VIDALIA &8212; Most folks agreed on one thing &8212; neither side is interpreting the school bus contract the same way.

The Concordia Parish School Board&8217;s contract with Durham School Services has become a mainstay for argument at the board&8217;s monthly meetings. Tuesday night was no different.

First, the board voted to table a policy reading relating to the hiring of new bus drivers because of a dispute over what the procedure should be.

As the policy was written, all vacant routes will first be offered to tenured operators, then ultimately filled by Durham.

&8220;That will mean the Concordia Parish School District will never hire another contract driver,&8221; board member Mary Campbell said. &8220;A person living in Concordia Parish who paid their tax dollars will not get the chance to buy a bus if they choose to and drive it.&8221;

Superintendent Kerry Laster told the board that was part of the original contract with Durham.

But several board members have repeatedly expressed concern with that contract, saying it wasn&8217;t what they wanted.

&8220;We were supposed to meet and go over that contract,&8221; Campbell said. &8220;And that did not happen. If we had gone over this contract at first we wouldn&8217;t be facing all the problems we are facing now.&8221;

Later in the meeting, the contract came up again when bus driver Clarence Skipper spoke to the board on behalf of the drivers.

Skipper has refused to let Durham employees board his bus for a required mileage audit. He was told Monday by administrators to stop running his route until he complied.

Skipper said Tuesday night that he didn&8217;t want Durham to inspect his bus because he did not work for Durham.

&8220;Dr. Laster stated (when the contract was signed) that Durham would have nothing to do with contract drivers.&8221;

Skipper said he would allow the district&8217;s transportation supervisor to audit his bus.

Laster told Skipper he was correct, that he was not responsible to Durham. However, the district has brought in an outside auditor before, and this was no different.

&8220;We always said (Durham) would be a part of the school district,&8221; she said. &8220;We said they would provide us with supervisory things. They will not evaluate you or take disciplinary actions against you.&8221;

The debate then centered on the meaning of &8220;supervisory&8221; and &8220;management.&8221;

&8220;When we talk about the management of it we are talking about two different things,&8221; President Lynn White said. &8220;There&8217;s a lot of gray. You can take what this says and make it say one thing or you can do it the other way.&8221;

Board members Campbell, Melanie Watson, Gary Parnham and Martha Rabb said they agreed with Skipper, saying he shouldn&8217;t have to allow Durham audits.

&8220;We have taken this company and thrown it in our contract drivers&8217; faces,&8221; Campbell said. &8220;And now we are rubbing it in.&8221;

Several times during the meeting board attorney John Guice stood up and warned the board about proceeding further.

Guice reminded the board that any changes to the contract must also be agreed upon by Durham. And he cautioned them to avoid talking about Skipper&8217;s employment in open session because it was a personnel issue.

Skipper said he would like to continue driving, but had no plans to comply with Durham&8217;s audit. Laster said she would meet with him today.