“Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.” Marcus Aurelius
Well, there are some facts, but then there is a LOT of opinion swirling around some parts of our community. Let’s start with some known facts, and then we’ll take a look at some opinions.
Fact: Rockwood School District received a “Fair” rating in the February audit by the Missouri State Auditor team.
Fact: Only two school districts, both much smaller than Rockwood, received higher ratings from the state auditing team.
Fact: “Fair” is the most common school district audit rating.
Now, let’s look at the opinions.
Some opinions are worth more than others.
Everything we hear or read is someone’s opinion, based on their particular viewpoint, political agenda or worldview. That opinion does not make it the one-and-only “Truth."
Thoughtful individuals who seek “truth” attempt to weigh and evaluate the expertise, professionalism and credibility of those making claims.
Relative to Rockwood, should individuals trust the opinions of self-appointed “Watchdog Citizens Group” or the State Auditor, whose professional team of auditors spent the audit?
Instead of listening to a small group of individuals who have consistently mischaracterized the audit findings (more below), let’s see what Auditor Tom Schweich had to say about the Rockwood Administration and Board:
“Tonight, while at this high school, I've seen typical school signs about respect, patience, self-control. I see a lot of that in this district."
“We’ve audited a lot of entities, and I did find a positive attitude here in Rockwood, with the Board.”
“We did not find any resistance to our work at Rockwood. I’m optimistic the matters we’ve identified in our audit report will be fixed.”
“What I don’t find constructive is to call people to the mat. We’ve done a thorough analysis. As long as it is fixed, that’s what’s important.”
The fact is that Auditor Schweich spoke positively and confidently about the attitude, credibility, and capabilities of Rockwood Administration and the Board. You can check this yourself in the Patch article summarizing the audit report and on Rockwood’s responses and action plan.
The self-appointed and unelected “Watchdog Group"—Rockwood Stakeholders for Real Solutions, or RS for RS—has another opinion on the audit. A few of their own words:
“Scathing Report”
“Embarrassing Audit Rating”
and then:
“Citizens’ Group Calls for Rockwood Resignations”
Here are two more opinions. They are mine, but shared by a number of my fellow citizens here in Rockwood.
Opinion 1:
RS for RS statements are demagogic, reckless, hysterical, deliberate, unfair and unsubstantiated accusations on the actions of the School Board and School Administration, and should be discarded as such. Further, they are destructive to our community, the hard working, unpaid volunteers who serve on the Board and OUR ROCKWOOD SCHOOLS.
Opinion 2:
Trust the professionals that are closest to the truth—in this case the Missouri State Auditor.
The most important opinion, of course, is yours.
Please read articles published by Patch and other media sources for yourself to make up your mind.
Please vote Yes for Prop S for the better of your schools and your community.
Sincerely,
Larry Lazar
Eureka
You believe what RS for RS is doing is "fundamentally unethical"; "illegal behavior". You have been throwing everything at RS for RS today and seeing what will stick; including the kitchen sink. May the participants in the forum have some sort of evidence of this unethical and illegal behavior. Please site this behavior or what we have written and we will back in up with facts and research; mainly from the RSD Boarddocs.
The only names mentioned in your note other than mine (from my postings), and this fellow Larry (from his posting), and someone who has been posting but not under their name. This is all I was saying, that some folks do not want to have their name associated with their postings (you, for example) and I did not want to then refer to them by name. Just trying to be courteous since, although many disagree on these issues we are all neighbors to an extent. And I don't know your name, of course, but if I did I would not bring it into discussion. We are on the same page here, I think, and I understand reasons for people to desire to be anonymous. I did mean to appear disrespectful, and don't think I was, but want to apologize if previous comment appeared personal. Regards.
Our review of several Board approved projects determined that Board member Smith did not always abstain from voting on issues related to Glenn Construction Company; rather, he voted on several additional projects that resulted in additional compensation to his employer. Smith voted for 12 additional projects approved from January 2011 to June 2012, totaling $2,703,782 and resulting in $189,265 in additional management fees paid to his employer. For 3 of these 12 additional projects, change orders were used instead of soliciting bids and entering into new contracts. These three change orders totaled $551,238 and resulted in $38,587 in additional management fees. Smith terminated his employment with Glenn Construction Company in June 2012. http://www.auditor.mo.gov/Press/2013-018.pdf
It is up to the citizens to decided if they like they way Rockwood is handling their money.
All the FACT quotes listed in our comments come directly from the Auditor's http://www.auditor.mo.gov/Press/2013-018.pdf
Thank you for your advice and concern. Based on our conversations with the Missouri Ethics Commission, we appear to have a valid cause for a claim and no cause for concern about frivilous complaints. Three of us, so far, have completed the Ethics complaint form. We plan on having them notarized tomorrow and mailing the complaint forms on Monday - unless something changes our plans.
Been a long day, but I found time tonight to look up the link you provided about the previous claim filed requesting investigation of RSRS and principals for State ethics violations. Thanks for passing along this factual information. The "devil is always in the details". I examined the letter and it states that the case of not placing "paid for" identification on yard signs was not a violation. Fine. Note that I would not have pursued a matter this minor (but to each their own). The issue I raise centers on campaign finance disclosure laws. RSRS appears to be strongly advocating for the replacement of Board members and for voting against Prop S. It tries to assert that it is an educational forum on one hand, but advocates for these issues on the other. Can't have it both ways. Law is specific on this, and any "group" that campaigns for the outcome of an "election or ballot" is a covered group. Next criteria is whether a minimum threshold of contributions have been made. It is quite low. And it is the law. I spoke via phone for over an hr with the RSRS spokeswoman this evening and a planning to file my complaint.
Has anyone in RS for RS ever worked in real life? If so, please tell me of any company in America where the Board of Directors bring their votes on their executive employees out to the customers? Even the companies that took bail out money didn’t do that! When you move into management level positions all things that may be ok for unions does not apply. That’s not the Rockwood way that’s the American way. Right or wrong that’s how pay agreements work and have worked throughout time. Morrell and Monde state that if they get elected to the Board they will change this and have all negotiations open for the public. Really? Good luck finding a superintendent who will agree to that!
Dr. Borchers contract is voted on privately because it involves a performance review which should be private. Rockwood closes what is allowed by Sunshine law. If Morell and Mondi get elected to the Board and change the policy and allow all those discussions into open session the District is at risk for litigation potential. And you are not 100% correct about union contracts. None of the contract negotiations are done in open session. The ONLY thing that is voted on in open session is after the ratification of the contracts which means they have already gone through the unions for a vote to determine whether or not they will be approved. The board vote in open session happens only if the ratification is approved. So yes they are voted on in open, but all the work has been done so there are no conversations required that could cause legal implications.
You raise several good points. And I appreciate the detail you include to help support a more intelligent and informed discussion. And every new person joining the dialog provides the framework to better understand the thoughts on this these subjects of affected parents and tax-payers. Further, until more of us join-in the dialog, particularly using thoughtful commentary, the small angry principals from RSRS will continue to dominate the dialog. I mean this dear reader, whatever opinions you personally might bring forward. Really need to expand the dialog and benefit from others' comments. Quote: "Adherence to dogma is lazy thinking"
And out of fairness, I am not referring to the folks who ping the group once or twice, joining during this period, and then not playing active roles. Affiliation is a very low bar, don't you think? Example is that my "affiliation" includes a large number of neighbors who talk on the sidewalk about how unhappy they are with the constant attacks made by RSRS. But I don't purport to speak directly for them when I publicly comment. And without governance mechanisms for people simply "affiliated" to attempt to influence or change the RSRS message promulgated by these select few, it is really not possible to view it as a community message, but rather, the message of a relatively small number of people?
I have met Larry and have been following his posts herein and have absolutely no idea what you refer to regarding "threats". Interested readers can scan his comments herein to satisfy themselves on this point.
IMO, RS for RS promotes those facts that support their "message", most of which is negative. They ignore, or downplay, the overwhelmingly positive facts about RSD. It's like focusing on STL Cardinal David Freese's strikouts while ignoring all his home runs. The right thing way to evaluate baseball players, and school districts, is to consider the entire package. In the case of Rockwood, they are a very high performing and financially conservative school district by just about any measure. Their cost per student is among the lowest in St Louis County, yet their academic performance is one of the best in the state. That is excellent performance no matter how you look at it. Yet RS for RS misses the big picture by only looking at the strikeouts. The right thing to do, IMO, is to support David Freese and the school district that he attended. Support our students, our schools, our communities and our home values Vote yes for Prop S and Support the current board and go David Freese and the Cardinals!
Being employed by one of the most powerful global companies (GE), we are encouraged to see the larger picture, but drill down into the business to identify issues and continuously improve. Focusing only on what Rockwood does well leaves no room for improvement. I see ‘change’ as an opportunity for Rockwood to actually marry their reputation with their actual state. Because of the perseverance of RS for RS, the Missouri State Auditor uncovered some very critical disturbing facts about the state of the district. Until the Missouri State Auditor returns to validate that real change has occurred, I cannot support Prop S. Until we get a school board that is capable of handling additional funding, I cannot support Prop S. It would be doing a disservice to the students, as well as my children, to overlook the grave factual findings of our Missouri State Auditor.
You omitted two other schools rating "fair" In fact, "fair" is the mean rating. In fact, the only two school districts obtaining a "good" rating were very small, and an example is Mexico School District, which via their website, comprises: one H.S., one M.S., and three grade schools = 5 total schools. You must know our RSD comprises 30 schools. Do you honestly believe you are making a fair comparison, considering the relative complexity of the RSD? Note that the four comparably large districts all received a "fair" rating. I think reasonable people can interpret this information to achieve perspective on this new ratings grade system, which serves to summarize, but also dumb-down.
“We did not find any resistance to our work at Rockwood. I’m optimistic the matters we’ve identified in our audit report will be fixed.” “What I don’t find constructive is to call people to the mat. We’ve done a thorough analysis. As long as it is fixed, that’s what’s important.” I will be supporting our students, our schools, our communities and our property values by voting Yes on Prop S and by supporting the current board.
Can you please name them?
No, I'm attempting to point out that the sample size of audit reports is small. That is a fact. I'm not the one attempting to derive meaning as to what is "normal." I personally don't find the results of the audit satisfactory, and I also don't believe that it's explained away by the fact that Rockwood is a large school district. Simple reasons are almost never accurate reasons, and I think most reasonable people would look at the difficulties and problems enumerated by the audit findings and RS for RS and realize they are the result of many factors. I appreciate the audit, and the efforts of RS for RS and I'm interested in solutions. I also believe those responsible for the performance of the district should be held accountable through elections.
re: "I also believe those responsible for the performance of the district should be held accountable through elections." Good, I'm glad to see this! I'm sure you will be giving RSD adminstrators and the Board credit for the achieving the following outstanding results: 1. Low cost per student: 20th lowest out of 23 schools in STL County. Half that of Clayton and 22% lower cost than Parkway. 2. Very Efficient Administration: RSD is the most efficient accredited district in St Louis County (1 out of 21), with 87 more students per administator than the state average! Will you be considering that in your evaluation? 3. Very Efficient Teachers: RSD Student to Teacher ratio is 19 to 1, which is tied for 2nd highest in STL County. 4. Very High Academic Achievement: 2nd in the County (after Parkway) in ACT tested % and 4th in ACT score (despite the high percentage) Low cost + high performance = excellent value for RSD Stakeholders I'm sure you will be taking the fact that RSD delivers outstanding academic performance at a very low cost into your evaluation of the board when you vote next week. Thank you
If they are necessary, where will the district get the funds to complete these projects if Prop S fails?
At this stage, Rockwood must prioritize and spend responsibly.
The priority list was made during the Picture Rockwood process. The community wants up-to-date technology so our students will be prepared to work in the 21 century. Yes, our teachers could teach in the dirt with a stick, but that is not the education I want for my children. The community wants facilities maintained/improved. Facility maintenance/improvement is quite different from home maintenance/improvement, and so are the financial products used to accomplish these goals. While it may sound good and simple to say, "let's use up the reserves", there are consequences to those actions. Per policy the money used from the Financial Stabilization Fund (emergency fund of 4% of budget) must be paid back in succeeding years. How would you propose we do that? This is not a real solution.
Do we understand that we are privileged to be in one of the very best school districts in the country? Do we consider our schools to be the heart and lifeblood of our community and do we support them accordingly? Do we understand that the very best investment we can make is to educate all of the children in our communities, even if we don’t have any of our own currently in school? Do we understand that schools that are supported by the community increase property values for everyone, and not just those whom have kids in school? Do we allow an unelected, self-appointed, organized, and apparently well-funded group (from whom?) to repeatedly attack our great schools and our school leaders in the media? for more on this question, please see this post: http://eureka-wildwood.patch.com/blog_posts/the-real-choice-this-tuesday