2 Pro-Bonders Fall!!

[mat]

Smitty

As I stated earlier, IF a maintenance department is run correctly and IF the department has the budget and has the support of admin it is more efficient and affordable than contracting out those services.

Maintenance within a school system has a lot of state and federal laws and requirements that are totally different than the industrial world. It would require a specialty contracting service to perform school services. Most districts that resort to this type of service do it to alleviate the headache rather than for financial reasons. Thus, reinforcing the problems of a maintenance department that is not run correctly or not supported.

A typical maintenance department handles way more than needed repairs. One of the most important values of school maintenance gets neglected by contract services or a poorly run department is the preventative maintenance that adds life to your building and equipment; saves money in the long run.

Many maintenance departments have the ability to do small scale construct and renovations that save money and add value to the department.

Something else that’s important; it’s important to know who you have working around you kids.

I could go on but I really don’t like long winded posts (I guess it’s too late for that)

[Guest The-NHS]

[quote name="smitty" post="1019440" timestamp="1308487794"]
I'm not sure i understand the difference.  But i am willing to listen to what you think they are.


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1019292#msg1019292 date=1308416320]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1019203#msg1019203 date=1308394826]
You can have in-house contractors that are there if/when needed.  But we wouldn't have to pay for benefits.  It's done were I work. 


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1018982#msg1018982 date=1308314652]
[quote author=Penny link=topic=84302.msg1018945#msg1018945 date=1308279649]
Smitty is right on about contracting some maintenance activities, he is right, that is a lower cost way to maintain facilities.  He's right about the reduced overhead that you experience when you don't have full time personnel on the books.  That is not a popular position, but it is a fact.  However, Smitty, we can make these cuts, contract maintenance, have parents drive their kids to sporting events to avoid fuel, reduce administrators salaries, eliminate administration through retirements and attrition, which essentially comes down to have other people step up and take on more leadership and responsibility, which can happen actually with improved results.  Smitty, I have personally implemented and seen positive results from the very actions you are discussing.  But at the same time, I've also had to make multi-million dollar decisions over maintaining with cost, or replacing with capital, critical facilities for the long term good of an objective.  You cannot sway my opinion here.  I know where you are coming from, I've navigated this maze many times before.  I'm sorry, you can nitpick the semantics and the minute details of what is going on and at times, you are right, but the bottom line is the long term need and the big picture, REQUIRES a bond to reduce the cost of running this school district.  When it is said that a bond will reduce taxes, that is the point, paying for old broken facilities versus addressing them with a financed long term solution, is the most financially prudent decision.  A bond WILL REDUCE COSTS, which EQUATES to LOWER TAXES.... that's right Smitty, LOWER TAXES.  This isn't ignorant kids WANTING things, this is the decision of professionals who have analyzed the situation.  Can we make cuts, ABSOLUTELY, will it address the problem, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  The question is, do you want to address the issue, or make a point about how you personally think things should be done, at the expense of ELIMINATING this community.  I'm hearing your points, and yes, people in authority should listen to the ideas you have, but ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, what you are suggesting, while at the heart good ideas, they WILL NOT address the LONG TERM needs of this community.  This is not up for discussion.  If the people of this community fall for the propoganda that killed the first bond, then we deserve to be buried with other short sighted failures from history.  There will be no upgrades of our sports or extra-cirricular facilities in the next bond.  It will be about building new schools.  Any upgrades to sporting facilities should be separately voted upon.  
[/quote]

In almost all cases it is not cheaper to contract out maintenance if a district’s maintenance department is run correctly and the department has the budget and support of the district. I can give plenty of info to support my opinion if needed. However, in some cases it could but more economical to contract some services such as food service or transportation.
[/quote]
[/quote]
There’s a lot more to consider when maintaining a school district than maintaining a plant or any other type facility.
[/quote]
[/quote]

What would you consider worthy of contracting out? Also, how does this have anything to do with a bond to build new facilities?

[smitty]

Well, I would personally contract ut the maintenance department.  But I'm listening to other opinions on this.  As for as the bond, like I said before, before you ask for MORE money you should make sure you have cut everywhere possible.  That's what we are discussing here.

[quote name="The-NHS" post="1019465" timestamp="1308499106"]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1019440#msg1019440 date=1308487794]
I'm not sure i understand the difference.  But i am willing to listen to what you think they are.


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1019292#msg1019292 date=1308416320]
[quote author=smitty link=topic=84302.msg1019203#msg1019203 date=1308394826]
You can have in-house contractors that are there if/when needed.  But we wouldn't have to pay for benefits.  It's done were I work. 


[quote author=mat link=topic=84302.msg1018982#msg1018982 date=1308314652]
[quote author=Penny link=topic=84302.msg1018945#msg1018945 date=1308279649]
Smitty is right on about contracting some maintenance activities, he is right, that is a lower cost way to maintain facilities.  He's right about the reduced overhead that you experience when you don't have full time personnel on the books.  That is not a popular position, but it is a fact.  However, Smitty, we can make these cuts, contract maintenance, have parents drive their kids to sporting events to avoid fuel, reduce administrators salaries, eliminate administration through retirements and attrition, which essentially comes down to have other people step up and take on more leadership and responsibility, which can happen actually with improved results.  Smitty, I have personally implemented and seen positive results from the very actions you are discussing.  But at the same time, I've also had to make multi-million dollar decisions over maintaining with cost, or replacing with capital, critical facilities for the long term good of an objective.  You cannot sway my opinion here.  I know where you are coming from, I've navigated this maze many times before.  I'm sorry, you can nitpick the semantics and the minute details of what is going on and at times, you are right, but the bottom line is the long term need and the big picture, REQUIRES a bond to reduce the cost of running this school district.  When it is said that a bond will reduce taxes, that is the point, paying for old broken facilities versus addressing them with a financed long term solution, is the most financially prudent decision.  A bond WILL REDUCE COSTS, which EQUATES to LOWER TAXES.... that's right Smitty, LOWER TAXES.  This isn't ignorant kids WANTING things, this is the decision of professionals who have analyzed the situation.  Can we make cuts, ABSOLUTELY, will it address the problem, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.  The question is, do you want to address the issue, or make a point about how you personally think things should be done, at the expense of ELIMINATING this community.  I'm hearing your points, and yes, people in authority should listen to the ideas you have, but ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, what you are suggesting, while at the heart good ideas, they WILL NOT address the LONG TERM needs of this community.  This is not up for discussion.  If the people of this community fall for the propoganda that killed the first bond, then we deserve to be buried with other short sighted failures from history.  There will be no upgrades of our sports or extra-cirricular facilities in the next bond.  It will be about building new schools.  Any upgrades to sporting facilities should be separately voted upon.  
[/quote]

In almost all cases it is not cheaper to contract out maintenance if a district’s maintenance department is run correctly and the department has the budget and support of the district. I can give plenty of info to support my opinion if needed. However, in some cases it could but more economical to contract some services such as food service or transportation.
[/quote]
[/quote]
There’s a lot more to consider when maintaining a school district than maintaining a plant or any other type facility.
[/quote]
[/quote]

What would you consider worthy of contracting out? Also, how does this have anything to do with a bond to build new facilities?
[/quote]

[dawgnut]

[quote name="mat" post="1019464" timestamp="1308498888"]
Smitty

As I stated earlier, IF a maintenance department is run correctly and IF the department has the budget and has the support of admin it is more efficient and affordable than contracting out those services.

Maintenance within a school system has a lot of state and federal laws and requirements that are totally different than the industrial world. It would require a specialty contracting service to perform school services. Most districts that resort to this type of service do it to alleviate the headache rather than for financial reasons. Thus, reinforcing the problems of a maintenance department that is not run correctly or not supported.

A typical maintenance department handles way more than needed repairs. One of the most important values of school maintenance gets neglected by contract services or a poorly run department is the preventative maintenance that adds life to your building and equipment; saves money in the long run.

Many maintenance departments have the ability to do small scale construct and renovations that save money and add value to the department.

Something else that’s important; it’s important to know who you have working around you kids.

I could go on but I really don’t like long winded posts (I guess it’s too late for that)

[/quote]

mat, schools are no different than industry in maintenance. Everyone has laws and regulations that they have to abide by. The principles of maintenance are the same on both sides, every task must be evaluated as to it's cost effectiveness anyone who says that this job or that job should be contracted out or kept in-house needs to reevaluate the statement. In today's market some expertise is just to expensive to keep on the payroll, and some expertise is used so sparingly that you don't want it on your payroll either.

The part of this that smitty does not want to understand is the fact that you could cut all the budget except teachers and you may have enough money in 20 years to build one new school, but then if inflation was calculated and you took the real value of money then you would see that you still couldn't build the school. The right time to build anything is now, how much has the cost of building material gone up in the two years that we have been discussing this bond. I could be wrong but on that size of the bond probably more than the amount that would be saved by all of smittys cuts. Delay is costing us money, we will get less by waiting not more.

[mat]

I never said there was no place for any contract services in school maintenance. Of course you have to evaluate the value of certain things. The issue was contracting out the whole maintenance department. To do so is usually not practical or economical.

True, industry and schools both have laws and regulations. The point is, there are many industry focused maintenance contract services but they can’t transition into education maintenance. There are very few education focused maintenance contract services out there.

As bad as I hate to bring it up, when Nederland’s first bond failed construction costs were the highest they had ever been. In terms of value, now would be a good time to pass a bond because construction costs are quite low now and may not go any lower.

A community’s school system plays a big role in successful growth. If a. family is relocating what is the one thing that determines where they choose to move? Schools