After watching tonight’s meeting I have to conclude that these are not serious people. The post-presentation discussion was mind-boggling; they don’t even seem to know what the hell they are asking for!!! I will give kudos to Sergio for shutting down any conversation of the Board being involved with any of the consultants by basically sa…
After watching tonight’s meeting I have to conclude that these are not serious people. The post-presentation discussion was mind-boggling; they don’t even seem to know what the hell they are asking for!!! I will give kudos to Sergio for shutting down any conversation of the Board being involved with any of the consultants by basically saying that it would be a disaster because nobody trusts them. What a mess.
Just to clarify, I think that was Joey, not Sergio. IMO Joey is reasonably self-aware, while Sergio is basically an old CD with scratches on it that keeps skipping back to essentially the same talking points regardless of the conversation.
Just wanted to confirm that you are correct, Pablo. That was Joey that said "we can't do this work because nobody trusts us" [that is not a verbatim quote]
Also if I had to guess, I'd say that at some point around the time that Turner was rolling out the framework for the SDRP, someone said "we're going to need some insulation from these decisions so we can suggest they're someone else's that we're resigned to approving since we need to make cuts somewhere.
Based on that meeting, my takeaway was that they're going to very aggressively cut staffing as a means to try and close the $13.2M gap for FY26, and then they're going to try and find an additional $7-10M+ in reductions -- mainly through school closures -- that would impact FY27, since they have that extra $6M or whatever earmarked for finishing the new school. Tom, do you know if the operating costs for Bessie Rhodes have already been factored into projected expenses for FY27 since that closure already was approved?
After watching tonight’s meeting I have to conclude that these are not serious people. The post-presentation discussion was mind-boggling; they don’t even seem to know what the hell they are asking for!!! I will give kudos to Sergio for shutting down any conversation of the Board being involved with any of the consultants by basically saying that it would be a disaster because nobody trusts them. What a mess.
Just to clarify, I think that was Joey, not Sergio. IMO Joey is reasonably self-aware, while Sergio is basically an old CD with scratches on it that keeps skipping back to essentially the same talking points regardless of the conversation.
Just wanted to confirm that you are correct, Pablo. That was Joey that said "we can't do this work because nobody trusts us" [that is not a verbatim quote]
Also if I had to guess, I'd say that at some point around the time that Turner was rolling out the framework for the SDRP, someone said "we're going to need some insulation from these decisions so we can suggest they're someone else's that we're resigned to approving since we need to make cuts somewhere.
Based on that meeting, my takeaway was that they're going to very aggressively cut staffing as a means to try and close the $13.2M gap for FY26, and then they're going to try and find an additional $7-10M+ in reductions -- mainly through school closures -- that would impact FY27, since they have that extra $6M or whatever earmarked for finishing the new school. Tom, do you know if the operating costs for Bessie Rhodes have already been factored into projected expenses for FY27 since that closure already was approved?