Several days ago, I mentioned that audit reports the last several years for District 150 have been warning about inadequate internal controls. Things are no different this year, the Journal Star reports.
The internal financial review controls at District 150 are at the very least inadequate, resulting in errors, unsubstantiated account balances and generally leaves the district without an accurate day-to-day report of its cash flow, according to a letter from the district’s auditors.
I had also wondered how Cahill could keep his job with such terrible audit reports year after year. Apparently Cahill wondered that himself, according to an e-mail he wrote that the Journal Star acquired through a Freedom of Information Act request:
Cahill said he believed the [audit] letter, received from District 150 this week through a Freedom of Information Act request, would be used in calling for his termination, according to an e-mail from his District 150 account to a Chicago attorney, received through a separate FOIA request.
“The attached will be used by several board members who, I suspect, will call for my firing,” the Feb. 5 e-mail states. “What the management letter does not disclose is that most if not all the items reported have been the norm in the district for more than 14 years, according to auditors (Ron Hilton, Dennis Baily, and Helen Barrick), and cover the terms of at least three controller-treasurers.”
Interesting defense. He’s basically saying that internal controls have always been inadequate, so he shouldn’t be held responsible for their continuing to be inadequate. Not very convincing.
But here’s what really slays me. The headline for this story is “District 150’s books a mess.” But another report filed just hours before this one has the headline: “District 150: Finances in order.” This latter story is about District 150’s meeting with the Public Building Commission to assure them that the district’s finances are not a problem.
Nine District 150 representatives filled a small meeting room before the Public Building Commission of Peoria on Thursday, reassuring its members that the school district is on the right financial path.
“I want to reassure this particular body that the Board of Education immediately began taking action in January to adjust expenditures to meet those predicted revenue shortfalls,” Superintendent Ken Hinton told PBC members. “This board, this administration is completely dedicated in seeing that our school district is solvent.”
Not that this was at all necessary. PBC members appear unconcerned with District 150’s budget woes.
When asked whether the PBC has any concerns about the district’s financial solvency and the district’s ability to repay the bonds, Goldstein and Thornton said “no.” Both men also noted the commission had no concerns about Cahill’s departure.
Really? No concerns at all? The district “has projected it will have a $4.3 million deficit and possible $9 million-plus revenue shortfall next year,” and they fired their controller/treasurer, and their audit reports have been deplorable, but the PBC has no concerns? I guess if you’re an unelected body, unaccountable to the voters, you can afford to take such a cavalier attitude with property tax money.
MiddleAgedWomanBlogging – I don’t doubt. I certainly hope they let their union leadership know–I know that Jeff Adkins-Dutro would like to hear from them, too. Too often teachers who suffer in this way keep it to themselves–from fear or embarrassment. My advice is “Never suffer in silence” because others will come forward if they know that someone else is having the same negative experiences. Also, administrators don’t often want to operate in private, etc., rather to keep these things quiet–it’s called intimidation.
Sorry! My mistake – Should read “some administrators want to operate in secrecy.” Of course, they have to do so because of privacy requirements. However, they don’t expect teachers to share their experiences and evaluations with others. I am hearing (just rumor) that more teachers than usual are receiving unsatisfactory evaluations. I have stated before and still believe that before teachers get tenure, they should be evaluated with great care (and understanding); however, this should be the time to determine a teacher’s effectiveness, etc. I suspect, however, that this year administrators are feeling freer to give unsatisfactory evaluations due to the possible number of teachers who will be pinkslipped. As always, just my opinion.