Like the FC resident in the article, the authors of this blog are “concerned about the direction that Fort Cherry has been going.”
With new board members, it is the hope of the authors of this blog that the board will move Fort Cherry in a positive direction.
Meantime, this blog will continue to expose the deception and irresponsible budgeting and expenditures of this current board and administration under Dinnen and Sroka’s influence.
Despite the recent election victories, there will still be incumbent representatives on the board.
One has played a major part in this deception and irresponsible use of taxpayer funds.
The others have not done their due diligence and have followed poor leadership by voting to approve issues without being informed.
--------------
due diligence
Measure of prudence, responsibility, and diligence that is expected from, and ordinarily exercised by, a reasonable and prudent person under the circumstances.
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/due-diligence.html
--------------
This blog will continue to bring to light what it feels is the gross misuse of public money.
Here’s another example.
October 27, 2009: Board Workshop, Pittsburgh Chop House
Yes, that total is $1,081.09 . . .
. . . $901.09 plus $180.00 for a tip
Take a look at the budget for 2009-2010.
Dinnen spent over half of the budget on one “night out” under the guise of a “board workshop”.
Let’s see how well they stayed within the $2000 budget for the year.
The budget year starts July 1 and runs to June 30.
July 2009, Sharpnack’s trip to Gettysburg: $576.30
September 2009, Sharpnack’s PSBA Conference: $367.79.
Sharpnack alone expended $944.09 out of the $2000.00 budget.
Dinnen, Sroka, and the entire Board were aware that the budget was almost half-way expended in September.
Yet in October, instead of keeping the “workshop” in-house at Fort Cherry, the board workshop took place at the Pittsburgh Chop House, increasing the total expended to $2025.18.
The district went over budget in September, just 3 months into the new budget year.
But, that didn’t stop them from spending. . . here’s one more . . .
March 2010, Sharpnack’s trip to San Antonio: $1376.64
Total expended from a $2000.00 budget: $3401.82.
Sharpnack was permitted to take the trip to San Antonio even though the entire budget for the year was expended.
The budget for “BOARD SERVICES CONF/TRAVEL” was depleted; due diligence would dictate no money, no trip.
In addition, Jacoby and Craig both went to the same conference in San Antonio; two people attending the same conference is excessive; three is ridiculous.
Sharpnack’s trip put the district $1,401.82 over budget.
The 2010-2011 budget, which specifies the actual amount spent in 2009-2010, shows total expenditures of $4,183.00.
In addition to the receipts shown above, the budget shows an additional $781.18 in reimbursements that year.
All documentation in this post was obtained through a RTK request. Sroka did not provide the additional $781.18 in reimbursements in response to the RTK request.
The District went $2,183.00 over budget.
Expenditures more than doubled the budgeted amount.
Could this overspending have been prevented?
Yes . . .
Budget Evaluation
Throughout the year a district’s finances should be closely monitored and evaluated for conformance to the budget. Generally, the superintendent or business manager submits monthly reports to the board members to allow them to compare budgeted funding with actual results. At the end of the year a portion of the Financial Statement compares the year-end actual results with the estimate in the budget. As a further control, all invoices payable by the district must be approved by the board.
A Basic Understanding of School Finances School Finance 101
Developed by the Pennsylvania Economy League in association with: PA School Boards Association Penn State University College of Education PA Association of School Business Officials PA Association of School Administrators
http://www.gorockets.org/Downloads/School_Finance_101.pdf
As stated in the article above, each month the Board is given a “Budget Control Report”.
--------------
budgetary control
A system of management control in which actual income and spending are compared with planned income and spending, so that you can see if plans are being followed and if those plans need to be changed in order to make a profit.
--------------
The District is not to make a profit like a private sector business; but it must control finances as if it were a private sector business.
Stewardship over the public's money should be of utmost importance.
The Budget Control Report is provided each month to the board members, but not to the public.
Each month, these reports compare actual expenditures for each line item of the budget to the total budgeted amount for the year.
Each month, the reports are approved and never questioned. All board members, including the President and Treasurer, vote to approve.
At the end of the budget year, Sroka does multiple budget transfers to cover consistent over-expenditures by the administration and Board.
By habitually allowing the multiple transfers, how can the Board PROPERLY budget for the following year?
“In summary, the budget is both a financial plan to help achieve the educational goals of the district and a control mechanism to ensure that the policy objectives determined by the board (and, indirectly, the electorate) are achieved.”
A Basic Understanding of School Finances School Finance 101
Developed by the Pennsylvania Economy League in association with: PA School Boards Association Penn State University College of Education PA Association of School Business Officials PA Association of School Administrators
http://www.gorockets.org/Downloads/School_Finance_101.pdf
The ability to transfer money to cover excessive spending should not permit the Board and administrators to continue to abuse taxpayer funds.
You will see in future posts that the budget line items used to pay for administrative expenses make use of some “creative accounting”.
Dinnen claims that he and Sroka both have accounting backgrounds. *
Is their experience benefitting the taxpayers of the district, or is it benefitting the administrators and board members who choose to indulge themselves with public funds?
Let’s hope the new board members are diligent in controlling costs.
------------
* In this Observer article, Sroka was reported to have been the “assistant business manager of accounting” at Baldwin-Whitehall before his employment at Fort Cherry. Dinnen goes on to state that Sroka has a “bachelor’s degree in accounting from LaRoche College”.
==============================
Fort Cherry hires business manager
--------------------------------------------------
Observer-Reporter (Washington, PA)-April 27, 2002
Fort Cherry School District has appointed a new business manager, Superintendent Robert Dinnen said Friday.
The school board held a special meeting Thursday to interview four candidates and voted to hire Paul Sroka, who has been the assistant business manager of accounting in Baldwin-Whitehall School District since 1997. Before that, he worked for Pressley Ridge Schools, and has experience as a staff accountant.
Dinnen said Sroka has a bachelor's degree in accounting from LaRoche College, and lives in Pennsbury Village in Robinson Township, Allegheny County. Sroka is scheduled to start at Fort Cherry at the end of May. He will be paid $56,000 a year.
Fort Cherry's former business manager, William McNamee, resigned in March.
The resume that Sroka submitted to FC does not appear to support either of those statements.
According to Sroka’s resume, he was the “Payroll Supervisor”, not the “Assistant Business Manager of Accounting”. He lists his degree as “B.S. Business Management”, not “B.S. Accounting”.
On his resume, Sroka specifically mentions his skill with Munis and Pentamation accounting software programs.
In actuality, it appears that Sroka’s lack of skill with those two software programs led the District to purchase yet another accounting software package. (Both of the previous packages were purchased under Sroka’s tenure, Munis in 2003, initial cost $74,000; Pentamation in 2007, initial cost $65,000.)
In February 2011, at Sroka’s insistence, the Board approved the purchase of ProSoft accounting software; costing District taxpayers an additional tens of thousands of dollars. (Observer articles reporting the purchase of the Munis and ProSoft packages are at the end of the post.)
Sroka now must be trained on the new software at District taxpayers’ expense.
Did the Board budget for this, or will they allow Sroka to do a "budget transfer" as he habitually does, to cover the cost?
The replacement of the accounting software was discussed in a previous blog post – see http://fortcherryinfo.blogspot.com/2011/07/dont-ask-dont-tell-dont-email-me.html.
------------
Fort Cherry takes 'big step' with software purchase
Observer-Reporter (Washington, PA) - Thursday, May 1, 2003
Author: john richards ; The Observer-Reporter ; jrichard@observer-reporter.com
MCDONALD – Moving to streamline student records, Fort Cherry School Board voted Monday to purchase a new accounting software package.
The board voted unanimously to buy the nearly $74,000 package from System Software Inc.
Prior to the board's vote, school directors questioned business manager Paul Sroka, who has been charged with overseeing the installation of the software over the next several months, about the logistics of setting up the new system.
Board member Elmo Cecchetti was concerned that teachers and staff using the software might not have enough time to learn a new system.
"I feel confident they should be able to grasp this within the first 30 days of school," Sroka said, adding that the financial portion of the package should be installed by July 1. As part of the purchase price, SSI will conduct a training session for teachers and staff, most likely during an in-service day.
"I'll make it my personal goal to make sure these teachers and administrators embrace this fully for the price tag," he said.
Rutledge asked, given the significant price, if an installation timeline would be in place.
Although typically included in a contract for a major purchase, with software, it would be difficult to foresee any system bugs and the time it would take to work them out, board President Gary Farner said.
Regardless, Sroka offered the board a tentative schedule. The SSI project manager will visit the district next week to begin the conversion. Between May and July, the company will install the system server and convert data from the district's current Edunet system to have the financial portion of the package installed by July 1. If all goes as planned, the student attendance, grading and scheduling portions would be installed Aug. 1, Oct. 1 and Jan. 1, respectively, he said.
The system will replace the Edunet software, the industry leader 15 years ago. The software will allow the district to do its own grading and scheduling, saving roughly $2,700 per year that the Intermediate Unit I charges the district, Sroka said Tuesday.
"We have not had the level of satisfaction (with Edunet) I'm comfortable with and the district is entitled to," he said. "It's a big step for the district and a commitment that has to be made, based on the last audit."
The board voted unanimously to buy the nearly $74,000 package from System Software Inc.
Prior to the board's vote, school directors questioned business manager Paul Sroka, who has been charged with overseeing the installation of the software over the next several months, about the logistics of setting up the new system.
Board member Elmo Cecchetti was concerned that teachers and staff using the software might not have enough time to learn a new system.
"I feel confident they should be able to grasp this within the first 30 days of school," Sroka said, adding that the financial portion of the package should be installed by July 1. As part of the purchase price, SSI will conduct a training session for teachers and staff, most likely during an in-service day.
"I'll make it my personal goal to make sure these teachers and administrators embrace this fully for the price tag," he said.
Rutledge asked, given the significant price, if an installation timeline would be in place.
Although typically included in a contract for a major purchase, with software, it would be difficult to foresee any system bugs and the time it would take to work them out, board President Gary Farner said.
Regardless, Sroka offered the board a tentative schedule. The SSI project manager will visit the district next week to begin the conversion. Between May and July, the company will install the system server and convert data from the district's current Edunet system to have the financial portion of the package installed by July 1. If all goes as planned, the student attendance, grading and scheduling portions would be installed Aug. 1, Oct. 1 and Jan. 1, respectively, he said.
The system will replace the Edunet software, the industry leader 15 years ago. The software will allow the district to do its own grading and scheduling, saving roughly $2,700 per year that the Intermediate Unit I charges the district, Sroka said Tuesday.
"We have not had the level of satisfaction (with Edunet) I'm comfortable with and the district is entitled to," he said. "It's a big step for the district and a commitment that has to be made, based on the last audit."
Meeting roundup
Observer-Reporter (Washington, PA) - Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Fort Cherry School Board
* Date: Feb. 28
* Action: The board bought ProSoft, a business office software, for $50,000.
The board approved a three-year contract extension with Cypher & Cypher. The auditors will be paid roughly $16,000 a year.
The board hired Jessica Drylic as accounting coordinator at an annual salary of $45,000.
The board approved the Western Area Career and Technology proposed budget totaling $5,785,592.
The board approved the 2011-12 Intermediate Unit 1 budget of $2,047,662.
* Discussion: Eight people spoke about concerns about air quality at the school campus because of nearby gas well drilling. Superintendent Robert Dinnen said he would work with the PTA to create an ad hoc committee about the drilling. The committee will talk about what the district can and cannot do about the drilling based on township ordinances and state Department of Environmental Protection regulations.
* Next meeting: 7:30 p.m. March 21 in the elementary center library
* Date: Feb. 28
* Action: The board bought ProSoft, a business office software, for $50,000.
The board approved a three-year contract extension with Cypher & Cypher. The auditors will be paid roughly $16,000 a year.
The board hired Jessica Drylic as accounting coordinator at an annual salary of $45,000.
The board approved the Western Area Career and Technology proposed budget totaling $5,785,592.
The board approved the 2011-12 Intermediate Unit 1 budget of $2,047,662.
* Discussion: Eight people spoke about concerns about air quality at the school campus because of nearby gas well drilling. Superintendent Robert Dinnen said he would work with the PTA to create an ad hoc committee about the drilling. The committee will talk about what the district can and cannot do about the drilling based on township ordinances and state Department of Environmental Protection regulations.
* Next meeting: 7:30 p.m. March 21 in the elementary center library
