Los Gatos Weekly-Times

Data indicates that unification would be a daunting and expensive task

Numbers add up to crowding, reduced school-funding base

Final report is set for Jan. 7

By Michelle Alaimo

The consultant for the Santa Clara County Committee on School District Organization gave data and encouraging words to those in Los Gatos who are against any school district reorganization. Consultant Mike Winters told a standing-room-only crowd that Scenario 4, which involves redrawing school district boundaries to match city limits and/or the unification of Los Gatos into a K-12 district, was a bad idea and recommended the scenario be dropped for Los Gatos.

However, other than explaining the data, Winters made no recommendations to the committee during the public forum at Lynbrook High School Nov. 10. He added that the data for the preliminary report is based on the 1995-96 school year because the 1996-97 school year data will not be official until the year is over.

Winters, in an interview after the meeting, said he believed no one in Los Gatos really wants to unify.

"Who wants less money, more complexity and [a scenario] no one supports?" Winters said. According to the data, Los Gatos would have to pay for two schools from the Union School District that are currently being rented out. The data also revealed that the LGUSD would not receive enough funding or facilities to accommodate students being transferred in and that schools would become substantially overcrowded. The district could face having to raise $8 million for a new elementary school, and residents could face higher annual property taxes.

But some Los Gatans dispute Winters' findings. Jayne Sonnenschein, a Los Gatos resident who lives in the Old Adobe neighborhood, said she was particularly concerned that Winters did not add the two union school district schools to Los Gatos' capacity when discussing overcrowding.

Winters stands by his data, suggesting that "a similar condition exists in the Los Gatos-Saratoga High School District under Scenarios 2 and 4, but even more drastic."

The high school district would suffer a significant revenue-limit decrease, would have to raise some $25 million to accommodate new students and would also suffer substantial overcrowding.

Some in the audience suggested that the high schools could accommodate more students than they do now, citing higher student numbers in the past. But Superintendent Cynthia Ranii said afterward that is not the case.

She said there used to be a lot more students enrolled in the two high schools in the late 1970s, but educational programs have changed since then. She explained that all freshman English classes are at a 20-to-1 ratio, students take more classes during the day and students are faced with stiffer graduation requirements--which has led to a need for more science labs.

Ranii explained that Winters' data does not take into account growth projections and that even without changing boundaries, the high school district will have space problems by the year 2000. The district conducted a facilities assessment in August 1997 that confirmed the need for science labs and additional classroom space at the high schools.

Saratoga is facing a similar situation under Scenarios 2 and 4.

While Winters did not recommend dropping the idea of unifying into a K-12 district or redrawing the districts along city lines for Saratoga, he gave hints to Saratoga residents and the county committee that it would cause a lot of problems.

"The district to which you think you are going to transfer would be significantly different than [the district is now]," Winters explained to the crowd. The data compiled by Winters suggests there may be a greater than 5 percent impact on Saratoga's educational programs because of an enrollment increase of 1,125 students under Scenario 2 or 4.

He added that it would cost some $6.5 million--for unification only--to accommodate an additional 250 high school students. He also said Saratoga would lose revenue due to bond-indebtedness absorption of some $6.7 million from the Cupertino Union School District and almost $2.3 million from the Campbell Union School District. According to Winters' data, Saratoga would also have higher annual property taxes from bond-debt absorption.

In a telephone interview Winters said, "If Saratoga wants more kids, less money, fewer facilities and higher taxes," then Scenario 2 or 4 should be approved.

"I'm not saying don't do it," he said. "Just do it with your eyes open."

Unlike previous meetings that were emotionally charged, the Nov. 10 public forum was overseen by a judge who insisted that speakers stick to the issues.

"It's absolutely essential to every single person in this room tonight who wants to see this study completed and the best possible school district organization ... to respect one another's point of view and to respect one another's right to be here tonight," said Rick Cornish, staff member for the county committee.

The three-hour forum, with Judge Len Edwards as the moderator, was broken down into three organized portions, unlike previous seemingly free-for-all forums. After Cornish reviewed the ground rules for the presentation to the crowd, Winters explained his data, followed by a question-and-answer session and public input from those who wished to speak.

However, Winters encouraged audience members to send in letters instead of giving public input because, he said, they would carry more weight. He added that all letters sent to the county committee will be attached to the committee's recommendation to the state Board of Education early next year.

Winters said the best way to write a letter to the committee is to state a position in the first paragraph, followed by reasons for the position. The concluding paragraph should emphasize the action that is requested. Winters said the letters need to also be signed, with a name and address. Letters can be sent to the county committee at the Santa Clara County Office of Education, 1290 Ridder Park Drive, San Jose, 95131-2398.

Final data from Winters will be available by Dec.19 at the county office and possibly on the Internet, said Larry Shirey, senior research analyst for the Santa Clara County Office of Education. A formal presentation of the report will be presented to the county committee at its meeting on Jan. 7, the last day of Winters' contract. The committee will then review the information and come to a decision at either the Jan. 7 or the Jan. 26 county committee meeting, Shirey said. If a decision is not made at either of those meetings, Shirey said, the committee would discuss the possible district organization at other meetings. Shirey added that there is an opportunity for public input at the meetings. The county committee could either make a recommendation to the state Board of Education, decide to leave things as they are and make no recommendation or ask for further study.

If a recommendation is made by the county committee, the state board would decide in late 1998 or early 1999 whether to approve it. Then, if the recommendation is approved, an election would be held in June or November 1999, in which the state Board of Education decides who is eligible to vote. Voter approval would mean that changes could take effect July 1, 2000.

[ Back to Contents Page | Los Gatos Weekly-Times Home Page | Archives ]