OCR Text |
Show School board looking into privatization By TOM BUSSELBERG FARMINGTON Youngsters attending schools in Davis County probably wouldn't notice a difference, differ-ence, but some services could be "privatized" there in the future. The school bus your child rides might be owned and operated by a private firm rather than the school ( district. The hot lunch he-she eats ; at noon might be prepared and i served by a private provider, as well. Armed with some "productivity grant" funds the school district commissioned a study that shows school foods and bus transportation transporta-tion services as best candidates for privatization. It's still too early to know if and when such steps would be taken, Supt. Richard Kendell emphasized. In fact, the study was only "preliminary" "pre-liminary" and additional funding should be forthcoming soon from the state that could support a more in-depth study, he said. Continued on page two School privatization studied Continued from page one Auditor Arthur Young & Co. prepared the study that evaluated all phases of the district's operation opera-tion down to paycheck dispersals. Recommendations centered not only on school foods and busing but also were favorable to mechanical mecha-nical and building maintenance. "The percent of private providers provid-ers is relatively low in all areas," Supt. Kendell said, adding that it was felt sufficient private providers provid-ers would be interested in bidding to provide such services. Some training would be necessary neces-sary to acquaint district officials with proper monitoring of such services, ser-vices, it was noted. The study suggests a pilot project pro-ject to provide some "valuable experience" ex-perience" with more efficiency and cost-savings eyed as pluses to any such move. Board Member Robert Thur-good Thur-good questioned what would happen hap-pen to the district's food services investment if a private firm were hired. "Our equipment and facilities facili-ties should be taken into account. We've got millions of dollars tied up in that." "We've looked at other districts around the country," Asst. Supt. Dean Penrod answered. "Sometimes "Some-times the privates have used their own facilities and at other times they've utilized the distrcts'. We emphasize there would be more study to see if we could get comparable compa-rable quality and product." "We shouldn't lose sight of why we provide school lunches for children," chil-dren," Mr. Thurgood said. "We have very high priorities (under the current foods setup) and could lose that with privatizing. The youth could start eating fast food and that's not nearly as nourishing." Most students aren't heading over to the fast-food eateries, Dr. Penrod said. Three in four of the district's 50,000 plus enrolled eat school lunch the second highest percentage in the state's 40 districts. dis-tricts. "We must work so that participation partici-pation would not drop" with privatization, priva-tization, Dr. Penrod added. "It appears generally that our size would be sufficient to attract" interested providers, the superintendent superin-tendent said although Davis District Dis-trict was given high ratings for efficiency effi-ciency of services compared to other districts. Smaller school districts could especially benefit through economies econo-mies of scale while the state also would benefit. Those savings should be passed on to localf tricts, the board was told. w |