It would appear that Wake County taxpayers will have to foot some of the costs of the December reception for new school board members.
Leaders of the Wake Schools Community Alliance had agreed to pay out of their own pockets the cost of the reception. But now they're only paying part of the cost because of questions about the bill.
Joe Ciulla, Kristen Stocking and Sarah Redpath have picked up $300 of the $693.83 bill for the reception. (Staff had previously reported the bill at $749.66.)
Ciulla said that when they first agreed to pay the cost, before the reception was held, they were told that it would cost $300. He said they were surprised later to find out later how much Wake was billing, especially considering what was served and how fewer people attended than expected.
At the school board reception, the school district provided coffee, punch and snacks such as lemon bars and brownies. Kathleen Dusto, the campaign manager for new school board member Debra Goldman, brought a cake that she had paid for herself.
As noted in a December post, Ciulla was already questioning the cost of the bill then.
"Money doesn't grow on trees," Ciulla said Tuesday.
But Ciulla stressed that at least they're helping cover some of the costs, reducing the impact on taxpayers.
Click here to view the invoice for the reception. For privacy reasons, I've left out the page which includes a copy of the $300 check Stocking submitted for the trio.
Comments
Good Grief
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 20:48 — TrailerParkGirlThree private citizens (like them or not, agree with them or not) donate $100 out of their own pockets and they get grief for it and one has their private account information publicly released by WCPSS.
That is a shame.
After this what sane person would offer to pay toward the costs of a WCPSS event?
My suggestions going forward would be 1) for these reception-type events to be BYOB - Bring Your Own Brownies and if donating to WCPSS, use cash.
Private Account Info- Where?? Not Here !!!
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 22:25 — shank56These 3 made a scene about this event involving taxpayer funds and publicly offered to fund the event! No one made a scene but themselves. They could have bailed out in December when the bill came but spokesman Joe didn't renege- he accepted it as reported to all.
There has not been any private info released that I have seen. Please tell me where and I will look!
Seems like 3 folks in charge of a PAC are embarassed by promises to the media a couple of times over to pay a bill, when in the end they will not honor their original pledge.
_________________________________________
N
Scene?
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 02:38 — TrailerParkGirlI don't recall seeing anything about this other than the information posted on this blog. Did I miss the press conference held at the Convention Center to announce they were funding it?
Private information released - See last line of the post.
"For privacy reasons, I've left out the page which includes a copy of the $300 check Stocking submitted for the trio."
Someone at WCPSS provided a copy of the check to the local newspaper or to someone else who provided it to the paper. That's a little troubling. Do you want WCPSS sending copies of checks you've written to anyone who requests it or to the local paper?
Again, just saying these kinds of antics discourage people from wanting to get involved and that is unfortunate.
How many supporters of the old BOE or their replacements paid for those receptions and how much did they contribute?
So do they still get credit
Thu, 01/14/2010 - 11:09 — user12345So do they still get credit for paying for the event if they could only come up with half of the amount?
Credibilty issue
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 10:07 — shank56I don't know any of the players, just what I read here. "Joe" had a perfect opportunity after the December billing to scale back then. But he did not. He stated to the press that they would pay up.
IMO this group has a crediblity problem in the promises they make and how they manage money- whether their own or other peoples money. Aren't these 3 (Joe, Kirsten, Sarah) the WCSA leaders who evicted Backhouse over reported "financial" issues? Just what I read on this blog.
...
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 13:01 — Sideburnsshank,
I was "evicted" but not due to financial issues. I never had access to PAC funds.
And, I agree about paying -- especially since WSCA emailed everyone and encouraged them to attend and sit in the "WSCA cheering section" and then they act shocked at the amount of the bill.
Sorry how that sounded.
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 14:03 — shank56Sorry how that sounded. Not what I meant to imply about you. (Think I read there were questions as to how the 3 were wanting to use WSCA funds- maybe to pay themselves?)
This is not a true statement.
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 20:20 — SDR256This is not a true statement. PAC funds were only used for PAC standard financial procedures. This is well governed and accounted for by IRS formal procedures. The three contributions were made by individual citizens by their personal accounts. You may enjoy making up stories for your entertainment. And btw, don't miss American Idol next week.
I Love American Idol!
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 22:52 — shank56Moral here: Honor thy personal commitments, especially those for money. THis wasn't a year long pledge to your church or your school.
This was a public/media event that you vowed to pay cash for - something that wasn't even solicited for to be be paid. You made an issue of it for the taxpayers. YOu did not specify a price.
You promised- you stiffed everyone- even when you had a chance to bow out favorably.
The end.
Commitment
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 01:23 — SDR256My commitment was for a donation of $100. I don't owe you any explanation. Your 'moralizing' is meaningless to me.
...
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 14:08 — SideburnsNo worries.
And, yes, you're getting closer. :>)
Opportunity
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 03:02 — SDR256Why doesn't your group pay the other half (+ some)? It would look so magnanimous.
SDR ... can any of your
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 10:14 — user12345SDR ... can any of your PAC's pay the amount or is that not a legal political expense? Just curious since I assume WSCA has more than $300 in the back left over.
Kristen here.
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 22:42 — petehsSince nobody (except me, the official PAC Treasurer) really knows the full story about the questions raised in this post, I suggest that it would be wise to stop making slanderous statements concerning issues with which you are uninformed.
A few tidbits of truth for those interested in that (often overlooked) element of the reception saga:
The commitment shown to us by our wonderful WSCA team has been amazing. To that end, we had enough offers from WSCA members to contribute the difference. We chose not to pass the hat, but rather to reimburse the amount we had committed to (the original $300 good faith estimate) and make a (private) statement about the unreasonably high bill for the quality of services provided.
I would never pay any service provider 200+% more than the quoted amount. Would you? If so, perhaps I can find you a job in Washington. We are talking about fiscal responsibility, folks, and imo we all have a responsibility to ask more questions of those who are spending/demanding our hard-earned tax dollars...especially to cover the costs associated with putting more (unnecessary) treats in our bellies.
My hat is off to Kathy D for bringing that cake. We should make this a tradition and get people to openly donate refreshments for ALL of these self-serving celebrations! Or better yet, use the money to help feed someone right down the street who needs a hot meal, not a tray of lemon bars.
Nobody ever wanted credit for anything. In fact, we did everything possible to NOT allow specific names be tagged to the donation; thus, another reason for not passing the hat.
For the record, it was THIS publication that persued this "story," making many separate calls to pry information from us and from the Superintendent's office.
I still cannot believe we don't have more productive topics to address here. Truly discouraging. But I guess that is the underlying motive for some. Well, in fairness, I must caution that they have tried to discourage the wrong people. :-)
Now please, everyone, let's move on. There is much work to be done, and many, many people who need our help. Want a truly newsworthy angle of this (ridiculous) story? How about the fact that millions of dollars are NOT going to be donated to the suffering in Haiti because of fear of credit card fraud?
Let's get together--somehow--to innovate around our problems instead of wasting precious time and energy trying to discredit those who are genuinely trying to make our community stronger.
Personal
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 21:09 — SDR256This came from our personal funds. It was Kristen's personal check that was circulated - you know, with the tracking numbers etc? (Thank you Tim Simmons and WEP for going to the time and effort to track that down, Kristen's personal check, and getting it into the 'right' hands. Thank you WEP for this community support. Real parents will really love you for this. And WCPSS - for quoting why they had the right to not mark out any of the personal tracking information before they handed it to the media. So comforting and encouraging of dialog. )
You want to get really personal User - or anyone else ? Share your tracking numbers - with the N&O - for your own checking account for what you have donated to WCPSS personally and then I can prove that you are a real accolyle of the school system. Is that where this is going? One hundred dollars at the holidays was not enough for you? What would be enough? $250? $500? $1000? So, the fact that you want me to have donated more to WCPSS- you request more but for all I know have donated nothing - beyond all the time and effort and talent - is really rude.
This makes me think that this particular blog is not the right place for real parents to participate. It is too toxic and it requires a level of bravery beyond what is reasonable.
And I guess that's the point. Some would like this to become so toxic and drama-centric that real parents with real concerns will just shy away from it.
" So, the fact that you
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 11:18 — user12345" So, the fact that you want me to have donated more to WCPSS- you request more but for all I know have donated nothing - beyond all the time and effort and talent - is really rude."
You guys are really rude ... all I asked was whether paying for events like this - either in full or partially was a legal PAC expense .... all someone had to say is yes or no and if yes, we chose not to do that because xxxx ... you really need to take a "chill pill" ...
"SDR ... can any of your PAC's pay the amount or is that not a legal political expense? Just curious since I assume WSCA has more than $300 in the back left over."
User, my reply was to all who have questions on this topic
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 12:03 — petehsI apologize for (unintentially) not answering your perfectly legitimate question.
Yes, I could have written a check from the PAC account (which, as you will see in our year-end report due 1/29, is almost "dry" since we used 98% of funding for the campaigns). That expense falls well within the boundaries of the PAC's stated purpose.
That said, since our point was to make a statement about superfluous public spending, a personal check was most appropriate.
(And good idea, TPG--if I ever do it again, I'll drop off my coin jar on the front doorstep, in the middle of the night, wearing a "Stocking" cap!)
Thanks ... I a was just
Sat, 01/16/2010 - 16:17 — user12345Thanks ... I a was just wondering for future knowledge if some group wins (any election) and uses up the PAC money having a party if that is against some state election law I just wanted to know so I would be better informed . It seemed like private donors often pay for the big parties for the president.
good job using almost all the money on the election ... I nver like it when there is a big pot left over since it makes me wonder why they collected it if they were not going to spend it.
Man of your word- NOT
Wed, 01/13/2010 - 15:02 — shank56"Ciulla said he's wondering why the bill from the school district is so high. He said he had been told ahead of time that it was going to be much less. Still, he said they'll pick up the tab. "
Who told him ahead of time it was going to be less? Check any catering prices- and this is a deal for 200 people. My guess is that the headcount was given to staff by the new BOE members- ie, who was coming to their swearing in.
PS. They could have done it for a lot less if he had PTA moms cooking and delivering!
"PS. They could have done it
Thu, 01/14/2010 - 11:12 — user12345"PS. They could have done it for a lot less if he had PTA moms cooking and delivering!"
Maybe a school fund raiser for kids who need books, supplies, soap, etc. for their school?
Hmm...
Wed, 01/13/2010 - 10:05 — supportwcpss$3 a person for $200 people. That sounds extremely cheap and cost effective.
hey Joe - Care to share the documentation where you were told $300.
...
Wed, 01/13/2010 - 14:37 — SideburnsI hope you're not holding your breath.