I was deeply disappointed when I read the recent article titled “Difficult decisions” in the May edition of the Our Town (Life) publication. This article, written by Kristine Thomas, did not represent the full discussion and comments regarding the recommendation to close the Monitor School during the May school board meeting.
As to the specific comments attributed to me in the article, I did not make them. I have no issue with the Scotts Mills community or school. From what I hear, they have a fantastic staff and work hard to give their kids a great education! I support Scotts Mills and all our schools in the district.
In addition to the inaccurate quote, Ms. Thomas left out many compelling discussion points. Completely omitted was the passionate plea to consider the new Montessori school (to be located on the Monitor School Campus) in the decision-making process. It was stated that closing the Monitor grade school may have a negative financial impact on them. Also, a Monitor teacher spoke in support of keeping the school open. She believed that they could do a very good job for those students. In addition, Ms. Thomas continued to repeat the cost-savings argument. There is very little cost savings, as the money will follow those children to whatever school they are moved to. Mr. Roessler stated that it was his judgment that Monitor students would not receive as good an education in a three-teacher school system, particularly because of the high ESL population. He indicated that the main advantage to closing the school is to provide those students with more services than they receive at Monitor today. However, no evidence has been provided showing that the education of these students will suffer with three grade levels per classroom. If additional services are what the parents in Monitor want, then I support closing it. However, based on the feedback I’ve seen, most Monitor parents would rather forgo some services and keep their school open.
My main point to Mr. Roessler and the board was to state the impact their decisions will have on families. Unnecessarily closing Monitor will impact dozens of families, and redrawing boundaries will affect dozens more. I have been active in the Butte Creek community all my life, and have been president of the Parent Teacher Team for over five years. Under the draft boundary changes provided at the meeting, four of our five current PTT board members (including myself) would fall outside the new boundaries.
One consideration being proposed is to grandfather anyone currently residing in the Butte Creek district with children attending the school so that no switching is necessary. I therefore would theoretically not be directly affected by this change. But how long will the district support busing students across districts? Can they really keep this promise? With a 5-month-old daughter, I alone would require 13 years of this exception.
I believe that the board should be building up the outlying communities they now represent, rather than tearing them down. I believe the outlying schools should be allowed to judge for themselves how best to operate within the confines of the district budget. Provide them with their share of the district’s allocation, and let them be. With no supporting evidence that it would benefit the children, it feels unnecessary to recommend closing Monitor, disrupting so many families.
Thanks,
Jonathan Edmonds
