Did doubling represent diligence?
Published 12:00 am Friday, March 10, 2006
In a matter of weeks the Natchez Planning Department has gone from worst to first.
Weeks after reports of the allegedly understaffed department&8217;s ineffectiveness surfaced, its staff has doubled.
Amazingly, no one really seems to know how it happened. It was almost as if members of the city&8217;s leadership pulled out some kind of Buck Rogers ray gun and &8220;poof&8221; the planning department is bigger.
Apparently blinded by the mysterious ray gun, aldermen became disoriented and disagreed on when &8212; or even if &8212; the details of the three new hires were ever discussed or approved.
Did it happen or not? Like the mysterious flashing lights over the New Mexico desert, the mystery remains.
In addition to creating new positions, the beams of light from the ray gun must have heated up the brains of a few of the city leaders, too. Somehow, the subject of race has become coiled into the investigation into what occurred.
Race isn&8217;t the real issue. It&8217;s why in the world have we doubled the size of a department in the middle of a budget year and modified the budget to be able to afford the action?
Two wrongs don&8217;t make a right, and doubling the size of a department may not necessarily make it run more efficiently.
Neither the lack of a comprehensive hiring policy or the inability to follow the policy if it exists is a reason to just throw money &8212; or more people &8212; at the problem.