Members of the Scranton School Board deciding via telephone to remove the tentative budget from the public agenda "raises significant issues" with transparency, a legal expert said Thursday.
Other action taken by the board Tuesday, including voting for more than $130,000 in project change orders after work was done, and the approval of work by the district engineer after it was completed, also should concern the public, said Melissa Melewsky, media law counsel for the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association.
The board was expected to approve the 2013 tentative budget on Tuesday, but as Kathleen McGuigan, chairwoman of the budget and finance committee, started to read the motion, board President Bob Lesh stopped her. Mr. Lesh said he called directors and a majority agreed to remove the budget from the agenda. The tentative budget must be posted for 30 days of public review, and the final budget must be passed by the end of the year.
While the phone calls by Mr. Lesh may not be a violation of the Sunshine Act - the state's open meetings law - it "raises significant issues," Ms. Melewsky said.
"The fact that you have that kind of decision-making going on behind the scenes is problematic," Ms. Melewsky said. "The budget is of major importance to the public."
The budget, presented at last week's work session, includes proposed expenditures of $121.8 million and proposed revenue of $116.7 million. Officials usually pass an unbalanced tentative budget and then balance it by the time of final passage in December. Under the state's Taxpayer Relief Act, the board voted this year to keep any possible tax increase within the district's index rate of 2.5 percent.
On Thursday, Mr. Lesh said he had many concerns with the budget, but there was no "decision making behind the scenes." Instead, Mr. Lesh said he called most of the board members, and they also had questions with the validity of the expected revenue in the budget.
Mrs. McGuigan argued the tentative budget should be passed to start the viewing process and that all of the numbers could be examined, but Mr. Lesh said he wanted to verify the numbers first.
District Solicitor John Minora said he saw no problem with Mr. Lesh's actions.
"He just called around and made sure everyone felt the same way," Mr. Minora said.
Change orders
Also Tuesday, more than $130,000 in change orders was approved for the paving, fencing and light project outside the district Administration Building. Mrs. McGuigan voted against the expense, citing concerns about why it was brought before the board after it was already completed.
"The expenditure of additional funds should have been discussed at a public meeting," Ms. Melewsky said. "That's a significant amount of money."
Change orders often exist in projects, because of unforeseen circumstances or a plan changes. Part of the change order was for unforeseen conditions in the building's parking lot.
For Mid Valley's elementary school project, some small change orders of $1,500 or $2,000 that would have hindered progress were started without board approval, but larger items were voted on by the board first at a public meeting, Superintendent Randy Parry said. During the height of school construction, Mid Valley's board often met weekly to approve change orders.
Scranton's change order included $67,000 for light poles to line district property and related electrical expenses. Mr. Lesh said board members were polled on the expenditure over the summer, after administration had a concern with a lack of lighting outside of the building.
"The whole area was poorly lit. Now it's the safest area in town," he said.
When asked by The Times-Tribune on the telephone poll vote's legality, Mr. Lesh said he had "never heard of it being illegal."
Mr. Minora said he did not know the poll vote was taken.
The public is entitled to comment on the project and witness the vote, Ms. Melewsky said.
"Committing the board to a course of public action ... is official action, that can only happen at a public meeting," she said.
Engineer bill
In a 7-2 vote on Tuesday, the board approved an $8,000 bill from Peters Design Group for an electrical cost analysis of West Scranton Intermediate. Mrs. McGuigan and Director Jason Shrive voted against paying the bill, stating that the study should not have been done without board approval first.
"I think anytime you're dealing with the expenditures of public funds, the board needs to be involved as a whole," Ms. Melewsky said.
While no action has been taken on the recommendations in the study, Mr. Lesh defended the expenditure.
"It was a safety issue," he said.
Contact the writer: shofius@timeshamrock.com, @hofiushallTT on Twitter