Too bad the story that was buried on page 10 of yesterday's paper was not included in the on line edition. Rather than simply reiterating the "first he said, and then the other one said" melodrama found in today's article, yesterday's story softly pointed out that the New York State Comptroller found that Middletown has not been handling construction change orders properly... exactly as the so called "minority faction" have been saying for over a year. In other words, the board members who claim that big money decisions are being made behind their backs, now have the support of the New York State Comptroller.
This finding by the State's chief financial officer doesn't exactly follow the unwavering story line that the Record has developed over the last year and a half: "dissidents impede superintendent from the excellent work he is doing." What the audit shows is that board members were right to raise questions about the construction projects. And by implication, it should make us ask why the superintendent and his supporters - including those here at the paper - worked so hard to ridicule those who were asking the right questions.
Maybe someone from the newspaper can join in this discussion and explain the journalistic decision making behind these articles and their placement. Here is yesterday's complete story, now available for your comments.
"M'Town district advised to alter construction policy
The state comptroller's office has recommended that the Middletown School District tighten up its policy on construction change orders to better safeguard public funds.
The state recommended that the school board change district policy so that the board is notified in a timely manner of proposed changes, so the board can review and approve all change orders before completion of the work.
District officials have agreed to follow the recommendations.
From July 2007 to October 2009, the district spent $26 million on its Phase I construction project - the new athletic facilities and high school renovations - of which $1.8 million or 6.9 percent was in change orders. Seven percent had been budgeted for changes.
Auditors found that without a comprehensive policy, about half the change orders were approved after work was done.
The board adopted a change order policy in September 2009; the auditors said that policy needs more changes to provide better control over the public's money."
By Fred Isseks
Dissidents Allegations
