Dearest reader,

Today, Lady B's ledger takes us to Fowlerville Community Schools in Livingston County.

📚 STEP 1: A DECADE OF DOLLARS

What changed between the 2014–15 and 2024–25 school years?

Let's follow the receipts. 🔎

📉 STUDENT ENROLLMENT

In 2014–15, Fowlerville reported 2,862 students.

By 2024–25, that number had fallen to 2,389.66.

That's a 16.50% decline in enrollment over ten years.

💰 REVENUE PER STUDENT

During that same period, total revenue from all sources increased from $8,585 to $14,868 per pupil.

That's a 73.19% increase, or 28.12% after adjusting for inflation.

And where did the spending increases occur?

📊 THE TEN-YEAR COMPARISON

• Total Instruction: +60.94%
• Instructional Support: +70.98%
• Business & Administration: +66.60%
• Operations & Maintenance: +96.48%

Those are the nominal increases. Even after adjusting for inflation, every category above experienced growth.

🍎 NOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT TEACHERS.

In 2014–15, Fowlerville's average teacher salary was $60,296.

Ten years later? $61,206.

That's an increase of just $910 over an entire decade.

A whopping 1.51%.

But here's the part that deserves attention.

After adjusting for inflation, the average teacher salary actually LOST 24.90% of its purchasing power.

Think about that.

Revenue per student increased 73.19%, yet the average teacher salary barely moved.

Does that mean the district did something wrong? Not necessarily. Revenue and expenditures cover many responsibilities beyond teacher salaries.

But it certainly raises a question worth asking.

💬 When school funding grows substantially over a decade, how much of that growth should make its way into the classroom and into the paychecks of the educators working directly with students?

Lady B isn't here to tell you what to think.

I'm here to put the numbers on the table so you can decide what questions deserve answers.

All figures come from Michigan Department of Education Bulletin 1014, comparing the same two fiscal years used throughout my statewide research.

With receipts and respect. 💙

#LadyBudgetdown #FowlervilleCommunitySchools #LivingstonCounty #MichiganSchools #SchoolFinance #EducationTransparency #PublicEducation #TeacherPay #TaxpayerAccountability #FollowTheReceipts

DEAREST READER,

How does a $243.10 FOIA bill for school board packets turn into a $35,000 court award?

Ask Midland Public Schools.

In July 2024, Renita Bonadies filed a lawsuit challenging fees associated with obtaining public school board records.

More than two years later, following a bench trial, a Midland County Circuit Court judge ruled in her favor. The district was ultimately ordered to pay $35,000 in attorney fees, costs, and disbursements.

💰 $243.10. One disputed FOIA bill.

⚖️ $35,000. The final court-ordered award.

And that doesn't include the district's own legal defense expenses.

Here's what really caught Lady B's attention.

Midland Public Schools now makes those same board packets publicly available at no charge.

So why did it take more than two years of litigation to get here?

School districts regularly talk about tight budgets, limited resources, and the need to stretch every taxpayer dollar.

Yet here is a dispute over access to public records that ended with a $35,000 court award.

In my opinion, that is an extraordinary waste of taxpayer resources.

Public school board packets should be readily accessible to the very taxpayers funding these districts. Transparency should be the starting point, not something residents have to fight for in court.

And that leaves Lady B with one question.

How many other Michigan school districts could avoid unnecessary legal expenses simply by being more transparent in the first place?

Public records. Public dollars. Public accountability.

With receipts and respect,
Lady Budgetdown 🕯�

#LadyBudgetdown #MidlandPublicSchools #MichiganSchools #TaxpayerDollars #GovernmentTransparency #FOIA #PublicRecords #SchoolBoardAccountability #FollowTheMoney

Dearest readers,

Lady B could use a little help from her readers across Michigan!

My inbox has been filling up with breadcrumbs from school districts across the state. Some are financial questions, others involve staffing, transparency, contracts, and concerns about how districts are handling certain situations.

These are some of the breadcrumbs I've received and am currently working through.

🔎 BREADCRUMBS FROM THE INBOX

📍 St. Johns Public Schools
Auditorium stage replacement problems and booster funding concerns.

📍 Hemlock Public School District
Questions about administrative spending, staffing, training, and childcare funding.

📍 Saline Area Schools
Increasing administrative staffing despite declining enrollment.

📍 Vicksburg Community Schools
Reported FERPA complaint and questions about administrative accountability.

📍 Carrollton Public Schools
Reported administrative raises while teachers face compensation and benefit reductions.

📍 Comstock Public Schools
Contracted support staff reportedly receiving no raises or wage progression.

📍 Williamston Community Schools
Alleged supplemental coaching compensation and housing assistance outside the regular contract.

📍 Saginaw Public School District
Questions about expenditures from a $65,000 school safety grant.

📍 Kalamazoo Public Schools
Concerns about employee lawsuit settlements, class sizes, and classroom support.

📍 L'Anse Creuse Public Schools
Questions about administrative spending, staffing, outside employment, and fundraising transparency.

📍 Saginaw Township Community Schools
Documented drug charges involving a currently serving school board member, FERPA complaints, and allegations of family harassment.

📍 Saginaw Township Community Schools
Allegations of unauthorized access to student Skyward records and retaliation concerns.

📍 Meridian Public Schools
Administrative hiring, position reclassifications, and use of Section 31a funding.

🔎 HERE'S WHERE I NEED YOUR HELP!

Do you have firsthand knowledge, public records, board documents, contracts, meeting information, or other documentation related to any of these issues?

Maybe you know something that could answer a question. Maybe you have a document that provides missing context. Or perhaps you can help clear up something that has been misunderstood.

I'd love to hear from you!

You can send Lady B a private message, email me, or complete the breadcrumb submission form on the Lady B website. Please DO NOT leave it in the comment section.

And please, don't hesitate to reach out if you have information about a district that isn't listed here. These are just some of the breadcrumbs currently sitting on my desk.

Remember, receiving a breadcrumb doesn't automatically mean something improper occurred. Some concerns may lead somewhere. Others may have perfectly reasonable explanations.

That's why I follow the records, ask questions, and let the facts tell the story.

With receipts and respect.

#LadyBudgetdown #MichiganSchools #SchoolTransparency #PublicEducation #FollowTheReceipts #EveryDollarMatters

Dearest readers,

When Lady Budgetdown first opened her ledger, I never imagined just how quickly this little corner of the internet would grow.

What started as one woman following the numbers has grown into something much bigger. The messages, requests, breadcrumbs, and conversations now come from communities all across Michigan.

And for that, I am incredibly grateful. ❤️

But with that growth comes a realization. There are only so many hours in a day, and behind Lady Budgetdown is just one person.

So, beginning this week, I'm introducing a little more structure to the ledger.

📚 MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY
Back to what I love most! My five-step district financial reviews. I'll be digging into as many districts as time and energy allow, following the numbers and sharing what the records reveal.

🔎 FRIDAY: BREADCRUMB DAY
Fridays will be dedicated to the tips, questions, and breadcrumbs readers send my way. Some may lead somewhere interesting. Others may simply spark a good conversation.

🌷 SATURDAY & SUNDAY
Lady B is officially off duty! Of course, if something catches my curiosity, you might still find me wandering down a rabbit hole. Old habits die hard. 😉

I want to make sure Lady Budgetdown remains what it was always meant to be: a place for curiosity, transparency, accountability, and respectful conversations about Michigan's public schools.

This little project has grown beyond anything I expected, but it is still a one-person operation, done voluntarily and on my own time.

Your messages and breadcrumbs are always welcome. Just know that I may not get to every one of them, and that's okay.

Thank you for reading, sharing, contributing, and helping this little ledger grow.

The receipts aren't going anywhere. I'm just organizing the desk a little better. ❤️

With receipts and respect,
Lady Budgetdown

#LadyBudgetdown #WithReceiptsAndRespect #MichiganSchools #SchoolTransparency #EducationAccountability

Dearest readers,

Well, those breadcrumbs are coming in! 🕯�

Following my earlier post asking about school districts requiring families to purchase athletic uniforms, apparel, and equipment from specific vendors, I've received quite a few responses.

Two districts have caught my attention so far.

📍 SAGINAW TOWNSHIP COMMUNITY SCHOOLS

A parent reports that Heritage High School requires families to purchase team apparel through Sandlot Sports, even when comparable items can be purchased elsewhere for less money.

The same parent reports that families found more affordable options for team photography but were required to use Hicks Studio.

I've also received information that Sandlot apparel is sold in physical school stores at Heritage and White Pine.

📍 BRIGHTON AREA SCHOOLS

Another reader reports that Brighton uses BSN Sports and Nike for athletic uniforms and that families are locked into those products.

Now, Lady B has some questions for BOTH districts.

🔎 Who selected these vendors, and how were those decisions made?

🔎 Are there written exclusive-vendor agreements? If so, where can taxpayers and parents review them?

🔎 Were competing suppliers considered, particularly when families could purchase comparable merchandise for less?

🔎 Do the districts, athletic departments, booster organizations, or other affiliated groups receive commissions, rebates, fundraising proceeds, or other financial benefits from these arrangements?

And here's the question I'm particularly interested in.

🔎 DO ANY CURRENT OR FORMER DISTRICT EMPLOYEES, ADMINISTRATORS, BOARD MEMBERS, OR THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE BUSINESS OR FINANCIAL CONNECTIONS TO ANY OF THESE VENDORS?

I'm not suggesting those connections exist or that anyone has done anything improper. But when families are required to spend their own money with specific businesses, I believe it's reasonable to ask how those businesses were selected and whether any relationships exist.

More school districts are being mentioned as the breadcrumbs continue coming in.

For now, these are Lady B's questions for Saginaw Township Community Schools and Brighton Area Schools.

If you have answers, firsthand experiences, or documentation, my inbox is open. Email is preferred, but comments and messages are welcome.

Sometimes all it takes is one question to start an interesting conversation.

With receipts and respect,
Lady B 🕯�

#LadyBudgetdown #MichiganSchools #SchoolTransparency #SaginawTownship #BrightonSchools #FollowTheMoney #WithReceiptsAndRespect

Dearest readers,

Lady B has received a few interesting breadcrumbs, and now I'm curious just how widespread this might be.

This is a call to Michigan parents, teachers, coaches, and educators.

Does your school district require families to purchase athletic uniforms, team apparel, or sports equipment from one specific vendor?

Have you ever found the same or comparable items somewhere else for less money, only to be told you MUST purchase them through the school's designated supplier?

Does that supplier operate a store inside your school or have an exclusive arrangement with your district?

I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has experienced this.

Please include the school district, the vendor's name, and what families are required to purchase. If you have written policies, order forms, or other documentation, even better.

You can share your experience in the comments or email me directly. Email is preferred because my messages can be difficult to keep up with, but I do read them.

I'm not drawing conclusions. I'm trying to determine whether these breadcrumbs point to a much larger issue.

After all, school athletics are expensive enough for families without unnecessary purchasing restrictions.

With receipts and respect,
Lady B 🕯�

#LadyBudgetdown #MichiganSchools #SchoolTransparency #FollowTheMoney #StudentAthletics #EveryDollarMatters

Dearest readers,

Voting NO on a school bond does not mean someone hates children, teachers, or their community.

I've watched bond discussions in St. Charles, St. Johns, Grand Ledge, Saginaw Township, Chippewa Valley, DeWitt, Lake Orion, Meridian, Hemlock, and Freeland.

And something continues to bother me.

The way people are sometimes treated simply because they disagree with a bond proposal.

❤️ These are your neighbors. Your coworkers. Your friends. Your grandparents.

They're the elderly couple who worked their entire lives, paid off their home, raised their children, and now live on a fixed income.

They're ALICE households. Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed. Working families who earn a paycheck but still struggle to afford life's basic necessities.

They're parents stretching every dollar and seniors wondering how much longer they can afford to stay in the homes they've lived in for decades.

And remember, it's not just one school bond.

It's school millages, county millages, township millages, city millages, and everything else that adds up on a property tax bill.

When someone says, "It's only another $10 or $20 a month," remember that for some families, that's groceries, medication, or money they simply don't have.

And some people may be able to afford it but disagree with the projects, the financing, or the priorities. That's their right, too.

❤️ Supporting our schools and questioning a bond are not mutually exclusive.

People who vote YES may genuinely believe they're doing what's best for their community. People who vote NO may believe exactly the same thing.

That's why we have elections.

A YES vote deserves respect. A NO vote deserves respect.

So before labeling someone as anti-children, anti-teacher, or anti-community, remember that you don't know what happens behind their front door.

A person's financial circumstances or opinion on a bond do not determine how much they care about children.

And a little compassion costs absolutely nothing. ❤️

With receipts and respect,
🦉 Lady Budgetdown

#LadyBudgetdown #MichiganSchools #SchoolBonds #ALICEHouseholds #SeniorCitizens #PropertyTaxes #EveryVoiceMatters #CommunityMatters #RespectYourNeighbors

 LADY BUDGETDOWN: CONCORD COMMUNITY SCHOOLS

Dearest reader,

Apparently, transparency at Concord Community Schools comes with an expiration date. And nobody seems particularly concerned about updating it.

Well, Lady B is.

I recently examined Concord Community Schools' public-facing Munetrix transparency page.

And quite frankly, what I found is unacceptable.

Michigan taxpayers should not have to play detective to locate basic financial information about their public schools.

Yet here we are.

📋 LET'S LOOK AT WHAT CONCORD IS SHOWING THE PUBLIC.

📌 Board-approved budgets: 2024–25. Two fiscal years behind.

📌 Superintendent compensation: 2021–22. FOUR fiscal years behind.

📌 Personnel expenditures: 2023–24. Two fiscal years old.

📌 Operating expenditures: 2023–24. Two fiscal years old.

📌 District-paid association dues: 2023–24. Two fiscal years old.

📌 Audited financial statements: 2023–24. Two fiscal years old.

And let's be clear about something.

We are currently in the 2026–27 fiscal year.

Concord's public-facing transparency page does not display either the 2025–26 or the 2026–27 board-approved budget.

TWO BUDGET YEARS.

Missing from the very page intended to provide financial transparency to the public.

⚖️ THIS ISN'T OPTIONAL WINDOW DRESSING.

Michigan law, MCL 388.1618, establishes financial transparency requirements for public school districts.

Among those requirements, districts must make their annual operating budgets and subsequent revisions publicly available through the required transparency reporting process within 15 days of board adoption.

Not whenever somebody gets around to updating a page.

Not when a parent asks.

Not when a taxpayer starts digging.

And not only after someone knows which board meeting to search.

Now, before somebody rushes into the comments to tell me these documents are available somewhere else, allow me to save you the trouble.

I am examining Concord's designated public-facing Munetrix transparency page.

A document sitting in a database, buried in a board packet, or stored on another platform does not make the outdated information displayed on that page disappear.

The purpose of financial transparency is to make information readily accessible to the public.

Not to turn it into a scavenger hunt.

💰 AND HERE IS WHY THIS MATTERS.

In my previous examination of Concord Community Schools, I documented that the district's General Fund balance declined from approximately $1.28 million in 2021 to just $18,910 in 2025.

Approximately 99% of its reserves, gone in four years.

The district also reported four consecutive years of operating deficits.

And its administrative spending per pupil was approximately 25% above the statewide median in fiscal year 2025.

Now consider that financial picture alongside a transparency page displaying superintendent compensation information from 2021–22 and budgets that stop at 2024–25.

This is precisely when the public needs timely, accessible financial information.

Not information that is years behind.

👑 LADY B HAS A FEW QUESTIONS.

Who is responsible for maintaining Concord's public-facing transparency page?

Who verifies that required financial disclosures are current?

Why are two fiscal years of budgets absent from the displayed budget section?

And why is the superintendent compensation disclosure still showing information from four fiscal years ago?

These are not unreasonable questions.

These are basic expectations for a publicly funded institution.

I am not declaring that every outdated entry constitutes a separate statutory violation. Different disclosures have different reporting requirements.

But the public-facing information shown here is plainly outdated, and the district owes its community an explanation.

School boards are entrusted with overseeing millions of taxpayer dollars.

Making current financial information accessible should be among the most basic responsibilities of that oversight.

Taxpayers should not have to beg for transparency.

Parents should not have to hunt for transparency.

And Lady B certainly should not have to explain why a public school district's financial reporting page ought to reflect the current fiscal year.

Transparency isn't a favor.

It's a responsibility.

And at Concord Community Schools, the public deserves better than what this page currently displays.

With receipts and respect. 👑

Concord Community School District

Source: Concord Community Schools public-facing Munetrix transparency page, reviewed October 12, 2026. Michigan State School Aid Act, MCL 388.1618.

#LadyBudgetdown #ConcordCommunitySchools #JacksonCountyMichigan #MichiganSchools #SchoolTransparency #FinancialTransparency #PublicAccountability #TaxpayerDollars #SchoolBoardAccountability #FollowTheMoney #WithReceiptsAndRespect

 LADY BUDGETDOWN: CONCORD COMMUNITY SCHOOLS

Dearest reader,

Today, Lady B takes a trip to Jackson County, Michigan, where Concord Community Schools has a financial story worth examining.

And this one involves disappearing reserves, repeated operating deficits, administrative spending above the state median, and some interesting observations from the district's auditors.

Let's follow the numbers. 🧐

💰 WHERE DID THE GENERAL FUND GO?

In 2021, Concord Community Schools had approximately $1.28 million in its General Fund balance.

Here's what happened over the next four years.

2021: $1,284,383

2022: $1,011,368

2023: $943,574

2024: $650,923

2025: $18,910, according to the district's audited financial statements.

That's approximately 99% of the district's financial cushion gone in just four years.

And in fiscal year 2025 alone, Concord reported:

Revenue and other financing sources: $9,845,007

Expenditures and other financing uses: $10,477,018

Annual deficit: $632,011

The district has now experienced four consecutive years of operating deficits.

Its remaining General Fund balance represents less than 1% of annual expenditures.

To help manage cash flow, the district also utilized a state aid note during the 2024–25 fiscal year and anticipated another in 2025–26.

Borrowing against anticipated state aid isn't necessarily unusual.

But when a district's financial reserves have nearly disappeared, it certainly deserves a closer look.

👑 NOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT ADMINISTRATION.

According to the Michigan School Almanac's fiscal year 2025 figures:

Concord administrative spending per pupil: $2,469

State median administrative spending per pupil: $1,975

That's approximately 25% ABOVE the state median.

Concord also devoted approximately 15.4% of its operating expenditures to administration, compared with a statewide median of 13.6%.

Now, smaller districts can have higher administrative costs per student because certain expenses remain necessary regardless of enrollment.

But here's Lady B's question.

When a district has lost approximately 99% of its General Fund reserves, shouldn't administrative spending be among the areas receiving particularly close scrutiny?

Especially when that spending is already above the state median?

📋 AND THEN THERE ARE THE AUDITS.

In 2022, Concord's independent auditors identified a significant deficiency involving budget compliance.
Expenditures exceeded approved budget amounts in several functions, resulting in reported noncompliance with Michigan's Uniform Budget and Accounting Act.

The district indicated that it would revise its budgeting procedures.

The good news?

The 2023 auditors reported that the previous finding had been corrected.

However, the 2023 auditor's communication included another recommendation worth mentioning.

The auditors recommended reviewing who had permission to establish vendors in the district's accounting system and separating that responsibility from accounts payable duties.

This was an auditor recommendation, not a formally reported significant deficiency.

And that distinction matters.

The 2024 and 2025 internal-control findings have not yet been independently verified, so Lady B isn't going to speculate about what they contain.

📉 LET'S PUT THIS TOGETHER.

Concord Community Schools has experienced:

📌 Approximately 99% depletion of its General Fund reserves over four years.

📌 Four consecutive years of operating deficits.

📌 Administrative spending approximately 25% above the statewide median.

📌 A documented significant deficiency in its 2022 audit, subsequently reported corrected.

📌 An additional 2023 auditor recommendation concerning separation of financial responsibilities.

📌 Reliance on short-term state aid borrowing to manage cash flow.

None of this, by itself, establishes wrongdoing.

But it certainly raises questions about financial planning, spending priorities, and long-term sustainability.

And here's the question Lady B keeps coming back to.

How does a school district go from approximately $1.28 million in General Fund reserves to less than $19,000 in four years, while spending substantially more per pupil on administration than the state median?

What financial decisions were made along the way?

What steps did the Board of Education take as those reserves continued declining?

And what is the district's plan to rebuild its financial cushion?

These are reasonable questions about public money.

Because whether a district serves 600 students or 6,000, taxpayers deserve to understand where their money goes.

And students and teachers deserve a financially stable school district.

Lady B will continue following the numbers.

With receipts and respect. 👑

Sources: Concord Community Schools audited financial statements, fiscal years 2021 through 2025. Michigan School Almanac, fiscal year 2025 administrative spending comparisons. Concord Community Schools 2022 and 2023 audit findings and auditor communications.

#LadyBudgetdown #ConcordCommunitySchools #JacksonCountyMichigan #MichiganSchools #SchoolFinance #EducationTransparency #FiscalAccountability #PublicEducation #FollowTheMoney #WithReceiptsAndRespect

Dearest reader,

Well, it appears Saginaw Township Community Schools is keeping me busy tonight.

Two readers raised an interesting question on my earlier post about the district's facility needs.

Has the district actually pursued grant funding instead of relying on another bond?

As it turns out, I have a receipt for that.

I have a copy of Saginaw Township Community Schools' 2025–2026 Section 12e School Infrastructure Grant application submitted to the State of Michigan.

And I found the district's own explanation particularly interesting.

The application states:

"Our community has demanded our school district's leadership to explore all other funding sources and that is exactly what we intend to do."

It continues:

"Our community has made it clear to us that they are not able/willing to pass a bond ask for all the needs our district requires."

And elsewhere in that same explanation:

"We had to remove critical needs but we hope to address these needs through funding such as 12e."

Now, dearest reader, those are not my words.

Those are the district's words, submitted to the state.

So what did the district request?

Approximately $27.43 million for roofing projects at six schools.

Arrowwood Elementary: $4,525,475
Hemmeter Elementary: $1,531,167
Heritage High School: $13,295,792
Mackinaw High School: $1,682,776
Sherwood Elementary: $4,759,392
Weiss Elementary: $1,634,657

And that's where I have questions.

The statewide facilities assessment identified approximately $68.07 million in repair needs, including $16.82 million classified as critical.

Those needs extended beyond roofing.

The district itself acknowledged removing critical needs from its reduced bond proposal.

Yet the Section 12e application I obtained requested funding for roofing alone.

Now, the grant program had specific eligibility and funding priorities, so I am not suggesting every identified repair would necessarily have qualified.

But I am curious.

Was this application part of a broader strategy to pursue alternative funding?

What other grant opportunities has the district pursued to address its documented critical needs?

And when the district told the state that its community had demanded alternative funding sources, how did that influence the decisions reflected in this application?

I don't know what motivated the district to submit it.

But I do know what the district wrote.

And sometimes the most interesting breadcrumbs are the ones found in the district's own paperwork.

With receipts and respect,
Lady Budgetdown

#LadyBudgetdown #SaginawTownshipCommunitySchools #MichiganSchools #SchoolGrants #Transparency #Accountability #WithReceiptsAndRespect