Site search
sponsored by
News
On Jan. 20, President Obama delivered his inaugural address and included this statement in a section dealing with several difficult issues facing our nation: “Our minds are no less inventive ... than they were last week or last month or last year ... But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions — that time has surely passed.”
I was reminded of that statement as I read the May 9 Other Voices column authored by Nevada County Superintendent of Schools Holly Hermansen concerning school district organization.
Like many other county residents, I find it counter-intuitive that a population of perhaps 80,000 in western Nevada County finds it necessary to have nine separate elementary school districts.
However, a study by the superintendent's office concluded that the costs of unification outweighed the benefits. If I read between the lines correctly, this is primarily due to a state law that mandates salary adjustments to the highest level of any single district when districts are consolidated.
Such an adjustment would be, however, a one-time event, while any benefits of consolidation are ongoing and continue well beyond the initial action.
Salary levels after consolidation are a product of negotiation. Given the precarious state of the California budget process, any action that reduces the costs of providing education resources to our communities should be carefully considered, even in one small county.
Since moving to Nevada County eight years ago, I have spent my “retirement” as a substitute teacher, working about 100 days per year in a variety of schools. I do not pretend to have perfect knowledge of the programs, facilities, class size, and classroom options in all of those schools. However, I have observed enough to at least make some suggestions as to how those charged with responsibility to consider changes might begin the task of consolidation and rationalization of the elementary schools within the county.
My access to statistics is limited to the publicly available 2008 STAR test results, which include the population of each school by grade level in grades second through 12th.
District boundaries are viewable online. Those school district boundaries are, for the most part, straight lines drawn, I assume, along section lines. I do not know when the boundaries were adopted, but certainly the existence of some schools can be traced to the transportation options in the 19th century, not the 21st.
We have one district, Union Hill, which is completely surrounded by another, Grass Valley, and owes its growth not to an increase in population, but to interdistrict transfers.
The Alta Sierra subdivision has a line through it separating the northeast corner from the rest of the area. The result of that is a never-ending process of applying for inter-district transfers.
One member of the Pleasant Ridge board was forced to resign because, while his driveway was in district, his house was over the line.
Another inadvertently moved 100 feet into the other district, and also resigned. The multiplicity of school districts creates confusion, waste of resources, and expense.
The basic premise of this proposal is that all of the existing elementary school districts should be consolidated into one district — the Nevada County Unified Elementary School District. Such a proposal is easier to implement than several combinations of two or more existing districts.
All of the voters in western Nevada County simply vote up or down on the consolidation. If approved, the new district would draw attendance boundaries so as to fit the population of grades 6-8 into three middle schools: Lyman Gilmore, Magnolia, and Seven Hills.
All of the remaining schools in the new district would either be closed or converted to K–5 or, in some cases, K–2 or 3–5. The three middle schools are now roughly of equal size and each has a sufficient population to support art, music, computer, and athletic programs of high caliber. Academically, their size permits them to offer classes at various ability levels, whether advanced or remedial.
While K–8 schools have their adherents, I believe that the benefits of consolidating into a single district with attendance boundaries around the three middle schools would reduce the overall costs of the county, and ensure that the three middle schools have sufficient populations to sustain their academic and extra-curricular programs, even as the overall student population continues to decline.
It is the prospect of school closures that will cause the greatest consternation among those in the education community, whether educators or parents. However, in a time when the state faces unprecedented revenue shortfalls, the community at large should have a role in determining whether or not to support a nine-district elementary school system with five schools in four of those districts, all K–8, each having a population of fewer than 200 students.
It is those single-school districts that are most difficult to justify, but because each has a separate administration and constituency, they are also the most difficult to eliminate.
Once a consolidation into a single district is accomplished, the changes to individual schools can be phased in as the county superintendent, the new district superintendent, and the principals explore their options and the best way to accomplish the goal of rationalization.
I fully realize that this proposal will be met with much disagreement from parents, faculty, and administration of the affected schools, but I do believe that the discussion has to start somewhere. “Standing pat” is not an option when costs are considered.
I was reminded of that statement as I read the May 9 Other Voices column authored by Nevada County Superintendent of Schools Holly Hermansen concerning school district organization.
Like many other county residents, I find it counter-intuitive that a population of perhaps 80,000 in western Nevada County finds it necessary to have nine separate elementary school districts.
However, a study by the superintendent's office concluded that the costs of unification outweighed the benefits. If I read between the lines correctly, this is primarily due to a state law that mandates salary adjustments to the highest level of any single district when districts are consolidated.
Such an adjustment would be, however, a one-time event, while any benefits of consolidation are ongoing and continue well beyond the initial action.
Salary levels after consolidation are a product of negotiation. Given the precarious state of the California budget process, any action that reduces the costs of providing education resources to our communities should be carefully considered, even in one small county.
Since moving to Nevada County eight years ago, I have spent my “retirement” as a substitute teacher, working about 100 days per year in a variety of schools. I do not pretend to have perfect knowledge of the programs, facilities, class size, and classroom options in all of those schools. However, I have observed enough to at least make some suggestions as to how those charged with responsibility to consider changes might begin the task of consolidation and rationalization of the elementary schools within the county.
My access to statistics is limited to the publicly available 2008 STAR test results, which include the population of each school by grade level in grades second through 12th.
District boundaries are viewable online. Those school district boundaries are, for the most part, straight lines drawn, I assume, along section lines. I do not know when the boundaries were adopted, but certainly the existence of some schools can be traced to the transportation options in the 19th century, not the 21st.
We have one district, Union Hill, which is completely surrounded by another, Grass Valley, and owes its growth not to an increase in population, but to interdistrict transfers.
The Alta Sierra subdivision has a line through it separating the northeast corner from the rest of the area. The result of that is a never-ending process of applying for inter-district transfers.
One member of the Pleasant Ridge board was forced to resign because, while his driveway was in district, his house was over the line.
Another inadvertently moved 100 feet into the other district, and also resigned. The multiplicity of school districts creates confusion, waste of resources, and expense.
The basic premise of this proposal is that all of the existing elementary school districts should be consolidated into one district — the Nevada County Unified Elementary School District. Such a proposal is easier to implement than several combinations of two or more existing districts.
All of the voters in western Nevada County simply vote up or down on the consolidation. If approved, the new district would draw attendance boundaries so as to fit the population of grades 6-8 into three middle schools: Lyman Gilmore, Magnolia, and Seven Hills.
All of the remaining schools in the new district would either be closed or converted to K–5 or, in some cases, K–2 or 3–5. The three middle schools are now roughly of equal size and each has a sufficient population to support art, music, computer, and athletic programs of high caliber. Academically, their size permits them to offer classes at various ability levels, whether advanced or remedial.
While K–8 schools have their adherents, I believe that the benefits of consolidating into a single district with attendance boundaries around the three middle schools would reduce the overall costs of the county, and ensure that the three middle schools have sufficient populations to sustain their academic and extra-curricular programs, even as the overall student population continues to decline.
It is the prospect of school closures that will cause the greatest consternation among those in the education community, whether educators or parents. However, in a time when the state faces unprecedented revenue shortfalls, the community at large should have a role in determining whether or not to support a nine-district elementary school system with five schools in four of those districts, all K–8, each having a population of fewer than 200 students.
It is those single-school districts that are most difficult to justify, but because each has a separate administration and constituency, they are also the most difficult to eliminate.
Once a consolidation into a single district is accomplished, the changes to individual schools can be phased in as the county superintendent, the new district superintendent, and the principals explore their options and the best way to accomplish the goal of rationalization.
I fully realize that this proposal will be met with much disagreement from parents, faculty, and administration of the affected schools, but I do believe that the discussion has to start somewhere. “Standing pat” is not an option when costs are considered.
Chris Kane lives in Nevada County.
