Saratoga News

Two school districts conclude Scenarios 2, 4 are bad choices

By Michelle Alaimo

Both the Saratoga Union School District and the Los Gatos-Saratoga Joint Union High School District boards reached the same unanimous decision in two separate meetings on Dec. 9: They do not support Scenario 2 and Scenario 4, two of four options presented by the county Committee on School Organization.

The decision was reached after analyzing preliminary data released by the county committee's consultant, Mike Winters. Both boards also took no position on Scenario 3, and while the SUSD said it supports Scenario 1 with some modification, the high school board took no action on it. The districts now join the Los Gatos Union School District in their opposition to Scenarios 2 and 4.

The four scenarios proposed by Winters to the county committee in August as part of a year-long study have been the cause of controversy in the West Valley. Last month, Winters released his preliminary data to the public, showing that Scenario 2--which would modify school district boundaries to match city lines in Saratoga and Los Gatos--and Scenario 4--which would align school district boundaries with city lines and give Saratoga and Los Gatos each their own K-12 district--would be costly and not meet all of the state's criteria under Education Code section 35753.

Scenario 3, on which none of the districts took a position, would reorganize the Campbell Union High School District into three unified school districts. Scenario 1 would maintain the current organization and would address instances of extreme geographic isolation, plus initiate a study of the territory in Santa Cruz County adjacent to the Lakeside joint and the Loma Prieta joint union school districts.

The decisions are not resolutions but formal positions. Winters is expected to release his final data to the public on Dec. 19 and present it to the county committee Jan. 7. Both school districts waited until the preliminary data was released before coming to a decision because school officials said they wanted to base their decision on facts.

According to Winters' data, which is based on 1995-96 school year figures, Scenarios 2 and 4 do not meet the state's educational code criteria which prescribe that such changes should result in an equitable division of property, should cause no increase in state costs, should not significantly disrupt educational programs or increase school housing costs, and should not have a negative fiscal impact.

The SUSD, the LGUSD and the high school district would suffer from overcrowding due to an increase in students, according to the report. The high school district would gain nearly 900 students, but no new facilities, and at an estimated cost of $25 million to accommodate the new students.

High school district board member Ron Adolphson said that offering the district 900 students but no new facilities just won't work. The preliminary report also did not account for natural growth within the school districts. Cynthia Ranii, high school district superintendent, said the district is already expected to have space problems by the year 2000 without any changes to the boundaries.

The Saratoga Union School District is in a similar situation. Although the district would gain schools, it would not gain a middle school, causing Redwood Middle School to become overcrowded.

When Winters presented his preliminary data to the county committee on Nov. 10, he gave hints, without giving a formal recommendation, that redrawing the districts along city lines or unifying the district into a K-12 district should not be done.

"The district to which you think you are going to transfer would be significantly different than the district to which you go," Winters said.

Winters' only formal recommendation then was to drop Scenario 4 for Los Gatos, since the LGUSD would not receive enough funding or facilities to accommodate students, and schools would become substantially overcrowded. Under this scenario, the LGUSD could also face having to raise $8 million for a new elementary school.

Now that the final report is near completion and the county committee will decide on its recommendation to the state Board of Education early next year, the high school district board members said at their Dec. 9 meeting that they are disappointed with the results.

"The sad part of this whole thing is the divisiveness that this [study] caused in the community," Ron Adolphson said.

High school district board member Nancy Crampton agreed. "When this is all done with, people are going to have spent tremendous time and money to just end up where we started," she said.

Both the SUSD and the high school district will write a letter to the county committee stating their positions. In addition, the high school board is asking the county committee to include four recommendations to the state Board of Education, if and when it makes its recommendation next year. The high school board asks that when looking at issues of territory transfers, the state board maximize the area of election; consider the cumulative impact; make decisions based on each of the state's criteria and make these findings public; and follow traditional due process practices, including public input and public disclosure.

While final data from Winters will be available on Dec. 19 at the county Office of Education and possibly on the Internet, Larry Shirey, senior research analyst for the county Office of Education, said no meeting will be held that day. Winters will formally present his final data to the county committee on Jan. 7, the last day of his 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, the committee would discuss the possible district organization at other 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. If the recommendation is approved, an election would be held in 1999.

[ Back to Contents Page | Saratoga News Home Page | Archives ]