Consolidation Response Letter

The letter below is what I submitted to the Pioneer in response to the conversation I had with Mr. Price from Shelley who is encouraging consolidation, and from what was said in Wednesdays paper.

Another point I didn't state in my response was when I talked about how I did not think Firth patrons would support this idea in part because of the cost. I mentioned how when we tried to pass two different override levies, that were not for very much money compared to this, that they had both failed. His response back to me was something to the effect that. If the Firth board would approve the consolidation, then since Shelley patrons out number Firth patron by such a wide margin, it wouldn't matter what Firth wanted to do. Shelley would then have enough votes to pass whatever funding that was needed without Firth support. Needless to say that sure didn't go over well with me. And I think points out a big problem with the idea of consolidation. Losing control of how we are taxed, and how the Firth patrons would be treated. I think at some point unless the state comes through with more funding we will need to pass an levy. But I would never want to force the issue like he suggested. We will need to approve one with the purpose well defined, not through force or some kind of trick.



Consolidation

Being a person that doesn't shy away from expressing my opinion, I felt compelled to respond to the article about consolidation.  I am on the Firth school board and I am one who would have to be convinced that we should consider consolidation.  My wife and I met with Mr. Price a couple weeks ago where he presented his groups ideas and we discussed it for about an hour and a half. 

To me there are many more negatives than there are positives, especially for the people from Firth. Talking with Mr. Price and reading the article I get the impression that they think it is a bad thing for Firth to be so small, and the outlook for slow growth, if any growth at all, is also a negative thing. To me that is a very positive thing. I guess I'm one who thinks if you want to send your kids to a big school then you should live in the cities, don't try and make Firth into a big city school. 

During our discussion I mentioned that we had an AG program with some classes in welding. He seemed intrigued by the idea to make Firth into some kind of trade school. I tried explaining to him our program is small. The classes are held in a very old facility with very limited space. They have keep it pretty well maintained, but I don't think there is room for many more students. If the idea is to greatly expand Firth into a trade school, all new facilities would have to be built. 

I know we don't provide every elective program they offer in larger schools, but that doesn't mean we don't provide a good education. Besides our success in athletic achievement over the last several years, we have won many academic awards also. Almost anyone who wants to participate in a school sport can. I would guess as a percentage Firth has a lot higher number of kids involved in sports, than have the opportunity to participate in Shelley. If you have ever attended a Firth state football or basketball game, you would think there are more Firth fans there than live in the district. 

I think getting support from Firth to help fund the growth in Shelley is also  very unlikely. In recent elections where Shelley and Firth have jointly voted on bonds, that were probably perceived to help Shelley more than Firth, they failed because of lack of enough support from Firth. Currently our school bond debt will be paid in full on June of 2014. I don't believe Firth patrons would like to bond for the level of debt to build a new library, auditorium, and community center. Let alone building a big technical school or future north Bingham county high school. 

As we are now we have a lot of empty classrooms mostly in the elementary. So as far as facilities are concerned there is no pressure to build anything new, like they have had to keep doing in Shelley. Also most of our class sizes are small. There are very few classes in the elementary with more than twenty students, most have even less. I believe Shelley's elementary classes are quite a bit bigger. 

I think it was a couple years ago the state was offering to fund a consolidation study for Bingham county. Firth's share to do the study was several thousand dollars. The state would pay for the study we just needed to agree to participate. There was no support from the board, even under these terms to participate in the study. They did the study anyway. I don't think the results from that study indicated many advantages for consolidation, and some obvious disadvantages. 

One more area of concern, I could continue with more, is the matter of board representation. I don't know for sure how the numbers would break down, but I would think with a five member board, Firth area would have only one board member in a consolidated district. Maybe part of another. So if we agreed to consolidation, in most ways Shelley would have complete control over the former Firth district. 

I was not invited to the meeting referenced in the paper, as the article claimed I was. Which went on to say because no one showed up no one was available to give their opinion about consolidation. Well now you now have mine.

As I say after the blog I write after our school board meetings. If you have any comments or questions let me know. If there are those in our district who support consolidation and you would like to tell me why you think it would be a good idea let me know. 
Thank you, Brian Esplin.  My school email is. besplin@d59.k12.id.us