The Facility Efficiency Review Committee outlined three scenarios preferred the most for consideration to the Olympia School District (OSD) Board, which they considered instrumental in bringing back more operational budget.
This Thursday, November 2, the committee had a work session to discuss the opinions of their 32 consistently attending members.
Shannon Bingham of Western Demographics, Inc., who served as the committee's demographer, explained the committee’s most prevailing choices for addressing the budget deficit.
“I think the majority opinion is that you're about to see attempts to identify the least harmful course of action, but it concedes that these changes will have a significant and lasting effect on the district and the nature of some of what we're proposing is fairly drastic,” said Bingham.
Bingham clarified that these scenarios are not necessarily final recommendations or consensus beliefs but the majority's opinion.
The committee presented four scenarios ranked in order of the majority’s preference:
“The solution that rose to the top would involve reconfiguring the district's middle schools to a 7-8 grade configuration and taking two offline,” Bingham shared.
Bingham identified two schools that would be taken offline: Jefferson Middle School and Reeves Middle School
This scenario would make the remainder of the elementary schools in the district operate as kindergarten or pre-kindergarten through sixth-grade schools (P-6), making middle school buildings run significantly more extensive than they are now.
“In conjunction with those changes at the middle schools reducing to two, and the kindergarten through sixth structure for the elementary schools, we would close LP Brown Elementary School,” reported Bingham.
Bingham also explained the second most preferred scenario: a standard consolidation of Boston Harbor, LP Brown, McKenny Elementary Schools, and Jefferson High School.
Bingham added that a standard school consolidation program means “no fancy changes” in grade configuration or other structural issues.
“What we would do would take four schools offline, and that would result in the Jefferson area being split between Marshall and Reeves,” said Bingham. “And then there would also be associated with that 3 elementary school consolidations based on a variety of indicators-- size, condition, percentage, utilization. Those would be Boston Harbor, LP Brown and McKenny.”
The third most preferred scenario would take two of the four existing middle schools and convert them into P-8, a bigger school with Pre-kindergarten to 8th grade.
“So on each side of the district, as divided by Budd Inlet, we would have a middle school and a P-8,” Bingham said.
The third choice leads to a possible closure of Roosevelt Elementary School near Reeves Middle School. Bingham said that Reeves is more appropriate for a P-8 because “Roosevelt sits on a 6.4-acre site, whereas Reeves is an appropriately sized middle school”.
The last scenario would be above the other three as a recommendation to look at the neighborhood population schools and the specialized curriculum schools.
It will consolidate three of the special curriculum buildings into fewer buildings.
“One scenario mentioned would be to close Lincoln, put it into ORLA, and then take a high school program at ORLA and put it in Avanti. Some of that prioritizing would require further conversation,” said Bingham.
Superintendent Patrick Murphy emphasized that if the board decides to consolidate or close schools, several hearings and community time would be designated to ensure a seamless transition for the affected families.
Each of the scenarios above also came with projected costs and savings. Scenario 1 would give the district approximate cost savings amounting to $3 million, Scenario 2 $4 million, and Scenario 3 $3 million.
Whichever the board chooses, these operating dollars would go back into the operating budget.
If the board also chooses to do the last additional scenario, there would be $1 million saved.
During the last regular board meeting, parents appealed against the potential closure of a community school.
1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
OSPIRetiredPro
In many areas of government, bigger is better, as parks and libraries are proving in several areas in our state. But be careful not to carelessly transfer that theory to public schs. This debate often revolves around numbers, but a more responsible examination would be based on people.
Perceived improvements to infrastructure are very common in the political arena of sch closures, a.k.a., consolidation, as “consultants” typically explain to sch boards how consolidation will spare taxpayers from additional property tax increases to maintain their existing schs, and suggest that larger consolidated schs can also provide better facilities for stdnts.
And in some ways, if a new central sch is built with a larger enrollment where more things can be done for kids, it actually might draw people back into communities – attributed in part to a centralized campus and an updated facilities — which prospective families often base their first impressions of a district upon. Consolidation can also have benefits on curriculum growth and staff effectiveness.
And it’s often suggested districts could stand to save $$$ operationally over time through consolidation. It’s not very efficient to run 2 small elementary schs. It’s going to cost more $$$ to operate them in the long run. Not surprisingly, the rate of savings diminishes as the size of the combined schs increases, reaching a point of diminishing return, and then moving rather quickly to a point at which the sch is so large that it becomes inefficient and administrative costs increase. Consolidation is not a magic bullet to “efficiency.”
But perhaps the most detrimental consequence of consolidation is an overall loss of community ID. Important considerations for districts and communities as consolidation discussions present themselves are (1) citizens may find decisions to elect sch board members to the newly consolidated sch based on changes in district boundaries to be confusing, further adding to a perception of loss of local control; (2) anxiety may increase during board elections, as constituents simultaneously vote for or against representation on the newly reconstituted sch board; (3) local citizens may be concerned that a disparity in representation across the geographic confines of the previous sch may occur on the new sch board.
In summarizing, a balance between costs, achievement, social, and political considerations must be maintained as district leaders explore the impact of consolidation. Questions and concerns that need to be asked and addressed are …
1. Is it more cost effective to reduce the need for more duplication in administration, transportation, and other services, and the affect this has on stdnt performance and ID;
2. And, or is the idea that joining together provides for more opportunities for stdnts;
3. And, or is this district push for consolidation designed to serve a PR purpose during economic difficulties, based on claims that cannot be supported solely by data?
Thursday, November 9, 2023 Report this