September 30, 2007
In reviewing the notes taken by staff and handouts provided during the September 27th meeting, I am wondering why district staff did not utilize the Capital Facilities Plan in developing their student enrollment forecast. In discussing the 2004-2009 CFP with others, it shows clearly that enrollment was moving downward and was far more accurate in determining actual FTE for 2007 than anything provided by your budget analyst.
Why wouldn't a Board-adopted document be part of the planning process? If Board members were provided a copy of the CFP, read it entirely and then adopted it, wouldn't they have every expectation that district staff would follow the forecasting methodology described therein?
To the casual observer, it would appear that district staff was aware these reductions in FTE were coming and chose to adopt a more optimistic forecast model so that more aggressive cuts could be made at a later date - without any reasonable warning.
September 28, 2007
1. Please provide the total of all payments made to AMEC since and including P.O. #240076. This would include a subtotal for their work at the Maintenance and Transportation site and a subtotal for the new administration site.
2. Please provide the names of the two board members that based their decision to buy the new administration site upon the outcome of a meeting on May 10, 2005.
September 26, 2007
I seek one copy of the current use agreement between Powerful Partners and copies of all rent checks paid since 2003.
As I already know, Powerful Partners has a "use agreement" as opposed to a lease. I am aware that a use agreement does not pass along base rent to the end user but does require reimbursement for general fund expenditures, such as utilities, custodial care and maintenance.
I hereby request one copy of the most current, fully executed use agreement between Powerful Partners and the Edmonds School District and copies of checks paid to the District since 2003.
September 26, 2007
I had asked which two members of the board were at that meeting, assuming you were there. Was that the case? Who accompanied these board members? When might a response be provided?
September 17, 2007
1. A list of all applicants that applied for the position of Executive Director of Business and Operations that resulted in the hiring of Marla Miller.
2. A list of all District employees that reviewed applications for the above position.
3. A list of all District employees that conducted interviews for the above position.
4. The most recent application completed by Marla Miller for any position at the District - less protected information.
Not directly related but also important;
5. Copies of all purchase orders involving Seattle Piano Gallery (SPG).
6. Copies of all leases between SPG and the Edmonds School District.
September 16, 2007
Please include the rating sheets for Ms. Hall and the other applicant, as well as the names of District staff members that were involved in rating these candidates.
September 12, 2007
Please provide a copy of the application and related documents of the current Planning and Property Management Specialist. Of course, you should exclude her social security number, date of birth, home address, telephone number and email address. I am only interested in knowing what qualifications she claimed to possess prior to being hired by the District.
August 14, 2007
We are seeking a copy of the document that I found and showed to Brian Harding demonstrating that access will be granted for one single family residence. It was signed by the superintendent at the time.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Mark, this time you've got me confused. How many of these are legal requests for information, which are emails (that can be ignored) and how much time (legally) can the district wait to respond. I'm particularly interested in the use agreement and checks from Powerful Partners. I've assumed you filed for the request, and that would mean 10 days from that date right?
The designated custodian of District records has ten days to acknowledge receipt of the request. In their response, they must provide a timeline for delivery of requested documents.
The current wait is 30 days. My understanding is that media agencies and other private citizens are making requests as well.
With all of work triggered by poor budget planning, this task really should move to someone other than Marla Miller.
What is the recourse?
A response is required in writing within 5 business days.
RCW 42.56.010 you get all e-mails too, not personal E-mails. Those are not subject to disclosure.
Ms Miller you should obay the law. Please stop the madness.
So can you amend your blog posting to tell us if the ESD has properly replied and what timeline they have set to respond to each request?
any paperwork in yet?
Post a Comment