June 2007 LASD Board Packet
Most folks never even see a "board packet" which is available to the public and handed out to each board member (or mailed) usually the Friday prior to the Monday regular board meeting each month. Besides the minutes of meetings that have occurred since issuance of the last month's packet, each packet contain financial reports covering the previous month's activity, other miscellaneous reports and a list of checks written since the last packet was published and covering the period up through the day the packet is printed. The very last page shows checks for each of the funds that have been voided, giving the number of the checks underneath their respective funds (i.e. general, athletic, cafeteria) and the date that it was voided. Sometimes, a voided check has been written many months before being voided. In the June packet, which contains reports and checks for the month of May, very strange numbers appeared in the report of expenditures from the general fund, designated with the lead number "10." Line Item 10-1241/400, reflecting purchased property services for Public Learning Support, for instance, had a deficit of -$47.00. Why such a thing is even reported in an expenditure report is extremely curious, but it has often been done and often for very large numbers. This can only mean that money came back to the account for that budget line item by virtue of a voided check or checks totaling that amount. If revenue came in associated with such a use, it should appear in the revenue report under a category designed for that purpose, or simply a general purpose (i.e. taxes). In this instance, there were no checks written against this line item in the back of the May packet and the June packet contained no residual checks written after the May meeting through the end of the month. That could easily be the case, but the only justifiable explanation for a minus amount against this line item would be a voided check or checks totaling that amount from May or previous months. There were none. The very same phenomenon (no checks against the line item and no voided checks for that line item) occurred in the case of four other line items yielding this picture: 10-1241/400 reflecting purchased property services for Public Learning Support in the amount of -$47.00
10-2120/600 reflecting supplies for Guidance Services in the amount of -$75.00
10-2250/600 reflecting supplies for School Library Services in the amount of -$78.67
10-3210/200 reflecting personnel employee benefits for School Student Activities in the amount of -$4,950.13
10-3250/200 reflecting personnel employee benefits for School Athletics in the amount of -$14,773.94 Thus a total of $19,924.74 is no longer counted as an expenditure in the budget, but there are no voided checks to validate those returns to the general fund. I wager that an examination of the bank accounts will also show no such returns. It would be great to learn what accounting gimmick achieves this feat. Then again, maybe it is just on paper and checks totaling that amount never were written for the purposes stated in the first place. The district owes an explanation for such numbers in their reports, or we have a right to suspect the worst. We also deserve proof of any assertion district officials or the board should make, because the Right-to-Know Law allows us to see any and all official financial records and accounts of the district dealing with the business of the school district. Even stranger things can be found in the publicly released reports and we will periodically reveal a great many of them. |
||
 |
|
|