Did the HCSD Cross the Line with Latest Mailer?

There is an update at the bottom of this post that makes for interesting reading....

Yesterday, the latest mailer from the Hilliard City School District arrived in our mailbox. Disguised as a community update, this latest piece of propaganda included not one, but three items about the levy.

First up was the board president, Doug Maggied talking about the importance of the Issue 7.  While I may disagree with Doug on this issue, he at least presented his side of the story in a calm and measured manner and he should be commended for that.

Of course, whether he actually wrote it or not is another matter since sections of it sounded identical to other propaganda, err, circulars related to this levy.

Also on the front were 'Seven Fast Facts'.  A rebuttal on those is available here.

But it was inside where I believe the district crossed the line, and actually lied to the voters.

Consider the following from the opening paragraph:

"Hilliard City Schools (HCS) reduced expenditures by $6.5 million since 2008."

Really?  That's odd, because the district's own numbers show expenditures of $146,383,330 in 2008, and a forecast of $161,965,755 for 2011.  (Forecast only at this point as the actuals wont be complete until the end of the school year.)

Now, I may not have as many degrees as some of the employees in the district, but my calculator shows me that's an increase in expenditures of $15,582,425.

Now, maybe they cut $6.5m of planned expenditures, but that's like Washington D.C. claiming a $38.5B budget cut, that turns out to only be $300m or so because it was a cut from the planned increase in 2011.

Look, I know it's a political campaign, and I fully expect the district to play loose with the facts.  But this wasn't playing loose with the facts.

It was a flat-out lie and the district needs to apologize to the voters for providing this mis-information.

UPDATE: I am looking right now at the numbers and I can no longer say with certainty that the district did in fact cut $6.5m of even planned spending.  In fact while this number may be connected to something, it's certainly not connected to reality.  In the Oct '07 5 year forecast, planned spending for 2011 was $181,692,204.  Currently, that number is forecasted by year end to be $161,965,755.  So that would mean a reduction in planned spending of almost $20m.  As noted earlier spending increases by about $15.5m in the time period, so where the district comes up with $6.5m, I have no idea...

---

P.S. For a great take down of the pro-campaign's Issue 7 mailer, read Justin Gardner's blog entry.