Wording in the proposed Peninsula School District capital levy says the district can use discretion to spend proceeds on construction and remodeling improvements if the original intent (new construction) “is deemed impractical.”
That means $50 million could go to just ongoing maintenance and/or remodeling. Given that phrasing, the school board has recourse to spend those funds otherwise.
Another statement says the district “could receive funds from the state ... ” to complete the project. If state funding (which we can ill-afford) isn’t approved, this could again be recourse for the school board to spend levy proceeds, fully or partially, in ways other than advertised.
Government entities, from school boards to Congress, have no profit motive unlike the private sector, where survival requires profit. Therefore, other incentives and techniques should be applied to make sure taxpayer dollars are spent wisely.
Have our public agencies considered adopting groundbreaking management and efficiency models? One such as Peter Drucker’s classical tenants of organizational efficiency, Management By Objectives, result-oriented management processes, Total Quality Management’s continuous product improvement, the Air Force’s performance management program, Six Sigma’s process improvement strategies or lean management techniques?
What incentives exist for meeting goals by under-spending a budget? Why aren’t budgets tied to a population increase and CPI multiplier?
How about teacher pay for performance vs. seniority? Have other available facilities or leasebacks been considered? Why not get rid of prevailing wage laws?
This levy will pay flaggers $35.34 per hour and drywall tapers $49.79 per hour.
Let’s spend our existing budgets efficiently before we ask taxpayers for more.