A City (Council) divided

The issue of how to replace Saco’s Young School has split the community, the school board and now the city council. Watching both sides carefully, I have come to fully believe that everyone wants to do what’s best for our kids and our town. That’s reassuring. It’s also why I’m certain that Saco will keep its smaller schools.

When choosing what’s best for our city, there are three main issues: 1. What’s best for education, 2. What costs less in the short term, 3. What costs less over time. I think we’ll find that keeping the smaller schools wins on at least two of those, and likely all three.

There is an overwhelming consensus in the educational literature that smaller schools are better. Although most of the research is on high schools, there are a number of studies on elementary schools too. The recommended number appears to be no more than 400 students for elementary schools. Having a smaller school is even more important for students who are under-prepared or come from poorer backgrounds. Thus, the large number of Title 1 students in our district might be especially worried about being lost in a larger school.

I know that the folks advocating for a consolidated school believe that learning will be better in a new environment. While that makes intuitive sense, there is simply not support in the educational literature for it. Moreover, the consulting architects, the school principals and the majority of the teachers all agree that the physical structure of Fairfield is in great shape and it’s fully functional for modern educational practices. A small renovation will bring the aesthetics up to modern standards too. Our teachers and administrators are doing a great job in the current schools. There is no reason to think that this will stop if we fail to consolidate. Given the benefits that the small learning community creates in small schools, the educational benefits are clear of replacing Young and keeping Fairfield.

In the short term, it’s also very clear that keeping smaller schools is cheaper. The construction costs are millions of dollars less. This means smaller bonds, less interest payment and less tax increase. Importantly, exactly how much cheaper is unclear. With every iteration put forward by the school construction committee, the costs change. It’s not clear why. What is clear is that the cost for option “A”, keeping small schools, has risen considerably during the discussion. Also clear is that some costs of building the consolidated school, such as road improvements, have not been included in the discussion. Thus, whether the true costs of consolidating is six million, 10 million or more has not been clearly established. An honest accounting needs to be done if this option is to merit any additional consideration. What is clear is that the savings of keeping small schools are not lost. These savings can be used to enhance education for all Saco students, reduce taxes and pay for other initiatives.

In the long term, the cost analysis is less clear. The original school construction committee originally estimated about $300,000 a year in savings from consolidation. This would mean that consolidating would pay for itself maybe as soon as 20-25 years (depending on interest rates). However, when discussing this estimate with the school board, it was clear that many committee members were uncertain about this number and felt the estimate was too high. Moreover, the published experience of many districts is that larger buildings are more complex to manage and require additional, unanticipated, administrative efforts. These eat into any anticipated savings. Thus, the overall wisdom appears to be that school consolidation rarely produces much annual savings.

The school board saw these arguments and voted overwhelmingly to support small schools. They asked the city council to bring a bond to the voters to replace Young and update Fairfield. In this case, we have a rare convergence in that what is good for Saco students is also good for Saco taxpayers. Why the City Council is still considering raising taxes to enact a plan that is no better, and is likely worse, for our students defies logic.

I’d urge all Saco citizens to write their councilor and let them know that you support what’s good for our students and good for the taxpayers. Keep our schools small.

Sign In: