General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thurs., Jan. 14, 2016
ALERT!! MARKELL, CHAMBER AND LONGHURST GIVE MIDDLE FINGER TO DELAWAREANS:
HB 235, the so-called Delaware Competes Bill, is the first bill the House will consider this year. What’s amazing, well, not amazing, but typical of the primordial ooze behind this, is that the bill will be considered under Motion to Suspend Rules. Here’s why. Even though the bill cleared the House Revenue & Taxation Committee, the bill was reassigned to the House Appropriations Committee (the committee is comprised of the House members of the Joint Finance Committee). That’s because the bill has a significant cost. Such bills are typically not considered until/unless JFC does the fiscal legerdemain. In this case, even though the bill will have a significant annual cost, the House will try to bypass the budgetary process. Since the bill wouldn’t even take effect until January of 2017, rushing this through serves no purpose other than to satisfy the Chamber and its millionaire minions. This is a transfer of wealth from ordinary citizens to the politically-connected corporate overlords, pure and simple. We’ll pay somehow, just wait. Last days of June when they hope that no one is watching. Hey, whaddayawant from Markell, Longhurst and their (wait for it) ilk? Call your state reps!
What’s not on the House Agenda under Motion to Suspend Rules is HB 50–the Opt-Out Bill. As opposed to HB 235, doing this under MTSR is legit. The bill has been through the committee process, was passed (twice) by the House, and it’s a veto override, not consideration of new legislation. Now, maybe the House will entertain a motion from the floor, maybe Speaker Pete won’t, but it sure as hell should be considered. Has the cynicism of Pistol Pete and Vindictive Val become so great that they can ignore the will of the members of the chamber? We’ll see.
Today’s House Agenda also includes HJR 10 (Bolden), which ‘apologiz(es) for the wrongs of slavery and espress(es) Delaware’s profound regrets for its role in slavery. Long overdue, of course, but forgive my skepticism in noting that this resolution will not, say, cost taxpayers $22 mill. Or anything. But there will be brochure pictures.
Only bill on the Senate Agenda merely streamlines procedures for getting an insurance producer license.
Here is yesterday’s Session Activity Report. Say-y-y, lookee here. Looks like a direct hijack of Rep. Kim Williams’ HB 186, which was supposed to have been considered in the Senate Education Committee yesterday. In fact, every House sponsor on this new bill voted against HB 186, except Rep. Heffernan. Here’s what I wrote in yesterday’s Post-Game/Pre-Game:
The Senate Education Committee considers HB 186 (K. Williams), which adds charter schools to the list of entities for audits through the Auditor of Accounts. The bill passed the House primarily on a party line vote, with Reps. Jaques and Speaker Pete the only D no’s along with all the Rethugs. Makes me think it’s a good bill.
Gotta say, introduction of SB 171 seems pretty low to me.
This session can hardly have gotten off to a worse start.
Tags: Delaware General Assembly, El Somnambulo, Steve Tanzer Delaware
I’m still a green horn around here, but did I interpret this correctly:
Senate pre-empted Rep. Williams’ HB 186 with their own version, that has the support of the original opponents of HB 186? What’s the difference between the two? There’s a catch somewhere.
At least Sean Matthews gets it:
http://delawarepublic.org/post/house-committee-okays-corporate-income-tax-bill#stream/0
Rep. Sean Matthews (D-Talleyville) was the lone no vote. He says he doesn’t agree with this kind of a piecemeal solution, plucking this single idea from a larger slate of recommendations from a state task force last year.
“I think this is more of a race to the bottom. We have to do it because other states do it. I don’t view it as economic development, I view it as cutting corporate taxes,” Matthews said.
Matthews also doesn’t like the $50 million bill hitting the state as it’s phased in over the next three years.
“I just think it’s important that we replace the revenue that we’re giving away. I think a lot of the parts of the bill regarding small business makes sense and I would’ve been supportive had we tacked on a way to fill and a way to honor the [Delaware Economic and Financial Advisory Council] committee’s revenue neutral mandate.”
Brian: What I know is that the words in the synopsis of SB 171 are more weaselly and less clear than the synopsis for HB 186.
Language variance which can permit continued flights under the radar until years later when the next story about a charter misusing public funds surfaces.
Yep, that’s also my take.
In terms of House Bill 235, the Appropriations Committee is meeting to hear this bill at 1:30 today: http://legis.delaware.gov/legislature.nsf/FSMain?OpenFrameset&Frame=right&src=/LIS/lis148.nsf/houseagenda
The motion to suspend rules to consider an override of HB 50 FAILED in the House, 13 Y, 26 N.
Here’s the roll call:
Baumbach Y J. Johnson N Peterman N
Bennett A Q. Johnson N Potter N
Bentz Y Keeley Y Ramone X
Bolden N Kenton N B. Short Y
Brady N Kowalko Y D. Short N
Briggs King N Longhurst N M. Smith N
Carson N Lynn Y Smyk N
Collins Y Matthews Y Spiegelman Y
Dukes N Miro N Viola N
Gray N Mitchell N K. Williams Y
Heffernan N Mulrooney N Wilson N
Hensley Y Osienski Y Yearick N
Hudson N Outten N Schwartzkopf N
Jaques N Paradee Y
House Bill 186 will require charter schools to have their audits done through the Auditor of Accounts like all other public school districts in the state. Currently, only public school districts are audited through the Auditor of Accounts. Sen. Sokola explained to us during the debate of House Bill 186 that his bill, Senate Bill 171, was drafted with the help of the Delaware Charter Schools Network, who represent charter schools and the leaders who have been stealing from Delaware taxpayers. Senate Bill 171 does not require the charter schools to have their audits done through the Auditor of Accounts office. The charter schools will be able to select who they want once again. Senate Bill 171 does nothing except protect the charter schools and not the taxpayers. I for the life of me cannot understand why these people do not care about protecting the taxpayers’ money; they are more interested in protecting the charter schools.
Where are the public school audits? I don’t see them on the State Auditor’s website.
@Rufus, all public school records are routinely audited every year by the Auditor of Accounts. You can request them from the auditor’s office. If a routine audit uncovers financial activity that warrants further investigation, then a financial audit or special investigation is launched. Those are what you see on the auditor’s website. Consequently, the Charter School investigations on the site are a direct result of findings of special audit or substantiated allegations of financial misconduct. (Which is why it would be nice if HB 186 got passed to bring Charters in line with traditional public schools in having the State Auditor conduct audits, rather than have the Charters choose who they’d like to have look at their books)
Del. Code Title 14 Chapter 15 § 1504 Audit
a) The Auditor of Accounts shall each year as soon as possible after July 1 audit the business and financial transactions, records, and accounts of the Department of Education, the State Board of Education, the Delaware Center for Education Technology, the Delaware Advisory Council for Career and Vocational Education, and the boards of education of the school districts.
(b) The Auditor of Accounts shall publish the results of such audit and shall also mention the name of any person who has made within the last year a gift to said funds, with the amount or value thereof.
(c) In order to ensure that authorized position complements are not exceeded, the Auditor of Accounts is directed to incorporate an examination of the number of authorized positions versus the number of actual positions a district has employed as part of the regular, annual audit review for all public school district audits that commence on or after July 1, 1991. This position audit function shall include, in addition to formula salary positions, an examination of positions and associated “option units” authorized by the Secretary of Education under any appropriation.
(d) Any discrepancy found by the Auditor of Accounts which has resulted in a local school district expending more general funds than it was entitled to during the fiscal year being audited shall be promptly reported to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Controller General and the Secretary of Education. Upon review and determination as to the status of the questioned expenditure, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Controller General and the local school district Board of Education shall develop and certify a written repayment plan.
(e) The local school district may choose to make the required General Fund reimbursement from its local current operating expense account or by agreeing not to utilize a current year General Fund appropriation for which it is otherwise eligible based on unit entitlements. Reimbursements required by this section shall be transacted during the fiscal year in which the over-expenditure is discovered unless the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Controller General agree that the timing of the discovery or the potential impact on the affected district is such that satisfying the obligation in part or in its entirety should be deferred until the next ensuing fiscal year.
(f) In order to assist the Auditor of Accounts in the performance of this function local school districts are instructed to maintain records and make them available in a format that will facilitate this review.
Code 1915, c. 71; 32 Del. Laws, c. 160, § 49; Code 1935, § 2710; 14 Del. C. 1953, § 1506; 57 Del. Laws, c. 113; 68 Del. Laws, c. 84, § 195; 71 Del. Laws, c. 180, §§ 88, 88A-88C, 89A; 75 Del. Laws, c. 88, § 21(7).;
§ 1505 Unauthorized expenditures.
The Auditor of Accounts may withhold approval of any voucher or bill or order for money of a school district whenever such district shall have failed to comply with this title in the expenditure of its moneys, until such district shall make good such failure.
32 Del. Laws, c. 160, § 5; 33 Del. Laws, c. 167, § 1; Code 1935, § 2711; 14 Del. C. 1953, § 1507; 57 Del. Laws, c. 113; 70 Del. Laws, c. 186, § 1; 71 Del. Laws, c. 180, § 89A.;
§ 1506 Limitation on use of tax revenues.
No tax revenues of the State, or of any political subdivision thereof, or of any school district, shall be used for the free public education of pupils living in the State on real property exempt from taxes levied on real property. The limitations of this section shall not apply to pupils living on real property owned by the State or any of its political subdivisions, or by the federal government where such real property is used for nonmilitary housing, or where such real estate is exempt from such taxes on account of the use of such property for charitable, educational or religious purposes.
14 Del. C. 1953, § 1508; 51 Del. Laws, c. 183; 71 Del. Laws, c. 180, § 89A.;
§ 1507 School district financial position reports.
(a) Beginning with the fiscal year ending June 30, 1997, all public school districts, including vocational-technical school districts, both sometimes referred to herein as “district,” are required to submit to the Secretary of Education, 3 financial position reports, 1 on or before February 1, 1 on or before May 1 and 1 on or before August 31 of each year. The format of the reports shall be as prescribed by the Secretary consistent with the provisions of this section, and also shall establish that the school district has sufficient year-end carryover balances, including any nonstate funded share, to fund at least 1 month of local payroll for the next ensuing fiscal year.
The financial position report due by February 1 shall project a school district’s current fiscal year ending balance in its local current expense revenue accounts after taking into consideration all remaining local operating obligations that can be reasonably estimated. To the extent that a district has General Fund balances in their Division III Equalization Accounts, Division II—All Other Costs and Energy Accounts, or in an approved cash option account, such balances may be identified as offsets to any local obligation. If the financial position report shows a deficit occurring prior to the close of the current fiscal year, the district shall indicate what steps it will take to assure that its obligations are satisfied in the current fiscal year. If the financial position report shows a current expense deficit for the current fiscal year, or a surplus that is less than the amount required to satisfy 1 month’s full local payroll and other operating obligations for the ensuing fiscal year, the district shall also indicate what steps it plans to take in the ensuing fiscal year to assure that its future year-end balance will be sufficient to cover at least this amount.
The financial position report due by May 1 shall project a school district’s current fiscal year ending balance in its local current expense revenue accounts after taking into consideration all remaining local operating obligations that can be reasonably estimated. To the extent that a district has General Fund balances in their Division III Equalization Accounts, Division II—All Other Costs and Energy Accounts, or in an approved cash option account, such balances may be identified as offsets to any local obligation. If the financial position report shows a deficit occurring prior to the close of the current fiscal year, the district shall indicate what steps it will take to assure that its obligations are satisfied in the current fiscal year. If the financial position report shows a current expense deficit for the current fiscal year, or a surplus that is less than the amount required to satisfy 1 month’s full local payroll and other operating obligations for the ensuing fiscal year, the district shall also indicate what steps it plans to take in the ensuing fiscal year to assure that its future year-end balance will be sufficient to cover at least this amount.
The financial position report due on or before August 31 of the ensuing fiscal year shall be focused exclusively on local district payroll obligations through and including the October 15 payroll cycle. This report shall compare the district’s year-end current expense balances from the previous fiscal year, and its preliminary Division III Equalization appropriation for the current year (which amount shall be based on 90% of the Division III amount earned in the previous fiscal year), with the district’s projected local salary obligations through October 15. To the extent that this report shows a deficit, the district shall report what steps it will take to meet its payroll obligations through October 15. If the August 31 report projects an October 15 surplus that is less than the amount required to cover 1 month’s full local payroll cycle, the district shall also indicate what steps it plans to take to attempt to assure that such a minimum balance will be in place in the subsequent fiscal year.
Whenever the August 31 report shows that a district will be unable to meet all or some of its payroll obligations through October 15, the district may meet those obligations by requesting from the Secretary of Education with the approval of the Secretary of Finance and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget an advance of state funds in an amount sufficient to cover the district’s payroll obligations through October 15. Upon such request and approval, the Secretary of Finance shall cause to have the requested funds advanced to the district, and the district shall reimburse the State for those funds no later than November 15 of the same year. In addition, the district shall pay an amount to the State for interest defined as the average rate of return on state investments during the period of the loan.
The financial position report shall have been reviewed and approved by the school board of each reorganized school district and be made a part of the public record of that school district. Three copies of each report shall be submitted to the Secretary of Education by the dates specified above. The Secretary of Education shall provide copies of the submitted reports to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Controller General within 5 working days.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision in this Code to the contrary, a minimum of 25% of all projected state funding to any school district, including a vocational-technical school district shall be withheld until the submission of the financial position report required to be filed on or before August 31 pursuant to the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, and the acceptance thereof as satisfactory in the sole discretion of the Secretary of Education, and the certification of the school district’s unit count in accordance with this Code and any rule or regulation promulgated in accordance therewith.
(c) If a school district materially alters its financial position after providing any report required by this section, the school district shall provide financial impact statements to the Department of Education, the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of the Controller General, specifying the nature of such change and its impact upon its previously filed financial position report.
(d) Any school district that fails to comply with this section or any provision herein shall be subject to review, including all of its books and financial records, by the Department of Education, the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of the Controller General in order to determine whether the school district is financially stable.