Group Initative script question

Is it possible to divide the results of rolls in the Group Initiative script by 100? The reason I ask is that I would like to reroll initiative every round in my next campaign. However I also like to use the Turn Tracker to track the round number, spell durations, etc. But this causes problems because when I re-roll it sorts everything in the Turn Tracker based on their current values. Thus the Round number can bounce around, causing problems. Dividing the Initative values of the combatants by 100 would solve this as they would always be less than 1 and always sort behind the Round number and spell durations. But I'm not seeing a way to do this short of changing the code. Am I missing something?
The Aaron
API Scripter
I can't think of a way to do that currently, but let's talk about the root problem, the turnmarker. What script are you using for that? I think fixing it to go to the right place would be easier. TurnMarker1 should be doing that already based on events from GroupInitiative. 
I'm not using any script to handle spell durations or round tracking.  Sorry for any confusion, l said Turn Tracker, but I mean the ingame Turn Order tool. I create a round tracker and spell duration tracker using the Add Custom Item and Round Calculation option via the ingame Turn Order tool.  But I would like the Round Tracker and spell duration counters to remain at the top of the initiative order each round.  Currently, based on what combatants roll, the current round and spell duration counters move around in the initiative order. So to do this, I came up with either: Make the initiative value of the combatants always <1.  This seemed cleaner since the values are arbitrary anyway.  All that matters is the order of the combatants. Start the Round Tracker and spell durations at 1000-something.  So combat would start at round 1001, then go to 1002, 1003, etc.  Spell durations would normally start at 1010, then drop to 1009, 1008, etc.  This way these trackers always remain at the top of the Initiative order.  But it looks bad.  I'm not a fan of this option.