[Vision2020] discussion: school configuration

[Saundra Lund]

Hi Debbie,

Thanks for bringing this up . . . but I think you should have shared your
thoughts  :-)  This is an issue where I really would like the benefit of hearing
what others think who likely have a better grasp on the intricacies than I have.

Debbie, I'm not sure if you're asking about facilities (which is the bond issue
we'll be facing) or grade configuration, but I'm going to share some of my
thoughts on facilities.

I appreciate that Jeff Harkins has shared his thinking -- he's provided some
good food for thought.  And, I'm hoping to read what others think about the
issues he raised.

I'll start out by saying that in spite of my tremendous support for public
education, I've not yet decided if I can afford to vote in favor of any bond at
this time.  OTOH, I don't know how I can afford to *not* vote in favor of  a
bond.

But, my husband works at the UI (I've been unable to work outside the home for
the past few years due to health problems of family members), and these have
been frighteningly lean years recently with no end in sight.  Add to that the
dramatic erosion of health care benefits for UI employees, something that's hit
our family very hard, and "lean" years become "grim."  And, then there's
increasing property taxes, inflation (while modest, still something to be
considered in light of all the other drains on our family budget), etc.

As tight as things have been for us, though, we are fortunate.  Many others in
our community, particularly the elderly and handicapped (and young families, and
families with college students, etc), don't have the personal resources our
family has been able to rely on.

And, the three tracks that are on the board now aren't necessarily the tracks
I'd be looking at.  BUT, that's what we've got, and I'm satisfied that those
actively involved have done their best at arriving at those tracks.

All of that said, I'd be most likely to support a bond for a "New Elementary and
New High School Track."

>From the little I know, remodeling the HS seems to be an incredible waste of
precious money -- I just don't see how it can be saved/remodeled to serve the
needs of HS students.  Period.  For me, this was a huge factor in looking at the
options and I don't foresee myself supporting a bond effort that wants to sink
money into remodeling what I view as a losing proposition.

I've also long had concerns about Russell as an elementary school:  that
facility, it seems to me, has serious problems for elementary students.  My
child didn't attend Russell so perhaps I'm not really in a position to say, but
the age of the building and costs seem to me to indicate that building a new
elementary school (estimated cost:  $7.12 - $9.23 million) seems to be wiser
fiscally than remodeling it for continued use as an elementary school (estimated
cost:  $4.53 - $7.11 million).

I almost certainly would NOT support a bond for the track that calls for
remodeling only.  In my opinion, remodeling only is incredibly expensive and
doesn't adequately address the facilities problems.

I know some folks have expressed concerns about "neighborhood" schools.  I'm not
really sure I understand their concerns, but it seems to me that "neighborhoods"
in Moscow have changed with new construction.  So, while it's difficult for me
to think about schools moving & being in different places, Moscow has grown &
perhaps we need to remember that there are new neighborhoods which need to be
included in the definition of "neighborhood schools."

All of that said, I have one major concern that relates tangentially, I guess,
to any facilities bond.  And, that concern is vocational/technical education in
this district, which (IMHO) is pretty darn pathetic.  My (limited) understanding
is that the main blocks to having a better vocational/technical program relate
to the lack of space *and* funding.

Back in the Dark Ages <g>, I was fortunate to attend school in a district that
had an *excellent* vocational program at the high school level.  It seems to me
that vocational/technical education is often talked about with respect to kids
who may not be college bound.

That, I think, is an incorrect assumption and sells short the importance of
vocational/technical education for all students.  While vocational/technical
education is beneficial for non-college-bound students, it's also very
beneficial (IMHO) to college-bound students.  I gave up some electives (which
was the only way I could participate and preserve my AP classes, plus I also had
to attend summer school to take "required" courses) to participate in my high
school's vocational program, and that education enabled me to get a decent job
to help me better support myself while attending college, and that's what a lot
of my friends did as well.  I had an employer who understood that college was
important, and the vocational education enabled me to get a job that paid a
*lot* better, so I could work fewer hours while attending college.

So, if we (as a community) support a bond that improves facilities so there's
adequate *space/facilities* for an expanded vocational/technical program, where
would the funds come from for actually expanding our vocational/technical
program???

Whew!  OK, I've shared some of my thoughts & concerns.  I'm really interested in
reading what others think, so I hope others will chime in, please!


Saundra Lund
Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
nothing.
-Edmund Burke

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On
Behalf Of Deborah Gray
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 5:05 PM
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] discussion: school configuration

Any opinions on the school configurations being considered by the school board?
Good, bad, indifferent, informed or not?

Debbie Gray
dgray at uidaho.edu