Convince Me

[pepelect]

and bring back hangin'!!

[Rudy Taylor]

 

[flo]

  now, pep, Rudy gave us all a compliment and you had to go and spoil it.  If they do bring back hanging, we'll let you test the rope first, okay? 

[pepelect]

It better be high tensile strength rope... and a strong gallows.  That is all I am going to say. 

[Janet Harrington]

I haven't read all of these posts, yet, but I did come across something that PEP said about this bond issue.

I quote.  "The legacy of what you will leave for future generations will have a greater impact than then your temporary financial setback.  Some one built the school you attended."

Jim and I have talked about this issue and about how we are going to vote.  We will vote yes.  Someone had to sacrifice to build a school for us.  I went to school in this district all my school years.  When we merged Severy and Howard to make North Elk we all thought it was the most horrible thing that ever happened to us never mind what it might do to our town.  Now, here I am, looking at another merger.  What is it going to do to Severy and Moline?  I don't know.  I worry about what will happen.  I'm still voting yes because I think it is the right thing to do.

[MarkHall]

In a nutshell, here is our problem:

The population of Elk County was estimated to be 3,077 in the year 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_County,_Kansas

Historical populations
Census    Pop.        %±
1880    10,623        
—
1890    12,216       15.0%
1900    11,443       -6.3%
1910    10,128       -11.5%
1920    9,034       -10.8%
1930    9,210       1.9%
1940    8,180       -11.2%
1950    6,679       -18.3%
1960    5,048       -24.4%
1970    3,858       -23.6%
1980    3,918       1.6%
1990    3,327       -15.1%
2000    3,261       -2.0%

Hope this copies and pastes OK, but between 1960 and 2006 our population declined from 5,048 to 3,077 which is a decline of about 40% in less than 50 years, and a combined facility is the only long-term solution.

If we still had a population of 5,000 or even 4,000, we'd have a tax base to support all facilities, but as our population continues to decline, we have to make some tough choices.

Yes, taxes will go up in the short-term, in order to bring down costs in the long run.

If the bond issue fails, you're going to be losing a lot more than the grade schools at Severy and Moline. Our school district will be trying to run a race with ankle weights - competing with other districts who aren't being burdened with the problems and expenses that keeping a facility open in every community will bring.

As for me, I will be voting YES on Nov 3.

[oldmom]

I was a student at Severy and I hate to see it go also, however.......

I live in the Bluestem school district now (Leon)  We closed our grade school at Haverhill last year.  The building now is leased out to South Central Special Ed Co-op (forgive me if the name isn't right).

Leon's enrollment has dropped from 745 total students in 04 to 566 this year.   With the amount of miles covered by this district, it just made sense to put it all in one area - it saves money on busing and on upkeep.  The district did an excellent job (my opinion, of course) of reassigning teachers and para's - most were kept.

I see all sides to this argument, and change is hard.  No one likes to see taxes or anything for that matter go up.   I certainly understand "scraping the bottom of the barrel" when it comes to making ends meet.  I have 3 girls (7, 4, and 2) and keeping up with their upkeep, let alone feeding them is tough.  Our family has had to make sacrifices lately that were hard but we manage.  At the same time, I don't understand the idea that a town will shut down without a school. 

I wish Leon had the businesses that Howard, Severy and Moline have.  Our grocery store burnt down a few years ago.  We now  have a Co-op, 2 cafe's and 5 churches.  I still think it's a thriving community and we do have new businesses looking to move here.  HOORAY!

[Sarah]

I haven't had a chance to read every single post yet.  I'm still on page 3.  LOL  But I do know that the taxes in Elk county are quite a bit higher than a lot of the other counties and while we struggle to make ends meet, the idea of having our taxes raised isn't real appealing.  I'm not sure what the problems are for sure as I hear a lot of ideas being tossed around.  I heard that the schools in Severy and Moline are old and need to have something done with them.  I don't see why upkeep can't be done.  There in a grade school in Goddard that I know is well over 40 years old as it's been there long before I was and I'm almost 40 now.  And as far as not attracting more teachers....wouldn't it be more prudent to spend extra money to raise teacher wages rather than a new building?  Old building or new building isn't going to affect child learning, although children always like to go to school in nice pretty new schools with all the bells and whistles.  I do tend to agree that losing a school does tend to be a bit of a death blow to a town.  I'd hate to see any more towns fall apart out here.  Piedmont is sort of that way.  The school closed down how many years ago?  And then I hear rumors that the post office may close and then that will just leave the restaurant and the two churches.  And with the population of Elk county steadily declining, the property tax burden for the school is going to continue to fall on fewer and fewer people. 

[momof 2boys]

The district is trying to work towards becoming more efficient, and the best way to do this is to become a one campus district.  We are trying to run a 3 campus system that we can no longer fund.  The state continually cuts the budget and the money is no longer there to proceed as we have in the past. 

At tonight's board meeting a letter was read about auditting school districts and the push by legislature for school districts to become more effiecient.  Each year we are auditted, we can no longer show that by running a 3 campus district we are being efficient.  The state will one day call us on this, and force us to do something drastic as they have with schools in Western Kansas.  We need to do something now, to show that we are addressing these issues and do them on our own accord rather than be told what to do. 

Some people say to close one of the elementaries, but this alone will not provide that savings we need over the long haul.  A one campus facility will allow us to become financially stable.  Yes, it will be a major sacrifice at first.  However, over time we will see the light at the end of the tunnel so to speak. 

[D Whetstone]

Sarah,

Thanks for raising some questions.  I would like to address some of them.

The problem is that state aid per student continues to decline in these economic times.  The cost of operating three campuses has not.  The only way we can cut expenses now is to cut in the classroom. To cut educational programming.

We could do upkeep on the buildings.  This would not address our operational costs.  That would stay the same.  And, this does not address upkeep needed on the HS/JrHS that is over 30 years old now.

We are not building a new building to attract teachers with a new building. You are right. We need to pay our teachers more.  Which gets back to operational funds.  We need to become more efficient to allow for growth in teacher salaries.  We cannot raise any more tax money right now to raise those salaries. Our local option budget is maxed out.  We have no extra money.

A new building will definitely affect our children's education.  And it has nothing to do with being pretty or having bells and whistles.  It has to do w/ money.  If we don't become more efficient w/ operational costs, then we will have to make cuts that affect our children's education. If we do become more efficient, then we can not only maintain our current level of education but we will be able to enhance it.

As far as population decline, if you look at Mark Hall's post, you will see that the decline has slowed.  And I think, in my opinion, shoring up our schools will help stabilize our population.

Lastly, you stated at the beginning of your post that paying more tax isn't real appealing.  If we don't do this, you will see our LOB (school tax that has increased dramatically over the last few years to make ends meet) remain at the highest level.  If we pass the bond,  through efficiency in operation, we will be able to lower the LOB before the bond is paid off.  Post bond (when the bond is paid in full) our taxes will be less than they are now.  This is demonstrated through other school districts like ours. Post bond - their taxes have actually gone down compared to before their bond.

David