HB 1289 - School Consolidation

[PrideTrombone]

Bill looks at school overhead

A lawmaker has filed a bill to shift more funding to the classroom by reducing administrative overhead. House Bill 1289 would create county districts across Oklahoma outside of the Oklahoma City and Tulsa metro areas. School districts in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Rogers, Cleveland and Canadian counties would be restructured into one or more districts of 7,000 to 14,000 students each under the measure filed by Rep. David Derby, R-Owasso. The bill would not close any school sites but would require fewer school administrators, he said, as only one superintendent could be hired per district.

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-capitol-briefs/article/3534450#ixzz1CXKCD3O0

Thoughts? I'm a teacher, and I think this doesn't go far enough. I'd be in favor of closing school sites that are lower than a certain enrollment, if transporting students to a more distant site would be cheaper. I don't understand how some of these districts can claim to be offering sufficient educational opportunities with 15 teachers in an entire district.

[Soonrboy]

As a principal I agree. I have almost 1000 students in my building alone. There are schools with less than 300 kids in it, and their principals make more than I do?? How is that equitable? Consolidate, get the money in the classrooms where it is needed!

[okie52]

"Bill looks at school overhead

A lawmaker has filed a bill to shift more funding to the classroom by reducing administrative overhead. House Bill 1289 would create county districts across Oklahoma outside of the Oklahoma City and Tulsa metro areas. School districts in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Rogers, Cleveland and Canadian counties would be restructured into one or more districts of 7,000 to 14,000 students each under the measure filed by Rep. David Derby, R-Owasso. The bill would not close any school sites but would require fewer school administrators, he said, as only one superintendent could be hired per district.

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-capitol-briefs/article/3534450#ixzz1CXKCD3O0"

Thoughts? I'm a teacher, and I think this doesn't go far enough. I'd be in favor of closing school sites that are lower than a certain enrollment, if transporting students to a more distant site would be cheaper. I don't understand how some of these districts can claim to be offering sufficient educational opportunities with 15 teachers in an entire district.


Thank God!!!! We should have about 1/5 of the school districts as we have now.

[Jammin']

This makes more sense than what we are currently doing and I agree with the OP that closing down the smallest/smaller schools would also benefit education in Oklahoma.

[ouwasp]

out in western OK many folks will be getting ready for a fistfight...

As for the county-wide Supt.... who would choose this person? Would the school boards of the existing districts be combined and/or thinned out? You know a town in the corner of one county will feel jealous over the attention/$ a school on the other side receives... would higher-performing districts be dragged down by other school systems that have perpetual infighting?

I can think of many such scenarios like the above happening in the county where I teach. There are a couple of nearby towns that are always in turmoil over coaches and administrators. Nobody should be yoked with that...

That said, there are a couple of dependent schools within my county that have dubious reason to exist. Tempered consolidation is on its way, and it is needed. But I think HB 1289 is too simplistic, imo.

[Cornfed]

Big can of worms if you ask me.

[BajaOklahoma]

Texas is cutting funding for next year - and I mean major cuts. Multi-millions is the lowest I've heard.
Our district started out by firing the second-in-command (widely presumed to be the next superintendent), who happened to be the guy presenting the plan to the school board. Our district is divided into three clusters of schools feeding into the senior high schools. Each cluster had their own admin staff - the cluster staff is now gone. Rumored cuts to extras like speech/debate, PACE (acedemically advanced classes in elementary), Special Ed (we provide way above what the state requires) and ESL (for speakers of other languages).
Personally, I was pleased to hear that they started at the top. My concern is that they create new jobs for the displaced admin staff.

[GDC]

As a principal I agree. I have almost 1000 students in my building alone. There are schools with less than 300 kids in it, and their principals make more than I do?? How is that equitable? Consolidate, get the money in the classrooms where it is needed!

All administrators do basically the same types and amounts of work, regardless of the number of students in their buildings or districts.

It's interesting to me that our society is all about having options or choices, except when it comes to education.

[Serenity Now]

My wife is a liberal teacher. She agrees with the OP. It's sad that a few bad apple Supt's sully the whole bunch in the small schools. My daughter goes to a nice county school here in Eastern OK. The Supt. functions like a Principal but he doesn't have to. He's directing traffic in the morning with the custodial staff when I dropp her off.

[Soonrboy]

All administrators do basically the same types and amounts of work, regardless of the number of students in their buildings or districts.

It's interesting to me that our society is all about having options or choices, except when it comes to education.



More teachers, more observations. The paperwork isn't the problem. It's the face-to-face interactions with the teachers, students, and parents that take up the time.

[PrideTrombone]

My wife is a liberal teacher. She agrees with the OP. It's sad that a few bad apple Supt's sully the whole bunch in the small schools. My daughter goes to a nice county school here in Eastern OK. The Supt. functions like a Principal but he doesn't have to. He's directing traffic in the morning with the custodial staff when I dropp her off.

See, if your Superintendent has time to go out and direct traffic, then IMO that district is too small for him to have a Superintendent gig to himself. Superintendents need to worry about $$ and managing the other administrators. If there isn't enough $$ or other administrators to worry about, time to add some more by combining with another district. Just my .02.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Oklahoma has over 500 superintendants while Florida as 67....I think this bill is a good start.

[oklaclarinet]

I understand the reasoning behind consolidation, but in order for it to be effective, it needs a much more thought out plan than this simplistic bill. For one thing, aligning by county could face problems for schools and districts that cross county lines. A couple of examples:

-Several schools in the Moore district, while primarily in Cleveland County, have boundaries in Oklahoma County. One in fact sits in Oklahoma County (just by being on the north side of SW 89th rather than the south side).

-The Owasso district lies mostly in Tulsa County, but a small portion stretches into Rogers County. Now Owasso has one 6th grade building, one 7th grade building, one 8th grade building, and one high school building for the whole district. So any 6th-12th grade student in Owasso district, even those in Rogers County, currently attend sites in Tulsa County. Would those students then have to go to a site in Rogers County? (Doing so would force those students to either Claremore or Verdigris, much further drives than to any of the Owasso sites.)

-While the bill wouldn't close any sites, would it force any students to relocate within the county? Would, for example, students who currently attend Poteau be forced to Howe, Wister, Cameron, or Spiro in order to create schools of more equitable size? (Currently most districts with multiple high schools keep them about equal size.)

With this county plan, I see more bureaucracy, not less. I can picture a new county superintendent in each county being added in addition to all current administration. To me, the most logical course of action would be to fold dependent districts into the independent districts. These dependent sites could function as another elementary feeder into the high schools they currently feed, and it would allow high school teachers to more vertically align curriculum with all the elementary students they will eventually receive.

[PrideTrombone]

"The bill would not close any school sites but would require fewer school administrators, he said, as only one superintendent could be hired per district."

Seems to me that they'd pick one of the superintendents to manage the whole thing, and do away with the rest. The entire point is to save money, so I don't see how they'd then add another administrator on top and leave the current ones in place. I'd like to see the actual language of the bill, but I think it's necessary.

The easiest thing to do (meaning that probably no one's thought of it) would be to have all students stay in the schools the currently attend, but only the oversight would change. I doubt they'd force students to change high schools unless actual SITES were consolidated (which I think would be a good thing for at least the schools in classes 1A, B, and C). The state saves money, and students go to schools that can actually offer them something. You can't tell me that Felt High School or Sweetwater High School (ADM - 18 students apiece) are able to offer sufficient educational opportunities to their students.

[oklaclarinet]

"The bill would not close any school sites but would require fewer school administrators, he said, as only one superintendent could be hired per district."

Seems to me that they'd pick one of the superintendents to manage the whole thing, and do away with the rest. The entire point is to save money, so I don't see how they'd then add another administrator on top and leave the current ones in place. I'd like to see the actual language of the bill, but I think it's necessary.

The easiest thing to do (meaning that probably no one's thought of it) would be to have all students stay in the schools the currently attend, but only the oversight would change. I doubt they'd force students to change high schools unless actual SITES were consolidated (which I think would be a good thing for at least the schools in classes 1A, B, and C). The state saves money, and students go to schools that can actually offer them something. You can't tell me that Felt High School or Sweetwater High School (ADM - 18 students apiece) are able to offer sufficient educational opportunities to their students.

Not disagreeing, but the logistics, as put forth in the original statement, again seem much too simplistic. And some of my previous county straddling examples weren't the best, since they are in the "metro" counties listed, so I will throw out another one - Skiatook straddles Tulsa and Osage Counties. Will its students be split?

Futher analysis of the metro plan raises even more questions. Why do the metro districts need to be split into districts of 7,000-14,000? In the counties listed, the Moore, Norman, Edmond, Mid-Del, Putnam City, Oklahoma City, Broken Arrow, Tulsa, and Union districts are all larger than 14,000. Is there really any reason to split them up? Also why limit the metro districts to 14,000 when a county like Comanche would end up with an enrollment of almost 22,000?

[SicEmBaylor]

In principle, I'm all for school consolidation. I'm not sure I like this idea, though.

I absolutely positively don't want any of the bozos in Muskogee having anything to do with Fort Gibson. The very idea horrifies me to my very core.

[oklaclarinet]

County based consolidation makes more sense when you are dealing with counties like Cimarron County, which has a total of 450 students.
Boise City 298
Felt 59
Keyes 83
Plainview 10 (dependent district)
(These are 2009 numbers, but still gives a good idea.)

Of course, the entire panhandle has less than 6,000 students, but you face major geographic issues at that point.

[jkjsooner]

What about school districts that currently cross county lines?

Edit: Just noticed clarinet already mentioned this...

[GKeeper316]

this was the top of the list recommendation a few years ago when the state hired an education consulting firm to come in and see what all could be done to cut education costs statewide. it was immediately shot down by the legislature. they like having all these districts for some reason.

[soonercruiser]

All administrators do basically the same types and amounts of work, regardless of the number of students in their buildings or districts.

It's interesting to me that our society is all about having options or choices, except when it comes to education.

Gee! I'm for educational choice!
Let's give all parents ed. vouchers and see where they want their children to go to school. (probably won't be public schools)
I think that we know the answer. Same as the Obamas.

[GKeeper316]

It's interesting to me that our society is all about having options or choices, except when it comes to education.

because we view education as a right, not a free market commodity.

[badger]

because we view education as a right, not a free market commodity.

Isn't it? I mean, at the K-12 level at least?

[SicEmBaylor]

Isn't it? I mean, at the K-12 level at least?

No, it is not.

[Cornfed]

No, it is not.

I'm allways amazed at how many people believe it is.

[yermom]

rights aren't compulsory...

[royalfan5]

In Nebraska, we have quite a few unified districts in which administration is shared between multiple K-12 districts. The school I went to before it consolidated didn't have a full-time adminstrator. We had a Social Studies/Football coach/track coach/principal. and a quarter time superintendent who also did some janitoring. The now consolidated successor district has a superintendent and a principal. Of course in Nebraska the main driver for consolidation is running out of bodies for the football team.

[OutlandTrophy]

Isn't it? I mean, at the K-12 level at least?

Nope, they are also not required to send busses to pick kids up to bring them to school.

[Jammin']

What about school districts that currently cross county lines?

Edit: Just noticed clarinet already mentioned this...

Whatever county the HS building is physically in, the whole district would be a part of. So the county that Owasso HS actually sits in, that's the county that will oversee that school district.

That took me almost 10 seconds to solve, what else you got?

[Soonerfan88]

I don't have much dog in this fight, probably not any since I don't live in OK any more, but here's my 2¢


I solved the multi-county issue just like Jammin' - that's a really weak argument. This is another NIMBY. Most understand that many of these administrators are unnecessary and a drain on limited tax dollars. However, nobody wants their district to be touched so we end up with either nothing or the wrong thing being done. Folks need to stop thinking selfishly and start thinking about what is best for Oklahoma students long term. Yes, some will be inconvenienced due to possible school closings and several administrators will lose their jobs, but can Oklahoma really afford to not do it?

[Jammin']

I don't have much dog in this fight, probably not any since I don't live in OK any more, but here's my 2¢


I solved the multi-county issue just like Jammin' - that's a really weak argument. This is another NIMBY. Most understand that many of these administrators are unnecessary and a drain on limited tax dollars. However, nobody wants their district to be touched so we end up with either nothing or the wrong thing being done. Folks need to stop thinking selfishly and start thinking about what is best for Oklahoma students long term. Yes, some will be inconvenienced due to possible school closings and several administrators will lose their jobs, but can Oklahoma really afford to not do it?

Agreed. And I know many GREAT administrators will lose their jobs. It will be bad. But no different than the hundreds, if not thousands, of teachers that have lost their jobs over the years in Oklahoma so that we could keep high priced administrators who spent time directing traffic, substituting, doing building repairs, etc... Some one pull the number of administrators OK has and compare it to Texas. It's a joke and needs to be addressed as does consolidating the schools, which will also be bad for about 3 years and then no one at the school will remember it any differently.

[jkjsooner]

No, it is not.

Again, I'll say that the quickest way to third world status is to have a large percentage of the population uneducated. It's in all of our best interests to educate our children. You think we have social problems now? Wait until 30% of our students are illiterate and roaming the streets because their parents can't afford to put them in school.

You know those liberal sociology professors that seem to have their head stuck in some kind of ideological cloud with no sense of true reality. I like you but sometimes you're the libertarian version of that.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

I believe k-12 is a statutory right, but not a constitutional right.

[OklahomaTuba]

This would all be solved if the parents were given the money to send their kids where they wanted to.

[jkjsooner]

This would all be solved if the parents were given the money to send their kids where they wanted to.

I know it's pointless arguing with you but do you honestly think that the money that is given to parents would actually fund a decent education? If so, then I'd be all for a voucher system.

I think what would really happen is that it would only be a way for the upper middle class to subsidize their kid's private education and the poor would be stuck in even worse schools.

And, Tuba, I know you agree that more government money just leads to price inflation so I think we would both agree that giving vouchers would escalate the cost of a private school education.


I'm all for choice in education and if someone came up with a plan that would seem to work then I would be all for it. The problem is that the school systems are locally funded and that complicates the issue greatly.

The charter school system seems to work but we're hardly talking about a fair comparison. In D.C. it's based on a lottery system which seems absurdly random and unfair. In addition, parents have to go through the process of applying to charter schools which clearly favors kids whose parents give a crap. It's no wonder they outperform the traditional public schools. They're comprised of kids whose parents actually value education.

[jkjsooner]

I believe k-12 is a statutory right, but not a constitutional right.

I think we're talking about rights that are above and beyond any statutory or constitutional concerns. In the modern world where education is required for any level of success, yes, I think primary education must be a right for all children. What they do with this education is up to them and their parents...

But this goes far beyond individual rights. It is absolutely necessary for the health of the country.

[OutlandTrophy]

I think we're talking about rights that are above and beyond any statutory or constitutional concerns. In the modern world where education is required for any level of success, yes, I think primary education must be a right for all children. What they do with this education is up to them and their parents...

But this goes far beyond individual rights. It is absolutely necessary for the health of the country.

that's a lot of words to say, "No, education in America is not a right."

[OUMallen]

I know some people worry about small towns drying up if their school districts are erased. E.g.: Lomega, Binger-Oney, Lookeba-Sickles.

[diegosooner]

With regard to the issue of Supt's losing their jobs, I would speculate that they are tenured as teachers so that they could go back into the classroom if their supt position is eliminated. However, I've seen many administrator/non-teaching positions eliminated here in California, and those losing their job usually don't seem interested in going back to classroom teaching. I don't have much sympathy for those individuals.

[Midtowner]

I know some people worry about small towns drying up if their school districts are erased. E.g.: Lomega, Binger-Oney, Lookeba-Sickles.

That's certainly a valid concern, and if they are willing to pay the extra tax dollars it costs us to keep those extra administrators and school boards, then they can keep their school districts.

I don't think keeping small towns on artificial life support is a legitimate use of our education dollars.

[badger]

It's either a right or it's a law, because the term "truancy" didn't pop up outta nowhere. :)

[OutlandTrophy]

It's either a right or it's a law, because the term "truancy" didn't pop up outta nowhere. :)

Kinda like the term 'speeding ticket'? Is driving slow or fast a right?

[okie52]

I know some people worry about small towns drying up if their school districts are erased. E.g.: Lomega, Binger-Oney, Lookeba-Sickles.

Why would the consolidation of school districts cause a community to dry up?

I am not talking about the elimination of any school (although some would certainly warrant it) but primarily the consolidation of administrative duties and the elimination of duplicative costs.

There are over 500 school districts in OK. Way too many for a state with less than 4,000,000 people. I think GA has over 10,000,000 people and about 180 school districts.

[OUMallen]

That's certainly a valid concern, and if they are willing to pay the extra tax dollars it costs us to keep those extra administrators and school boards, then they can keep their school districts.

I don't think keeping small towns on artificial life support is a legitimate use of our education dollars.

Oh, I agree. I don't agree that it's even a valid concern. If people want to stay, they will. If they don't, they won't. If it makes sense to stay, they will. Why would we want people to stay in a town where it doesn't make any sense to stay? That's just inefficient.

[diegosooner]

It's either a right or it's a law, because the term "truancy" didn't pop up outta nowhere. :)

A child is not required to attend public school but his/her right to attend the public school of the district in which he/she resides cannot be denied without sufficient cause. I believe this is how the courts interpret our statutes.

[OklahomaTuba]

I know it's pointless arguing with you but do you honestly think that the money that is given to parents would actually fund a decent education?Well considering how the teachers unions and government gave up trying to really educate our kids generations ago, I would say yes.

[SoonerJack]

This would all be solved if the parents were given the money to send their kids where they wanted to.

the path of least resistance is so easy to follow.

First of all, for most families, vouchers would not cover the full cost of private school tuition.

Secondly, keep in mind that public schools have to take everybody, Tuba. That means EVERYBODY.

EVERYBODY

Got a kid who is on an IEP and needs a six million dollar adaptive wheelchair, feeding tube, and pooping assistance? Public school has to take him.

Got a kid whose parents think its just fine for Johnny to skip the day after Call of Duty 14: Mars Attacks is released? Or it's ok to skip just because it's a little snowy outside or it's just too pretty to go to school etc. etc. Public school has to take him too. AND has to answer as to why his grades are so #%#(#*'n bad.

Private schools can decline to accept whoever the heck they want and they are not subject the regulations and requirements placed on public schools.

Trust me. Private schools don't want the red freakin' tape that would come along with public funding.

[oklaclarinet]

Whatever county the HS building is physically in, the whole district would be a part of. So the county that Owasso HS actually sits in, that's the county that will oversee that school district.

That took me almost 10 seconds to solve, what else you got?

Yes, but the bill doesn't address this. And of course, what if the building sits in a different county from where the school is organized. For my example, I will once again use Skiatook. The high school building officially sits in Osage County, but the district is primarily in and recognized as a district of Tulsa County. These are logistics that need to be worked out before, not after, something like this goes through.

[SoonerJack]

Our district's footprint includes around 6 taxing jurisdictions and parts of two counties. It's no big deal.

[OklahomaTuba]

Private schools can decline to accept whoever the heck they want and they are not subject the regulations and requirements placed on public schools.

Trust me. Private schools don't want the red freakin' tape that would come along with public funding.Hospitals are private, and by law they have to accept everyone.

Schools should be no different. And they aren't for the most part.

All i'm saying is let the schools compete. Parents need to have the power to do this, not these schools and their unions. The schools admins and unions have done enough damage, it time to admit its failed and move on.

[Sooner_Bob]

This makes more sense than what we are currently doing and I agree with the OP that closing down the smallest/smaller schools would also benefit education in Oklahoma.

But doing that would kill most small towns . . .

[yermom]

could you explain that?

[Sooner_Bob]

could you explain that?


Me?

[oklaclarinet]

Our district's footprint includes around 6 taxing jurisdictions and parts of two counties. It's no big deal.

Exactly. It's no big deal now because the school district boundaries in no way shape or form correlate with any of those other boundaries. It's when you realign those boundaries to conform with other pre-existing boundaries that you will have problems if you do not account for them ahead of time.

[Midtowner]

Why would the consolidation of school districts cause a community to dry up?

Small towns' identities often are embodied in their schools. While the town might not physically dry up, morale and identity probably will.

Of course, it bears repeating that administrative consolidation =/= physical school consolidation.

[OutlandTrophy]

boo freakin' hoo if their identity and morale dry up. cry me a river.

[Midtowner]

Does this bill account for how bond debt service would be handled? Why should (for example) citizens of Meridian have to pay debt service on a bond voted on and borrowed for the benefit of Cushing High School?

[Midtowner]

boo freakin' hoo if their identity and morale dry up. cry me a river.

I agree. I was merely stating the argument.

Do I give a rat's patoot if Carnegie has an identity or even exists? Nope. 'Specially if my tax dollars have to subsidize it and it is inefficient.

[OutlandTrophy]

Does this bill account for how bond debt service would be handled? Why should (for example) citizens of Meridian have to pay debt service on a bond voted on and borrowed for the benefit of Cushing High School?

are they part of the same district?

[Midtowner]

are they part of the same district?

No, in smaller counties, consolidation would consolidate by county. I believe Cushing and Meridian are both in Lincoln County.

[royalfan5]

At the end of the day, a lot of small towns are going to dry up whether you have a school or not. People don't have kids like they used to, and there isn't a lot of opportunity in small towns. Sure some will stay, but there isn't the opporuntity for most people.

If a small town is going to make, it is going to be the local businesses that keep it going. My hometown in Nebraska lost it's high school 11 years ago. I was the last graduate. The town has grown since then because the local phone/internet company has reinvested in the community and grown, same with the local construction company that goes all over the Midwest. I'm pretty sure my Uncle is down in Tulsa right now overseeing a store foundation being laid. Another couple started a meat processing business that now covers a solid block of buildings. That is what is keeping people around, not the idenity that comes the school.

[OutlandTrophy]

No, in smaller counties, consolidation would consolidate by county. I believe Cushing and Meridian are both in Lincoln County.

the folks of Meridian currently sevrvice debt for bonds in Cushing? I'm confused.

[Midtowner]

the folks of Meridian currently sevrvice debt for bonds in Cushing? I'm confused.

Let me rephrase the question.

Currently, with 500 and something different entities, you have 500 and something different entities capable of issuing bonds for capital improvements.

Let's take a collection of 30 of those entities, all of which have some bond debt, some of it very substantial, but hardly equal from district to district.

For example, we have Mid/Del, which hasn't invested much in their system and OKC, which really has. Should Mid/Del voters (who are also in Oklahoma County, and I realize this is a bad example because the bill doesn't contemplate the merger of major districts, but rather possibly splitting them), who have been decidedly against borrowing money, now be forced to pay the debt obligation borrowed for the benefit of other folks and voted on by other folks? Perhaps this is a bit of taxation without representation?

If we combine those 30 districts, how does service on all of those bonds get handled? Is there a process for that? In the past, when we've had one district merging into another, this was a little simpler. That's not the case here. He're we're talking about a lot of different entities and a lot of different obligations.

I'm not objecting to the idea of consolidation, but I do think we have to be realistic about the fact that it'd be a fairly involved and complex, and possibly unfair process.

[royalfan5]

Let me rephrase the question.

Currently, with 500 and something different entities, you have 500 and something different entities capable of issuing bonds for capital improvements.

Let's take a collection of 30 of those entities, all of which have some bond debt, some of it very substantial, but hardly equal from district to district.

For example, we have Mid/Del, which hasn't invested much in their system and OKC, which really has. Should Mid/Del voters (who are also in Oklahoma County, and I realize this is a bad example because the bill doesn't contemplate the merger of major districts, but rather possibly splitting them), who have been decidedly against borrowing money, now be forced to pay the debt obligation borrowed for the benefit of other folks and voted on by other folks? Perhaps this is a bit of taxation without representation?

If we combine those 30 districts, how does service on all of those bonds get handled? Is there a process for that? In the past, when we've had one district merging into another, this was a little simpler. That's not the case here. He're we're talking about a lot of different entities and a lot of different obligations.

I'm not objecting to the idea of consolidation, but I do think we have to be realistic about the fact that it'd be a fairly involved and complex, and possibly unfair process.

I don't know if you can do this in Oklahoma, but in Nebraska most consolidation agreements are drawn so remaining bonded indebtness stays with the patrons within the orginial district. E.G. District A has 15 years left on a bond issue, and district B has none, so the basic levy is the same for both, and then former District A shoulders the remaining bond cost until expiration. However, sometimes District B will eat District A's indebtnesses to keep it from merging with District C.

[OutlandTrophy]

for preexisting bonds nothing changes. That debt gets serviced like it has been. going forward all bonds would encumber everyone in the district.

I guess.

[prrriiide]

I'm allways amazed at how many people believe it is.

The irony of this post is priceless.

To the OP: What happens to districts like Bethany? Small district, small school, big metro area. But people line up and camp out 2-3 days in advance of the transfer application date to get their kids into that school. The academics at Bethany have always been second to none. Should that district be thrown under the bus in the name of cost-savings?

Why should a school that is doing just fine, TVM, be pulled down into the morass of mediocrity that mark most public school districts? You have a district that has committed itself to educational excellence and for the most part delivers. The parents are mostly engaged in the schools, because many of the students are there by choice. How is it a service to those students to be forced into a district that is too big to give a hoot about their academic excellence programs at lil' ol Bethany? Just because some other districts can't manage their affairs the few hundred students in the Bethany district should get boned? How is it their fault?

I'm not against consolidation, but just going at it willy-nilly like this bill is a stupid and short-sighted idea. You consolidate the districts that need consolidating. Leave the ones that are doing the job well and within budget alone.

[soonercruiser]

[QUOTE=prrriiide;3134348]The irony of this post is priceless.

To the OP: What happens to districts like Bethany? Small district, small school, big metro area. But people line up and camp out 2-3 days in advance of the transfer application date to get their kids into that school. The academics at Bethany have always been second to none. Should that district be thrown under the bus in the name of cost-savings?

Why should a school that is doing just fine, TVM, be pulled down into the morass of mediocrity that mark most public school districts? You have a district that has committed itself to educational excellence and for the most ..........[QUOTE]

You do realize that argument sounds like the national healthcare debate??
78-83% of Americans had good healthcare.
Soooooo, I guess we can justify destroying the whole American private healthcare system just to add some people??

[Midtowner]

for preexisting bonds nothing changes. That debt gets serviced like it has been. going forward all bonds would encumber everyone in the district.

I guess.

That seems like it'd be a fairly complicated task for the administrators of a combined district to take 20-30 districts and allocate ad valorem taxes from certain geographical districts to certain bonds.

I'm not claiming to be an expert in the area, this just strikes me as something which would be pretty complicated considering the scope and scale of consolidation being proposed.

[OutlandTrophy]

That seems like it'd be a fairly complicated task for the administrators of a combined district to take 20-30 districts and allocate ad valorem taxes from certain geographical districts to certain bonds.

I'm not claiming to be an expert in the area, this just strikes me as something which would be pretty complicated considering the scope and scale of consolidation being proposed.

here's an idea, why do we have to reinvent the wheel? Can we not look at another state's setup and model ours after theirs? I keep hearing about Florida, why not model theirs?

[PDXsooner]

I say we expand all our high schools to about 3 or 4 thousand so we can be really good at sports like Jenks and then brag about it as if it's because we're just superior athletes.

No Jenks, you're really not that great, you're just a huge high school. I'd like to see the three Lawton high schools merge into one. They'd kick Jenks' *** all over the field.

[Midtowner]

here's an idea, why do we have to reinvent the wheel? Can we not look at another state's setup and model ours after theirs? I keep hearing about Florida, why not model theirs?

Florida's system is a disaster. Maybe that's partially because Floridians in general are a disaster... idiots can't even work a hole punch and a ballot correctly.

But I see your point.

At the same time, I'm not aware of any state which has drastically reduced the number of school districts in the way we're proposing, so I imagine there's not a heck of a lot of precedent.

I just see bonds as being a major bugaboo to this process--and they're being overlooked.

[PrideTrombone]

Well considering how the teachers unions and government gave up trying to really educate our kids generations ago, I would say yes.

Luckily Oklahoma is right-to-work so I can try to teach kids and not be in the union. I really am thankful for that.

[PrideTrombone]

At the same time, I'm not aware of any state which has drastically reduced the number of school districts in the way we're proposing, so I imagine there's not a heck of a lot of precedent.



Arkansas did, pretty recently. They now spend $3,000 more per kid than we do.

[PrideTrombone]

The irony of this post is priceless.

To the OP: What happens to districts like Bethany? Small district, small school, big metro area. But people line up and camp out 2-3 days in advance of the transfer application date to get their kids into that school. The academics at Bethany have always been second to none. Should that district be thrown under the bus in the name of cost-savings?

Why should a school that is doing just fine, TVM, be pulled down into the morass of mediocrity that mark most public school districts? You have a district that has committed itself to educational excellence and for the most part delivers. The parents are mostly engaged in the schools, because many of the students are there by choice. How is it a service to those students to be forced into a district that is too big to give a hoot about their academic excellence programs at lil' ol Bethany? Just because some other districts can't manage their affairs the few hundred students in the Bethany district should get boned? How is it their fault?

I'm not against consolidation, but just going at it willy-nilly like this bill is a stupid and short-sighted idea. You consolidate the districts that need consolidating. Leave the ones that are doing the job well and within budget alone.

If I had my way, the metro areas would be left alone (especially high-performing districts, why not reward excellence), and the rural counties would be consolidated, mostly because no one wants to be lumped in with OKC or Tulsa Public Schools. In Bethany's case, because OKC Public is so big, I'd think they would be lumped in with Putnam City and be left as their own site. I don't see the problem with that.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

Do you recall the movie Schmidt, starring Jack Nicholson? When he retired, life at the company somehow managed just fine without him. That's pretty much true across the board for all of us. If a Supt's position is eliminated somehow life will still go on, and the teachers in that district will somehow manage to continue teaching.

Look, there are more superintendents in Oklahoma than there are generals in the entire damned United States Army! Our government has too many employees! We spend too much damned money paying public servants! Some of these superintendents can go back in the classroom to teach. If they don't like that idea, maybe they're in the wrong profession.

Where are you GrandLakeSooner, aka GLS? Stand up and defend yourself like a man! Or listen to yourself talk on and on and on and on like administrators love to do.

[GKeeper316]

I think we're talking about rights that are above and beyond any statutory or constitutional concerns. In the modern world where education is required for any level of success, yes, I think primary education must be a right for all children. What they do with this education is up to them and their parents...

But this goes far beyond individual rights. It is absolutely necessary for the health of the country.

it is a right in that it is offered freely to all children of appropriate age.

public educational opportunities are only denied to those children who prove themselves to be violent.

it is not guaranteed in the constitution, but as an enlightened society, we recognize the need for an educated populace.

[GKeeper316]

tulsa needs to build more schools, though.

thats why the jenkses and unions and broken arrows are always so dominant in football... it's easy to be the best when your talent pool is 3 times the size of your competition's.

[Half a Hundred]

it is a right in that it is offered freely to all children of appropriate age.

public educational opportunities are only denied to those children who prove themselves to be violent.

it is not guaranteed in the constitution, but as an enlightened society, we recognize the need for an educated populace.

In other words, it is a societal right, rather than an individual right. It is right to everyone in society that we have an educated populace. It's one of the things that the General Welfare clause was designed to address, along with the state versions of the clause.

As bad as it may be in Oklahoma, it's even worse here in New Jersey. There are four school districts and two high schools within walking distance of my house. That's insane.

[SpankyNek]

Hospitals are private, and by law they have to accept everyone.

Schools should be no different. And they aren't for the most part.

All i'm saying is let the schools compete. Parents need to have the power to do this, not these schools and their unions. The schools admins and unions have done enough damage, it time to admit its failed and move on.

Have you never considered moving because of the school district you kids will be in?

People already use the market to decide where their kids will go to school...it is probably the first item researched when selecting residency. I think that the entire educational budget should be split on a price per student basis, and checks should be sent out. period. If your school of 13 kids can live off of that money, then stay open, if not, consolidate.

The cost for a new high school in Katy or Cypress here in Texas is about $130 million dollars...as long as folks keep passing the bond issues, they should be able to pay their superintendents whatever they wish.

[oklaclarinet]

Ok, I went through and checked the complete wording of the bill, and here's some things I found:

Outside the 5 metro counties, all districts will be split along county lines and their assets and territories split between the two counties. However, no site may be closed within the first three years. So this wording implies that a student who attends school in one county but lives in another county would be forced to move schools. This would be a major problem and create more spending. Example:

Broken Arrow, the largest single high school in the state (not district, but single school) is located at Albany and 193rd E Ave. For those of you who don't know, 193rd E Ave. is also the county line between Tulsa and Wagoner Counties. Under this bill, the Tulsa portion of BA would restructure as one of the new Tulsa County districts, while the students in Wagoner County would be forced to another school. Over half of the territory of BA school is in Wagoner County. Now much of that is more rural, but that is a significant chunk of students that would be forced out of BA schools, which has the facilities to handle these larger numbers. To service these students, the Unified Wagoner district would have to build new schools in the Wagoner County portion of BA, costing a lot of money, or force these students into the facilities at Coweta, which are not designed to handle this influx of students. As for these students, does it really make economical sense for a student who currently attends BA High School and who lives in the city of BA and who lives across the street from BA High School to not be allowed to go to BA High School just because the county line falls in between.

You can pull up a map of all the districts in this state and see where problems will occur. From students in Seiling that will now have to travel 25 miles to Fairview to students in the northern portions of Deer Creek and Edmond that will be forced up to Guthrie, there are problems similar to the one I described in BA. And while many school districts follow county line boundaries because it makes geographic sense (i.e. there is a river), many don't in places. Why? Because the basic geography makes it much easier for the current school to serve the student than it does for a school in the county to do so.

Also the wording of the bill says all resulting districts must have between 7,000 and 14,000 students, but it doesn't provide any provisions for cases where a countywide district would have more or less. (I've already pointed out places where this would happen.)

I'm not opposed to consolidation where warranted. However, this half-baked bill creates as many problems as it fixes.

[SpankyNek]

Any state bill that creates a dichotomy of rights between "metro" and rural counties is unlikely to garner support, much less be able to withstand judicial scrutiny.

[jkjsooner]

Is there not a way that the state could allow the local districts to make decisions on how they consolidate their administrative and/or schools? You could push them without forcing them to follow arbitrary county lines.

One thing that has forced school consolidation was the increased academic related requirements. About 20 years ago Oklahoma started forcing schools to offer a full time counselor. (When I graduated we had an English teacher / librarian / counselor. Her counseling consisted of handing out college pamplets a couple of times a year.) Some schools couldn't meet this requirement and so they were forced into consolidation.

I've always been under the impression that schools were funded local and via the federal government. Is that true? If so, why does the state really care? If not, maybe some cuts in educational budget and increases in academic requirements would force the district's hands. Let the districts deal with the details rather than a one size fits all attempt by the state board of education.

Just a thought...

[Soonerwake]

This issue has always been the sacred cow in Oklahoma. Urban legislators will always point to the rural districts as the ones needing to be consolidated, while the rural legislators point right back at the Crooked Oak's, Millwood's, and Bethany's of the state. The reality is that folks don't want to lose "local control" of their schools, and any attempt to close a bunch of districts, specifically rural disticts, will bring people out of the woodwork. I feel for the administrative assistants for all of those legislators as their phones go beserk.

Saying that, I support consolidation as the first issue in a long plan to revamp education in Oklahoma. It just has to be done right, not as a quickly thrown-together attempt to get reelected.

[Half a Hundred]

Is there not a way that the state could allow the local districts to make decisions on how they consolidate their administrative and/or schools? You could push them without forcing them to follow arbitrary county lines.

No, because they would simply decide not to consolidate. Bureaucracies are concerned with their own self-preservation over all other goals.

[tulsaoilerfan]

I live in Henryetta and within 10 miles are the following other school Districts; Wilson, Dewar, Schulter, Graham, and Ryal(only goes thru 8th grade); when u figure in the amount of students in each school and the fact that each one has a Superintendent then that is alot of money that to be honest is being wasted; nothing against any of those schools but really it should be looked at doing something to save money to use elsewhere

[Leroy Lizard]

Just a note:

Florida only has about 70 districts but employs almost 12,000 administrators. So while they have very few superintendents, they have a lot of assistant administrators. Which makes sense, because as the districts consolidate the administrators start becoming overwhelmed and the district needs to hire more people.

I would suggest considering the consolidation of the smallest districts that are relatively close to each other. Consolidating two medium-sized districts into one large district isn't going to save much in terms of personnel and the layer of bureaucracy will make the district that much less effective. (The superintendent of the large district is going to pull a larger salary, so some of your savings fly out the window.) IMO, Moore PS is probably about as large as a district can become and still remain effective.

Administrators work very hard, that I can say. They are not always effective time managers and they don't necessarily have their priorities right. But they tend to put in long hours and are usually pretty stressed. IMO, they need more training in management and more oversight.