|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
State officials are weighing whether to conduct an “extraordinary audit” of the Mountain View Whisman School District, a type of external review that’s meant to investigate possible fraud, misappropriation of funds or other illegal fiscal practices.
Santa Clara County’s superintendent of schools submitted a referral to the state’s Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) for the agency to conduct an extraordinary audit of Mountain View Whisman. Mary Ann Dewan sent the request in her role as the county’s superintendent prior to her removal by the board last week.
FCMAT Chief Executive Officer Mike Fine confirmed on Friday, Oct. 4, that his agency is reviewing the referral and talking to Santa Clara County about the scope of a potential audit. A decision on whether FCMAT would conduct an extraordinary audit hadn’t yet been made as of Friday.
The Mountain View Whisman School District has faced controversies on multiple fronts in recent months, including over six-figure contracts for specialized leadership coaching, meditation sessions for top administrators and services from an external public relations firm.
Parents have raised concerns about district spending and fiscal oversight in district contracts and other areas. They have spoken consistently at board meetings, started a petition to remove the superintendent and contacted media outlets about their findings.
Santa Clara County Assistant Superintendent of Business Services Stephanie Gomez told the Voice that the county had received inquiries about doing an extraordinary audit of Mountain View Whisman and that the county had “conducted a thorough review.” Based on that, Dewan submitted a referral for the audit to FCMAT, Gomez said.
Gomez wouldn’t say who had reached out to the county to request the audit referral, what the county’s review had entailed or what specific concerns prompted Dewan to decide to make the referral to FCMAT.
Mountain View Whisman Superintendent Ayindé Rudolph wrote in an Oct. 2 public letter that he had spoken with Dewan, the county superintendent at the time, and that they “both agreed that the best course of action is an audit of MVWSD by the state’s Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team.”
Some community members have questioned Rudolph’s explanation, including two commenters at a Thursday, Oct. 3, school board meeting who raised doubts about the idea that Mountain View Whisman initiated an audit meant to investigate evidence of malfeasance.
Rudolph reiterated that he had met with Dewan and both agreed the audit was the right decision.
“The real issue here is that parents continue to assert that something nefarious or something illegal is taking place,” Rudolph said at the meeting. “I welcome an outside entity reviewing our processes and procedures, so that the district, the board and myself can have our names cleared.”
When asked who requested that the county refer Mountain View Whisman to FCMAT for an extraordinary audit, Gomez wouldn’t say, but noted that the county superintendent is the only person authorized to request this type of audit. She said that Mountain View Whisman is cooperating.
Fine said that an extraordinary audit is only meant for cases where the county superintendent has reason to suspect that specific types of wrongdoing have occurred, which are enumerated in state law.
Under California Education Code, a county superintendent can audit the “expenditures and internal controls” of any school district within their jurisdiction if they have “reason to believe that fraud, misappropriation of funds, or other illegal fiscal practices have occurred that merit examination.”
Extraordinary audits are uncommon. In the 2023-23 fiscal year, FCMAT conducted these reviews of just four school districts and three charter schools statewide, according to a FCMAT report.
What is an extraordinary audit?
FCMAT doesn’t conduct an extraordinary audit as a “fishing expedition,” but rather in response to specific allegations, Fine said.
Before undertaking such an audit, FCMAT collaborates with the county that made the referral to reach an agreement that enumerates the specific scope of work that the audit will cover. Santa Clara County and FCMAT haven’t yet settled on a scope of work, Fine said.
“I think there’s a big question here – whether this is justified doing or not justified doing, based on the information that’s available,” Fine said. “That’s part of what’s being worked through – that’s what the scope is about.”
FCMAT doesn’t need conclusive evidence of wrongdoing to start an extraordinary audit, but there does have to be something to back up the allegations, Fine said.
In this case, Fine noted that a parent group had already done a lot of work and spent substantial time digging.
“I don’t in any way want to mitigate their concerns, but the question is do those concerns and allegations actually appear to cross the line into questions of misappropriation of public funds, fraud or illegal fiscal practices?” Fine said.
That’s a determination that FCMAT has not yet made, he said on Friday.
For his part, Rudolph wrote in his letter last week that the district’s “practices are sound” and that Mountain View Whisman has received clean audits for the past decade. California school districts are required to hire an independent auditor to review the district’s finances each year, which is different from an extraordinary audit conducted by FCMAT when there is suspected wrongdoing.
Rudolph also noted that the district is instituting new practices, including forming a budget advisory committee and developing a vendor approval process.
This story just confirms my strategy. Don’t vote for any council candidates that are coming from MVWSD Board, and Vote NO to any school measure until the Superintendent is replaced or resigns. Isn’t it time that Mountain View gets top notch leadership in the MVWSD? Come on now, it’s been decades of drama.
lol “top notch leadership”? The current roster of board candidates isn’t exactly having me fall out of my chair. Perhaps we could elect the anti-transgender guy.
Ultimately the county guy is right:
They have to have
“reason to believe that fraud, misappropriation of funds, or other illegal fiscal practices have occurred that merit examination.”
Overpaying a contractor for meditation services is not illegal. The cranky parent group has come up with lots of things they are UNHAPPY with, which is their perogative, but ILLEGAL? I don’t see it.
And Mr Wizard also said to vote no to the parcel tax until the Supt goes away.
Gee, a real good way to attract “top notch leadership” is by having the voters vote against school funding. That’s what a smart top notch Supt wants to see when he joins!
Grifting doesn’t happen on mass scale, just look at the details.
Also, how magnificent is the move to have audit committees whose members are approved my Rudolph and report to him as well? I mean, that’s one slick move!
Mountain View Whisman has been running with a $40 Million budget reserve in unrestricted funds and a total $50 Million reserve. Their spending has ballooned from $52 Million in 2013-14 to more than double that in 2023-24, while at the same time losing 10% of their students enrolled.
They have revenues equal to 130% of the statewide average.
That’s why they have been able to be so wasteful. FCMAT might not think it’s illegal but it really requires a close look to decide. Question is why have expenses per student gone up to 220% of what they were 10 years ago?
Also it’s worth noting that they take in about $1400 more per ADA than does Los Altos Elementary.
I think the school board’s motto is, “Ask for money ‘For the children’, spend what we want, and wait out the parents because they’ll either get tired and lose interest or their kids will graduate from the district.”.
Yeah, when a million dollars goes missing and the council cannot resolve it then you need outside help. These are the same folks who voted themselves backrubs and other perks on our dime. It’s outrageous.
Backrubs? Hadn’t heard of that one? Details?
Long resident I’m sure you’ve heard of this concept called unionized labor.
Tal, where is the missing million?
The announced temporary leave of the Superintendent is not enough. It needs to be a complete departure. We need this before supporting any ballot measures requesting financial support of the MVWSD. No more drama.
To voters considering NO on Measure AA:
Before you cast your NO vote, try to imagine just one of the consequences of voting against this measure. In your attempt to punish the Superintendent, you are actually punishing the hardworking teachers and staff – and ultimately the students – who are all powerless to remove the superintendent.
You excuse your no vote with talk about new salary renegotiations and putting new ballot measures up after this election cycle. It’s not that easy. This takes time and money. Ballot measures usually come in 2-4-year cycles so there will be considerable pain for students and staff in loss of services and support. Salary negotiations within a union takes time, unlike your unimaginable individual raises in high tech. We’re talking about lowly-paid non-teacher staff and newer (minimally paid) teachers who are utterly powerless to make the leadership changes you are so consumed with.
The result will be more staff vacancies – because who wants to work in a school district with less pay and more uncertainty? Are you, voter, ready to step in and work for the salaries you are so recklessly ready to jeopardize?
Staff vacancies require substitutes. Substitute needs will increase which means the principals will have to focus on filling vacancies and teachers will need to also step up to fill the shortages, when they are already stretched so thin, creating more discord. Remember your latest rant about substitute shortages in recent social media posts? Voting no will make the substitute shortage more acute. Who do you think will take such lowly paying jobs after you kneecap this measure?
The people you are hurting didn’t tie the salary increases to the measure. That was all the work of the district staff and the school board. Your pressure campaign is having some effect with the Superintendent’s leave of absence. Try to consider that your short-term victory and don’t make a bad situation worse for the real hard-working people of the district, who you claim to care so much about.
We’re MV parents as well and have seen the dysfunction of MVWSD for almost 2 decades. Until the leadership is permanently replaced I will NOT support the parcel tax. Back in the day, I canvassed neighborhoods to help bring about the first and subsequent parcel taxes. A short term LOA only to come back after the election will not make change happen. Now, if the Superintendent quits before the election, I will support the parcel tax. It’s that easy.