Arizona administrators denounce school-district-unification plans
Administrators across Arizona say the school-district-unification plans sent to Gov. Janet Napolitano are not the answer to higher academic results. The report submitted by the Arizona School District Redistricting Commission would affect more than 330,000 Arizona students. Twenty-seven districts would replace the existing 76 elementary and high-school districts, eliminating 49 districts of the state's 227. Napolitano spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer said that the governor's role in the process is limited to receiving the plan and that it doesn't require her approval. That means voters in the nine affected counties will decide through the November ballot whether to pass the plans. It's a first for Arizona, where unification has never before been attempted statewide. The idea is to reduce duplicative administrative cost, align curriculum so student transition to high school is smoother, equalize elementary and high school teacher salaries and put more money overall into classrooms, commission Chairman Martin Shultz said. But plans received opposition from many school-board members and educators. Under the 2005 state law that created the commission, unification proposals would not take effect unless approved by a majority of voters in every individual district. That's the last hope for school superintendents and boards, many of whom say there's no data to justify unification. Steve Johnston, president of the Glendale Elementary School District board, said he and his colleagues hope to express their dissatisfaction with the plan to the governor. He added that action committees are being formed and money being raised ahead of the November vote to make sure voters are informed about the concerns. If unification is approved, the new boards in affected districts would not be elected until 2010 and would take office in January 2011.
School officials said aligning of curriculum is done already, as is standardization, through the state board of education and the AIMS test. Shultz said because of disparities in various districts, it's hard to nail it down to a general figure on financial impact. The difference in taxation would be marginal, up or down. Research backs some of the concerns, said Matthew Ladner, vice president for research at the Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank that published a study about consolidation. The study indicates that big school districts are hard to manage and parents find it hard to connect with teachers. Ladner said there is no evidence of reduced administrative costs, and they may even go up, nor is there a dramatic increase in academic test scores. "The story then is spending goes up, scores decline and the gains fail to materialize," Ladner said. School officials in district after district echo that sentiment. Sen. Linda Gray, R-Phoenix, whose bill led to the creation of the commission, said she's looking forward to seeing the voters pass the initiative. "They need to decide whether as taxpayers they want to pay for two or five or 14 superintendents and transportation directors or one," Gray said. Shultz said additional legislation likely will be introduced to give affected districts longer to unify if voters pass plans.
Arizona Republic By Sonu Munshi
[Editor’s Note: The commission and the Goldwater institute reports are below. The subject of school district consolidation has been raised in several states, including Maine. Background and a recent news report on Maine’s sweeping consolidation plan, as well as links to other materials on the subject, also are below.]
Commission report to governor
Goldwater Institute report
NSBA School Law pages on Maine’s school district consolidation
Bangor News By Rich Hewitt