Redistricting...

What's Going On?

Sen. Linda Gray
Wants to Eliminate Three Big School Districts 
And Turn them into
One GREAT BIG DISTRICT

Why Does the
Legislature Want to
Mega-size Our
Schools?

It’s a "pretend fix." Instead of increasing per-child funding, they claim consolidation will save wasted cash.

(It won’t, but never mind.)

Then, when 2010 test scores show even worse performance, the legislature can "blame it on the schools" for not wisely using their consolidation "savings!"

(Which--you may not have heard this yet--requires supplemental funding! Where's that coming from?

Oh, probably from selling the existing administration buildings and pocketing the excess into
the legislature's general fund.)

It’s a scheme to put off full funding for a decade.

But You Vote On It Nov. 4!


Bigger Districts Lead to Administrative Bloat, not
Streamlining

According to a Goldwater Institute study...

In light of available Arizona data,
statewide school district consolidation
appears ill-advised. A growing body of
national research on consolidation
supports this assessment. Syracuse
University’s Maxwell School Center for
Policy Research scholars Matthew
Andrews, William Duncombe, and John
Yinger recently surveyed three decades
of empirical research on school district
consolidation. They concluded that cost
savings might be achieved by moving
from a very small district (500 or fewer
students to districts of 6,000 or
more students as models of dministrative
savings. Researchers Andrews,
Duncombe, and Yinger caution that
diseconomies of scale begin to emerge
when districts grow larger than 6,000
students, and “sizeable diseconomies of
size may begin to emerge for districts
above 15,000 students.”

 The Syracuse study is not alone.

 In his study of New York
state school districts, economist Herbert
Kiesling concludes that “no evidence has
been found to support the popular idea
of economies of scale in school district
performance.”53 [all footnotes are available at Goldwater web site:
http://goldwaterinstitute.org/Common/Files/Multimedia/401.pdf
James W. Guthrie, now chair of the
Peabody Center for Education Policy at
Vanderbilt University, concluded that
the consolidation trend has generally
failed to produce promised economies of
scale.54 Likewise, William F. Fox,
director of the Center for Business and
Economic Research at the University of
Tennessee at Knoxville, finds much of
the research on economies of scale in
education to be flawed methodologically
and concludes that “size economies
results must be applied cautiously, and
with full recognition of the unique
characteristics of each place, because
considerations [besides size] are vital to
determining the cost implications of
policy decisions.”55
Over 30 years of research indicates
that school district size does not
determine efficiency.

Gray's Idea Dumbs Down Kids, Voters
What about Test Scores and Big vs. Small districts?
In October 2002, the American
Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) released its Report Card on American Education, which included a state-bystate
analysis of education outcomes
from 1976 through 2001. Among the many factors the ALEC report examined were school district size, school size, and their effects on student achievement. footnote #97 --Goldwater Report, (supra)January 12, 2004
On average, fewer
students per school and
fewer schools per district
(which means more
and smaller districts
with more and smaller
schools)
are associated
with higher SAT, ACT,
and National Assessment
of Educational
Progress (NAEP) scores.

James W. Guthrie, now chair of the Peabody Center for Education Policy at Vanderbilt University, concluded that the consolidation trend has generally failed to produce promised economies of
scale.54 Likewise, William F. Fox,
director of the Center for  Business and Economic Research at the University of
Tennessee at Knoxville, finds much of the research on economies of scale in education to be flawed methodologically
and concludes that “size economies
results must be applied cautiously, and with full recognition of the unique
characteristics of each place, because considerations [besides size] are vital to determining the cost implications of policy decisions.”[footnote #55 in above cited Goldwater Report]
Over 30 years of research indicates
that school district size does not
determine efficiency.

Big District...Big Savings?
 "Writing for the American School Boards Journal, Carolyn Mullins reviewed the pros and cons of consolidation and found consolidation is no “panacea for all education’s ills.”

Mullins concluded,
“Like the bikini, it isn’t
for everybody and never
will be.” (at p. 15 of Goldwater report, supra)

Didn’t the Nov. 2007 School Vote Defeats Prove Arizonans hate their Schools?

No, the residential taxpayers hate their property tax increase going to subsidize business property tax cuts instead of schools. This sleight of hand trick from the legislature is complicated, but it really put the whammy on schools. Arizona’s pro-business, Byzantine tax code spends residential property taxes to offset business taxes FIRST, then the reduced business property taxes and inflated residential taxes pay the schools. Result? The schools DO NOT get more money when property taxes go up!

Paid for by Ken Gallatin



 Sen. Gray's Redistricting Savings:
Cut Buses and Buildings

Questions remain: Whose bus? Whose building?
             Whose bus?
At the AZSOS Redistricting Forum Sen. Gray said WESD and GUHSD could cut transportation costs by eliminating two bus managers. When this parent reminded her that each would buy enough gas for only a few day's bus runs, she claimed Paradise Valley has cheaper transportation costs. What she did not mention is that the larger Tucson schools spend significantly more on transportation.
           Whose building?
This is eye wash. All the research shows you have to close school buildings to reduce administrative costs (on paper, then it usually doesn't work). So the next question is:

Which schools would close? i.e., get consolidated into larger school buildings.

Obviously, the oldest buildings in the district. At the north end that's Lookout Mountain and
Shaw Butte.
Primary Success is not recommending this, but these are the facts: To save significant administrative costs you have to close down the number of buildings.

Since 57% of administrative costs occur in the individual buildings, you have to shut down some buildings and build BIGGER ones. Read the data.

Of course, Shaw Butte and Lookout Mountain would make a relatively large student body (2500 kids), but it would save over 100,000 dollars to slash a principal and school secretary.



What Does
the Research Say?

Simply, school consolidation will
dumb down kids and waste money.

See the article in the right column at the bottom.


...............................
How to Lower Your 
Property Taxes


The NY Times published an article (that specifies Maricopa County property taxes) about lost home values and expected drops in property taxes. Click here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/us/23tax.html?ei=5087&em=&en=ec0dcda24caf518b&ex=1198645200&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1198509007-FtzSIDJ7FgYkuuwSHZAyEQ

There are procedures for you to appeal your home valuation--that it should be lower. Go to the Maricopa County Assessor's page and request an appeal form before the appeal deadline listed at the top of your valuation--or, at least, appeal your next valuation.
Here's how:
https://www.maricopa.gov/Assessor/notice_value.aspx


 

 

Web Hosting Companies