In Your Corner

There have been a number of letters exchanged and media “arguments” made public by members of the School Board (SB) and the new School Superintendent in the last few weeks. In them has surfaced an unhelpful amount of acrimony from both sides. Outside of an obvious mutual dislike/distrust, the main issues seem to be submission of the 2009 – 2010 budget and levels of control. In general the essence of the rhetoric is that some Board members accuse the Superintendent of not having a timely budget submission and wanting to increase their span of control. The Superintendent counters that she tried unsuccessfully to get Board input on these issues, the State’s per student dollar allotment was only issued on May 5 th and excessive control by the SB limits staff efficiency.

We believe that this rhetoric is far more reflective of the personalities involved than real problems and therefore remain cautiously optimistic – at least about the budget. The new Superintendent is making a thorough review of Administration Departments and seems to have a good working relationship with the unions. Also, there has been a reduction in our K – 12 student population for the last two-years. While this decrease has been relatively minor, when taken against the anticipated increases provided for by recent years’ construction the County is now blessed with a number of empty classrooms and student stations at all grade levels. In addition, a number of schools have core facilities (cafeterias, auditoriums, parking, etc.) that will support larger student populations. This will allow the addition of more classrooms to existing schools when needed without expensive new campuses. This excess capacity will permit early removal of many portable classrooms, a significant reduction in projected capital outlays and possibly provide a short-term solution for other budget problems.

On the negative side, this contentious relationship between the School Board and the new Superintendent – a former School Board member herself – can certainly be detrimental. The School Board tried to manage the new Superintendent’s staff selections before she was even in office. They are currently trying to reduce the size of contracts that can be awarded without their approval to $10,000, even as the new Superintendent uncovered and mitigated significant improprieties in contracting that existed for years. Her first cut at staff reorganization was largely rebuffed and ended up being tabled. Her request for suggestions from the Board on where to cut the required dollars from their 2009-10 budget was also largely dismissed. The admonishment was that the Superintendent and her staff should make up the budget with comparisons to the current year and bring it in for their approval.

In our opinion the School Board, whose members are elected and command a State mandated salary, could be less provocative and more supportive. Their situation is unlike that of a County or City Commission that hires an Administrator to do their bidding in that the Superintendent is an elected official in her own right. Hopefully, all of these elected individuals have the same objective - the effective and efficient education of our students.

We have always held Martin County Schools in high regard for their academic achievements. However, we believe that many of their fiscal policies, especially in the areas of capital expenditures, maintenance, unwarranted fringe benefits and cost of administration could and should be modified. There are many other areas that could be explored such as block scheduling, transportation options and student assignments. We hope that the Superintendent and School Board can put aside current or previous personal issues and work together to address the budget and the other opportunities available to improve the system.