Letter in Response to SCFFAC Co-chair

Submitted by Robert T. Bernat

I assume Dan Littmann’s comments were addressed to me and that I am the unnamed SCFFAC member to whom his comments refer. Whereas such comments are in part correct in that the District did provide full responses to any inquiries related to the mission of the SCFFAC, his comments miss the crucial mark by a wide distance. The District’s own website describes the SCFFAC’s mission statement as follows, “The committee’s purpose is to recommend a community vision and plan for the school district’s facilities [emphasis added] that reflects the district’s mission statement, strategic plan goals and educational values and considers the restraints of current and anticipated district resources.”

It is abundantly clear that intentionally excluded from the scope of the SCFFAC’s purview was an examination of approximately 80% of the District’s expenditures, the bulk of which are labor and benefit costs. As a result, the SCFFAC conclusions are skewed. There exist two “Fs” in the acronym “SCFFAC,” the former stands for “finance” and the latter “facilities.” But truly the SCFFAC only focused upon the latter. Any discussion of the finances dealt only with the impact upon the facilities or that of the facilities upon finances.

An independent audit of the entirety of the District’s finances is essential. Such audit is likely to reveal unsustainable labor and benefit costs. Without such audit the District’s finances will remain in crisis. And without first controlling the costs in the vast bulk of the District budget, any proposed referendum will only delay the inevitable. The proposed referendum only serves to kick the can down the road, and it is a very short road.

Very truly yours,

BERNAT & BERNAT

A Professional Corporation