Council issues Portsmouth school audit RFP

By John McDaid | Wednesday, 15 August 2007

I was out of town yesterday on business and missed the Town Council meeting, but a reliable informant tells me that they unanimously approved the long-awaited RFP for the school performance audit.

Congrats to the Council and School Committee for working together to make this happen. I know everyone in Portsmouth is looking forward to having a good sets of facts on the table for our school budget discussions.

Hat tip to anonymous.

Tags: 
Localblogging, 02871

Comments

Realman

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 2:03pm

Portsmouth hires firm to review school operations.

All Portsmouth School Department operations are in for a closer look.

In the coming weeks, the town will send out requests for proposals for a performance audit of everything from the school budget to the way classes are taught and transportation is handled.
[Remainder of comment removed] -- via Newport Daily News

NOTE:
Realman, I do not censor anything written here by readers. I'm happy to hear anything you have to say, but but copying articles whole from a publication does not, I believe, fall within fair use. In the future, please excerpt and link. Thanks.

Lije

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 4:39pm

Unfortunately John is right. Copying a whole article is not fair use and violates copyright laws. The problem with John's solution (post a link) is that the Newport Daily News only keeps their articles online for one day, then they get moved to the "archive" section of the daily news website, which is not free.

Last I checked, it cost about five bucks to download a single article. I imagine the Newport Daily News must think it is the venerable paper of record around here, but five bucks for one of their articles? They must be joking, but unfortunately they are not.

John McDaid

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 5:17pm

Hi, Lije...
Yeah, it's pretty steep, but honestly, if you could get this stuff online, why would people read the dead tree version? Monetizing a local news site in a community too small to maintain an online financial ecosystem is going to require some radical thinking. Remember, ten years ago, the ProJo was charging something on the order of a couple-hundred bucks a year for online access. But the Web is a game changer, and it has to happen. As Egon Spengler said, "Print is dead."

FWIW, sometimes The Google caches NDN articles for a while. You can try searching for a whole sentence from the post, then click the "cached" link. Or enterprising folks could go there on the first day and just download the pages and cache them locally, for their personal use. The phony tough and the crazy brave could repost them to offshore pirate havens. Just think of it -- a Romanian mirror of the Newport Daily News.

Not that I personally would do anything to run afoul of USC Title 17 Chapter 5 §501, nor should my comments be interpreted as supporting or condoning such transgression.

Cheers.
-j

English

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 3:25pm

Realman - if I'm not mistaken, your post, other than your "about time" is text from the online edition of the Newport Daily News.

I've been an employee of the school department for 14 years now and have seen improvements in how budgeting is done and in the transparency of the process. Although I also welcome the audit as yet another assurance to the public that there is no conspiracy to drive up taxes while someone gets rich, I also doubt this will stop the doubters in "some circles". After the gym bond situation, I read for years how the money was mismanaged. Then someone would write an article clarifying that there was no hiding of funds, but rather a bond that asked for insufficient funds, so the money was spent on other needed improvements to the schools. Then the next week, there would be the bogeyman 'neath the bed making the same claim. This dance went on until the recent bond was approved, and I still occasionally see reference to it. I guess people are more likely to believe the beliefs of people on the editorial page than they are the reporters who at least attempt a lack of bias. Human nature, I guess.

English

Realman

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 5:57pm

Funny how everyone here is saying they "Welcome the audit" ,but a certain few seem to be getting ( i sense) a bit too sensitive. Probably with good reason.

In any case it certainly will be interesting. I for one am THRILLED about it, and THANK you to ALL of the town council members who agreed on it!

Thanks John for the lecture on the law. However I seriously doubt that the BLOG police will be knocking on my door any time soon.
{{{laughing}}}

English

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 6:33pm

Sensitive? I think not. There was no bristling on my part, simply pointing out that the words that appeared to be yours were not yours. I too welcome an audit if only so we can stop hearing the same tired conspiracies rattling around. I am all for transparency in government and audits are a great way to achieve that. So are many different groups serving as watchdogs for our elected officials, even the ones with whom I often philosophically disagree. And, yes, it is possible the audit will turn up some places that need improvement or where there is minor mismanagement in the form of duplication of services. If so, bring it out in the open and let's get it fixed.

And then, MAYBE, we can move on to some new dead horse to kick, although I won't hold my breath on that one.

English

Realman

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 6:50pm

I didn't point any fingers at you, or mention any names. Soo...don't be so sensitive. No...they were not my words, but i felt they were very well put,and just wanted to share with those who didn't see the paper.

"And, yes, it is possible the audit will turn up some places that need improvement or where there is minor mismanagement in the form of duplication of services."

A very nice,nice, way of putting it, sugar coated candy any one?
Thank you English...I do appreciate your honesty.

John- Good thing it wasn't only Ms. Gleason, who voted for it eh?I bet you would have had a TON of things to blog about it then.

John McDaid

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 9:42pm

Hi, Realman...
I have always, unequivocally, supported the performance audit. Look at everything I have ever said about it. I don't care that Tailgunner happened to support it; this time, for once, she was on the right side.

Best Regards.
-j

Lije

Wed, 08/15/2007 - 11:08pm

Speaking of sensitive, what do you mean, "Good thing it wasn't only Ms. Gleason, who voted for it eh?" What makes you think this is a divisive issue, Realman?

Check the record. All 7 council members supported the performance audit back in October. After the election and the new council was seated, still all 7 members of the new council voted for it. The school committee also has long supported it.

I have not heard anyone in town government argue against it, whether from Superintendent Lusi on down, or President Canario on down.

And, I'm not interested in sugar coatings either. I expect some difficult conclusions to come from this. But remember, all the experts have said that this is a double edged sword. There will be recommendations to fix things that need fixing and some of those recommendations will COST MONEY. Are you ready to cough it up?

Hold onto your seat. It's going to be a rough ride.

John McDaid

Thu, 08/16/2007 - 6:37am

Hi, Realman...
I find this comment quite interesting: Thanks John for the lecture on the law. However I seriously doubt that the BLOG police will be knocking on my door any time soon. {{{laughing}}}.

This says that you treat intellectual property theft as a laughing matter; if you don't have to fear the "police" it's okay to break the law. That's an ethically ugly position.

For someone who shows such sympathy for the PCC to admit they pick and choose the laws they care about obeying certainly speaks volumes. Thanks for helping set my readers straight on any claim you have to the moral high ground.

Cheers.
-j

Realman

Thu, 08/16/2007 - 1:39pm

"intellectual property theft"
This is a blog,and nothing more...something anyone with a computer,and millions of teenagers have, complete with copy/pasted song lyrics, and you name it...This is not some big newspaper,or highly respected magazine, for crying out loud, get a grip on reality man.

"if you don't have to fear the "police" it's okay to break the law. That's an ethically ugly position."

That is the dumbest thing you have ever said. You don't know me, but have assumed that since I quoted the paper here,and made a silly joke about the "blog police" that I believe it is ok to "break the law",?and you are judging my "ethics"? Wow! Talk about drama...Who do you think you are to judge anyone? And...what does the PCC have to do with anything I have said? You are reaching again(as usual) ,trying to make something so simple,and petty, into something...big, ugly,and bad.

Do you see monsters under your bed at night? Get therapy.

P.S. I realize that you are trying to get rid of me,and turn your blog members(groupies,all 3 of them) against me. It is only because I challenge you,and your motives.
I guess I should leave you alone now with your 3 blog groupies in order for you to be right 100% of the time, and have them pump your ego up with all their, YES John...you are such a genius comments.
Was getting too bored anyway...{{{laughing}}}

John McDaid

Thu, 08/16/2007 - 3:38pm

Hi, Realman...
I believe in the same ethical standards whether you're big or small, whether people are watching or not. If you don't, that's fine, but I would urge consulting competent counsel should you ever decide to take up blogging instead of just, well, trolling. Copyright law doesn't distinguish. No drama. Just facts.

Everyone is welcome to post here; I'm not trying to get rid of you. As I said when I edited your post, I'm always happy to hear what people have to say, whether I agree with it or not. It is interesting that the folks who come here to argue always end up leaving in a huff.

Oh, and the common mistake that you, and several other critics have made is to confuse people who post here with people who read. The numbers are not identical; to use an analogy you might be more familiar with, think about the number of columnists in a newspaper compared to the number of readers. If you're interested, you can click on the "sitemeter" link at the bottom left of the page. Based on the data and some inferences about frequency of visits, it appears that there are on the order of several hundred regular readers (who I am proud to serve and hopefully inform and entertain.)

Cheers.
-j

English

Thu, 08/16/2007 - 4:36pm

Jim writes - "Based on the data and some inferences about frequency of visits, it appears that there are on the order of several hundred regular readers (who I am proud to serve and hopefully inform and entertain.)"

This is my hunch about the real reason why you were denied membership in PCC. The only thing I can figure is that you pose some sort of threat, whether real or more likely imagined. I was hoping they'd say sure, come on in. Everyone is welcome and let's get the conversation flowing. Instead, I guess only the chosen few may be members of the exalted group. BTW, my partner is considering applying and then reporting out - we'll see if he follows through.

I guess they are "concerned" that if if those of us who would never want to be a member of PCC, although we are STILL "concerned citizens of Portsmouth", were to find out what goes on and how some of the decisions are made, and more importantly, exactly how badly the numbers are skewed for effect, egad!

It's not all that different from those who want to define patriotism - either "fer us or agin us". At the same time the fact that groups like the PCC exist is part of what makes this a great country - one perhaps in need of its own performance audit, but great nonetheless.

And thank you Jim for your input on intellectual property. This is a battle I fight all the time in the classroom as cut and paste plagiarism is on the rise. If you borrow and don't cite it's plagiarism, pure and simple and supported by plenty of case law. Obviously, realman wasn't doing anything intentional and there is a distinction.

English