As predicted, Virginia’s so-called public-private education partnerships are causing right-to-know tensions -- not just with parents but with school boards, city councils and boards of supervisors as well.

The secret nature of the so-called PPEA process almost guarantees such conflicts, with elected governing bodies on the outside looking in -- or, in some cases, not looking in.

Here’s what can happen:

A school board gets an unsolicited proposal for a new school. Sometimes, it will get more than one. Strings are attached; traditional public bidding is bypassed.

Cost estimates and construction concepts can’t be talked about publicly (these are business deals, after all -- and a private business is not about to negotiate away a favorable bargaining position).

In theory, the 2002 Public-Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act makes all kinds of sense. Innovation is encouraged, bureaucratic red tape can be trimmed, funding options may be broadened (put the school in an open space, rent the space next door to a retirement home: bingo, there’s a revenue source to pay off construction bonds with no tax increase).

Too good to be true? Maybe, maybe not. Too improbable to ever happen exactly that way? Maybe, maybe not.

What is known is that turf battles inevitably break out, if only because appointed or elected school boards have no taxing powers. Councils and boards of supervisors may or may not be allowed to join in the closed sessions to discuss a private partner’s proposal; parents and other citizens most definitely will not be allowed in.

In Clarke County, town, county and school board officials had to promise not to reveal details before they were allowed to see proposals in detail.

The school board then voted to move forward with a proposed partnership -- without asking its liaison with the board of supervisors to join in a closed-door discussion.

Miffed, the supervisors then voted to hire their own consultant to check the school board’s proposal -- prompting the school board to complain that the search for a consultant had been done behind its back.

Little wonder some members of the board of supervisors flatly expressed disdain for the PPEA process. Supervisor David Weiss said he was worried that only "a select group of people" knew what was going on.

Two groups that are in cahoots can come up with terms that benefit them, Weiss complained at a session with Del. Joe May, R-Leesburg. But unless there is a compelling need for people to know, May said, these business deals can be kept private.

In Stafford County, PPEA let the school board forge a partnership with an out-of-state company, without telling the public that a local company -- one with a history of building schools in Stafford -- had offered to do the job for $12 million less.

The partnership was supposed to net the county $10 million in development deals, bring a library and businesses to the area, and trim costs and time from three school-building projects.

But, as The Free Lance-Star reported, not much had gone as planned: The schools are costing millions more than expected, $10 million in potential revenue has evaporated, a library and other amenities will not be built, and the private partner was dropped from one construction project (after $800,000 got spent on a design that might never be used).

Elected officials had hoped a partnership would be a model for other counties to emulate. It was the first of its kind in Virginia. "Sometimes, you have to take a risk and see if there’s a better way," said Jim Campbell, executive director of the Virginia Association of Counties.

In Bedford County, school officials decided to go along with two contractors who asked members not to divulge costs for building two schools until contracts got signed. Understandably, that frustrated the board of supervisors, which holds the purse strings for education spending. Chairman Bobby Pollard told The Roanoke Times that residents have "got to know what they’re paying for."

In an editorial, the Times said, "By agreeing to shield the costs from taxpayers until the school board signs a contract, Bedford officials are putting the interests of private firms above public scrutiny. The public deserves greater accountability. "

The situation, said the Times, "illustrates a broader concern about what and when the public is entitled to learn about proposals negotiated under public-private partnerships. Private firms can ask governing bodies with which they are partnering for extensive privacy. That doesn’t mean, however, that the localities should agree to it. The public, which picks up the tab, should not be brought into the process as an afterthought. "

The editorial concluded: "With the growing prevalence of public-private partnerships, state leaders should revisit (PPEA) legislation and clarify it to improve public access to information regarding projects being built for Virginians ’ benefit, and with their tax support."

-- Frosty Landon