By Natasha Jones - Langley Times
Published: October 29, 2009 6:00 PM
Letters from auditors Grant Thornton reveal that the Langley School District did not take immediate steps when it was warned to close gaps in internal controls.
Other information reveals that finance department staff failed to inform superintendent Cheryle Beaumont and former secretary-treasurer Peter Greenwood of the conditions which allowed accounting errors to occur. These led to multi-million dollar overspending by the district, all of which will have to be repaid to the Ministry of Education.
Obtained by The Times, the Grant Thornton correspondence relates to the international chartered accountants and management consultants’ audit, which identified shortcomings that were not corrected.
In the spring of 2009, independent auditors Deloitte advised the board that instead of an anticipated surplus of more than $250,000, the district had overspent its budget by $4.8 million.
A more detailed examination of the books showed overspending of millions more.
The final debt to be repaid is $8.2 million.
Deloitte found that the district’s finance department was aware of several conditions which caused the errors, but did not report them to either Beaumont or Greenwood.
The overspending was the result of accounting errors which began in the 2007-08 school year and continued in the 2008-09 school year, two and three years after inefficiencies were first brought to the district’s attention.
Greenwood announced his retirement in February, three months before the board of education was made aware of the errors.
Deloitte blamed, in part, a computerized accounting system that was outdated and not capable of carrying out the checks and balances necessary. It recommended new software.
In its Sept. 12, 2008 letter, Grant Thornton wrote: “It is management’s responsibility to weigh the costs of implementing controls against the benefits that the controls will achieve.
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with the information related to the identified risks so that you can make the necessary decisions. Observations not addressed from the prior year have been repeated to allow management to challenge past judgments in the current operating environment.”
The letter noted, but did not specify, “some areas where controls could be tightened.”
In June, 2006, Grant Thornton noted that the IT manager, who is involved in the day-to-day management of the school district’s critical systems, has the ability to perform programming functions.
“This constitutes improper segregation of duties and the IT management function should be segregated from the programming function,” the letter stated.
Wayne Braun took over from Greenwood on Aug. 17. On Wednesday, The Times asked Braun if it is possible that, had the district taken Grant Thornton’s advice, the mistakes which led to the overspending could have been avoided.
Braun said: “That’s a good question, if we knew what the advice actually was.
“The letter was prescriptive. They don’t explain what the shortcomings were or what some solutions were to rectify them. They leave that up to the board and management how they are going to do that. They suggest findings, not solutions.”
He continued: “Since Aug. 17, internal controls have been tightened tremendously. My assistant (assistant secretary-treasurer Tally Bains) and I have put in place internal controls to mitigate this ever happening again.”
On Grant Thornton’s observations about updating software, Braun said that accounting software must track budgets versus actual spending “to ensure we are on track. We have modified the software tools and we will look at upgrading software as required. We have not done it yet.”
Asked if the school district had, at any point before the deficit was discovered, taken any of Grant Thornton’s advice to tighten controls, Braun said: “I would say minimally, until August 2009. There were internal controls, but the question is, where they monitored? I can’t speak to them.”
The Times asked Braun about changes in the IT department. He said: “We are in a better place today to make sure that there is proper segregation of duties in the IT area.”
International auditors Deloitte, hired by the district to investigate how and why the massive debt accrued, “has confidence in the staff that is now in place,” Braun said.
The Langley Teachers Association has requested a copy of Grant Thornton’s letter for the 2008-09 year, but Braun said it will not be released because it is for district management only.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Schools deficit: Promises time-limited
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Dear Editor,
Craig Spence states that, even though one board promised bus services, we can't expect promises from the school district to last.
He also states that the school district overspent $582,000 on busing.
Perhaps if they hadn't closed the schools "down the road" and made (time-limited?) promises to compensate, they wouldn't have needed so many buses as they do now.
His letter is nothing more than propaganda, regarding broken promises and closed schools by Spin Doctors 35.
Mike MacDonald, Langley
Published: Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Dear Editor,
Craig Spence states that, even though one board promised bus services, we can't expect promises from the school district to last.
He also states that the school district overspent $582,000 on busing.
Perhaps if they hadn't closed the schools "down the road" and made (time-limited?) promises to compensate, they wouldn't have needed so many buses as they do now.
His letter is nothing more than propaganda, regarding broken promises and closed schools by Spin Doctors 35.
Mike MacDonald, Langley
Schools deficit: Land can cover bills
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Dear Editor,
Langley school district should sell their prime piece of property that their works yard sits on, to pay off the $8 million deficit.
The land on 64th Avenue must be worth millions.
The trucks and buses parked there could be spread out to school grounds.
The maintenance workers ( what's left of them) could be asked to take their trucks home at night reducing the need to keep this pricey land.
The budget for maintenance could be restored so we will not have to play an expensive catch-up game later - when the schools are falling apart from lack of maintenance.
Mark Morrison, Langley
Published: Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Dear Editor,
Langley school district should sell their prime piece of property that their works yard sits on, to pay off the $8 million deficit.
The land on 64th Avenue must be worth millions.
The trucks and buses parked there could be spread out to school grounds.
The maintenance workers ( what's left of them) could be asked to take their trucks home at night reducing the need to keep this pricey land.
The budget for maintenance could be restored so we will not have to play an expensive catch-up game later - when the schools are falling apart from lack of maintenance.
Mark Morrison, Langley
Schools deficit: Changes required
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Dear Editor,
My question to the school trustees, senior admininstration staff, and the public is: Do you really think this school district's deficit is going to shrink or get any better?
The captain of the ship in this school district is still steering it.
Until Ms. Beaumont goes, nothing is going to change. She should have to pay her consequences, and let's bring on a new superintendent with new ideas and new direction, and hopefully someone who truly puts the students ahead of her own personal career gains.
Many are still very angry that Ms. Beaumont still has her position.
Wendy Minar. Langley City
Published: Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Dear Editor,
My question to the school trustees, senior admininstration staff, and the public is: Do you really think this school district's deficit is going to shrink or get any better?
The captain of the ship in this school district is still steering it.
Until Ms. Beaumont goes, nothing is going to change. She should have to pay her consequences, and let's bring on a new superintendent with new ideas and new direction, and hopefully someone who truly puts the students ahead of her own personal career gains.
Many are still very angry that Ms. Beaumont still has her position.
Wendy Minar. Langley City
Monday, October 26, 2009
Langley schools face huge budget cuts; teachers ask for meeting with MacDiarmid
The Tyee - The Hook
By Crawford Kilian October 25, 2009 08:20 pm
Langley teachers, facing disastrous cuts in their district's budget next year, are asking for a meeting with Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid. Even if they get it, they won't get much support from their own school board.
In an interview with The Tyee, Langley Teachers Association president Susan Fonseca said teachers are seeking an urgent meeting with the minister to prevent a $3.3 million cut out of next year's operating funds--with similar cuts in the following two years.
The cuts are intended to pay back $8.3 million in overspending last year, but Fonseca said the true total is $9.2 million.
"Many school districts have deficits," Fonseca said, "but we have an actual debt. So with a stable enrolment of about 18,000 students, we will be down $15 million in spending from last year. Our services are already cut to the bone."
The LTA blog is running recent news stories about the problem in an effort to raise public awareness of the problem. The Hook has reported earlier on the story here and here.
Contacted by The Tyee, Langley school board chair Joan Bech said: "I understand their concern, and I share it. But we have a debt and we have to pay it back."
Crawford Kilian is a contributing editor of The Tyee.
By Crawford Kilian October 25, 2009 08:20 pm
Langley teachers, facing disastrous cuts in their district's budget next year, are asking for a meeting with Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid. Even if they get it, they won't get much support from their own school board.
In an interview with The Tyee, Langley Teachers Association president Susan Fonseca said teachers are seeking an urgent meeting with the minister to prevent a $3.3 million cut out of next year's operating funds--with similar cuts in the following two years.
The cuts are intended to pay back $8.3 million in overspending last year, but Fonseca said the true total is $9.2 million.
"Many school districts have deficits," Fonseca said, "but we have an actual debt. So with a stable enrolment of about 18,000 students, we will be down $15 million in spending from last year. Our services are already cut to the bone."
The LTA blog is running recent news stories about the problem in an effort to raise public awareness of the problem. The Hook has reported earlier on the story here and here.
Contacted by The Tyee, Langley school board chair Joan Bech said: "I understand their concern, and I share it. But we have a debt and we have to pay it back."
Crawford Kilian is a contributing editor of The Tyee.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Changes are needed in school administration
Langley Times - Letter to the Editor
Published: October 22, 2009 4:00 PM
Updated: October 22, 2009 4:15 PM
Editor: The education deficit is a mess, to say the least. There is comment from the administration and board members that places to cut costs are with things that don’t affect the education of the children.
The only reason we pay taxes for education is for the children, so my question is this, why is money being spent on things that don’t affect them? Give that some thought.
Why does this administration spend money on things that do not affect the classroom? An example would be that they now say they won’t replace some administration positions as they become vacant. Well, why did you have them in the first place, if you can do without? What did these people do, or not do, that they can leave and not be replaced?
If this administration was doing its job properly, there would not be places to cut without an effect on children.
It sounds like a big out-of-control bureaucracy. There was more than $8 million in overspending, and no one noticed.
It’s time for our board members to make some changes to key staff members, and get value for our tax dollars.
John Hynes,
Langley
Published: October 22, 2009 4:00 PM
Updated: October 22, 2009 4:15 PM
Editor: The education deficit is a mess, to say the least. There is comment from the administration and board members that places to cut costs are with things that don’t affect the education of the children.
The only reason we pay taxes for education is for the children, so my question is this, why is money being spent on things that don’t affect them? Give that some thought.
Why does this administration spend money on things that do not affect the classroom? An example would be that they now say they won’t replace some administration positions as they become vacant. Well, why did you have them in the first place, if you can do without? What did these people do, or not do, that they can leave and not be replaced?
If this administration was doing its job properly, there would not be places to cut without an effect on children.
It sounds like a big out-of-control bureaucracy. There was more than $8 million in overspending, and no one noticed.
It’s time for our board members to make some changes to key staff members, and get value for our tax dollars.
John Hynes,
Langley
Friday, October 23, 2009
QUESTION: Double prep time at a Langley school
By Janet STeffenhagen - Vancouver Sun Blog - Report Card - An Indepth look at the B.C. Education System
22 October 2009
Last week, a reader asked about reports that one contributor to the Langley deficit was the double prep time given to HD Stafford school.
"What does it mean?" the reader asked. "Does it mean they hired extra teachers so teachers could have two preps a week instead of one? Does it mean they hired extra teachers so teachers could have two preps a week instead of one?"
Langley communication manager Craig Spence told me yesterday that Stafford was erroneously given double the prep-time money it was due, and the school spent the money. But it did not spend the money doubling prep time for teachers. The error went unnoticed until the recent audit.
22 October 2009
Last week, a reader asked about reports that one contributor to the Langley deficit was the double prep time given to HD Stafford school.
"What does it mean?" the reader asked. "Does it mean they hired extra teachers so teachers could have two preps a week instead of one? Does it mean they hired extra teachers so teachers could have two preps a week instead of one?"
Langley communication manager Craig Spence told me yesterday that Stafford was erroneously given double the prep-time money it was due, and the school spent the money. But it did not spend the money doubling prep time for teachers. The error went unnoticed until the recent audit.
Teachers ‘keep heat on’ superintendent
By Natasha Jones - Aldergrove Star
Published: October 21, 2009 12:00 PM
Updated: October 21, 2009 12:51 PM
Provincial Minister of Education Margaret MacDiarmid appears to be in no hurry to discuss the Langley School District’s $9.1 million deficit with the teachers’ union.
“I have been told [by a ministry official] that it’s ‘in for consideration at this point’,” Langley Teachers Association president Susan Fonseca said on Monday.
The LTA had requested an urgent meeting with MacDiarmid to discuss the district’s plan to repay $3.3 million in each of the next three years. The union denounced the plan, which was unveiled by school superintendent Cheryle Beaumont last week, as “totally unacceptable.”
“Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to ‘finding’ funds to offset the $9.1 million overspent in 2008/09,” Fonseca wrote in an Oct. 13 letter to MacDiarmid.
The plan “will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services,” she said.
“What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition. Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by senior management,” Fonseca wrote.
The LTA is prepared to invite representative of the board of education, CUPE and DPAC to a meeting with the minister.
The union has also taken exception to secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun’s remark that schools will be “squeezed a bit but not short-changed.”
If the proposed Debt Elimination Plan proceeds, “our schools and students will be trash compacted,” Fonseca said.
Meanwhile, Langley teachers continue to put heat on Beaumont, the superintendent of schools. At a meeting on Monday, approximately 60 teachers voted unanimously to recommend that the B.C. Teachers Federation “review the oversight role of the superintendent in the accumulation of the $8.3 million debt in Langley.”
The LTA, which represents 1,100 full time equivalent teachers, will ask the Representative Assembly, which is made up of representatives of teachers’ unions across the province, to make that recommendation to the BCTF.
The LTA executive was ruled out of order at the board’s Sept. 22 meeting when Fonseca attempt to convey a motion from the membership calling on the board to seek Beaumont’s resignation.
Secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun said that it would be more appropriate to send a letter to the board, as firings and resignations are personnel matters which local governments and boards typically do not discuss in public.
On Tuesday Fonseca said that the LTA will not repeat the call for Beaumont’s resignation, because a majority of trustees gave the superintendent a vote of confidence.
“They have taken a vote and we decided that it wouldn’t be productive,” Fonseca said
Published: October 21, 2009 12:00 PM
Updated: October 21, 2009 12:51 PM
Provincial Minister of Education Margaret MacDiarmid appears to be in no hurry to discuss the Langley School District’s $9.1 million deficit with the teachers’ union.
“I have been told [by a ministry official] that it’s ‘in for consideration at this point’,” Langley Teachers Association president Susan Fonseca said on Monday.
The LTA had requested an urgent meeting with MacDiarmid to discuss the district’s plan to repay $3.3 million in each of the next three years. The union denounced the plan, which was unveiled by school superintendent Cheryle Beaumont last week, as “totally unacceptable.”
“Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to ‘finding’ funds to offset the $9.1 million overspent in 2008/09,” Fonseca wrote in an Oct. 13 letter to MacDiarmid.
The plan “will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services,” she said.
“What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition. Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by senior management,” Fonseca wrote.
The LTA is prepared to invite representative of the board of education, CUPE and DPAC to a meeting with the minister.
The union has also taken exception to secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun’s remark that schools will be “squeezed a bit but not short-changed.”
If the proposed Debt Elimination Plan proceeds, “our schools and students will be trash compacted,” Fonseca said.
Meanwhile, Langley teachers continue to put heat on Beaumont, the superintendent of schools. At a meeting on Monday, approximately 60 teachers voted unanimously to recommend that the B.C. Teachers Federation “review the oversight role of the superintendent in the accumulation of the $8.3 million debt in Langley.”
The LTA, which represents 1,100 full time equivalent teachers, will ask the Representative Assembly, which is made up of representatives of teachers’ unions across the province, to make that recommendation to the BCTF.
The LTA executive was ruled out of order at the board’s Sept. 22 meeting when Fonseca attempt to convey a motion from the membership calling on the board to seek Beaumont’s resignation.
Secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun said that it would be more appropriate to send a letter to the board, as firings and resignations are personnel matters which local governments and boards typically do not discuss in public.
On Tuesday Fonseca said that the LTA will not repeat the call for Beaumont’s resignation, because a majority of trustees gave the superintendent a vote of confidence.
“They have taken a vote and we decided that it wouldn’t be productive,” Fonseca said
Teachers unhappy with class sizes
y Monique Tamminga - Langley Times
Published: October 22, 2009 4:00 PM
Updated: October 22, 2009 4:13 PM
Some Langley teachers are not happy with class sizes and composition.
At the last Board of Education meeting, the board accepted a government required report from staff on class size and composition. It read that most elementary classrooms were under 28 students and of those exceeding that, the ‘learning conditions were appropriate.’ Most high school classrooms exceeded 30, but by small margins, said assistant superintendent Charlie Etchell.
The Langley Teachers Association calls the report a ‘farce.’ The LTA report shows one in eight teachers in Langley are unhappy with class sizes.
The district is required to send its class sizes to the ministry of education.
“We have written statements from 125 teachers who have told their principals that the classrooms are too full. The principals have always signed off on any class size,” said LTA president Susan Fonseca.
Many of the classrooms have around 30 students but exceed 30 with special needs students.
A classroom can be more than 30 students if it has the permission of the teacher and principal.
There is no limit to the amount of special needs students per classroom.
“Overall we are in a good position,” said Trustee Alison McVeigh.
Trustee Wendy Johnson questioned how Etchell will deal with the 125 teachers who aren’t happy with class sizes.
Etchell explained that it is up to the individual principals to dialogue with the teachers and that already happened at the beginning of the year.
Chair Joan Bech asked for a mid-year planning session to see how classes are going.
There are more than 2,000 classrooms in Langley.
Published: October 22, 2009 4:00 PM
Updated: October 22, 2009 4:13 PM
Some Langley teachers are not happy with class sizes and composition.
At the last Board of Education meeting, the board accepted a government required report from staff on class size and composition. It read that most elementary classrooms were under 28 students and of those exceeding that, the ‘learning conditions were appropriate.’ Most high school classrooms exceeded 30, but by small margins, said assistant superintendent Charlie Etchell.
The Langley Teachers Association calls the report a ‘farce.’ The LTA report shows one in eight teachers in Langley are unhappy with class sizes.
The district is required to send its class sizes to the ministry of education.
“We have written statements from 125 teachers who have told their principals that the classrooms are too full. The principals have always signed off on any class size,” said LTA president Susan Fonseca.
Many of the classrooms have around 30 students but exceed 30 with special needs students.
A classroom can be more than 30 students if it has the permission of the teacher and principal.
There is no limit to the amount of special needs students per classroom.
“Overall we are in a good position,” said Trustee Alison McVeigh.
Trustee Wendy Johnson questioned how Etchell will deal with the 125 teachers who aren’t happy with class sizes.
Etchell explained that it is up to the individual principals to dialogue with the teachers and that already happened at the beginning of the year.
Chair Joan Bech asked for a mid-year planning session to see how classes are going.
There are more than 2,000 classrooms in Langley.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Langley teachers request urgent meeting with minister
The Vancouver Sun - Blog - Report Card: An in-depth look at the BC Education system
By Janet Steffenhagen
Langley teachers are requesting an urgent meeting with Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid to discuss their district's plan for eliminating a $8.2-million deficit, the Langley Advance reports.
"This plan is totally unacceptable to the teachers of Langley," the Langley Teachers' Association says in a letter to the minister. "Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to 'finding' funds to offset the 9.1 million overspent in 2008/09, will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services.
What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition! Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by Senior Management. The LTA Executive requests a meeting with you and your Deputy Minister at your earliest possible convenience.
The union will also decide today whether to ask the BCTF to call on the government to investigate the oversight role of superintendent Cheryle Beaumont as it relates to the deficit.
By Janet Steffenhagen
Langley teachers are requesting an urgent meeting with Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid to discuss their district's plan for eliminating a $8.2-million deficit, the Langley Advance reports.
"This plan is totally unacceptable to the teachers of Langley," the Langley Teachers' Association says in a letter to the minister. "Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to 'finding' funds to offset the 9.1 million overspent in 2008/09, will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services.
What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition! Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by Senior Management. The LTA Executive requests a meeting with you and your Deputy Minister at your earliest possible convenience.
The union will also decide today whether to ask the BCTF to call on the government to investigate the oversight role of superintendent Cheryle Beaumont as it relates to the deficit.
Accountability chief concern
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Dear Editor,
I don't see anyone throwing around blame and playing the blame game. I see concerned community members asking, "Who is responsible? Who is accountable?" Schools superintendent Cheryl Beaumont accepted responsibility for our horrendous deficit situation.
She had no choice but to do so. Ms. Beaumont's contract states that she "Oversees the development and implementation of effective financial and administrative systems and ensures that the financial resources of the district are maximized, within the objectives, policies, plans and budgets established by the Board of School Trustees."
She is in charge of district finances; of course, this mess is her responsibility. Now I see community members asking for accountability. We hear from the district that those directly responsible are no longer in positions where they can make those kinds of decisions, as if the district actually took some action, as if someone was actually held accountable.
No one has been held accountable. No action has been taken. One past financial officer retired and the other accepted a job offer in another district; neither left as a result of any action taken by this district. An outside audit has been done only because two new board members, Trustees McFarlane and Johnson, insist on asking tough questions and actually receiving answers.
Once our superintendent is replaced with one we can trust, and accepts accountability along with responsibility, then we can get on with business. Chair Joan Bech stated during a board meeting, "We need a truce. We need a cease-fire. We need to remember there's a child in the middle."
What Mrs. Bech and some others on the board need to understand is that you cannot have a truce with someone you cannot trust, and we trust the current superintendent to lead this district out of the disaster she has led us into. Has a magic wand been waved over Ms. Beaumont so that she is suddenly trustworthy?
I am not willing to gamble my child's education just because certain board members tell me to. We cannot trust that Ms. Beaumont has the skills necessary to run the district. She hasn't shown us skill or leadership thus far. What will make tomorrow any different?
From the very first year of being appointed superintendent, Ms. Beaumont has led us into a deficit position.
I cannot understand the call for a "cease-fire." A cease-fire refers to a temporary stoppage of war or aggressive actions. I have seen no acts of war or aggression on the part of the community. I have seen and heard parents ask for accountability. I have seen and heard the teachers ask for accountability.
The only aggression I have seen has come from Trustee Steve Burton during his (in)famous tantrums. So, what we are supposed to stop or cease? Are we to stop caring that our children are being forced to pay for Ms. Beaumont's mistakes? Are we to stop wanting accountability to follow responsibility? Are we to stop speaking up for what is right? Are we to stop speaking up for truth?
Accountability and responsibility must exist hand in hand and certain board members refuse to acknowledge that. We cannot trust that Superintendent Beaumont will remember that the child in the middle is yours and mine. Superintendent Beaumont finally accepted responsibility for our financial disaster; now she must also accept the consequences.
To blame those who are no longer here to defend themselves is unacceptable and is not the sign of a strong, ethical leader. What this district now needs is a good, honourable, and skilled leader - someone who can be respected and trusted.
L. Fletcher, Langley
Published: Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Dear Editor,
I don't see anyone throwing around blame and playing the blame game. I see concerned community members asking, "Who is responsible? Who is accountable?" Schools superintendent Cheryl Beaumont accepted responsibility for our horrendous deficit situation.
She had no choice but to do so. Ms. Beaumont's contract states that she "Oversees the development and implementation of effective financial and administrative systems and ensures that the financial resources of the district are maximized, within the objectives, policies, plans and budgets established by the Board of School Trustees."
She is in charge of district finances; of course, this mess is her responsibility. Now I see community members asking for accountability. We hear from the district that those directly responsible are no longer in positions where they can make those kinds of decisions, as if the district actually took some action, as if someone was actually held accountable.
No one has been held accountable. No action has been taken. One past financial officer retired and the other accepted a job offer in another district; neither left as a result of any action taken by this district. An outside audit has been done only because two new board members, Trustees McFarlane and Johnson, insist on asking tough questions and actually receiving answers.
Once our superintendent is replaced with one we can trust, and accepts accountability along with responsibility, then we can get on with business. Chair Joan Bech stated during a board meeting, "We need a truce. We need a cease-fire. We need to remember there's a child in the middle."
What Mrs. Bech and some others on the board need to understand is that you cannot have a truce with someone you cannot trust, and we trust the current superintendent to lead this district out of the disaster she has led us into. Has a magic wand been waved over Ms. Beaumont so that she is suddenly trustworthy?
I am not willing to gamble my child's education just because certain board members tell me to. We cannot trust that Ms. Beaumont has the skills necessary to run the district. She hasn't shown us skill or leadership thus far. What will make tomorrow any different?
From the very first year of being appointed superintendent, Ms. Beaumont has led us into a deficit position.
I cannot understand the call for a "cease-fire." A cease-fire refers to a temporary stoppage of war or aggressive actions. I have seen no acts of war or aggression on the part of the community. I have seen and heard parents ask for accountability. I have seen and heard the teachers ask for accountability.
The only aggression I have seen has come from Trustee Steve Burton during his (in)famous tantrums. So, what we are supposed to stop or cease? Are we to stop caring that our children are being forced to pay for Ms. Beaumont's mistakes? Are we to stop wanting accountability to follow responsibility? Are we to stop speaking up for what is right? Are we to stop speaking up for truth?
Accountability and responsibility must exist hand in hand and certain board members refuse to acknowledge that. We cannot trust that Superintendent Beaumont will remember that the child in the middle is yours and mine. Superintendent Beaumont finally accepted responsibility for our financial disaster; now she must also accept the consequences.
To blame those who are no longer here to defend themselves is unacceptable and is not the sign of a strong, ethical leader. What this district now needs is a good, honourable, and skilled leader - someone who can be respected and trusted.
L. Fletcher, Langley
Union slams SD plan
Heather Colpitts, Langley Advance
Published: Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The largest employee group in Langley's school system is calling for an urgent meeting with government.
The Langley Teachers Association is going back to its membership for another vote. In September it was a non-confidence vote in Langley School District superintendent Cheryle Beaumont.
This time it will be whether the union calls on the the province to investigate the role of the superintendent and oversight issues regarding the district's $8.2 million deficit. The membership were expected to vote on this Oct. 19.
The plan to cut $3.3 million over three years from the Langley School District budget is also unacceptable, according to the LTA and it wants a meeting ASAP with the education minister.
That's the message from the largest employee group has sent to Education Minister Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid.
"This plan is totally unacceptable to the teachers of Langley," LTA president Susan Fonseca said in Friday's announcement.
"Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to 'finding' funds to offset the $9.1 million overspent in 2008/09, will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services. What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition."
The union executive also passed motions on Oct. 13 calling for the LTA to invite CUPE, the District Parent Advisory Council, and the board of trustees to join in the call for an urgent meeting about the district's finances.
"Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by senior management," said Fonseca.
Craig Spence, the communications manager, sent out a school district statement Monday that said the superintendent remains focused on carrying out the deficit elimination plan which will meet the board's legal and financial responsibilities to fix the overspending and balance its books.
"Ms. Beaumont will continue to work with partner groups and the community in implementing the district's Deficit Elimination Plan and appreciates the willingness of groups to work with with the district," the satement said.
The LTA also plans to go to the BC Teachers' Federation for backing, asking the provincial organization that oversees teachers' unions to demand the government look into the superintendent's role in the district's deficit.
Published: Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The largest employee group in Langley's school system is calling for an urgent meeting with government.
The Langley Teachers Association is going back to its membership for another vote. In September it was a non-confidence vote in Langley School District superintendent Cheryle Beaumont.
This time it will be whether the union calls on the the province to investigate the role of the superintendent and oversight issues regarding the district's $8.2 million deficit. The membership were expected to vote on this Oct. 19.
The plan to cut $3.3 million over three years from the Langley School District budget is also unacceptable, according to the LTA and it wants a meeting ASAP with the education minister.
That's the message from the largest employee group has sent to Education Minister Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid.
"This plan is totally unacceptable to the teachers of Langley," LTA president Susan Fonseca said in Friday's announcement.
"Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to 'finding' funds to offset the $9.1 million overspent in 2008/09, will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services. What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition."
The union executive also passed motions on Oct. 13 calling for the LTA to invite CUPE, the District Parent Advisory Council, and the board of trustees to join in the call for an urgent meeting about the district's finances.
"Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by senior management," said Fonseca.
Craig Spence, the communications manager, sent out a school district statement Monday that said the superintendent remains focused on carrying out the deficit elimination plan which will meet the board's legal and financial responsibilities to fix the overspending and balance its books.
"Ms. Beaumont will continue to work with partner groups and the community in implementing the district's Deficit Elimination Plan and appreciates the willingness of groups to work with with the district," the satement said.
The LTA also plans to go to the BC Teachers' Federation for backing, asking the provincial organization that oversees teachers' unions to demand the government look into the superintendent's role in the district's deficit.
Trustee censored
By Monique Tamminga - Langley Times
Published: October 20, 2009 2:00 PM
Updated: October 20, 2009 2:21 PM
In what new Langley School District secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun called “a very unusual” motion, the Board of Education chair was challenged and had to temporarily step down from her duties after censoring Trustee Rob McFarlane from speaking last Tuesday night.
In the “trustee activities” portion of the meeting, McFarlane started to read from a statement he had prepared regarding discussion that took place at a Sept. 18 in-camera meeting.
He was abruptly cut off by board chair Joan Bech who ruled his comments out of order because his comments were from an in-camera meeting. McFarlane challenged the chair and the ruling.
“This is not only in-camera items. These are already publicly-released information,” he said.
Bech responded that because his comments would reference in-camera meetings, he can’t discuss anything without permission from the board.
Bech was then relieved as chair and vice-chair trustee Wendy Johnson took over.
A recess was called to review Roberts Rule of Order on how to deal with this situation.
In the end, the board voted to sustain the chair (bring back Bech), with only McFarlane and Johnson opposed.
Following that decision, McFarlane announced he was postponing his notice of motion on a whistle blower policy to consult further with the board and staff on how to proceed with it.
This followed by a speech by Bech asking for “respectful” discord in these trying times.
“It’s going to be a difficult year. It’s been suggested the board should apologize. For my part, I apologize. My goal is to keep it respectful . . I am asking people choose words with care.”
Published: October 20, 2009 2:00 PM
Updated: October 20, 2009 2:21 PM
In what new Langley School District secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun called “a very unusual” motion, the Board of Education chair was challenged and had to temporarily step down from her duties after censoring Trustee Rob McFarlane from speaking last Tuesday night.
In the “trustee activities” portion of the meeting, McFarlane started to read from a statement he had prepared regarding discussion that took place at a Sept. 18 in-camera meeting.
He was abruptly cut off by board chair Joan Bech who ruled his comments out of order because his comments were from an in-camera meeting. McFarlane challenged the chair and the ruling.
“This is not only in-camera items. These are already publicly-released information,” he said.
Bech responded that because his comments would reference in-camera meetings, he can’t discuss anything without permission from the board.
Bech was then relieved as chair and vice-chair trustee Wendy Johnson took over.
A recess was called to review Roberts Rule of Order on how to deal with this situation.
In the end, the board voted to sustain the chair (bring back Bech), with only McFarlane and Johnson opposed.
Following that decision, McFarlane announced he was postponing his notice of motion on a whistle blower policy to consult further with the board and staff on how to proceed with it.
This followed by a speech by Bech asking for “respectful” discord in these trying times.
“It’s going to be a difficult year. It’s been suggested the board should apologize. For my part, I apologize. My goal is to keep it respectful . . I am asking people choose words with care.”
LTA requests meeting with minister
By Natasha Jones - Langley Times
Published: October 20, 2009 4:00 PM
Updated: October 20, 2009 4:13 PM
Provincial Minister of Education Margaret MacDiarmid appears to be in no hurry to discuss the Langley School District’s $9.1 million deficit with the teachers’ union.
“I have been told [by a ministry official] that it’s ‘in for consideration at this point’,” Langley Teachers Association president Susan Fonseca said Monday.
The LTA had requested an urgent meeting with MacDiarmid to discuss the district’s plan to repay $3.3 million in each of the next three years. The union denounced the plan, which was unveiled by school superintendent Cheryle Beaumont last week, as “totally unacceptable.”
“Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to ‘finding’ funds to offset the $9.1 million overspent in 2008/09,” Fonseca wrote in an Oct. 13 letter to MacDiarmid.
The plan “will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services,” she said.
“What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition. Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by senior management,” Fonseca wrote.
The union has also taken exception to secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun’s remark that schools will be “squeezed a bit but not short-changed.”
If the proposed Debt Elimination Plan proceeds, “our schools and students will be trash compacted,” Fonseca said.
Meanwhile, Langley teachers continue to put heat on Beaumont, the superintendent of schools. At a meeting on Monday, approximately 60 teachers voted unanimously to recommend that the B.C. Teachers Federation “review the oversight role of the superintendent in the accumulation of the $8.3 million debt in Langley.”
The LTA, which represents 1,100 full time equivalent teachers, will ask the Representative Assembly, which is made up of representatives of teachers’ unions across the province, to make that recommendation to the BCTF.
The LTA executive was ruled out of order at the board’s Sept. 22 meeting when Fonseca attempt to convey a motion from the membership calling on the board to seek Beaumont’s resignation.
Braun said that it would be more appropriate to send a letter to the board, as firings and resignations are personnel matters which local governments and boards typically do not discuss in public.
Yesterday (Tuesday), Fonseca said that the LTA will not repeat the call for Beaumont’s resignation, because a majority of trustees gave the superintendent a vote of confidence.
“They have taken a vote and we decided that it wouldn’t be productive,” Fonseca said.
Published: October 20, 2009 4:00 PM
Updated: October 20, 2009 4:13 PM
Provincial Minister of Education Margaret MacDiarmid appears to be in no hurry to discuss the Langley School District’s $9.1 million deficit with the teachers’ union.
“I have been told [by a ministry official] that it’s ‘in for consideration at this point’,” Langley Teachers Association president Susan Fonseca said Monday.
The LTA had requested an urgent meeting with MacDiarmid to discuss the district’s plan to repay $3.3 million in each of the next three years. The union denounced the plan, which was unveiled by school superintendent Cheryle Beaumont last week, as “totally unacceptable.”
“Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to ‘finding’ funds to offset the $9.1 million overspent in 2008/09,” Fonseca wrote in an Oct. 13 letter to MacDiarmid.
The plan “will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services,” she said.
“What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition. Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by senior management,” Fonseca wrote.
The union has also taken exception to secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun’s remark that schools will be “squeezed a bit but not short-changed.”
If the proposed Debt Elimination Plan proceeds, “our schools and students will be trash compacted,” Fonseca said.
Meanwhile, Langley teachers continue to put heat on Beaumont, the superintendent of schools. At a meeting on Monday, approximately 60 teachers voted unanimously to recommend that the B.C. Teachers Federation “review the oversight role of the superintendent in the accumulation of the $8.3 million debt in Langley.”
The LTA, which represents 1,100 full time equivalent teachers, will ask the Representative Assembly, which is made up of representatives of teachers’ unions across the province, to make that recommendation to the BCTF.
The LTA executive was ruled out of order at the board’s Sept. 22 meeting when Fonseca attempt to convey a motion from the membership calling on the board to seek Beaumont’s resignation.
Braun said that it would be more appropriate to send a letter to the board, as firings and resignations are personnel matters which local governments and boards typically do not discuss in public.
Yesterday (Tuesday), Fonseca said that the LTA will not repeat the call for Beaumont’s resignation, because a majority of trustees gave the superintendent a vote of confidence.
“They have taken a vote and we decided that it wouldn’t be productive,” Fonseca said.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
District overspent by $3.5 million on TOCs
By Monique Tamminga - Langley Times
Published: October 15, 2009 2:00 PM
Updated: October 15, 2009 2:22 PM
It is not a good time to be a substitute teacher in Langley right now.
“Teachers on call just aren’t getting called this year,” said Antonia Tsiolas, chair of the Teachers of Call committee.
The committee is there to help underemployed teachers on call (TOCs).
“There were being called at least 10 times a month and now they are lucky to get three calls. I heard one story about a teacher on call getting only 2.85 days so far. It gets heartbreaking.”
She even had to tell one teacher to get another job, she said.
Superintendent Cheryl Beaumont said the district spent $7.5 million last year on calling substitutes to replace teachers — that was $3.5 million more than Langley had to spend.
There will be a $1.66 million reduction which represents 7,619 days of work for TOCs, said Tsiolas.
“The teachers on call was the most overspending we had in this deficit so we are reigning in the amount of TOCs being called,” she said on Tuesday. “We have some fabulous TOCs. We aren’t questioning their value. We are questioning what is affordable.”
Teachers have the ability to request a certain substitute to teach their class, so some TOCs would be called more than others, said Langley Teachers Association president Susan Fronseca.
She believes the district ‘low-balled’ the numbers so it looked like they overspent on TOCs. Already, teachers are being told they can no longer have meetings about their special needs students in school hours.
“They have been told they are not allowed to call a TOC to replace them for the meetings. They have been asked to hold the meetings after school hours,” said Fronseca. “We have some teachers who have nine IEP (Individual Educational Plan) students. Now they are supposed to go to meetings after school? It’s just not going to happen and then both the students and the teachers suffer.”
Field trips are also on the decrease with a ban on calling TOCs to replace teachers out of school. Teachers have to ask students to pay for the TOC in their field trip costs now, she said.
The TOC budget cuts don’t appear to impact substitute teachers replacing sick and absent teachers.
“We will lose some of our talented new TOCs,” said Fronseca.
Published: October 15, 2009 2:00 PM
Updated: October 15, 2009 2:22 PM
It is not a good time to be a substitute teacher in Langley right now.
“Teachers on call just aren’t getting called this year,” said Antonia Tsiolas, chair of the Teachers of Call committee.
The committee is there to help underemployed teachers on call (TOCs).
“There were being called at least 10 times a month and now they are lucky to get three calls. I heard one story about a teacher on call getting only 2.85 days so far. It gets heartbreaking.”
She even had to tell one teacher to get another job, she said.
Superintendent Cheryl Beaumont said the district spent $7.5 million last year on calling substitutes to replace teachers — that was $3.5 million more than Langley had to spend.
There will be a $1.66 million reduction which represents 7,619 days of work for TOCs, said Tsiolas.
“The teachers on call was the most overspending we had in this deficit so we are reigning in the amount of TOCs being called,” she said on Tuesday. “We have some fabulous TOCs. We aren’t questioning their value. We are questioning what is affordable.”
Teachers have the ability to request a certain substitute to teach their class, so some TOCs would be called more than others, said Langley Teachers Association president Susan Fronseca.
She believes the district ‘low-balled’ the numbers so it looked like they overspent on TOCs. Already, teachers are being told they can no longer have meetings about their special needs students in school hours.
“They have been told they are not allowed to call a TOC to replace them for the meetings. They have been asked to hold the meetings after school hours,” said Fronseca. “We have some teachers who have nine IEP (Individual Educational Plan) students. Now they are supposed to go to meetings after school? It’s just not going to happen and then both the students and the teachers suffer.”
Field trips are also on the decrease with a ban on calling TOCs to replace teachers out of school. Teachers have to ask students to pay for the TOC in their field trip costs now, she said.
The TOC budget cuts don’t appear to impact substitute teachers replacing sick and absent teachers.
“We will lose some of our talented new TOCs,” said Fronseca.
Bad time to be a teacher-on-call in Langley
By Janet Steffenhagen 17 October 2009
Vancouver Sun Blog- Report Card - An In-depth look at the B.C. Education System
The Langley Times says now is not a good time to be a substitute teacher in that district.
"Teachers on call just aren't getting called this year," Antonia Tsiolas, chair of the teachers-on-call(TOC) committee, is quoted as saying.
Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont said the district spent $7.5 million last year hiring replacement teachers - $3.5 million more than the available money.
There will be a $1.66-million reduction, which represents 7,619 days of work for TOCs, the newspaper says.
"The teachers on call was the most overspending we had in this deficit so we are reigning in the amount of TOCs being called," Beaumont said. "We have some fabulous TOCs. We aren't questioning their value. We are questioning what is affordable."
Susan Fonseca, president of the Langley Teachers' Association, told the Times that some TOCs will get more work than others because classroom teachers have the right to request substitutes they know.
She said the district "low-balled" the TOC numbers, which now looks like overspending. Teachers are already being told they can't attend meetings about special-needs students during regular school hours, the paper says.
"They have been told they are not allowed to call a TOC to replace them for the meetings. They have been asked to hold the meetings after school hours," Fonseca said. The number of field trips will also decrease because of a ban on asking TOCs to replace teachers out of school. That means teachers have to ask students to pay for TOCs as part of the field-trip cost.
Vancouver Sun Blog- Report Card - An In-depth look at the B.C. Education System
The Langley Times says now is not a good time to be a substitute teacher in that district.
"Teachers on call just aren't getting called this year," Antonia Tsiolas, chair of the teachers-on-call(TOC) committee, is quoted as saying.
Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont said the district spent $7.5 million last year hiring replacement teachers - $3.5 million more than the available money.
There will be a $1.66-million reduction, which represents 7,619 days of work for TOCs, the newspaper says.
"The teachers on call was the most overspending we had in this deficit so we are reigning in the amount of TOCs being called," Beaumont said. "We have some fabulous TOCs. We aren't questioning their value. We are questioning what is affordable."
Susan Fonseca, president of the Langley Teachers' Association, told the Times that some TOCs will get more work than others because classroom teachers have the right to request substitutes they know.
She said the district "low-balled" the TOC numbers, which now looks like overspending. Teachers are already being told they can't attend meetings about special-needs students during regular school hours, the paper says.
"They have been told they are not allowed to call a TOC to replace them for the meetings. They have been asked to hold the meetings after school hours," Fonseca said. The number of field trips will also decrease because of a ban on asking TOCs to replace teachers out of school. That means teachers have to ask students to pay for TOCs as part of the field-trip cost.
LTA seeks minister's help
Heather Colpitts, Langley Advance
Published: Friday, October 16, 2009
Langley's teachers are asking for an urgent meeting with the minister of education
The Langley Teachers Association is going back to its membership for another vote. In September it was a non-confidence vote in Langley School District superintendent Cheryle Beaumont.
This time it will be whether the union calls on the the province to investigate the role of the superintendent and oversight issues regarding the district's $8.2 million deficit. The membership will vote on this Oct. 19. The plan to cut $3.3 million over three years from the Langley School District budget is also unacceptable, according to the LTA and it wants a meeting ASAP with the education minister.
That's the message from the largest employee group has sent to Education Minister Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid. The union executive also passed motions on Oct. 13 calling for the LTA to invite CUPE, the District Parent Advisory Council, and the board of trustees to join in the call for an urgent meeting about the district's finances.
"Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by Senior Management," said a press statement from union president Susan Fonseca.
Oct. 16 press release from the Langley Teachers' Association:
On October 14, 2009, the following letter was sent from LTA President Susan Fonseca to the Honourable Dr.
Margaret MacDiarmid, Minister of Education:
"Dear Dr. MacDiarmid:
I write to follow up on the LTA's letter of October 7, 2009. Last night, the LTA Executive passed an emergency motion in anticipation of the District's announced Debt Elimination Plan. On behalf of the Langley Teachers' Association, I am writing to request an urgent meeting with you to discuss the proposed Debt Elimination Plan for Langley School District #35.
This plan is totally unacceptable to the teachers of Langley. Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to 'finding' funds to offset the 9.1 million overspent in 2008/09, will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services.
What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition! Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by Senior Management. The LTA Executive requests a meeting with you and your Deputy Minister at your earliest possible convenience.
We are prepared to meet with you at either your Victoria or Vancouver office. Parents and other partner groups may also wish to join us for this emergency meeting. Please advise us of the nearest available date for a meeting by calling the LTA office at (604) 533-1618 or my cell at (604) 897-2454."
The LTA executive unanimously passed the following motions on October 13, 2009:
"That the LTA request an urgent meeting with the Minister of Education regarding the district debt." "That the LTA invite CUPE, DPAC, and the Board of Education to join us in requesting an urgent meeting with the Minister of Education regarding the district debt."
The LTA membership will be voting on the following motion at the General Meeting on October 19, 2009:
"That the following motion be placed on the Rep Assembly Agenda. That the BCTF call on the Minister of Education to investigate the oversight role of the Langley Superintendent of Schools in regard to the $8.3 million debt."
Published: Friday, October 16, 2009
Langley's teachers are asking for an urgent meeting with the minister of education
The Langley Teachers Association is going back to its membership for another vote. In September it was a non-confidence vote in Langley School District superintendent Cheryle Beaumont.
This time it will be whether the union calls on the the province to investigate the role of the superintendent and oversight issues regarding the district's $8.2 million deficit. The membership will vote on this Oct. 19. The plan to cut $3.3 million over three years from the Langley School District budget is also unacceptable, according to the LTA and it wants a meeting ASAP with the education minister.
That's the message from the largest employee group has sent to Education Minister Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid. The union executive also passed motions on Oct. 13 calling for the LTA to invite CUPE, the District Parent Advisory Council, and the board of trustees to join in the call for an urgent meeting about the district's finances.
"Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by Senior Management," said a press statement from union president Susan Fonseca.
Oct. 16 press release from the Langley Teachers' Association:
On October 14, 2009, the following letter was sent from LTA President Susan Fonseca to the Honourable Dr.
Margaret MacDiarmid, Minister of Education:
"Dear Dr. MacDiarmid:
I write to follow up on the LTA's letter of October 7, 2009. Last night, the LTA Executive passed an emergency motion in anticipation of the District's announced Debt Elimination Plan. On behalf of the Langley Teachers' Association, I am writing to request an urgent meeting with you to discuss the proposed Debt Elimination Plan for Langley School District #35.
This plan is totally unacceptable to the teachers of Langley. Langley teachers are deeply concerned that the proposed repayment of $3.3 million per year for the next three years, in addition to 'finding' funds to offset the 9.1 million overspent in 2008/09, will result in incapacitating and debilitating cuts to student services.
What teachers would like you to know is that education services in this district are already in critical condition! Our students cannot afford to sacrifice their educational opportunities to repay a debt created by Senior Management. The LTA Executive requests a meeting with you and your Deputy Minister at your earliest possible convenience.
We are prepared to meet with you at either your Victoria or Vancouver office. Parents and other partner groups may also wish to join us for this emergency meeting. Please advise us of the nearest available date for a meeting by calling the LTA office at (604) 533-1618 or my cell at (604) 897-2454."
The LTA executive unanimously passed the following motions on October 13, 2009:
"That the LTA request an urgent meeting with the Minister of Education regarding the district debt." "That the LTA invite CUPE, DPAC, and the Board of Education to join us in requesting an urgent meeting with the Minister of Education regarding the district debt."
The LTA membership will be voting on the following motion at the General Meeting on October 19, 2009:
"That the following motion be placed on the Rep Assembly Agenda. That the BCTF call on the Minister of Education to investigate the oversight role of the Langley Superintendent of Schools in regard to the $8.3 million debt."
Trustees butt heads over leadership
Heather Colpitts, News Canada
Published: Friday, October 16, 2009
The Langley School Board moved to silence one of its own members during a public meeting.
Langley School Board chair Joan Bech survived a school trustee's equivalent of a non-confidence vote at Tuesday's meeting, during an unusual exchange over the board's expression of confidence in the superintendent.
Trustee Rob McFarlane tried to bring up a public statement made Sept. 18 and the district's policy on special meetings, but Bech called a point of order before he was able to say much.
She noted that McFarlane did not have board permission to deal with an in camera item. The special meeting had been in camera, but after it, the board made a public statement about having confidence in superintendent Cheryle Beaumont.
School Board chair Joan Bech and trustee Rob McFarlane disagreed over whether he could discuss a special meeting last month.
It was a reaction to the Langley Teachers' Association holding a non-confidence vote in the superintendent.
At Tuesday's public trustee meeting, McFarlane challenged the chair's ruling, and Bech stepped back from the chairperson role, in light of the challenge.
"Challenging the chair is a very unusual motion," commented Wayne Braun, the district secretary-treasurer.
Wendy Johnson, as vice chair, stepped in and suggested a motion to sustain the chair in her ruling.
McFarlane wanted a chance to explain the challenge, but was not allowed.
He noted that the only in camera items in his statement come from the board's public statement, information that has been publicly disclosed already.
Bech countered that he was referencing an in camera meeting.
"Unless you have board approval, you can't go there," she said.
Steve Burton asked for a point of order, noting that the board should seek an opinion on the proper procedure for that sort of thing.
Braun said the preferred method would be to discuss the matter in camera.
Burton asked whether there could be a motion to defer the matter, but the answer came back: "No."
He added that McFarlane wouldn't be able to fully explain his position during the public meeting.
The meeting went into a short break for Braun to go through the rules.
When the board voted, all of the trustees were in favour of the motion to sustain the chair, except for Johnson and McFarlane.
McFarlane later said it appears he won't be able to get the clarification he was seeking on the matter.
"I was surprised that it was ruled out of order," McFarlane told the Langley Advance after the meeting.
He said he was simply inquiring about a public statement arising from the special meeting, and the board policy on special meetings.
Published: Friday, October 16, 2009
The Langley School Board moved to silence one of its own members during a public meeting.
Langley School Board chair Joan Bech survived a school trustee's equivalent of a non-confidence vote at Tuesday's meeting, during an unusual exchange over the board's expression of confidence in the superintendent.
Trustee Rob McFarlane tried to bring up a public statement made Sept. 18 and the district's policy on special meetings, but Bech called a point of order before he was able to say much.
She noted that McFarlane did not have board permission to deal with an in camera item. The special meeting had been in camera, but after it, the board made a public statement about having confidence in superintendent Cheryle Beaumont.
School Board chair Joan Bech and trustee Rob McFarlane disagreed over whether he could discuss a special meeting last month.
It was a reaction to the Langley Teachers' Association holding a non-confidence vote in the superintendent.
At Tuesday's public trustee meeting, McFarlane challenged the chair's ruling, and Bech stepped back from the chairperson role, in light of the challenge.
"Challenging the chair is a very unusual motion," commented Wayne Braun, the district secretary-treasurer.
Wendy Johnson, as vice chair, stepped in and suggested a motion to sustain the chair in her ruling.
McFarlane wanted a chance to explain the challenge, but was not allowed.
He noted that the only in camera items in his statement come from the board's public statement, information that has been publicly disclosed already.
Bech countered that he was referencing an in camera meeting.
"Unless you have board approval, you can't go there," she said.
Steve Burton asked for a point of order, noting that the board should seek an opinion on the proper procedure for that sort of thing.
Braun said the preferred method would be to discuss the matter in camera.
Burton asked whether there could be a motion to defer the matter, but the answer came back: "No."
He added that McFarlane wouldn't be able to fully explain his position during the public meeting.
The meeting went into a short break for Braun to go through the rules.
When the board voted, all of the trustees were in favour of the motion to sustain the chair, except for Johnson and McFarlane.
McFarlane later said it appears he won't be able to get the clarification he was seeking on the matter.
"I was surprised that it was ruled out of order," McFarlane told the Langley Advance after the meeting.
He said he was simply inquiring about a public statement arising from the special meeting, and the board policy on special meetings.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Secrecy rules
Bob Groeneveld, Langley Advance
Published: Friday, October 16, 2009
Rules of order can go to the devil. Langley's school board needs to understand that the people who pay the bills - and the mothers and fathers whose children are in local schools - have a right to know what's going on.
It seems ludicrous that, after all that has occurred over the past few months during which the illusion of a modest surplus became unraveled and revealed an almost unbelievable deficit of more than $8 million (more than five per cent of the school district's annual budget), Langley school trustees still don't get it.
What kind of arrogance does it take to sweep concerns about the board's financial responsibilities under an in camera carpet and pretend that if nobody outside the boardroom knows what's going on, then everything is hunky dory.
Yes, surely all of the parents throughout Langley School District understand that there are rules.
Just as they understand that there are rules in accounting for ensuring that your books are in order.
And certainly Trustee Rob McFarlane also realizes that there are rules.
Unfortunately, Trustee McFarlane seems to be in the minority among board members when it comes to understanding that, before the rules, trustees must accept that their elected offices require them to work on behalf of the people of Langley.
Undoubtedly, a lot of people are working hard to correct the mistakes that led the school district into its current crisis, and it's probably an extra bother to keep Langley's ordinary people informed of what is being done to rectify an error that has put the quality of our children's education in question.
Disallowing a trustee's public question - simply on the basis that some information pertaining to the subject discussed may be inherently secret - does nothing to support any public confidence in this board of education.
Published: Friday, October 16, 2009
Rules of order can go to the devil. Langley's school board needs to understand that the people who pay the bills - and the mothers and fathers whose children are in local schools - have a right to know what's going on.
It seems ludicrous that, after all that has occurred over the past few months during which the illusion of a modest surplus became unraveled and revealed an almost unbelievable deficit of more than $8 million (more than five per cent of the school district's annual budget), Langley school trustees still don't get it.
What kind of arrogance does it take to sweep concerns about the board's financial responsibilities under an in camera carpet and pretend that if nobody outside the boardroom knows what's going on, then everything is hunky dory.
Yes, surely all of the parents throughout Langley School District understand that there are rules.
Just as they understand that there are rules in accounting for ensuring that your books are in order.
And certainly Trustee Rob McFarlane also realizes that there are rules.
Unfortunately, Trustee McFarlane seems to be in the minority among board members when it comes to understanding that, before the rules, trustees must accept that their elected offices require them to work on behalf of the people of Langley.
Undoubtedly, a lot of people are working hard to correct the mistakes that led the school district into its current crisis, and it's probably an extra bother to keep Langley's ordinary people informed of what is being done to rectify an error that has put the quality of our children's education in question.
Disallowing a trustee's public question - simply on the basis that some information pertaining to the subject discussed may be inherently secret - does nothing to support any public confidence in this board of education.
Mystery in school board deficit plan
Heather Colpitts, Langley Advance
Published: Friday, October 16, 2009
School trustees approved a plan to cut $3.3 million from its budget, but a big chunk of the cuts are still unknown.
DEFICIT PLAN OVERVIEW
Cuts that will start with the 2010/2011 school year:
- $290,000 from elementary counselling and Reading Recovery
- $500,000 to school allocations
- $810,000 from central administration
- $175,000 from not filling administrative job openings
- $100,000 from building shutdown at Christmas
- $25,000 saved by aligning school calendars
- $10,000 from trustee expenses
- $50,000 in capital purchases
- $75,000 by not giving the annual contribution to the Langley School Foundation
- $775,000 more to be decided
For more info click here.
Published: Friday, October 16, 2009
School trustees approved a plan to cut $3.3 million from its budget, but a big chunk of the cuts are still unknown.
DEFICIT PLAN OVERVIEW
Cuts that will start with the 2010/2011 school year:
- $290,000 from elementary counselling and Reading Recovery
- $500,000 to school allocations
- $810,000 from central administration
- $175,000 from not filling administrative job openings
- $100,000 from building shutdown at Christmas
- $25,000 saved by aligning school calendars
- $10,000 from trustee expenses
- $50,000 in capital purchases
- $75,000 by not giving the annual contribution to the Langley School Foundation
- $775,000 more to be decided
For more info click here.
Letter from LTA President Susan Fonseca to Janet Steffenhagen's blog at the Vancouver Sun
The following message was sent to Janet Steffenhagen's Blog Report Card at the Vancouver Sun.
Hi, Janet~
The Langley Teachers’ Association would like to make it clear that teachers are NOT the cause of the staggering debt we face in Langley. Superintendent Beaumont has stated that the area with the most overspending at $7.5 million is teachers on call.
Please note that the district’s actual costs for “substitutes” in June 2008 was $7,186,629. The actual cost for June 2009 was $7,225,469, a difference of $36,098 – hardly a dramatic increase in a budget of $153 million. And especially when you consider that Langley teachers had a 3% harmonization increase last year to bring us in line with provincial average teacher salaries. (This is less than the 9.1 % increase received by the Superintendent in 2008-09). Based on the public Audited Statements, we’d like to know how the Superintendent concludes that the TTOC budget had increased $3.5 million over last year.
The LTA notes that in the 2009 Amended Annual Budget submitted in February 2009, the district projected an expenditure for substitutes of only $5,553,749. They should not have been surprised that the June actuals were closer to figure reported for the previous year, rather than this lowball estimate. We wonder what logical rationale they could have for anticipating such a dramatic change in the expenditures over previous years.
We also take exception to the new ST Wayne Braun’s statement that “Schools will be squeezed a bit but not shortchanged.” If the proposed Debt Elimination Plan proceeds, our schools and students will be trash compacted!
This year, the district will be spending $9.2 million less than last year in operating costs. They found another error at the September board meeting which bumped up last year’s overspending from the $8.2 million. We have also lost the $3.2 million Annual Facilities Grant and have had 26 trades people terminated. We foresee numerous Health & Safety problems ahead as our aging buildings are left to deteriorate. So if we add those two numbers together, this year our district will be spending $12.5 million less than last year. If next year, we have to cut another $3.3 million, we will be spending $15.8 million less that 2008-09. This adds up to more than 10 percent of a $153 million budget.
The LTA appreciates the honesty of Vice Chair Wendy Johnson who challenged the smoke and mirrors spin at the Board meeting: “To say we aren’t impacting schools isn’t the truth…It will be felt by teachers and students.”
The LTA has written to Minister Margaret MacDiarmid requesting and urgent meeting with teachers and other partner groups who would like to join us. This Debt Elimination Plan is totally unacceptable to us and we are waiting to hear back with the date and time for a meeting. We will keep you posted.
Susan Fonseca
President
Langley Teachers' Association
O: (604) 533-1618
Hi, Janet~
The Langley Teachers’ Association would like to make it clear that teachers are NOT the cause of the staggering debt we face in Langley. Superintendent Beaumont has stated that the area with the most overspending at $7.5 million is teachers on call.
Please note that the district’s actual costs for “substitutes” in June 2008 was $7,186,629. The actual cost for June 2009 was $7,225,469, a difference of $36,098 – hardly a dramatic increase in a budget of $153 million. And especially when you consider that Langley teachers had a 3% harmonization increase last year to bring us in line with provincial average teacher salaries. (This is less than the 9.1 % increase received by the Superintendent in 2008-09). Based on the public Audited Statements, we’d like to know how the Superintendent concludes that the TTOC budget had increased $3.5 million over last year.
The LTA notes that in the 2009 Amended Annual Budget submitted in February 2009, the district projected an expenditure for substitutes of only $5,553,749. They should not have been surprised that the June actuals were closer to figure reported for the previous year, rather than this lowball estimate. We wonder what logical rationale they could have for anticipating such a dramatic change in the expenditures over previous years.
We also take exception to the new ST Wayne Braun’s statement that “Schools will be squeezed a bit but not shortchanged.” If the proposed Debt Elimination Plan proceeds, our schools and students will be trash compacted!
This year, the district will be spending $9.2 million less than last year in operating costs. They found another error at the September board meeting which bumped up last year’s overspending from the $8.2 million. We have also lost the $3.2 million Annual Facilities Grant and have had 26 trades people terminated. We foresee numerous Health & Safety problems ahead as our aging buildings are left to deteriorate. So if we add those two numbers together, this year our district will be spending $12.5 million less than last year. If next year, we have to cut another $3.3 million, we will be spending $15.8 million less that 2008-09. This adds up to more than 10 percent of a $153 million budget.
The LTA appreciates the honesty of Vice Chair Wendy Johnson who challenged the smoke and mirrors spin at the Board meeting: “To say we aren’t impacting schools isn’t the truth…It will be felt by teachers and students.”
The LTA has written to Minister Margaret MacDiarmid requesting and urgent meeting with teachers and other partner groups who would like to join us. This Debt Elimination Plan is totally unacceptable to us and we are waiting to hear back with the date and time for a meeting. We will keep you posted.
Susan Fonseca
President
Langley Teachers' Association
O: (604) 533-1618
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Students must be put first by district
Langley Times - Letter to the Editor
Published: October 15, 2009 9:00 AM
Editor: It is about time that the students were put first in the Langley School District.
I don’t care whether or not the superintendent, Cheryle Beaumont, is a nice person. I don’t care if Rich Coleman is a friend of hers.
The fact is, when she took power several years ago, the Langley School District had $5.4 million in reserves in the bank. Every year since then, the Langley School District has lost vast amounts of money, even though Trustee Steve Burton was always spouting off about a surplus the district had.
We are told that the $8.3 million debt was not due to reconfiguration of some schools in the district. This really concerns me — for if that’s not the cause, what is? Where did all the money go?
We are told that the people “accountable” are no longer in those positions. What people? Beaumont still holds her $150,000 a year job.
Who else was accountable? Assistant secretary-treasurer Brian Sommerfeldt left the district for a promotion. He is now secretary-treasurer in the New Westminster School District. Secretary-treasurer Peter Greenwood retired.
So what this really means is that the Langley School District and board of trustees did not take any action in light of this staggering debt. No one has been held accountable for the huge financial mess the district is now in. No action has been taken by the Langley School District or board of trustees.
Chair Joan Bech is correct — there is a child in the middle. My child.
It is about time we had honesty and trust restored in this district, and not just cover-ups all of the time, so that no one loses face. That isn’t helping the students at all.
E. Robinson,
Langley
Published: October 15, 2009 9:00 AM
Editor: It is about time that the students were put first in the Langley School District.
I don’t care whether or not the superintendent, Cheryle Beaumont, is a nice person. I don’t care if Rich Coleman is a friend of hers.
The fact is, when she took power several years ago, the Langley School District had $5.4 million in reserves in the bank. Every year since then, the Langley School District has lost vast amounts of money, even though Trustee Steve Burton was always spouting off about a surplus the district had.
We are told that the $8.3 million debt was not due to reconfiguration of some schools in the district. This really concerns me — for if that’s not the cause, what is? Where did all the money go?
We are told that the people “accountable” are no longer in those positions. What people? Beaumont still holds her $150,000 a year job.
Who else was accountable? Assistant secretary-treasurer Brian Sommerfeldt left the district for a promotion. He is now secretary-treasurer in the New Westminster School District. Secretary-treasurer Peter Greenwood retired.
So what this really means is that the Langley School District and board of trustees did not take any action in light of this staggering debt. No one has been held accountable for the huge financial mess the district is now in. No action has been taken by the Langley School District or board of trustees.
Chair Joan Bech is correct — there is a child in the middle. My child.
It is about time we had honesty and trust restored in this district, and not just cover-ups all of the time, so that no one loses face. That isn’t helping the students at all.
E. Robinson,
Langley
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Education stakeholders unite against school cuts
The Hook Online
By Crawford Kilian October 7, 2009 01:15 pm
In an “unprecedented letter,” four major stakeholder groups have united to demand that Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid restore funding cuts to the system.
Sent on October 6, the letter was signed by Anne Whiteaker, president of the Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils; Connie Denesiuk, president of the B.C. School Trustees Association; Irene Lanzinger, president of the B.C. Teachers Federation; and Barry O’Neill, president of CUPE B.C.
They cited “shared concerns about the cutbacks to programs and grants that are now being felt by students in classrooms across the province.”
For more information, click here.
By Crawford Kilian October 7, 2009 01:15 pm
In an “unprecedented letter,” four major stakeholder groups have united to demand that Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid restore funding cuts to the system.
Sent on October 6, the letter was signed by Anne Whiteaker, president of the Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils; Connie Denesiuk, president of the B.C. School Trustees Association; Irene Lanzinger, president of the B.C. Teachers Federation; and Barry O’Neill, president of CUPE B.C.
They cited “shared concerns about the cutbacks to programs and grants that are now being felt by students in classrooms across the province.”
For more information, click here.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Debt plan ready
Heather Colpitts, Langley Advance
Published: Friday, October 09, 2009
The Langley School Board will have a plan to eliminate its $8.2 million debt ready to present publicly at its Oct. 13 trustees meeting.
The public meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. in the district office at 4875 222nd St. In recent weeks, superintendent Cheryle Beaumont and secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun have met with partner groups, employee groups, trustees and staff to provide information and accept input on how to deal with the district's budgeting shortfall.
The district expects to meet with the Ministry of Education prior to presenting the plan at the Oct. 13 meeting. The provincial government must approve the district's plans.
The district website, www.sd35.bc.ca, includes information about the budget problems and the Deloitte report commissioned by the district. The website also includes:
"Senior Management and Finance Department staff are confident that, given sufficient time, the deficit can be paid down without severe impacts on direct services to schools and with limited impacts on staff. A combination of some revenue enhancement and significant cost savings in other areas have been identified.
The total deficit of $8.2 million was tied to inadequate monitoring and lack of strong financial controls in the system.
It should be noted the measures taken in the Deficit Elimination Plan will carry forward until the deficit is completely paid down over the next several years. Once the plan is fully implemented in the 2010-11 school year no additional measures will be necessary in subsequent school years."
Published: Friday, October 09, 2009
The Langley School Board will have a plan to eliminate its $8.2 million debt ready to present publicly at its Oct. 13 trustees meeting.
The public meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. in the district office at 4875 222nd St. In recent weeks, superintendent Cheryle Beaumont and secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun have met with partner groups, employee groups, trustees and staff to provide information and accept input on how to deal with the district's budgeting shortfall.
The district expects to meet with the Ministry of Education prior to presenting the plan at the Oct. 13 meeting. The provincial government must approve the district's plans.
The district website, www.sd35.bc.ca, includes information about the budget problems and the Deloitte report commissioned by the district. The website also includes:
"Senior Management and Finance Department staff are confident that, given sufficient time, the deficit can be paid down without severe impacts on direct services to schools and with limited impacts on staff. A combination of some revenue enhancement and significant cost savings in other areas have been identified.
The total deficit of $8.2 million was tied to inadequate monitoring and lack of strong financial controls in the system.
It should be noted the measures taken in the Deficit Elimination Plan will carry forward until the deficit is completely paid down over the next several years. Once the plan is fully implemented in the 2010-11 school year no additional measures will be necessary in subsequent school years."
School district deficit plan will be unveiled
By Natasha Jones - Langley Times
Published: October 08, 2009 5:00 PM
The Langley School District’s plan for eliminating an $8.2 million deficit will be presented at Tuesday’s public board meeting.
For several weeks, school superintendent Cheryle Beaumont and secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun have been meeting with partner groups, employee groups, trustees and staff to provide information and gather feedback about how best to manage the $8.2 million operating deficit which was incurred in the 2008-2009 budget.
The deficit was the result of mistakes made in the finance department over approximately two years.
The two senior personnel in that department no longer work in the Langley School District, and Beaumont and board chairman Joan Bech have taken responsibility for the errors.
School district spokesman Craig Spence said on Thursday that senior staff are hoping to meet Education Minister Margaret McDiarmid before Tuesday’s board of education meeting.
Spence said that staff “are confident that, given sufficient time, the deficit can be paid down without severe impacts on direct services to schools, and with limited impact on staff.”
A probe into the miscalculation uncovered inadequate monitoring and lack of strong financial controls in the system.
Spence said that the measures the district plans for eliminating the deficit will carry forward until the deficit is completely paid down over the next several years. Once the plan is fully implemented in the 2010-11 school year no additional measures will be necessary in subsequent school years, he added.
Meanwhile, Langley Teachers Association has said that it wants the ministry to nullify the debt, and will not take part in discussions that involve possible staff reductions.
Published: October 08, 2009 5:00 PM
The Langley School District’s plan for eliminating an $8.2 million deficit will be presented at Tuesday’s public board meeting.
For several weeks, school superintendent Cheryle Beaumont and secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun have been meeting with partner groups, employee groups, trustees and staff to provide information and gather feedback about how best to manage the $8.2 million operating deficit which was incurred in the 2008-2009 budget.
The deficit was the result of mistakes made in the finance department over approximately two years.
The two senior personnel in that department no longer work in the Langley School District, and Beaumont and board chairman Joan Bech have taken responsibility for the errors.
School district spokesman Craig Spence said on Thursday that senior staff are hoping to meet Education Minister Margaret McDiarmid before Tuesday’s board of education meeting.
Spence said that staff “are confident that, given sufficient time, the deficit can be paid down without severe impacts on direct services to schools, and with limited impact on staff.”
A probe into the miscalculation uncovered inadequate monitoring and lack of strong financial controls in the system.
Spence said that the measures the district plans for eliminating the deficit will carry forward until the deficit is completely paid down over the next several years. Once the plan is fully implemented in the 2010-11 school year no additional measures will be necessary in subsequent school years, he added.
Meanwhile, Langley Teachers Association has said that it wants the ministry to nullify the debt, and will not take part in discussions that involve possible staff reductions.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Debt waiver idea nixed
Why not just erase the school district deficit off the books?
Langley Advance
Published: Tuesday, October 06, 2009
The Langley Teachers' Association is calling on the provincial government to nullify the $8.2 million debt of the Langley School District.
"Why should the teachers, staff, students and families of Langley pay for the errors of senior management by suffering through years of further cuts to services?" the union asked in a statement.
The union is calling on the Langley School Board to ask the Ministry of Education to wipe the debt off the books. The Deloitte review found the problems were caused by miscalculations, accounting errors, and incorrect forecasts.
"We have responsibilities we need to own up to," said board chair Joan Bech.
The union met with senior management Sept. 25. On Sept. 29, the LTA executive unanimously passed a motion calling for the debt elimination.
The LTA has taken a position that it won't participate in discussions that have to do with reducing staff numbers nor dealing with cuts to direct services or supports for students.
Bech said she's disappointed because it's important teachers add their input.
The district's largest employee group is also refusing to be bound by any confidentiality restrictions about any district debt elimination plan.
A Ministry of Education spokesperson said the district is one of many facing financial difficulties and the ministry is working with Langley on a solution, one that does not include wiping it from the balance sheet.
Langley Advance
Published: Tuesday, October 06, 2009
The Langley Teachers' Association is calling on the provincial government to nullify the $8.2 million debt of the Langley School District.
"Why should the teachers, staff, students and families of Langley pay for the errors of senior management by suffering through years of further cuts to services?" the union asked in a statement.
The union is calling on the Langley School Board to ask the Ministry of Education to wipe the debt off the books. The Deloitte review found the problems were caused by miscalculations, accounting errors, and incorrect forecasts.
"We have responsibilities we need to own up to," said board chair Joan Bech.
The union met with senior management Sept. 25. On Sept. 29, the LTA executive unanimously passed a motion calling for the debt elimination.
The LTA has taken a position that it won't participate in discussions that have to do with reducing staff numbers nor dealing with cuts to direct services or supports for students.
Bech said she's disappointed because it's important teachers add their input.
The district's largest employee group is also refusing to be bound by any confidentiality restrictions about any district debt elimination plan.
A Ministry of Education spokesperson said the district is one of many facing financial difficulties and the ministry is working with Langley on a solution, one that does not include wiping it from the balance sheet.
Friday, October 2, 2009
MLA's anger at LTA misdirected
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
The Langley Teachers' Association is disturbed to read about MLA Rich Coleman that the "only thing [he's] been disappointed in in this whole process was the LTA thinking they could tell who should run the district." [Coleman lambasts teachers, Sept. 29, Langley Advance]
As President of the LTA, I'd like to say, "Don't shoot the messenger!" Teachers didn't create this deficit mess.
Students and parents didn't create this deficit mess. We were only told about it after the fact. But these are the people who will be paying the price for years to come for this financial mismanagement, unless the provincial government provides relief.
We are shocked that Mr. Coleman is not disappointed in the district's senior management's failure to take the advice of its auditors, who have advised them every year since 2005 to strengthen internal financial controls. The Deloitte review identified 27 errors and miscalculations, and another $728,000 error came out in response to Tr. McFarlane's question at the last school board meeting.
New secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun acknowledged that the district actually overspent its operating budget by $9.2 million last year. That is error number 28! And the LTA is still waiting for answers to further budget questions we've raised with the district about other reporting anomalies that we have identified.
Friends or not, how many millions more in deficits or budget errors would it take for Mr. Coleman to lose confidence in the superintendent's leadership? The LTA did not vote to tell the board who should run the district, but rather who should not. We have 8.3 million reasons.
Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont admitted at the board meeting that she is responsible for the financial and administrative management of the district, and teachers voted to tell the board of trustees that we have lost confidence in her leadership of the district.
The trustees voted behind closed doors to support the superintendent, but our democratically held votes were all taken out of committee and reported out publicly to members. We agree with board chair Joan Bech that "there is a child in the middle" of the political discussions surrounding this deficit.
The LTA would like to know where Mr. Coleman stands on what cuts should be made to services to Langley students and schools now and in the future? We would like to know how he intends to represent the need for adequate financial funding to the district to his cabinet colleagues in Victoria. Does he agree that $3.2 million in Annual Facilities Grant funds should be cut from our district so we cannot maintain aging buildings and infrastructure? Or will he stand up and fight for restoration of these funds for our district?
Does he agree that employees' negotiated salary increases should be fully funded so that trustees don't end up making cuts to programs to pay for a provincial agreement? Does he agree that public education for our children is society's best long-term investment?
The LTA would like to meet with the board, parents, other district employees, and our two MLAs, to discuss how we prevent these cuts to student services in Langley. We've been cutting for years already, and it's time to rally round the "child in the middle" and say no more cuts!
Students and their families should not pay the cost of senior management's budgeting errors.
Susan Fonseca, Langley Teachers' Association
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
The Langley Teachers' Association is disturbed to read about MLA Rich Coleman that the "only thing [he's] been disappointed in in this whole process was the LTA thinking they could tell who should run the district." [Coleman lambasts teachers, Sept. 29, Langley Advance]
As President of the LTA, I'd like to say, "Don't shoot the messenger!" Teachers didn't create this deficit mess.
Students and parents didn't create this deficit mess. We were only told about it after the fact. But these are the people who will be paying the price for years to come for this financial mismanagement, unless the provincial government provides relief.
We are shocked that Mr. Coleman is not disappointed in the district's senior management's failure to take the advice of its auditors, who have advised them every year since 2005 to strengthen internal financial controls. The Deloitte review identified 27 errors and miscalculations, and another $728,000 error came out in response to Tr. McFarlane's question at the last school board meeting.
New secretary-treasurer Wayne Braun acknowledged that the district actually overspent its operating budget by $9.2 million last year. That is error number 28! And the LTA is still waiting for answers to further budget questions we've raised with the district about other reporting anomalies that we have identified.
Friends or not, how many millions more in deficits or budget errors would it take for Mr. Coleman to lose confidence in the superintendent's leadership? The LTA did not vote to tell the board who should run the district, but rather who should not. We have 8.3 million reasons.
Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont admitted at the board meeting that she is responsible for the financial and administrative management of the district, and teachers voted to tell the board of trustees that we have lost confidence in her leadership of the district.
The trustees voted behind closed doors to support the superintendent, but our democratically held votes were all taken out of committee and reported out publicly to members. We agree with board chair Joan Bech that "there is a child in the middle" of the political discussions surrounding this deficit.
The LTA would like to know where Mr. Coleman stands on what cuts should be made to services to Langley students and schools now and in the future? We would like to know how he intends to represent the need for adequate financial funding to the district to his cabinet colleagues in Victoria. Does he agree that $3.2 million in Annual Facilities Grant funds should be cut from our district so we cannot maintain aging buildings and infrastructure? Or will he stand up and fight for restoration of these funds for our district?
Does he agree that employees' negotiated salary increases should be fully funded so that trustees don't end up making cuts to programs to pay for a provincial agreement? Does he agree that public education for our children is society's best long-term investment?
The LTA would like to meet with the board, parents, other district employees, and our two MLAs, to discuss how we prevent these cuts to student services in Langley. We've been cutting for years already, and it's time to rally round the "child in the middle" and say no more cuts!
Students and their families should not pay the cost of senior management's budgeting errors.
Susan Fonseca, Langley Teachers' Association
Schools deficit: Spin doctor's letter deflects fault
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
I have issues with the statement, in the letter that spin doctor superintendent Cheryle Beaumont sent home on September 10 with students across Langley School District, that the $8 million deficit is not the school board's fault.
The deficit is a direct result of the incompetence of the previous majority of the board and the superintendent. Over the past three years, concerned parents, students, and taxpayers tried to stop the incompetent overspending that was occurring in the district.
It was explained through letters, delegations, interviews, and town hall meetings that you can't approve a huge reconfiguration in a district without knowing how much it will cost. This is exactly what happened when trustees voted for reconfiguration without knowing the financial, let alone the educational costs.
The letter is misleading at the very least. The money was not used to provide programs and services to students. It was misspent busing more than 2,000 students who previously walked to their neighbourhood schools.
It was misspent on cosmetic upgrades to schools so that the reconfiguration appeared on the surface to have been a good idea. It was misspent when Langley School District handed $3 million to the new Langley Events Centre.
Trustee Hattie Hogeterp was, luckily, not re-elected last year, but Trustees Steve Burton, Alison McVeigh, and Rod Ross should immediately resign their positions, owing to their arrogance and lack of regard for the students and parents of this district.
Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont should leave immediately for not managing the district properly. She can blame the financial department all she wants, but ultimately, they report to her, and if she couldn't see the errors even though Joe public kept pointing them out at every board meeting and every opportunity, then she obviously doesn't have the competence necessary to be in her position.
Fiona Miller, Langley
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
I have issues with the statement, in the letter that spin doctor superintendent Cheryle Beaumont sent home on September 10 with students across Langley School District, that the $8 million deficit is not the school board's fault.
The deficit is a direct result of the incompetence of the previous majority of the board and the superintendent. Over the past three years, concerned parents, students, and taxpayers tried to stop the incompetent overspending that was occurring in the district.
It was explained through letters, delegations, interviews, and town hall meetings that you can't approve a huge reconfiguration in a district without knowing how much it will cost. This is exactly what happened when trustees voted for reconfiguration without knowing the financial, let alone the educational costs.
The letter is misleading at the very least. The money was not used to provide programs and services to students. It was misspent busing more than 2,000 students who previously walked to their neighbourhood schools.
It was misspent on cosmetic upgrades to schools so that the reconfiguration appeared on the surface to have been a good idea. It was misspent when Langley School District handed $3 million to the new Langley Events Centre.
Trustee Hattie Hogeterp was, luckily, not re-elected last year, but Trustees Steve Burton, Alison McVeigh, and Rod Ross should immediately resign their positions, owing to their arrogance and lack of regard for the students and parents of this district.
Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont should leave immediately for not managing the district properly. She can blame the financial department all she wants, but ultimately, they report to her, and if she couldn't see the errors even though Joe public kept pointing them out at every board meeting and every opportunity, then she obviously doesn't have the competence necessary to be in her position.
Fiona Miller, Langley
Schools deficit: Bully politics
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
It sure is rich that Rich Coleman, from his bully pulpit, is labeling the LTA intervention into the district's financial crisis as being, of all things, political [Coleman lambasts teachers, Sept. 29, Langley Advance].
Did not Rich Coleman intervene in a most partisan way in the trustee election last fall?
That couldn't have been political, could it?
Peter and Heather Thomson, Walnut Grove
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
It sure is rich that Rich Coleman, from his bully pulpit, is labeling the LTA intervention into the district's financial crisis as being, of all things, political [Coleman lambasts teachers, Sept. 29, Langley Advance].
Did not Rich Coleman intervene in a most partisan way in the trustee election last fall?
That couldn't have been political, could it?
Peter and Heather Thomson, Walnut Grove
Schools deficit: MLA missing accountability of data
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
I read with dismay the article by Heather Colpitts quoting MLA Rich Coleman's thoughts about the Langley Teachers' Association [Coleman lambasts teachers, Sept. 29, Langley Advance].
"'The only thing I've been disappointed in in this whole process was the LTA thinking they could tell who should run this district,' Coleman told the Langley Advance."
He further opines that Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont is a friend in whom he has every confidence. It is appalling to me that an MLA would put his "friendship" with an individual ahead of the interests of thousands of Langley children and the 1,300 Langley teachers who have been struggling to meet their many needs.
One would assume that taxpayers and the parents of these children elected Minister Coleman to represent them, just as Susan Fonseca and Gail Chaddock-Costello were elected to represent Langley teachers.
As for the whole affair being "all politics," as Coleman is also quoted as saying, this government has been demanding that the public education system be held "accountable" for "student achievement" by frequent, rigorous testing of students.
School districts are burdened with multiple reports that reduce children to little more than data generators.
The data in the Langley School Board Office clearly demands accountability also.
Susan O'Neill, Central Coast Teachers' Association
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
I read with dismay the article by Heather Colpitts quoting MLA Rich Coleman's thoughts about the Langley Teachers' Association [Coleman lambasts teachers, Sept. 29, Langley Advance].
"'The only thing I've been disappointed in in this whole process was the LTA thinking they could tell who should run this district,' Coleman told the Langley Advance."
He further opines that Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont is a friend in whom he has every confidence. It is appalling to me that an MLA would put his "friendship" with an individual ahead of the interests of thousands of Langley children and the 1,300 Langley teachers who have been struggling to meet their many needs.
One would assume that taxpayers and the parents of these children elected Minister Coleman to represent them, just as Susan Fonseca and Gail Chaddock-Costello were elected to represent Langley teachers.
As for the whole affair being "all politics," as Coleman is also quoted as saying, this government has been demanding that the public education system be held "accountable" for "student achievement" by frequent, rigorous testing of students.
School districts are burdened with multiple reports that reduce children to little more than data generators.
The data in the Langley School Board Office clearly demands accountability also.
Susan O'Neill, Central Coast Teachers' Association
Schools deficit: Quick, open response applauded
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
I would like to thank the current school board for the expeditious manner in which it took steps to first uncover and then make public, within 24 hours of receiving the report, the extent of the deficit facing our district.
I also applaud the manner in which they are taking steps to clean up the mess left and to ensure nothing like this ever happens again. That being said, there are several questions that still remain unanswered.
Why were the concerns expressed by the auditors in past audit reports, regarding the need to tighten up internal controls over the district's accounting practices, not addressed by either the superintendent or the previous board?
In response to numerous questions raised by the public and by candidates in the 2008 election, why weren't the actual costs of the Fundamental School site purchase and renovation and the South Central reconfiguration ever calculated and made public?
Were performance reviews on the secretary-treasurer completed annually by the superintendent, and if so, why were these issues not revealed or corrected through those reviews? If performance reviews were not completed, why not?
Why does the school district still not have a written contract for its $3 million contribution to the Langley Events Centre? Why was such a large sum of money committed to the project by the previous board without public debate or an open vote at a public meeting by the previous board of trustees?
At the end of the day, as in any large public or private corporation managing hundreds of millions of dollars, it falls upon its CEO to take responsibility for gross examples of mismanagement. Has the superintendent offered her resignation to the current board of trustees? If not, why not?
Similarly, has the former board chair, Trustee Steve Burton, offered to resign? If not, why not?
Graeme Shepherd, Langley
Published: Friday, October 02, 2009
Dear Editor,
I would like to thank the current school board for the expeditious manner in which it took steps to first uncover and then make public, within 24 hours of receiving the report, the extent of the deficit facing our district.
I also applaud the manner in which they are taking steps to clean up the mess left and to ensure nothing like this ever happens again. That being said, there are several questions that still remain unanswered.
Why were the concerns expressed by the auditors in past audit reports, regarding the need to tighten up internal controls over the district's accounting practices, not addressed by either the superintendent or the previous board?
In response to numerous questions raised by the public and by candidates in the 2008 election, why weren't the actual costs of the Fundamental School site purchase and renovation and the South Central reconfiguration ever calculated and made public?
Were performance reviews on the secretary-treasurer completed annually by the superintendent, and if so, why were these issues not revealed or corrected through those reviews? If performance reviews were not completed, why not?
Why does the school district still not have a written contract for its $3 million contribution to the Langley Events Centre? Why was such a large sum of money committed to the project by the previous board without public debate or an open vote at a public meeting by the previous board of trustees?
At the end of the day, as in any large public or private corporation managing hundreds of millions of dollars, it falls upon its CEO to take responsibility for gross examples of mismanagement. Has the superintendent offered her resignation to the current board of trustees? If not, why not?
Similarly, has the former board chair, Trustee Steve Burton, offered to resign? If not, why not?
Graeme Shepherd, Langley
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Langley schools: Who is working together?
Letter to the Editor - Langley Advance
Dear Editor,
I'm happy to see school board chair Joan Bech make an honest request to all work together in fixing the financial and community problems in the district [Deficit dominates meet, Sept. 25, Langley Advance]. Kudos to her good intentions.
However, after watching the rest of the meeting, I'm left with two questions. Question one is: "With whom are we working together?"
Reviewing the meeting:
- Parents remain confident trustees don't 100 per cent support the superintendant not having accountability.
- Parents at the meeting asking for accountability and support at Langley Secondary were insulted in a tirade.
- Langley Teachers' Association expressed its fair and valid opinion, and were fully insulted and belittled by a trustee.
- The LTA's opinion on the superintendent was suppressed, while a suspect board opinion on the same topic was made very public.
- Trustees took many cheap shots at each other
- The chair and a trustee argued openly in the meeting.
- Unsubstantiated pro-reconfiguration propaganda was spewed out by trustees.
- Pro-non-accountability newsletters have been sent home by the school district, at our cost.
- Staff union spokespersons spoke up clearly in and after the meeting, asking for accountability and fairness.
- It was made clear in the meeting that DPAC is being ignored, and its letters suppressed by the school district.
- The only group of people not insulted or suppressed was that of the principals at the meeting, who coincidentally work for the district.
The board's decision (presumably made in an "in camera" meeting) to not enforce accountability on the one self-admittedly-responsible for the deficit damages the community by ignoring and suppressing, some trustees, large parent groups, teachers, staff (and union), and DPAC.
So my second question is: "Who does the board represent?"
Mike MacDonald, Langley City
Dear Editor,
I'm happy to see school board chair Joan Bech make an honest request to all work together in fixing the financial and community problems in the district [Deficit dominates meet, Sept. 25, Langley Advance]. Kudos to her good intentions.
However, after watching the rest of the meeting, I'm left with two questions. Question one is: "With whom are we working together?"
Reviewing the meeting:
- Parents remain confident trustees don't 100 per cent support the superintendant not having accountability.
- Parents at the meeting asking for accountability and support at Langley Secondary were insulted in a tirade.
- Langley Teachers' Association expressed its fair and valid opinion, and were fully insulted and belittled by a trustee.
- The LTA's opinion on the superintendent was suppressed, while a suspect board opinion on the same topic was made very public.
- Trustees took many cheap shots at each other
- The chair and a trustee argued openly in the meeting.
- Unsubstantiated pro-reconfiguration propaganda was spewed out by trustees.
- Pro-non-accountability newsletters have been sent home by the school district, at our cost.
- Staff union spokespersons spoke up clearly in and after the meeting, asking for accountability and fairness.
- It was made clear in the meeting that DPAC is being ignored, and its letters suppressed by the school district.
- The only group of people not insulted or suppressed was that of the principals at the meeting, who coincidentally work for the district.
The board's decision (presumably made in an "in camera" meeting) to not enforce accountability on the one self-admittedly-responsible for the deficit damages the community by ignoring and suppressing, some trustees, large parent groups, teachers, staff (and union), and DPAC.
So my second question is: "Who does the board represent?"
Mike MacDonald, Langley City
Langley schools: Joan not a fall guy
Langley Advance - Letter to the Editor
Published: Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Dear Editor,
I personally hold Ms. Beaumont responsible for the $8-million-plus deficit, not Joan Bech. Joan should not be one of the fall guys, just because she is now the chair of the board.
Two years ago, Joan Bech was only a trustee, and one of the three who voted against H.D Stafford Secondary becoming a middle school.
I believe the changeover to a middle school was the start of our district's decline in finances. Also adding to the decline was the purchase of the Langley Christian school for the Langley fundamentals to use as their elementary school. This older school building had to be brought up to standards.
Then their existing elementary school to be renovated to a high school. A whole new science lab was put in, along with many other cosmetic changes.
The public was never told of the cost from all these changes that were made. I would think that, as the CEO of the school district, Ms. Beaumont would of been well aware of all these costs, for is this not her job?
I feel her resignation is long overdue.
Wendy Minar,Langley City
Published: Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Dear Editor,
I personally hold Ms. Beaumont responsible for the $8-million-plus deficit, not Joan Bech. Joan should not be one of the fall guys, just because she is now the chair of the board.
Two years ago, Joan Bech was only a trustee, and one of the three who voted against H.D Stafford Secondary becoming a middle school.
I believe the changeover to a middle school was the start of our district's decline in finances. Also adding to the decline was the purchase of the Langley Christian school for the Langley fundamentals to use as their elementary school. This older school building had to be brought up to standards.
Then their existing elementary school to be renovated to a high school. A whole new science lab was put in, along with many other cosmetic changes.
The public was never told of the cost from all these changes that were made. I would think that, as the CEO of the school district, Ms. Beaumont would of been well aware of all these costs, for is this not her job?
I feel her resignation is long overdue.
Wendy Minar,Langley City
Superintendent needs to go
Letter to the Editor - Langley Advance
Published: Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Dear Editor,
At the Sept. 22 public school board meeting, superintendent of schools Cheryle Beaumont made a statement accepting responsibility for the $8.3 million debt that the Langley School District now has.
We heard many times at the meeting, from the superintendent, from Chair Joan Bech, and from Trustee Steve Burton, that the people responsible for the numerous mistakes that were made were "no longer in those positions." Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont is responsible, and at the moment she still holds the same position.
If she does not resign, the board should fire her. Stakeholders in any other company would expect no less.
Jeff Miller, Langley
Published: Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Dear Editor,
At the Sept. 22 public school board meeting, superintendent of schools Cheryle Beaumont made a statement accepting responsibility for the $8.3 million debt that the Langley School District now has.
We heard many times at the meeting, from the superintendent, from Chair Joan Bech, and from Trustee Steve Burton, that the people responsible for the numerous mistakes that were made were "no longer in those positions." Superintendent Cheryle Beaumont is responsible, and at the moment she still holds the same position.
If she does not resign, the board should fire her. Stakeholders in any other company would expect no less.
Jeff Miller, Langley
Trustees should give up last salary increase
Letter to the Langley Times
Published: September 29, 2009 3:00 PM
Updated: September 29, 2009 3:45 PM
Editor: Why am I supposed to be happy that our school district’s deficit is due to error, and not misappropriation?
Why is the board of education happy to say “we aren’t dishonest, only inept?” I would rather have had one brilliant, resourceful and unethical person “cook the books” rather than people who “no longer are in positions to make those errors again.”
I believe the board recently voted itself a raise to bring it into line with other boards of similar size and responsibility. Obviously, our board isn’t average, as these “errors in accounting” weren’t showing up in other districts.
Schools and parents are being asked for reasonable suggestions to tackle the deficit.
Please rescind your raises. It’s a drop in the bucket, but we got into this mess because of a few thousand here and a few thousand there.
Julie Recksiedler,
Langley
Published: September 29, 2009 3:00 PM
Updated: September 29, 2009 3:45 PM
Editor: Why am I supposed to be happy that our school district’s deficit is due to error, and not misappropriation?
Why is the board of education happy to say “we aren’t dishonest, only inept?” I would rather have had one brilliant, resourceful and unethical person “cook the books” rather than people who “no longer are in positions to make those errors again.”
I believe the board recently voted itself a raise to bring it into line with other boards of similar size and responsibility. Obviously, our board isn’t average, as these “errors in accounting” weren’t showing up in other districts.
Schools and parents are being asked for reasonable suggestions to tackle the deficit.
Please rescind your raises. It’s a drop in the bucket, but we got into this mess because of a few thousand here and a few thousand there.
Julie Recksiedler,
Langley
Editorial — The buck has stopped
Langley Times Editorial
September 24th, 2009
At last, there has been an admission that the buck of responsibility stops somewhere.
Ever since it was revealed that Langley School District ran up an $8.3 million deficit in 2008-09, the response on the part of both trustees and senior management has been inconclusive.
The Deloitte auditor’s report stated that the overspending was not the fault of trustees, who in fact did not even know about it. The report also stated that staff in positions of authority, dealing directly with financial matters, were no longer doing so.
There was no mention of where the superintendent, Cheryle Beaumont, fit in. She is, after all, the CEO of the school district and is most definitely in charge.
Trustees cannot evade responsibility, even if they didn’t know what was going on. It is their job to ask pointed questions of both the superintendent and other senior managers. If they do not get satisfactory answers, they have a number of ways of continuing to probe and make their concerns known.
At Tuesday’s meeting, board chair Joan Bech and Beaumont admitted that yes, they were responsible for the sorry mess the district finds itself in. Bech has only been the chair since December, taking over from longtime chair Steve Burton, but she has acknowledged the buck stops with her.
The board met in camera last week and trustees reaffirmed that they want Beaumont to lead them out of the mess the district is in. That’s not a bad decision — she is already in place and should know what needs to be done. Firing her, paying severance and undertaking the search for a new superintendent in the midst of this mess would be counter-productive, and would likely cause even more problems.
The next step is for an action plan to be produced — the sooner, the better. It must be made public so that all the players — teachers, staff, parents, students and taxpayers — know how the district plans to get itself out of this deep hole.
The first step is taking responsibility, and at least that has now taken place.
—Frank Bucholtz
September 24th, 2009
At last, there has been an admission that the buck of responsibility stops somewhere.
Ever since it was revealed that Langley School District ran up an $8.3 million deficit in 2008-09, the response on the part of both trustees and senior management has been inconclusive.
The Deloitte auditor’s report stated that the overspending was not the fault of trustees, who in fact did not even know about it. The report also stated that staff in positions of authority, dealing directly with financial matters, were no longer doing so.
There was no mention of where the superintendent, Cheryle Beaumont, fit in. She is, after all, the CEO of the school district and is most definitely in charge.
Trustees cannot evade responsibility, even if they didn’t know what was going on. It is their job to ask pointed questions of both the superintendent and other senior managers. If they do not get satisfactory answers, they have a number of ways of continuing to probe and make their concerns known.
At Tuesday’s meeting, board chair Joan Bech and Beaumont admitted that yes, they were responsible for the sorry mess the district finds itself in. Bech has only been the chair since December, taking over from longtime chair Steve Burton, but she has acknowledged the buck stops with her.
The board met in camera last week and trustees reaffirmed that they want Beaumont to lead them out of the mess the district is in. That’s not a bad decision — she is already in place and should know what needs to be done. Firing her, paying severance and undertaking the search for a new superintendent in the midst of this mess would be counter-productive, and would likely cause even more problems.
The next step is for an action plan to be produced — the sooner, the better. It must be made public so that all the players — teachers, staff, parents, students and taxpayers — know how the district plans to get itself out of this deep hole.
The first step is taking responsibility, and at least that has now taken place.
—Frank Bucholtz
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)