What Would You Do Differently?

Communication is not only the exchange of information, but also connotes a respect for the other person and a value placed on the information they can convey.

Until major personnel changes are made, we will not be able to change the attitude that 'outside' input has little to no value. But, we can make suggestions to at least open the communications so that SOMETHING can flow both ways. We can also make suggestions to modernize District communications to best fit today's family and community lives.

To that end, I propose we jot down ways to improve communication in local school districts - including, of course, MSD Decatur Township - but also input from anyone around here for their district.

I'll start off. On school board meetings alone, I can think of a number of improvements.

Allow citizens to sign up to receive email, tweets, facebook posts, whatever - to get notice of upcoming school board meetings, including special sessions.

Post on line a detailed agenda with items that will come up for a vote clearly noted and described.

Allow public comments after board/administration discussion of the issues involved and before the vote - not at the beginning of the meeting.

The board members should respond to the public input, unless to do so would take an enormous amount of time (highly unlikely) or would involve private matters of employees (somewhat likely).

The minutes of the meetings should be more detailed so that when somebody reads them, they actually know what was being voted on, how much it cost, or who was newly hired or fired.

That's my quick list. What would you change or add that would improve communications? Don't limit it to school board, but also parent-teacher, school-community communications are fair game here.

More Violations of State Law by Decatur School Board and Adminstration

I have reviewed all minutes of the MSD Decatur Township School Board that are posted on the District website. These include all of the minutes from regularly scheduled Board meetings for the years 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009. No minutes for special sessions or work sessions are posted, although they are shown approved in the minutes of the regular meetings.

It is very disturbing that at no time from January, 2006, through December, 2009, is there any mention of any contract nor is there any record of any contract being submitted to the Board for a vote.

State law (IC 20-26-4-8) (addition of bold font is my addition)

Approval of contracts Sec. 8. Notwithstanding any other law, the president and secretary of the governing body of a school corporation are entitled, on behalf of the school corporation, to sign any contract, including employment contracts and contracts for goods and services. However, each contract must be approved by a majority of all members of the governing body. In the absence of either the president or secretary of the governing body, the vice president is entitled to sign the contracts with the officer who is present.

Indeed, at no point in these years of minutes, was there either mention of the public opening of competitive bids by the Board, or a designation of a committee to take on that responsibility on behalf of the Board.

State law (IC 20-26-4-6) (addition of bold font is my addition)

IC 20-26-4-6Bids for purchase of supplies or equipment Sec. 6.
(a) The governing body of any school corporation may designate a committee of at least two (2) of the governing body's members, or a committee of not less than two (2) employees of the school corporation, to open and tabulate bids:
(1) in connection with the purchase of supplies, material, or equipment;
(2) for the construction or alteration of a building or facility; or
(3) for any similar purpose.
(b) Bids described in subsection (a):
(1) may be opened by the committee at the time and place fixed by the advertisement for bids;
(2) must be read aloud and tabulated publicly, to the extent required by law for governing bodies;
and
(3) must be available for inspection.
(c) The bids described in subsection (a) must be reported to and the tabulation entered upon the records of the governing body at the governing body's next meeting following the bid opening.
(d) A bid described in subsection (a) may not be accepted or rejected by the committee, but the bid must be accepted or rejected solely by the governing body in a board meeting open to the public as provided in section 3 of this chapter.

The Board is either being deliberately kept in the dark by its Administration or it is willfully avoiding disclosure of fiscal matters to the public in its meetings. Either way, these violations of State law should cease at once so that the public can have the access to this information - a protection created by the laws.

An additional State law was violated just last Thursday evening. On January 28, 2010, the MSD Decatur Township School Board held an executive session followed by a special meeting which was followed by a work session. I am still looking into how legally adequate the notice of these three meetings was. But, one thing is clear - the location of these meetings in the Southwest Pavilion Office Building instead of the School Board room is a violation of State law.

State law states (IC 20-26-4-3) (addition of bold font is my addition)

(c) Special meetings of a governing body must be held on call by the governing body's president or by the superintendent of the school corporation. The call must be evidenced by a written notice specifying the date, time, and place of the meeting, delivered to each member personally or sent by mail or telegram so that each member has at least seventy-two (72) hours notice of the special meeting. Special meetings must be held at the regular meeting place of the board.

The regular meeting place is the Board Room in the Central Office. That meeting was held in violation of at least this State law.

The attitude of this School Board and this School District Administration is to do whatever they please. Regardless even of State laws that are easily located.

Health & Hospitals - 2nd Public Notice on the New Wishard Project

On Friday, September 25, the Health & Hospitals Corporation published two public notices in the Indianapolis Star. The first was required by law since they intend to issue bonds secured by property taxes. I mentioned that notice in my 'Um - What Happened to No Property Taxes for New Wishard Project' entry.

The second public notice may not be required by any law and may be H&H's attempt to link the price tag and the project description to the upcoming referendum. To say that the referendum question is poorly written is to be kind; rather it is decidedly propaganda without reference to any facts a discerning voter might want to consider, like price tag and project description.

I will cut and paste the 2nd notice below, so you can read it for yourself.

What I see is an English version of the shorter, first notice, with more detail that I hope the public does take the time to read. What I see as items of interest are briefly put:

1) new Wishard project is described as the acquisition of land, construction of and equipping of a medical complex (two or more buildings related to the dispensing of health care), construction of least one parking garage and/or parking lot, and construction of a power plant.

2) they will finance the project by entering into a lease with the Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority and BOTH entities will float bonds -- why is not explained. H&H will float General Obligation Bonds secured with property taxes. IMCBA will issue Revenue Bonds secured by the lease payments to be made by H&H. No indication is made as to why both bodies would issue bonds, or indeed, why the IMCBA need be involved at all in this project.

3) the total of all bonds issued by both bodies combined will not exceed $703,040,000 in principle, not exceed 30 years in payback time, not exceed 6.16% interest, and not exceed $830,478,858 in total interest paid over the 30 years. These numbers do not include the Build America Bonds issued by the federal government, estimated elsewhere to be about $120,000,000 in total interest to be paid by those bonds. So, the total payback could be as high as $1,653,518,858. These numbers also do not include any money, such as the $150,000,000 H&H has already saved in cash for this project. There is no indication in the notice of how much of the total bonds shall be issued by H&H and how much by IMCBA.

4) the maximum annual lease to be paid by H&H to IMCBA is $54,807,604 which is estimated would cause a maximum increase in property tax rates of $0.1494 per $100 of assessed value. Not mentioned is that this amount would be outside of the property tax caps now law in Indiana.

5) the current debt plus lease obligations currently held by H&H and repaid by property taxes is $41,730,000. The total of debt plus lease obligations currently held by all taxing units in Marion County combined and repaid by property taxes is $2,160,112,176, or 5.8878% of the total assessed value of Marion County.

Not said in the notice, but easily derived is that the new Wishard project would increase the total debt plus lease obligations currently held by all taxing units in Marion County combined and repaid by property taxes by a third.

6) the notice links the bonds to the approval of the referendum on November 3, 2009.

Following is the public notice itself.

THE HEALTH AND HOSPITAL CORPORATION OF MARION COUNTY, INDIANA NOTICE OF PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE HEALTH AND HOSPITAL CORPORATION OF MARION COUNTY, INDIANA, TO ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND TO ENTER INTO A PROPOSED LEASE OR LEASES OF FACILITIES OPERATED OR TO BE OPERATED BY THE HEALTH AND HOSPITAL CORPORATION IN CONNECTION WITH THE WISHARD HOSPITAL PROJECT

Registered voters residing within Marion County, Indiana (the “County”), hereby are given notice that the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of The Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana (the “Health and Hospital Corporation”), preliminarily has determined, at its meeting held on September 22, 2009: (1) that a need exists for all or any portion of the construction and equipping of a replacement hospital and related facilities for Wishard Health Services currently located at 1001 West Tenth Street (the “Wishard Complex”), together with land acquisition and site development related thereto and all projects and activities related to any of the foregoing, including, but not limited to, all or any portion of the following: (a) acquisition of land and any improvements located thereon and any site development related thereto, (b) renovation and equipping of any such buildings, and the construction and equipping of one or more buildings which will replace the existing hospital and related facilities for the Wishard Complex and provide all or any portion of (i) inpatient services, (ii) diagnostic and treatment, (iii) clinical support, (iv) non-clinical support, (v) offices and education, and (vi) public and building functions, (c) construction and equipping of a new ambulatory care building, (d) construction and equipping of one or more related parking garages and/or surface lots, (e) construction and equipping of a central plant for all of the foregoing facilities, and (f) all projects related to any of the projects or facilities described in clauses (a) through and including (e) (clauses (a) through and including (f), collectively, the “Wishard Hospital project”); and (2) to the extent permitted by law to take all of the necessary steps to finance all or a portion of the costs of all, or as much as is possibly based on the facts and circumstances at the time, of the Wishard Hospital project by: (a) entering into a proposed lease or leases (collectively, the “Lease”) between the Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority (the “Building Authority”), as lessor, and the Health and Hospital Corporation, as lessee, relating to all or any portion of the Wishard Hospital project operated or to be operated by the Health and Hospital Corporation; and (b) issuing one or more series of general obligation bonds of the Health and Hospital Corporation (the “General Obligation Bonds”). The Building Authority will issue one or more series of revenue bonds, as lessor, secured by and payable from the lease payments under the Lease (the “Revenue Bonds”).

Each series of the General Obligation Bonds and the Revenue Bonds (collectively, the “Bonds”) will have a maximum term of 30 years. The Bonds will be issued in an original aggregate principal amount not to exceed $703,040,000, or such greater amount in the case of the issuance of any bonds, all or any portion of which will be used to refund all or any portion of the Bonds. The proposed term of any Lease entered into in connection with the Revenue Bonds will not exceed 30 years, beginning on the date each such Lease is executed by the Health and Hospital Corporation. Based on an estimated maximum interest rate that will be paid in connection with the Bonds of 6.16% per annum, the total interest cost associated therewith will not exceed $830,478,858 (which amount is net of any funds expected to be received by or on behalf of the Health and Hospital Corporation or the Building Authority from the United States of America as a result of any series of the Bonds being issued as Build America Bonds pursuant to Section 54AA of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), as Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds pursuant to Section 1400U-2 of the Code or as any other type of tax credit bond pursuant to the Code (collectively, the “Tax Credit Bonds”)), not taking into account any funds of the Health and Hospital Corporation or the Building Authority available for capitalized interest.

Including interest costs, the maximum annual lease rental to be paid by the Health and Hospital Corporation under the Lease is $54,807,604 (which amount is net of any funds expected to be received by or on behalf of the Building Authority from the United States of America as a result of any series of the Bonds being issued as Tax Credit Bonds), and the maximum total lease rental over the term of the Lease is $1,478,711,254 (which amount is net of any funds expected to be received by or on behalf of the Building Authority from the United States of America as a result of any series of the Bonds being issued as Tax Credit Bonds), not taking into account any proceeds of the Bonds deposited in a debt service reserve fund for the Bonds. The Health and Hospital Corporation’s: (i) total debt service fund tax levy for 2007 pay 2008 (which is the most recent certified tax levy) is $3,714,897; and (ii) debt service fund tax rate for 2007 pay 2008 (which is the most recent certified tax rate) is $0.0085 per $100 of assessed value. The estimated maximum increase in the debt service fund tax levy for the Health and Hospital Corporation and the estimated maximum increase in the debt service fund tax rate for the Health and Hospital Corporation after the issuance of the Bonds are anticipated to occur in 2036 pay 2037 and will be $54,807,604 and $0.1494 per $100 of assessed value, respectively, as a result of the payment of the debt service on the General Obligation Bonds and the lease rentals under the Lease.

The net assessed value of taxable property within the County, which is coterminous with the jurisdiction of the Health and Hospital Corporation, as shown by the last, complete and final assessment for state and County taxes (which is for 2008 pay 2009), is in the amount of $36,686,229,690 (the “Net Assessed Value”). The aggregate amount of the Health and Hospital Corporation’s debt service payments on bonds and lease rental payments under leases secured by ad valorem property taxes in 2009 is $4,314,980. Such amount divided by the Net Assessed Value is equal to 0.0118%. The projected maximum aggregate amount of the Health and Hospital Corporation’s debt service payments on bonds currently outstanding, together with the General Obligation Bonds, and lease rental payments under leases currently in effect, together with the Lease, which are secured by ad valorem property taxes, is $54,807,604. Such amount divided by the Net Assessed Value is equal to 0.1494%.

The sum of the Health and Hospital Corporation’s currently outstanding long-term debt, together with any bonds secured by leases entered into by the Health and Hospital Corporation and currently in effect, all of which are secured by ad valorem property taxes, is $41,730,000. The sum of the outstanding long-term debt of all other taxing units in the County, as of September 2, 2009, together with any bonds secured by leases entered into by all other taxing units in the County and in effect as of September 2, 2009, all of which are secured by ad valorem property taxes, is estimated to be $2,118,272,176. The aggregate of such amounts is $2,160,002,176. Such amount divided by the Net Assessed Value is equal to 5.8878%.

The proposed payment of debt service on the General Obligation Bonds or lease payments under the Lease must be approved at the special election to be held in the County on November 3, 2009, on the following public question:

“Shall the Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana, issue bonds or enter into a lease to finance safe, efficient and functional facilities for the Wishard Hospital project:
1.to allow Wishard to provide access to care for all residents of Marion County, including people who are seniors, poor, uninsured or vulnerable regardless of their ability to pay; and

2.to allow Wishard to provide specialized care, including to victims suffering from traumatic injuries or severe burns; and

3.to allow Wishard to work with colleges and universities, including Indiana University School of Medicine, Ivy Tech Community College, and the Purdue School of Pharmacy, to teach future doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals in Indiana?”

Dated this 25th day of September, 2009. THE HEALTH AND HOSPITAL CORPORATION OF MARION COUNTY By: Dan Sellers, Treasurer (S - 9/25/09 - 5543537) - 09/25

Notes on the Budget Hearings - August 18

Again, not a list of the important issues discussed, just what caught my attention otherwise.

Administration and Financing committee was up again on the 18th.

Not on the notice of the meeting was Prop. 292 regarding the pay for Township Administrators, but that did not stop Councillor Pfisterer, who Chaired the committee, from bringing it to a vote nonetheless. The idea that the public might actually look at the published agendas that also serve as the legal notice of the meeting seemed to escape the logic of those who wanted to hear the Proposal again, right then. Only one person spoke to the Proposal itself, and that was Wayne Township Assessor, Mike McCormick. I spoke to the lack of proper notice and the public's ability to have input when it does not realize an item is back on the agenda for discussion and vote. Also related, the cc: list at the bottom of the Committee agenda did not list the Township Assessors as a courtesy, even though they are duly elected officials who otherwise would have received that courtesy.

During the public comment discussion by the Marion County Recorder, Julie Voorhies, it was mentioned that the Recorder's website has a link for property owners to sign up for email notice should any document be submitted for recording regarding their address. This is part of the effort Voorhies has put into fighting those who would try to commit the fraud of pretending to have purchased a property in order to obtain mortgage loans tapping the equity of that property. Here's the link so you can get notice for any activity on your home -- http://www.indy.gov/eGov/County/Recorder/Pages/MCROFraudAlert.aspx They are also working on a twitter notification system, but it is not yet up and running.

Notes From Budget Hearings - August 13

A reminder once again, that this is not a list of the important issues discussed at the Parks budget hearing. Rather these are some asides that I found interesting.

For consideration that night, in addition to the budget, was Prop. 293, authored by Councillor Coleman, the lone Libertarian on the Council. The Proposal originally would direct "the Director and Board of Parks and Recreation to consider the sale of city golf courses", but was changed by Coleman at the hearing to propose a feasibility study of the value of the properties which would be completed by February 1, 2010. Lone he was when he came into the room. And, lone he was when he left after no public testimony was taken and the Proposal was tabled to a time uncertain, although hell freezing over might be a rough estimate.

Also of interest was that notice of this meeting erroneously stated 5:30 pm as the start time, a half hour late. Those who double checked the time with a phone call arrived on time. Several stragglers, came in for the 5:30 meeting. Presumably they were mostly interested in speaking to Prop. 293, as they left when Councillor Gray mention it had already been discussed and tabled. I don't know what the Committee would have done, but the notice error, had it been called out by a member of the public, could have legally caused a delay in the meeting, as proper notice is required 48 hours in advance of any Committee or Council meeting.