IN YOUR CORNER

Our columns occasionally rub local government officials the wrong way.  This is not our
intention.  We prefer to write about examples of efficient government, but we write about
inefficiency with the hope that improvements will follow constructive criticism.

The School Superintendent disagreed with two points raised in our October 25 column.
First, we reported that the new Jensen Beach High School is over budget.  This opinion is
based on the difference between the School District's capital improvement budget of
$35M for a new high school, and the construction contract price of  $48M. 

The Superintendent pointed out that this is not a construction cost overrun, as we will not
know the final cost until construction is complete.  We agree.  Our description should
have been more accurate.

The Superintendent also pointed out that the 1999/00 budget for the new high school was
$46M.  That budget was for a 1900-student school.  It was then reduced the next year to
$35M for a 1200-student school, then increased recently to an 1800-student school.  We
did not appreciate that state funding restrictions were involved in these budget changes.
Also, the cost of the land, and of the furnishings and equipment was not reflected in any
of these budgets, so we will do additional research before reporting the actual cost to
open the new high school. 

The second disagreement concerns redistricting for the new high school.  Upon further
discussions with School District staff, we stand by our opinion that a careful analysis of
redistricting should have been done before a site was selected.  We were told the reason
this was not done is because the redistricting analysis was being done by hand, which was
not very accurate and would have taken too much staff time to improve upon.  At that
time, the proper  analytical tools needed for accurate redistricting estimates were not
available for use in site selection.  We are happy to report that new mapping and
population projection tools are now in use at the School District.  The next time a new
school site is being evaluated, the public will be able to review the redistricting prior to
final site selection, not after.

**

We also offended County Commissioners with our criticism of the recently approved
three year Fire Fighter/EMS contract.  We stand by our position.  That contract provides
benefits in excess of those set by the employment market, and in excess of those provided
other County employees.  The recent decision of the Sheriff's deputies to unionize is a
predictable side effect of treating one group of employees better than the rest.  This
situation will become somewhat self-correcting as more County employees join a union
and demand the same benefits.  Unfortunately, we taxpayers will pay the price.

**
Our School District has an Internal Auditor who reports directly to the School Board.
Although the Board is her employer, her actions do not have to be Board initiated.  She
has been quite busy over her 2 1/2 year stint with the school system. One of her first
projects was to create a uniform and a more efficient bookkeeping system for our 20
public schools.  Previously, each school had its own unique system.  Also, positive
changes have been made with the after school programs.  We could not obtain a dollar
figure of the savings being generated by her office, but an end of the year report to the
School Board may be of help to us.

The Internal Auditor's next project is to re-evaluate each of the School District's
departments. We are enthusiastic that these efforts will result in more cost efficient
practices.  As we all know, it sometimes takes an outside observer to spot a problem that
could be staring us right in the face.