COMMENTS TO SCHOOL BOARD REGARDING KMAC  BY FRED HINK:

 

(At the regular board meeting the following Monday, Fred Hink in the Open Forum session made these comments:)

Honored Board Members

I am here this evening to ask for you to either vote no – which I would prefer – or at the very least table the item for consideration of the contract between Region IV and KISD concerning KMAC

There are many areas within the proposed contract, which seem on the face of it, ill advised

· First, the fact that the contract is supposed to be perpetual: Why should we enter any contract with such a stipulation. Maybe it sounds great now with guaranteed income, but what if something changes down the road, and it no longer is such a good deal for KISD and its taxpayers? I can think of no reason why a contract should be forever, and it should be ringing alarm bells in your heads that something is not kosher.

· Second, the fact that KISD is paid 6%: Why should it not be more? Under the proposal, KMAC offers at least the same value as CCAP does. And so, if we only merit 6%, where is the other 94% going? Who is going to benefit beyond KISD from the proposed contract? These are questions, I feel, you no doubt are asking yourselves right now.

 Third is state law: Under the Texas Statutes, Government Code, Chapter 2157, subchapter 2157.068,
 pertaining to Purchase of Commodity Items (commodity items being defined as commercial software,
 hardware, or technology services) subsection 
(d) The department may charge a reasonable administrative fee to a state agency, political
 subdivision of this state, or governmental entity of another state that purchases commodity
 items through the department in an amount that is sufficient to recover costs associated
 with the administration of this section.
 In my mind, reasonable administrative fee does not include profit. Has state law been researched and is this administration positive
 that the sale for profit of KMAC is, in fact legal? 
 My final argument beckons to taxpayers across the state. Why should it be proper for a political subdivision – a school
 district – to use tax funds as venture capital to create a product or service to sell for profit?  
 
KMAC will be sold to other school districts – at a profit I am assuming. The funds to purchase KMAC are taxpayer funds – some coming 
from the local tax base and others coming from state money, to which you and I contribute. So, why isn’t this double dipping? Why isn’t this
 basically a reallocation of funds from one district to another? Sounds great to us because we get the money. But ethically, it stinks and I ask 
this board to do the right thing:   Say NO to this fishy smelling contract.