Search This Blog

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

1/13/12 - Oakland Press article, "Clarkston school district plans $20 million bond vote for May", by Monica Drake

Interesting article in the Oakland Press about the Clarkston Community Schools' proposed $20 million bond request. 

I urge you to check out the online version as there are public comments after the article that are very insightful.

 
Here is the article:  

Clarkston school district plans $20 million bond vote for May


The Clarkston school board voted to hold a special May election, three months before the regular primary, for residents to vote on a $20 million technology bond.

The cost of a special election is $35,000, which is about the salary of an entry level teacher or aide within the district. The board voted 4-3 on Monday, Jan. 9 in favor of the special election.

Trustee Rosalie Lieblang, who voted against the special election, said: “I do not agree with having a special election for the bond proposal in May. Two years ago, we made a conscious decision to save the district money by moving our school board elections to November for even years.”

Board Treasurer Steve Hyer said he voted for a special election, instead of waiting to put the proposal on the next ballot, because “we save $200,000 in capitalized interest costs by going in May, which far outweighs the small cost of the election.”

“We are able to use our summer tax collections to make our first payment on the bonds. This allows more of the bond dollars to be used in the classroom instead of on administrative capitalized interest costs,” he said.

Vice President Elizabeth Egan and Trustee Barry Bomier, who voted for the special election, were contacted by The Oakland Press, but did not respond before deadline.

If approved, property taxes are projected to increase by 1 mill each year to pay off the bond, which would be retired by 2029. A home with a market value of $200,000 and an state equalized value of $100,000 would pay $100 dollars extra per year. But with a non-qualified bond, the board can increase the number of mills at any time in order to pay principal and interest payments without public approval.

Lieblang said: “While the district is saying it’s one mill, that’s not how this non-qualified bond series works. The public will be asked to vote on a not-to-exceed $20 million proposal. If taxable values go down or delinquencies go up, the district has the ability to levy whatever number of mills it needs to collect the principal interest payment without voter approval.”

Trustee Susan Boatman said the school board has never had a non-qualified bond. “We’ve always run our bonds through the state,” said Boatman. She said with a qualified loan, a district would get the credit rating of the state, which is less interest than an individual school district.

“We’re maxed out on credit with the state because we already levy seven mills to our taxpayers,” she said.

 According to administration, some capital needs the bond would be used on is: upgrading technology and increase mobile technology (with iPads, netbooks, etc.), installation of district-wide wireless access, replace five to seven-year-old computers, enhance security systems, resurface tennis courts, improvements to parking lots and sidewalks, updating energy management systems, security improvement to the gym’s interior doors and improvements to restroom fixtures.

Board President Cheryl McGinnis said the “bond proposal will enhance the learning environment for all students in Clarkston Community Schools.”

Hyer said: “Ultimately, we expect student achievement to increase as a result of these initiatives. We are not using technology as a gimmick, and we are not simply replacing books with e-books. We are looking to advance the way we think about and do teaching and learning in Clarkston.”

Hyer said the bond money would be issued to the school in three series so new technology could be purchased in several years. He said a first series of $10 million would be issued upon successful passage of the election, and two subsequent series of $5 million would be issued in 2016 and 2020.

“This will allow us to be sustainable in keeping our teaching and learning infrastructure and capital needs up-to-date through 2024 at least,” said Hyer.

Boatman said, at a previous meeting, she asked what happens if the board defaults, or fails to pay, the bond payments. “We have already defaulted at the state level, but at the state level, they have something called a school bond loan fund that bails out school districts and pays their interest payments. The state is in trouble because all school districts are doing this,” she said.

Boatman said at the Jan. 9 meeting, she found out that, with a non-qualified bond, the district can’t default because the bond no longer goes through the state. Instead, they would automatically increase the millage rate.

Trustee Joan Patterson said multiple technology pilots with iPads and netbooks are currently ongoing through the district at all grade levels. She said she thinks the results of these pilots should be assessed so the board knows how technology directly affects students before more money is spent.

“I’m going to be painted as a person who doesn’t care about kids. I care that what we’re spending our money on is on kids,” she said. “This is my responsibility as a school board member to make sure we can afford it, that it’s what our kids need now and we’ve done the research. And I don’t think we’ve done the due diligence to say that yet.”

Boatman said: “It’s too early to get results for those pilots. I feel asking the taxpayers to pay for technology is premature until we get results to know that using this technology really makes a difference in student achievement.”

1/9/12 - Prepared CCS board meeting comments by Dawn Schaller

1/9/12 CCS Board meeting comments by Dawn Schaller
(I spoke, but was cut short by the “two minute rule”.)

I urge the board to vote no on the bond request.

I am concerned that the district is getting into greater debt via the proposed non-qualified bond when the district is still getting further into debt every year due to the district’s inability to pay for all of the expenses for the current “in effect” bonds.

I am concerned that administration is trying to sell the public on this being a one mill bond, when in fact, as explained tonight, if the interest rates for the two later bond issuances rise beyond the estimates or property values continue to drop, administration will have the right to increase the bond millage to the property owners to an amount over one mill.

I found that the board packet from the last board meeting and this board meeting failed to explain the School Bond Revolving Fund (although board questions brought out some answers).  According to the Plante & Moran audit that was performed this past summer and fall, the School Loan Revolving Fund and School Bond Loan Fund actually extended the maximum 7 mill bonds several years to no later than the spring of 2035.  This was never approved by the public and my understanding is that it was caused by a combination of the current recession lowering the taxable values of property and the district unreasonably over estimating the taxable property values over the terms of the bonds.    

The district plans to spend $35,000 to hold the bond election in May instead of waiting until November when the cost would be zero dollars.  When the election is held in May you are unlikely to get the general public out to vote and I’m sure that is exactly what administration wants to happen.  I’m sure Administration will press the PTAs/PTOs to get the vote out by parents.  

The district needs to think about what they wish to put into the new bond request.  In my opinion, many of these things are unnecessary and some should be coming out of the district’s general operating fund.  Bonds are not supposed to be for maintenance items.  They are supposed to be for improvements.

Does the district really need the following?
1.      Almost $8.5 million for brand new infrastructure for the new classroom technology and $2 million for replacement of current personal computers in the district.  
2.      $2 million for the addition to the “team room” and concession stand at the high school football stadium that was recently approved by the board as being paid for by fund raising, not as a district expense, (from a board meeting in July 2011)
3.      $1 million for a new pool entrance at the high school.  There is no logical reason to spend a million dollars so there is a separate entrance for the pool.  
4.      $700,000 for the Astroturf for the soccer/lacrosse field at the high school,
5.      $700,000 for the Astroturf for the junior high,
6.      Were the fields that the district wants to turn into Astroturf fields recently set up with sprinkler systems?  If so, that came out of recent district bond funds.

I have learned over the years that the more you have, the more you have to pay to maintain all of those additional things you have.  The cost of maintaining all of the technology and capital improvements (short of the energy saving improvements) are not being addressed by administration… 

Just how long does the district think it will take for elementary age students to damage, destroy, or lose their new iPads?  How will that affect future district costs?  We all know how long our cells phones or laptops tend to last, so how long does the district think the student’s iPads will last that will be mobile every day?

In my opinion, the district is trying to spend money they don’t have for items the district doesn’t need, and the public can’t afford. 

11/17/11 CCS response to my FOIA request - what I asked for and what they were unwilling to provide

November 17, 2011

Dear Mrs. Schaller,

Clarkston Community Schools has completed your Freedom of Information Act, MCL 15.231 et seq. (FOIA) request received by our office on September 12, 2011.  You requested the following,

Freedom of Information Act Request by Dawn Schaller
sent via email to CCS 9/12/11
This is my newest Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.  A good portion of what I am asking for was documentation that the district failed to supply to me (although requested) from previous FOIA requests, but some is new and being requested based on recent school issues or questions opened up based on what I was supplied from previous FOIA requests.  Please provide what I am requesting below that is in red, bolded and underlined:
1)      Complete documentation (any and all backup documents and all documents signed) for any decisions made or documents signed by the President of the CCS School Board that was not voted on in a public session by the School Board since 05/01/09.
2)      Consolidated board feedback on the Berkley Operating Procedures that Mrs. Lieblang provided to Steve Hyer.
3)      From the “Total salary and a description and cost of each and every fringe benefit in the compensation package” for the superintendent and each employee of the district whose “Medicare Wages” exceeds $100 K from the district “Transparency Reporting” on the district website–
a)      Need the actual “Medicare Wages” for the people on the report as the State of Michigan instructions for Transparency reporting found here mandate: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Budget_Transparency_Reporting_327912_7.pdf   The Michigan Transparency reporting instructions mandate: 
(1)   g) “Employee Compensation Information” Provide a report of the total salary and a description and cost of each and every fringe benefit included in the compensation package for the superintendent of the district or intermediate district and for each employee of the district or intermediate district whose salary exceeds $100,000 (e.g. a pdf file). For purposes of this reporting, salary will be defined similar to that reported as Medicare wages on the employee’s prior year W2. This data must be all inclusive and should be data from the most recently completed year for which they are available (NOTE: the total compensation package must be fully disclosed).”
4)      Please provide a report showing the “Medicare Wages” for all CCS employees for the most recent year (either 2010/2011 fiscal school year or 2010 calendar year, however the data is kept).  This should be a simple report pulled off the computer.
5)      Please provide a report showing the base salaries and/or hourly salaries for all district employees for the 2011/2012 fiscal year as I received last year.   This should be a simple report pulled off the computer.
6)       “Current Complete District Organization Chart”.  I still have not received a complete Current District Organization Chart as mandated in Policy 1230.01, titled, Development of Administrative Guidelines" that I requested on two previous FOIA requests (the first one being requested 3/17/10).  Policy 1230.01 states, "The Board of Education delegates to the Superintendent the function of designing and implementing the guidelines, required actions, and detailed arrangements under which the District will operate. These administrative guidelines shall not be inconsistent with the policies adopted by the Board. The Superintendent shall maintain a current organizational chart to which immediate reference can be made by the Board or any employee of the Board”.  It would be a violation of policy for the document not to be be completed.
7)      A copy of all documentation, including, but not limited to, all POs, PO alterations, account codes charged, quotes, bids, invoices, comparison bids, all PO backup documentation, all information on the bid process (advertisement, bids received, and bid comparison), and Board BAR where the contract was discussed and approved.  If no bid, not put out to bid, and/or no Board BAR, an explanation for why these purchasing policies were not followed for the following  :
a)      Check 84432, 10/9/08, Arizona Saddlery of Clarkston, $140.00
b)       “POH Medical Center”.  In a previous FOIA request, I requested “all bids, approvals, etc. for the "athletic trainer services" under POH Medical Center”.  I did not receive any information on the bidding, nor approval processes for this contract, nor a copy of the contract.  The amount of the annual contract was $40,625.00, which is well over the “$20 thousand something” that is the current trigger point for going to bid, and having to be approved by the Board of Education. 
8)      "Lighting Upgrades Project".  In a previous FOIA request, I asked for the complete bid package, but did not receive the “detailed scope of work” from the original bid (although I did receive it from the change order).
a)      I still need the original contract signed by the winning bidder, Midwest Illumination.
b)     I still need the “detailed scope of work” from the original bid.  I already have everything else I had requested from the original bid.
c)      I still need the explanation for the multiple versions of the bid sheets.  There were five different companies that bid the job and there was one bid sheet for four of the companies and multiple bid sheets with different amounts for the winning bidder, “Midwest Illumination”.
9)      "Pro-Tech Lighting". “New web server", delivery, and set up at CHS, paid on two checks, check 85250 on 11/6/08 for $18,792.00 and balance paid on check 85817 on 12/03/08 for $2,088.00 (total of $20,880.00).  In a previous FOIA request, I asked for competing bids and evidence that it went out to bid or was approved by the board, but I received nothing in regard to that request. 
a)      Please prove that this did go out to bid and was approved by the board by supplying bid notice, received bids, and board meeting BAR.
b)     If not put out to bid and not approved by the board, please explain the justification for not doing so (against purchasing policy that mandates both requirements).
10)  "Elementary School Irrigation Systems" from 2006.  In a previous FOIA request I requested a great deal of information from the district on this contract and received very little information back. 
a)      I still need the “detailed scope of work” in the original bid package that I was not given previously,
b)     I still need the complete bids from all of the bidders (I only received the bid comparison sheet),
c)      I still need all of the purchase orders and payments against both the original contract as well as for any and all change orders paid to the contractor,
d)     I still need business justification for making the change order that was given to Progressive Irrigation a change order instead of putting the business out to bid as a separate contract.  The base contract was called, “Elementary School Irrigation Systems” and was for irrigation system jobs at six of the elementary schools, but the “change order” was to install irrigation systems for nine sports fields at the middle school and the junior high. 
11)  “February 2010 National School Boards Association (NSBA) FRN Conference”.  The district sent three board members to the 2010 FRN Conference - Steve Hyer, Cheryl McGinnis and Barry Bomier.  Yet I found: 
a)      There was no flight expense charged against the district purchasing card, nor an expense reimbursement request for the trip submitted by Barry Bomier, nor Steve Hyer.  I understand that Mr. Bomier works in the Washington DC area frequently, so he may have been in DC on business and did not incur flight expenses. 
(1)   Did the district pay for Barry’s flight to Washington DC?  If so, please supply a copy of the expense and show where it was paid.
(2)   Did Mr. Hyer attend the conference and if so, did he submit expenses to be reimbursed for the February 2010 FRN conference?  If so, please supply a copy of the complete expense claim with receipts.   
b)      I found that the district paid for the flight expenses of $209.20 each against the January 2010 purchasing card for Steve Hyer, Cheryl McGinnis, and also Kyle Hughes.  All three of the flight expenses were charged against the Board of Education’s “conference/registration” account.
(1)   Please supply the business justification for sending Kyle Hughes, who is a high school teacher in the district and not a Board of Education member, to Washington DC at that time.
(2)   Please supply the business justification for charging the flight expense for Kyle Hughes to Washington DC to the Board of Education’s “conference / registration” account.
(3)   Please supply the invoice/documentation for the $911.44 bill for Hilton Hotels in Washington DC charged against Heidi McClain’s purchasing card on 2/5/10 that is on the March 2010 JP Morgan Chase purchasing card bill showing it is for the hotel charges for the FRN conference.  If that documentation includes a room for Kyle Hughes, please provide the business justification for charging the Board of Education’s “conference/registration” account for that portion of the bill.
12)  Regarding “Steve Hyer’s expense report for the 2009 FRN conference trip”, please provide a business justification for the district to pay for the expense charged for a cab ride to the “Chinese Consulate”.
13)  On # 7 of my one of my previous FOIA requests, I asked for all expense information related to any individual Board of Education member”, whether the expense was related to Board business or any other capacity related to the district including clubs/activities, including all individual statements, expense reports, quotes, conference documents, and detailed receipts for the period June 2008 to May 2010 including:
a)      All purchasing card charges incurred on the board member’s behalf,
b)     All reimbursed expenses,
c)      All expenses paid out of district purchase orders on the Board member’s behalf, and
d)     Any other payments made to, or on behalf of all Board members.
e)      What I actually received was just reimbursed expenses claimed on expense account sheets for board attendance reimbursements and a few travel expenses…   I know that all of the board members attended conferences, but I did not receive conference expense documentation for all of the board members.  I also know that many conference expenses were incurred utilizing the district purchasing card for most (if not all) of the board members under Heidi McClain’s district purchasing card, but this information was not supplied to me.  Therefore, I am asking for:
(1)   For fiscal years 2008/09, 2009/10, and 2010/11, copies of all backup documentation for all charges against Board account codes:
(a)   110.1231.3220.098.0000.0000.0000 (“conference registration”
(b)   and 110.1231.3200.098.0000.0000.0000 (“pur serv-travel & expense”
(2)   the cumulative summary revenue and cumulative summary expense reports for the Board’s account codes for fiscal years 2008/2009, 2009/2010, and 2010/2011.
(3)   the cumulative detailed revenue and cumulative detailed expense reports for the Board’s account codes for fiscal years 2008/2009, 2009/2010, and 2010/2011.
(4)   I still want the balance of the information that was not provided to me earlier if not supplied in the other documentation I have asked for here.
14)  As a result of a previous FOIA request, I received the explanation of Doug Slater’s theater ticket purchase” from the January 2010 purchasing card being charged against the “114” account code for “supplies/materials” when he was on a DECA Club trip to New York City as “this is account used for item purchases when not a registration, due, or fee”.  I would like:
a)      a copy of all receipts and transaction documentation,
b)     information on for whom the two tickets were purchased and who used the theatre tickets,
c)      and a business justification for purchasing and charging the district for two Broadway theater tickets while on a DECA trip.
15)  “Two purchases from Net Tech Corporation” ($32,965.00 and $36,345.00 paid in 2009 and 2010) for 24x7x4 hour maintenance service contract on IBM servers and Cisco routers.  From a previous FOIA request, I had asked for a “copy of all documentation, including, but not limited to, all POs, PO alterations, account codes charged, quotes, bids, invoices, comparison bids, and all PO backup documentation” related to those purchases, but I did not receive any information on the bidding process and approval for this contract, nor a copy of the contract.  Therefore, I still need:
a)      All information on the bid process (advertisement, bids received, and bid comparison).  If not put out to bid, an explanation for why it was not done.
b)      Board BAR where the contract was discussed and approved.  If not brought to the Board for approval, an explanation for why it was not done.
16)  All documentation regarding the “creation and maintenance of the CCS district website” including bids, board approvals (if any), POs, PO backup documentation, copies of checks, invoices, and any other financial documentation regarding the school district’s website.
17)  From the “CHS “Parking” 610 account”, from the current or previous financial system I need:
a)      the cumulative summary revenue and cumulative summary expense reports for fiscal years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011.
b)     the cumulative detailed revenue and cumulative detailed expense reports for fiscal years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011.
c)      the name of the person responsible for the account for both years, where monies are supposed top be applied, and the stated purpose of the account.
18)  From the “CHS “Jungle Run” 610 account”, from the current or previous financial system I need:
a)      the cumulative summary revenue and cumulative summary expense reports for fiscal years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011.
b)     the cumulative detailed revenue and cumulative detailed expense reports for fiscal years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011.
c)      the name of the person responsible for the account for both years, where monies are supposed to be applied, and the stated purpose of the account.
19)  “Explanation for the splitting of the $262.40 Air Trans flight expense charged by Scott Banks” on 9/18/09 that is on the October 2009 JP Morgan Chase district purchasing card into $165.00 against the “610” high school “parking” account fund and $97.40 against the “610” “video production” account fund.  Please also provide a business reason for the trip.
20)  Detailed check registers from the following months:
a)      December 2010
b)     January 2011
c)      June 2011
d)     July 2011
e)      August 2011







Enclosed are the documents related to your requested items.

Several of the items contained in your FOIA fall outside of the scope of MCL 15.231 et seq. for the reason that such public records do not exist.  These items are as follows:

  • Complete documentation (any and all backup documents and all documents signed) for any decisions made or documents signed by the President of the CCS School Board that was not voted on in a public session by the School Board since 05/01/09: We have no such documentation.
  • Copy of expense for Barry Bomier’s flight to Washington DC for the February 2010 FRN Conference:  The district did not pay for this flight.
  • Copy of complete expense claim with receipts for Mr. Hyer’s expenses at the February 2010 FRN Conference:  Mr. Hyer did not submit any expenses for this conference.
  • Cumulative summary revenue and expenses reports for Board account codes:  We do not maintain such reports.
  • Net Tech Corporation – information on bid process, etc.:  These expenses were annual maintenance fees and thus were not bid.
  • Cumulative summary revenue and expense reports for fiscal years 2009-10 and 2010-11 for the CHS Parking 610 account and Jungle Run 610 accounts:  We do not maintain such reports.  The name of the person responsible for both these internal Clarkston High School accounts is Gary Kaul, CHS Principal.

Please be advised that MCL 15.233 states, in relevant part,

(4) This act does not require a public body to make a compilation, summary, or report of information…
(5) This act does not require a public body to create a new public record…
Accordingly, all public records that have been requested and exist have been provided.  The total cost for this request is as follows:

Number of pages: 585 x $0.10 per copy = $58.50
Labor:  $15.33 x 22 hours = $337.26
Total cost = $395.76 less credit of $81.50 = Total amount owed of $314.26

The materials will be available at the front desk at the Administration Building anytime after 12:00 noon on Friday, November 18.  Please present your payment to the receptionist.

Sincerely,


Heidi S. McClain
District FOIA Coordinator and
Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent 

Dr. Rock spent $1,700 of CCS district money on attorneys to keep from giving me documents I requested through FOIA

From: Dawn Schaller
To: Steve HyersCheryl McGinnis, Elizabeth Egan, Barry Bomier, Joan Patterson, Sue Boatman, Rosalie Lieblang
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 9:30:53 PM
Subject: Fwd: FOIA Response - concerns over items not included
Dear CCS Board members, 

I wanted you to know that Dr. Rock finally did respond to me tonight (see below)... 

It's interesting that Dr. Rock found it necessary/preferable to spend $1,700.00 district dollars on attorneys to prevent me from receiving documents under FOIA that I know exist, than to provide the actual documents.  How is that for 'transparency' and being a responsible steward of the school district's limited dollars?

However, I just want to advise the board, there are sanctions for violations of FOIA.  See here for Michigan FOIA rules: http://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,4534,7-164-20988_18160-51242--,00.html 
Thank you. 



From: Rod Rock
To: Dawn Schaller
Cc:
Cheryl McGinnis
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 6:36:15 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: FOIA Response - concerns over items not included
Mrs. Schaller:

Our district's attorney counseled us, at a cost of $1,700, on your FOIA request. We provided all documents according to our attorney's counsel.

Thank you.
--
Rod Rock, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Clarkston Community Schools
http://www.clarkston.k12.mi.us
On Twitter: @RodRock1
Find Clarkston Community Schools on Facebook
Go Wolves!
Our mission is to cultivate thinkers, learners, and positive contributors to a global society.




From: Dawn Schaller
To:
Rod Rock  Steve HyersCheryl McGinnis, Elizabeth Egan, Barry Bomier, Joan Patterson, Sue Boatman, Rosalie Lieblang
Cc: Heidi Mcclain

Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: FOIA Response - concerns over items not included

Dr Rock,

On December 16, 2011, I sent the attached email string to Heidi McClain and cc'ed you regarding the FOIA request I submitted to the district on September 12, 2011. 

The comments below in black and bold are my responses to the district's explanations of why the items noted were not going to be supplied to me on the FOIA request.  I gave you quite a bit of time to respond, however, neither you nor Heidi McClain have responded to my email of 12/16/11. 

I picked up the FOIA documents the district did supply in December and as I expect you are aware, there were additional items that I had requested on the FOIA request that you also did not supply, but were not included on this response of items you were not going to supply.  I will send a separate email with those items to you, Heidi, and the board. 
 
Since you and Anita Banach have both told me that you do not intend to communicate with me in any way other than communicating receipt of my emails, maybe the board members can ask you some questions on this, since you actually work for the board (rather than the other way around)...

I expect an acceptable (to me) response to this email by Friday afternoon at 5 PM (1/20/12).

I feel that the district's responses (this and the actual documents supplied that were missing additional documents I requested) from my 9/12/11 FOIA request were disingenuous.  They were also much more "opaque" than "transparent".  

CCS Board: Mrs. McGinnis, Mr. Hyer, Mrs. Egan, Mr. Bomier, Mrs. Patterson, Mrs. Boatman, and Mrs. Lieblang,

Please inquire of Dr. Rock why he felt it necessary to deny the items on this list.  I will forward the list of additional items that were missing from the FOIA documents to you.  I would appreciate it if you would also follow up with Dr. Rock on those items after I send it.  Please also understand that in the case of your action or lack of action on this, the press will be apprised and my blog will also be updated.  Please feel free to call or email me if you have any questions or concerns.  I am still a parent of a child in the CCS district.

Also, I would recommend that you ask Dr. Rock for an explanation of the $32,662.14 paid to Coponen Construction Services, LLC between July and October 2011.  Coponen Construction was the construction company used to make multiple repairs to the Bayliss house over the summer and possibly into early fall.  I know that this was not approved by the board.   

Thank you.

Dawn Schaller
http://acrosstheboard-clarkston.blogspot.com/



From: Dawn Schaller
To: Heidi Mcclain
Cc: Rod Rock
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 10:26:54 AM
Subject: Re: FOIA Response - concerns over items not included
Heidi,

Your response is below in red.  My responses are in black next to what I am commenting on.  Please advise.
Enclosed are the documents related to your requested items.

Several of the items contained in your FOIA fall outside of the scope of MCL 15.231 et seq. for the reason that such public records do not exist.  These items are as follows:

Complete documentation (any and all backup documents and all documents signed) for any decisions made or documents signed by the President of the CCS School Board that was not voted on in a public session by the School Board since 05/01/09: We have no such documentation.  Are you saying that the district does not have this information because the School Board is a separate "public body"?  If you are saying that there are no documents from decisions made by the President of the CCS School Board that were not decided by the full board, then I would have to say that is a violation of FOIA.  There have been multiple arguments during board meetings about decisions made by both Cheryl McGinnis and Steve Hyer while holding the President's position where the full board was not allowed to vote on the matter.  Please advise what you are saying here so I can decide how to take my next steps.
 
Copy of expense for Barry Bomier’s flight to Washington DC for the February 2010 FRN Conference:  The district did not pay for this flight.  OK

Copy of complete expense claim with receipts for Mr. Hyer’s expenses at the February 2010 FRN Conference:  Mr. Hyer did not submit any expenses for this conference.  OK, obviously he attended with a scholarship from somewhere else.
 
Cumulative summary revenue and expenses reports for Board account codes:  We do not maintain such reports.  In past FOIA requests I have received these reports.  What is the difference now?

Net Tech Corporation – information on bid process, etc.:  These expenses were annual maintenance fees and thus were not bid.  I asked an accountant to look at all of the district Purchasing policies.  He said that he could not find anything in policy 6320 that distinguishes between an expense and a capital item when talking about the bid process.  Maintenance is an expense item.  It also doesn’t single maintenance out for special treatment, i.e., something that is exempt from the bid process.  He scanned a couple of other policies to see if maintenance was mentioned elsewhere but didn’t see anything.  He said that he believes that if the value of a maintenance contract is sufficiently large to trigger the bid process under State of Michigan rules, then maintenance would have to be bid also.
 
Cumulative summary revenue and expense reports for fiscal years 2009-10 and 2010-11 for the CHS Parking 610 account and Jungle Run 610 accounts:  We do not maintain such reports.  The name of the person responsible for both these internal Clarkston High School accounts is Gary Kaul, CHS Principal.  In past FOIA requests I have received cumulative summary revenue and expense reports for full fiscal years for other 610 accounts.  What is the difference now?

Please be advised that MCL 15.233 states, in relevant part,

(4) This act does not require a public body to make a compilation, summary, or report of information…
(5) This act does not require a public body to create a new public record…
Accordingly, all public records that have been requested and exist have been provided.  The total cost for this request is as follows:

Number of pages: 585 x $0.10 per copy = $58.50
Labor:  $15.33 x 22 hours = $337.26
Total cost = $395.76 less credit of $81.50 = Total amount owed of $314.26

The materials will be available at the front desk at the Administration Building anytime after 12:00 noon on Friday, November 18.  Please present your payment to the receptionist.

Sincerely,

Heidi S. McClain
District FOIA Coordinator and
Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent



From: Heidi Mcclain
To: Dawn Schaller
Cc: Rod Rock
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 3:52:19 PM
Subject: FOIA Response

Mrs. Schaller,

Please see the attached response regarding your September 12, 2011 FOIA request.  As stated at the end of the letter, your total amount due for this request is $314.26.  Your documents may be picked up at the front desk of the administration office anytime after 12:00 noon on Friday, November 18.

Thank you,
Heidi

Heidi S. McClain
Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent and
Board/Superintendent Communications
Clarkston Community Schools