meeting room redone including carpets replaced, recovering seating, and other equipment upgrades at little or no cost to the district.

Normally this would be a great accomplishment, but considering the room suffered almost no water damage – the damage was limited to minor water stains on a few ceiling tiles -, the work on the board room was fast tracked ahead of other heavily damaged areas, and the costs were submitted for insurance coverage, it appears less than honorable. While this may be a common practice in Houston Texas in Portland we expect better.

* * * * * * * * * *

In the past few years there have been many unnecessary administrator office remodels, entire departments moved to other areas within BESC without any meaningful justification other than political, territorial, or questionable restructuring purposes. Can anyone see increased efficiencies or graduation rate increases as a result of these remodels and moves? We can’t.

* * * * * * * * * *

We have asked many times why volunteers are allowed to participate in and at times direct projects that often fail to get proper permits, open up or work in contaminated areas increasing hazards to staff and students at schools, apply incorrect paint to surfaces like steam radiators that when heated cause fumes bad enough to require evacuation of the area and then required disassembly of the radiators for cleaning and reassembly, application of paint in a sloppy fashion requiring the efforts of district staff to clean, build walls and add other items within schools that fail to meet code or change the occupancy rating, etc.

This is a very common and expensive problem that could be solved by requiring projects to be approved by central staff ahead of time and greater project accountability.

* * * * * * * * * *

Over the last ten to fifteen years there has been an increasing push to send construction and maintenance projects to outside vendors. In many cases this results in greatly increased costs, reduced quality of work and accountability.

Some contractors understand we are understaffed and can’t thoroughly track or inspect all projects assigned to us so they operate accordingly and the district often has to assign inhouse people to correct projects they have already paid too much for.

* * * * * * * * * *

Looking back a few years to the efforts to fire school custodians and replace them with contracted people will show how misguided the efforts of administrators can be. After the courts ruled the action illegal and fined the district about $500,000, the replacement Custodians hadn’t properly maintained the schools costing the district undetermined additional sums, and lowering already low morale, can anyone show where an upper level administrator was disciplined?

* * * * * * * * * *

When we question why the district maintenance workers continue to have projects reassigned to outside contractors when much of the work could be done much cheaper with greater accountability inhouse we are usually directed to mind our own business and don’t receive a meaningful answer.

One senior administrator said “the business community needs our money.” She also said “it is easier to write a check and not have to deal with the objections from our staff on how we do things.”

While the business community might desire our (the tax payer’s money) money the classroom teachers could put the saved money to use as well. We frequently hear how short on funds PPS is. Why are we wasting money where we could be saving money? Could it be it is harder to direct funds to those with connections when the money is spent on work done inhouse?

* * * * * * * * * *

It would be very interesting and possibly telling to track contracts with and money paid to past employers or other business contacts of Randy Miller, a recently hired FAM Ast. Director over Project Management. There appears to be a possible favored status in some cases (Heery International for one) and possibly a disadvantage for Portland Public Schools in most.

* * * * * * * * * *

The recent IT Server Room remodel project is a good example of PPS’s IT department’s mismanagement of resources, lack of ability to effectively manage projects, failure to consider the long term impact of their actions, and refusal to cooperate with other PPS departments.

After major cost overruns, lack of proper prior planning, construction delays resulting from poor project management, and petty infighting, the entire project was taken from IT and reassigned to FAM Project Management.

While the above action is an improvement much of the damage has already been done and again the taxpayers, teachers, and students suffer from funds not available due to administrative mismanagement.

* * * * * * * * * *

Portland passed a development tax with a portion designated to fund maintenance projects at Portland Public Schools. So far the majority of that money has been directed to cover K thru 8 reconfiguration and other Administrative pet projects. Not only has the results of K thru 8 reconfiguration been a failure with little or no measurable benefit, it is hard to imagine and a stretch to classify it as a maintenance project.

* * * * * * * * * *

For additional background Google PBS, KPMG, Heery International, Gerding Edlen, PBS Environmental, and Magellan with attention to their money connections and track record with Portland Public Schools.

DISREGARD FOR SCHOOL STAFF AND STUDENTS

For years there has not been any meaningful inspection or maintenance of Fire Alarm systems in our schools by the specific direction of Portland Public Schools Administrators. Needless to say the condition of these systems are not any better than other systems in the schools.

About 1 1/2 years ago media scrutiny forced administrators to begin the code required NFPA 72 inspections. Additional technicians were added to the still understaffed Electronics Shop after the Marysville fire to appear proactive in the massive backlog of required inspections which today are a long way from being current.

Will it take another fire and possibly with the loss of life before administrators properly staff and fund the Electronics Shop and allow them to do their job properly?

While they are making progress with fire inspections the majority of the deficiencies discovered during the inspections are left unaddressed meaning some areas within many schools may not report the presence of a fire.

On the rare occasion where discovered deficiencies are addressed they are usually assigned to contractors to resolve and always costlier than if addressed inhouse. Many times the work is poorly or incorrectly done and requires the attention of inhouse staff to assess or correct and paying twice for the same work.

Frequently the Electronics Shop staff discover circuits improperly wired, sensors connected improperly or not connected at all, and other problems resulting in areas with a potential void in fire alarm protection.

The fire codes also require fire panels in schools to be replaced every ten years. Many of the schools are not compliant. Some schools like Benson High School are two or three cycles past due.

Some administrators have bragged of having Fire Bureau officials and other city staff in their pockets and all they have to do is take them to lunch to be excused from almost any requirement. This might explain the relaxed approach by the Fire Bureau when dealing with Portland Public Schools.

Funds always seem to be available for pet administrative projects, politically correct, or correcting projects-gone-wrong before they become an embarrassment to administrators, but when it comes to safety, function, or maintenance the funds are much more difficult to get. Can anyone point to where questionable projects have improved our poor graduation rate?

* * * * * * * * * *

Portland Public Schools Administrators have a long history of disregard for staff and students by considering cost over health and safety when faced with contamination events. Poor maintenance priorities also contribute by creating incidents that cause exposures of hazardous substances that effect all who enter, are educated in, or work in our schools.

Grant High School
Steam pipes hammer so bad in some areas as a result of improperly operating systems that Asbestos covering is damaged and fibers fall off when pipes are jerking back and forth. At times it is so bad that people are afraid the pipes will burst and possibly burn them from steam leaks.

School staff, volunteers, and contractors frequently enter posted Asbestos contaminated areas without containment efforts and spread Asbestos fibers into areas accessible to students.

Last Summer’s main office remodel done by the new principle, contractors she hired, and volunteers lacked the necessary permits, changed the Fire Marshal approved configuration requiring additional work to correct, directed contractors to open up and work in an under floor Asbestos contaminated area without proper procedures, and required additional work by district employees to correct and complete the project.

* * * * * * * * * *

Jefferson High School and other Schools
Contractors mounting equipment on Asbestos bearing walls allowed dust from drilling to become airborne and settle on the floor and other surfaces. Rather than properly contain and decontaminate the Asbestos fibers the Custodians were directed to sweep up the material with normal daily tools further spreading the dust into the air and adding to the exposure of staff and students.

* * * * * * * * * *

Duniway School
When an Asbestos covered tank in the Boiler room leaked it spread large amounts of Asbestos fibers throughout the area. A door to a main ventilation fan room was blocked open and the fan distributed Asbestos fibers through a large part of the school.

The Steam leak was repaired and the clean up of the contaminated area was done mostly by Custodial staff not trained or skilled in Asbestos contamination clean up, using normal daily cleaning tools and no containment efforts. All people involved in the clean up were warned to “keep your mouths shut!”

* * * * * * * * * *

Asbestos Inspection and Contamination Records at BESC have been archived making the latest testing results (there has been little to no recent testing) costly to access and not available in a timely manner. As a result it is very difficult to determine with any level of accuracy if areas in schools suspected as contaminated have been tested, testing date, or what the test results were.

* * * * * * * * * *

Adams High School – Whitaker Middle School
The way that concerns at this school were handled is a text book example of why many people in Portland lack faith in PPS’s senior administrative staff. After years of lies, nondisclosure, and other efforts to mislead, the decision to teardown the school was unavoidable after staff and students refused to use the building and the community lacked any level of trust in what administrators said.

If the roof had not been allowed to leak for at least ten years in addition to the ventilation system being shut off nights and weekends – which lead to massive amounts of toxic mold, and heat exchangers installed that would allow a greater percentage of outside air to be economically introduced increasing the exhausting and reduction of Radon gas buildup, the school could have been saved and not torn down.

Instead administrators chose to order ventilation increased at this and other schools being tested for Radon gas to reduce the measured levels.

After the administrators destroyed the trust of the staff, parents and other community members by lying and misleading them it is possible that no amount of redesign would have restored the trust enough to ever use the school. The total cost to district tax payers has been enough to build multiple new schools or to properly maintain those that we currently have.

ASK OTHERS

The above information amounts to a small amount of the notable administratively caused problems within PPS that result in wasted funds, lack of safe school buildings, and reduced comfort during classroom education, etc. Like an Iceberg the visible portion is small compared to what really exists.

To get a greater grasp of the scope of these problems within PPS you could contact the following people and others. If these people are questioned by people in a way that would allow them to remain anonymous and not suffer for telling the truth, we are sure many additional sad facts will come out.

Patrick Wolfe
Was demoted and often passed over for promotion because he had the ethics to ask tough questions where the answers embarrassed administrators.

Chris Boice
Dismissed for refusing to compromise standards in recording and maintaining Asbestos and other hazardous element records.

Randall Johnston
Now Director of Facilities for Hood River School District – was the Maintenance Manager prior to Jerry Lively. Randall was forced out after over twenty years for refusing to go along with practices and conditions that would compromise student safety and good maintenance practices.

Alan Carpenter
IT Project Manager – many of the same problems and incompetent administrative practices exist in IT also. Alan is frequently scolded and belittled for trying to hold work to a high standard and enforce codes for the betterment of PPS.

Rose Schroeder
Electrician and Labor Management Committee Chair – Has an independent mind with the courage to speak with the media if approached discretely. Being a member of the LMC she has an inside knowledge of administrative dealings and worker complaints.

Tom Adams
Ast. FAM Director over Maintenance – a new employee, but has close knowledge of administrative practices. On multiple occasions he has indicated that Tony Magliano, FAM Director, is in over his head, but is only following directions from above.

Jerry Lively
Manager of Maintenance Forces – after working his way up from maintenance worker with over twenty years of service, he has a clear picture of the district’s building’s needs and the long term cost of not providing it.

Sid Yamasaki – Steam Fitter Foreman
Pat Christenson – Ast. Steam Fitter Foreman
Both can supply information on the true cost of administrators preventing proper maintenance of Steam Heating systems, HVAC Fans, poor current Asbestos practices and past contamination incidents covered up.

Eli Triplett – Electronics Shop Foreman
Pat Silver – Retired Ast. Electronics Shop Foreman
Both can supply information on the poor state of the school Fire Alarm systems, how increased efforts to improve FA systems and inspections are driven solely by media attention, and how their technicians were banned from attending Project meetings or visiting the construction site while Rosa Parks School was under construction after they discovered hundreds of Fire Alarm System problems in early construction visits. Some of those problems still exist.

Pat Silver appears to have been a primary media source of PPS FA system problems after the Marysville fire.

Louis Bybee – Electrical Shop Foreman
Waimun Yee – Retired Ast. Electrical Shop Foreman
Both are information sources for overloaded Electrical panels and possible fire hazards due to lack of regularly scheduled maintenance. Waimun Yee has over twenty years with the district and could comment on the background history of most problems listed in this Email and many others not listed.

Larry Sather – Carpenter Foreman
Would be a good information source for damage to building interiors from allowing window framing to go unpainted and unrepaired. Many window casings have rotted to the point where security is an issue and you can see daylight where wood used to be.

Charlie Slaughter – Retired Painting Foreman
A good information source for tens of thousands of dollars of damage at each school caused by letting wood surfaces go unpainted to rot.

Stephen Strom – Rover Foreman
A good information source for extra costs by allowing Principles and other school staff to direct volunteers efforts that often are done wrong with improper materials that result in the need for PPS District staff to clean up and correct.

Craig Tolonen – Retired Glazier Foreman
Has knowledge of unnecessary costs as a result of irresponsibly allowing skylights, vents, and window leaks to compromise the building envelope and allowing water to damage internal structures.

Almost any other PPS District Teacher, Custodian, clerical worker, or craft worker.

CONCLUSIONS

If Portland’s taxpayers had a clear picture of the past and present administrative malfeasance within PPS we fear that they would probably never pass another bond levy, but the planned bond levy must pass in some form as the future of Portland’s children and Portland itself depend on it.

It is also equally important to guarantee the mismanagement, malfeasance, and possable graft or corruption evident during the last bond levy and to a lesser degree on a daily basis, is permanently corrected.

The bottom line is the administrative mindset that allows, and even encourages, events as outlined above need to be identified and cut out as you would cancer from an otherwise sound body.

Portland Public Schools has a terrible record as a steward for maintaining its schools up until now. What evidence would lead anyone to believe the addition of 1/2 Billion dollars and new buildings would alone change past behavior?

What really needs to happen before Portland’s taxpayers pass another bond levy is for a completely independent source, with no connections to Portland Public Schools present or future, to complete a thorough audit of past practices and decisions with close attention paid to the money trail surrounding the decisions.

Unless a thorough audit is completed and the administrative cancer is removed we might as well look for a pit and toss the money in. That will save a lot of time and frustration and the outcome would be about the same.

Here’s to the person with the courage and determination to make it happen. We will all be in your debt!

Franklin HS PTA presents a discussion on the proposed School Facilities Bond Measure?

Voters will decide in the May 17, 2011, election on a $548 million bond measure that, according to PPS, “would allow Portland Public Schools to update learning environments and upgrade safety, security and building systems at every PPS school, and to rebuild nine schools.” 

This is the first of several bond requests.  The first step in the PPS Office of School Modernization’s long-range plan to rebuild all school buildings over the coming 20 to 30 years. 

Learn more about the proposed bond; What new facilities are proposed?  How have facilities slated for improvement been selected? What is the impact to the Franklin community? And how much will this cost tax payers?

Bring your questions for a respectful conversation about the pro’s & con’s of Measure 26-121, an opportunity to examine the bond proposal in detail. 

When:              Wednesday March 9^th, 7:00pm – 8:30pm

Where:            Franklin High School Library

                        5405 SE Woodward Street, Portland, OR 97206

 Hosted by the Franklin High School PTA.

Presented by the Portlanders for Schools campaign.

Given the ongoing changes to PPS use of proposed bond funds, I wanted to refresh voter memory about the district’s historical use of construction funds. 

Beginning on page 206, this KPMG audit covers the district’s management (or mismanagement) of the 1995 bond project. 

Notice the section on page 231 where KPMG discusses the diversion of funds from North Portland schools to the central office.  That’s where I believe PPS will once again be taking the money from to cover the addition of a west side school expansion and a $5 million contribution to the city.

PPS has always been just a step behind Seattle.  The Seattle school board is holding a public hearing  tonight on whether to fire their superintendent but they’ve waited until after school closures (followed by costly and rushed re-openings), boundary changes and construction bonds were passed and wasted.  

We’ve seen changes slipped into the proposed PPS bond already with the last minute addition of the expansion of a west side school and $5 million being diverted to the city.  Imagine how the proposed bond projects could change if the bond passes. 

But then PPS could always fire the superintendent later.

How can PPS start with a $548 million bond plan then add a major expansion of a west side school and give the city $5 million for transportation and infrastructure without increasing the cost of the bond?

Although I only know of one person who says they will support the PPS bond, I haven’t heard much about anyone organizing in opposition to it.  One group has held a rally against the bond and plans to hold more.  Here’s a link for those interested in getting involved:

http://www.goodgrowthnw.org

Has anyone noticed that PPS has been hiring in anticipation of the bond passage for over a year?  PPS job postings have pretty consistently included Office of School Modernization positions.  High level positions. 

Why are staff being hired prior to the passage of the bond?  The current positions are listed as ”temporary until May 18, 2011, transitioning to regular pending voter approval of local option levy.”  (Not the bond but the levy)  These positions are in addition to all of the consulting contracts that PPS has with construction, engineering and architechture firms. 

Like someone else said on this blog, I am sick of PPS threats to the classroom.  The PPS list of current job postings are an accurate reflection of PPS priorities: 

Office of School Modernization- Director of Capital Operations- 1.0 FTE starting salary $105,000

 

Office of School Modernization- Director of Design and Construction- 1.0 FTE starting salary $105,000

 

Special Education Director – 1.0 FTE starting salary $100,000

ESL Director – 1.0 FTE starting salary $100,000

Lately I’ve been hearing from people who say they would like to do something to preserve teacher positions, but the bond is too expensive and may be more than they can afford.

What they don’t understand is that the bond will pay only for “capital improvements”–i.e., repairs and remodeling to buildings.  According to law, not one penny of the bond can be spent on any PPS employee.  The bond cannot be treated as part of the General Fund and can only be used for purposes specifically named in the bond measure itself.

Or can it? 

This morning I had a conversation with a teacher who was complaining about maintenance costs impeding teacher raises.  He said it was important to pass the bond so that General Fund dollars could be freed up from building maintenance and used instead for teacher salaries.

If that is how the bond is being promoted, then it’s no wonder people are confusing the construction bond with the operating levy.  The levy does go into the General Fund that is used for teacher salaries (and many other things).  The bond and the levy are two different ballot measures, each requiring a separate vote.  No doubt some people will vote “yes” on both, but our laws give voters the right to vote “yes” on one and “no” on the other (or “no” on both) if they so choose.

But if what the teacher said is true—if the bond will, indeed, “free up” cash from the general fund to pay teachers—then why does PPS need an operating levy at all?