Civic Vandalism

I told you, he is a punk. (Link)

This paperboy always delivers

This week, our misguided mayor has opted to use 'net school spending' as his political chew toy. Let's take a closer look by peeling the 'faux outrage' back and thinking about what is underneath.


The Lowell Sun made a hay day out of mayor Elliott's 'revelation.' In the five days between the Council meeting (where drama queen Elliott thrust the DOE letter into the public square at the end of the meeting, via suspension of rules) and today, the Sun has written, by my count, four stories. Each one escalating the blame game rhetoric.

From 2/12/14 (Link)

... Elliott had to ask councilors for a suspension of the rules to discuss its contents at the meeting.
"When I saw this number, I was taken aback," Elliott said.
Lynch said the council's directive to hold the line on taxes has had a direct impact on school spending.
"Not going up in taxes means not going up in schools," he said.
City Councilor Jim Milinazzo questioned why councilors did not know about this beforehand.
"No one knows until this letter comes out," Lynch said.

From 2/13/14 (Link)

Deputy Superintendent of Finance and Operations Jay Lang acknowledged the letter from Chester a year ago.
Lang said the only way to address a school-spending shortfall in the middle of a fiscal year is for the city to put more money toward educational expenses, which did not occur last fiscal year.
"It is not a number in our control," Lang said. "We can only spend what gets appropriated to us."
...
Lynch planned during the budget season last spring to request the City Council approve an additional $1 million in cash to the schools, but increased the total by another $1.5 million at the request of the School Department so it could have a level-funded budget. The council approved the increase.
But Lang said the School Department was aware the funding would not be enough to have the city keep up with its spending requirement because of the anticipated large shortfall from fiscal 2013.
"Obviously, we would have liked more, but Bernie did not end up recommending that," said Lang.

The Blog of Record has painted a vivid picture of finger pointing between Jay Lang and Bernie Lynch. So compelling is this drama, a reader would almost miss completely the little tidbits of relevant information. Like,

"This shortfall falls within the 5 percent range allowed by law, and will be added to the district's FY14 spending requirement," the letter states.

With the blame game in full swing, in come the punks and vandals.

From 2/15/14 (Link)

The final determination of the schools spending shortfall for 2013 was first revealed at Tuesday's council meeting by Elliott, who was copied on a letter from the state sent to Franco.
City Councilor Ed Kennedy has filed a motion to discuss the shortfall at Tuesday's council meeting. He said he does not recall the council being told about the expected school-funding shortfall. He also said the blame for the problem falls on Lynch's administration, not the council.
"You rely on the administration to be solid on the numbers, and apparently they were not," said Kennedy. "I also don't understand why the manager did not bring this to the council before this time."
...
School Committee member David Conway is also critical of top city and school officials' handling of the issue, saying the city should not shortchange its students.
"I find it disturbing that between City Manager Bernie Lynch and the School Department's business manager, Jay Lang, that they couldn't identify that the city was $3.8 million below net school spending as required by state law and rectify the situation," he said. "This mismanagement needs to be fixed."
Conway has filed a motion for Wednesday's School Committee meeting calling for a report on the total impact to the schools' programs and staff as result of any "financial mismanagement" in the last five years. He also wants a report on the financial impact to the schools of not meeting the net school spending requirement at any point in the last five years.

Setting the actual policy discussion aside, for a moment, let me please just note two things that may not be obvious to those outside the 'bubble.'

- Ed Kennedy's favorite pose is, 'Why weren't we told?' It's a fairly good pose, as far as hackneyed claptrap goes. It attempts to let Kennedy, as we say. "Get caught trying.' He WANTS to be a decider. In the 'front seat,' and all. But, he can't because of the secretive ways of the City Administration (Boo...Hiss). At worst, this tact lays bare the shallowness of Kennedy's efforts to spin his dereliction. He doesn't try harder because he must think Lowellians are stupid. Maybe, it's just the voters. He did come in #3. At best, it exposes how reactive Kennedy is. He doesn't keep his finger on the pulse of important matters. He simply awaits the City Admin to spoon feed him grist for the political pornography mill.

- Dave Conway wants Jay Lang's head on a platter. It can't be said that Lang's efforts on our behalf don't bear scrutiny. It sorely does. But, don't let Dave Conway's flailing distract you from something that resembles 'stewardship.' Conway has an ax to grind. (Link) If festering revenge is a quality cherished by Shady Lowell, Conway proudly sets the standard. Of course, he only brags about his feeble Machiavellian ploys among those with the stomach to feign listening. Unfortunately, that crowd isn't as puny as it should be.

But, the crud-de-la-crud comes in The Column. (Link)

Lynch admitted Tuesday night he had discussed the letter a week prior with former city Chief Financial Officer Tom Moses and planned to discuss the topic with him again to get a firmer grasp on the anticipated shortfall.

Moses was back at City Hall the next night. Elliott said he saw Moses enter Lynch’s office. Lynch, who had told The Sun he was having budget preparation meetings with staff that night, said Moses was back “to go over his budget spreadsheet model.”
(bold mine)

*whispers* Palace intrigue. Tom Moses is skulking around the City Hall. *Snorts* Wha .. What?! Is Elliott and the Blog of Record shaming our former CFO for voluntarily helping us sort through the budget details? For realz?! They have the gall to talk in this tone? If you have any confusion as to why there is an exodus from City Hall, by top officials, the fog of confusion should be blowing away from your head, right .. about .. NOW!

"Thanks, but NO THANKS, Mr. Moses!" is what I get from that twisted passage.

And, it gets worse.

Elliott had received his copy of the letter only recently and brought it to the council's attention Tuesday night.

“I don’t remember being told about last year’s letter, and I wonder if I had not found the letter, if the manager was going to tell us about it,” Elliott told The Column Lynch said he received the recent letter via traditional mail on Feb. 3, and assumed the mayor and superintendent received it the same date.

“I had included it in my budget file to review and analyze and planned to discuss it with them in presenting information on the FY15 budget, which would obviously be before March 4th,” Lynch told The Sun. “Whereas the mayor, as chair of the council, also receives the same letter, I assumed he would send a copy onto his colleagues in his communications if he so chose and place it on as a matter of discussion.”
(bold mine)

This one line, " .. I wonder if I had not found the letter, if the manager was going to tell us about it, .." is what set me off. Otherwise, I would have chalked this all up to petty politics. Conway's shiv of Lang is petty par for the course. And, with Lynch leaving, we knew mayor Elliot and Councilor Ditto would not disappoint. Petty is, as petty does. They were rewarded in the last election. They will not relent until voters shit can them.

Elliott's invocation of a letter not found and not being told by the City Manager is, I am certain, a conjuring of this:

said Elliott. “It’s clear to me we were left in the dark by the previous administration.” (Link)

No wonder mayor Elliott is verklempt. The self described "fiscal watchdog" is caught, again, unawares. Poor Hot Rod. Stewing in his own vapours.

Unfortunately, Elliott opts to direct his scorn, under our noses, at his outgoing nemesis in such a ham fisted way. Did Rod actually think we would liken the letter from Mitchell Chester, which is rather routine in nature, to that of a letter that led to this?

###

This week, there are two agenda items that are petty instruments of political charlatanism.

At the City Council, Tuesday:

C. Kennedy – Req. City Council and City Mgr. discuss the letter dated January 31, 2014 from the Mass. Commission of Elementary and Secondary Education regarding School Budget shortfall.

At the School Committee, Wednesday:

[by David Conway]: Because of the City of Lowell failing to meet its net school spending requirement in fiscal 2013 by more than $3.8 million: Requesting the Superintendent prepare a report listing the programs and staff within the last five years, that were put on hold, eliminated or compromised because of financial mismanagement. Furthermore, that the Superintendent supply a report of the total financial impact/loss of revenue to the Lowell Public Schools in the last five years due to not meeting net-school spending requirement.

Don't be fooled by their breathy pleas for civic relevancy. At worst, these two motions are designed to inflict political damage to their maker's foes. Sad, really. How they so arrogantly waste the People's time with ego masturbation.

A kind analysis would be forward looking. Why the focus on school spending, at this point? It's never been a bother to the Council, anyways.

In my travels, especially between Nov. 2013 and Jan.2014, I would hear troubled minds speak of the 'damage Rodney would do to the schools, if he was mayor.' A Shady salve was offered up, vouching that Elliott got the message and he would not bring his anti-union flim flam to the 'school side.'

Is Elliott trumping up a crisis, so he can justify breaking from his penny wise, pound foolish ways? The UTL contract is up for renegotiation, y'know.

City Manager Lynch did a decent job bringing savings to Lowell, by juggling health care insurance benefits. That efficiency translated into a shortfall in our obligation to school spending. Some will argue that those savings rightfully belong to the school side and should be related directly to better outcomes for students, e.g. more teachers, more support, or technology improvement.

The School district is holding an IOU for $3.8 million (I think).

Right minded elected officials, not mentioned above, should be clear as to how this obligation is satisfied. They need to be mindful of the public good. And, while doing so, they should self police their peer group. If they don't, nothing will deter the petty minded bull shit artists sitting among them, to straighten up.