Consolidation Location

I want to think about several issues of school consolidation location selection, and focus on what for us may be a central issue -- the college connections. But first I'll consider some others, and (as an update) at the end I'll add some context.

Split Elementary If two declining-enrollment school systems consolidate to save money, they can often leave their elementary schools in place, and that seems like a good idea -- I suspect that most parents will agree that distance matters more for the very young (and their parents) and I'm not going to argue it here.

Merged High The high schools, however, must actually merge: if no new building is contemplated, then one set of students (and teachers) has to go to the buildings formerly occupied only by the other. In this case, we actually expect a merge to result in all middle-school students at one location, high school at the other, but it seems that high school is the focus of discussion.

Identity It's an emotional issue for many, which I think has to do with a sense of identity, and is likely to be strongest for those who grew up in one place and still live near their old high school; in rural communities that's common. I suppose I'm not the best person to address that sort of connection; I am at this moment close to 2627 miles almost due north of my old high school, which was my fourth high school (counting correspondence school but not counting junior high, or the other way around), and anyway senior year I spent more time doing freshman math and physics at a local university...the yearbook had a blank where my picture should have gone, and I've never gone back. So I should probably leave that issue alone. In any case, it's neutral -- except as a reason not to merge in the first place. Community identity is presumably always damaged in consolidation. (Or is it?)

Practicalities Apart from emotional ties, we have several possible concerns:

• Distance If A is much larger than B, then making A's students go to B is worse than the other way around -- but that's really an annexation, not a merger. In any case it doesn't seem to apply to us. If many of A's students walk or bicycle and only a few of B's, then it might again be less disruptive to bring B to A (they were on the road anyway.) That seems to apply -- I think that HCS students are more likely to walk (mine did) and M-ECS students have to drive or bus (it's far out from the village). Indeed, M-ECS seems to do more than double the bus transport of HCS, reinforcing the notion that the HCS student population is more concentrated. Call it a moderate H+, which will become more important in future if fuel costs rise.
• Facilities If one building is much newer than the other, or has a much better physical plant, then of course we use that one -- but both HCS and M-ECS have been recently upgraded and are probably comparable. (Except elementary, which is not in question here; see below.) I'd call it a wash, except that the HCS facility will soon be heated less expensively, by natural gas; I don't know how M-ECS is heated or what the relative costs are. So it might be a weak H+, or neutral.
• Outdoor Spaces Comparing upstate schools should involve not only athletic fields but woods and trails; apparently these are comparable.
• Nearby Places My kids all got themselves to music lessons in town, after school; they would also meet friends at local food places, and one had a habit of stopping for coffee while walking to high school. Groups of kids and grownups, e.g. theatrical and athletic groups, have found places to meet. I always thought this convenience was a major advantage; it turns out that some M-ECS parents think that their lack of this convenience is a major advantage, because truancy is harder work when your school is out in the middle of nowhere. That's interesting. It seems there's a tradeoff between making life harder for kids you trust, and making life harder for kids you don't. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something here -- I often do. I'm calling this a rather strong H+, but I accept that people with different values may call it an M+, and I accept that different values may provide good reasons not to merge in the first place.

And then there are the college connections which are my main focus here. Colgate has a history of supporting HCS, and of course SUNY Morrisville has supported M-ECS. It's my understanding that the level of support is not really comparable, simply because Colgate has a lot more resources. Some of these resources are straightforwardly financial -- Colgate gives a substantial voluntary contribution each year (there is no formal PILOT (Payment-In-Lieu-Of-Taxes) agreement, it's just voluntary.) Some apply at the elementary level. Some have to do with faculty volunteers. The connection that's most visibly endangered, though, applies to HCS juniors and seniors. It's common for HCS students to take a few Colgate courses despite schedule mismatches -- at any given moment, a dozen or so students are doing this, with about forty students in each HCS year. (I.e., a dozen or so out of about eighty juniors+seniors.) Some M-ECS students, according to the superintendent, would do the same if they could -- and they will be able to, if the high school location is in Hamilton. If the high school location is in Morrisville, that's probably gone -- add transport to the schedule mismatch and it won't be an option.

Is this a big deal? It is for the kids who sign up for it, and it is for those who would if they could, but can't yet do so. If the function of school is to serve kids' developmental needs, I'm calling that a strong H+.

And that's all I can think of....

Or then again, maybe not.

Context (update): This post is basically about two possibilities, but others exist. The elementary issue mentioned above is the possibility that Andrews Elementary, the separate and older elementary school for M-ECS, might close, with those students going to the M-ECS high school building, and M-ECS high schoolers coming to HCS. If enrolment is high and we stop using BOCES, this risks overcrowding. On the other hand, if later on we learn that we have a safety margin, this would save a good deal of money, about $300-350K/year in addition to any gain from sale or lease, and avoiding the likelihood that as the oldest building it might need repair sooner than the others. Even apart from consideration of Morrisville's heavier debt and heavier dependence on state aid, it may be worth keeping this option open. (Whenever I say "state aid" I think "New York, like most states, is in trouble...and there are lots of reasons why the financial district that's providing this aid might not do as well in years to come.")