Bill for smaller schools criticized

Tuesday, March 22, 2005 | 9:35 a.m.

SUN CAPITAL BUREAU

CARSON CITY -- There appears to be no dispute that building smaller schools will produce better students, higher achievement levels, fewer dropouts and a host of other benefits -- but it will mean more money, a lot more money.

Joyce Haldeman, representing the Clark County School District, told the Senate Human Resources an Education Committee on Monday that smaller schools are "better for the students."

"But as much as we would like to have them, I don't think we can afford them," she said.

Sen. Mike Schneider, D-Las Vegas, has introduced Senate Bill 166 to require construction of future elementary schools to house 300 students; middle schools to accommodate 600 students and high schools at 900 students.

Plans by the school district are to build 72 more schools at a cost of $3.1 billion by 2014. Schneider's bill would require 219 new schools at a cost of $9.9 billion, or triple the present plans of the district.

The present design for students calls for 720 students in an elementary school, 1,700 in a middle school and 2,700 in a high school.

Schneider said there would be a reduction in busing, which would save on vehicles, drivers and fuel. He said smaller schools would allow the students to participate in extra-curricular activities or play athletics.

He called it "the biggest thing without funding at the national level" to improve education.

Fred Smith, director of construction for the school district, said New York City and Los Angeles are spending more money but they are replacing their older schools rather than building new ones as is happening in Clark County.

To illustrate the increased cost, Smith presented a chart that showed the present cost per student of an elementary school is $19,531. That would rise to $28,500 per student if the school size were lowered to 300 pupils.

Smith and Dusty Dickens of the school district provided the committee with a chart of numbers showing the building program, the projected increase in students and the rising cost of construction.

Haldeman said the district will have to ask voters to approve another bond issue in 2008 to pay for the construction of schools. County taxpayers approve bonds to pay for building of schools as the state does not chip in except in rare cases.

Schneider said the Clark County School District is "afraid to gamble" in asking the voters to approve the extra $6.8 billion to build smaller schools. If the bond issue were explained properly, he said, the voters would probably approve it.

And if the bond issue failed, a judge would probably tell the district to follow the state law and build the smaller schools.

Sen. Maurice Washington, R-Sparks, said the bill is a "good concept" but "financially, it doesn't have much of a chance."