Editor,
What is actually needed to address growth in the Ridgefield School District (RSD)? That’s a question I’ve been looking into because RSD focused on overall growth and funding needs in its town hall presentation but didn’t actually connect the needs to the bond ask.
Current enrollment in RSD, per the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, is 3,939 students, excluding early learning and alternative learning because they don’t attend the K-12 brick and mortar schools. RSD shows current permanent capacity is 3,374. That’s a gap of 565 permanent seats, a far cry from the often-repeated point that 1,337 students have been added since the last bond, implying a much-higher need than actually exists.
But 565 kids is not something to sneeze at. I’ve walked through the schools and understand how difficult it is, especially in the elementary schools, to handle this level of growth.
So, let’s talk about where that need is:
265 kids at the K-4 level versus 600 added capacity from Prop 10
96 kids at the grade 5-8 level versus 1,000 added capacity from Prop 11
204 kids at the high school level versus. not specified added capacity from Prop 10
There are a number of questions that should be answered before moving forward. At what point does it make sense to build more capacity? Should we build a new school when it will be half full when completed, 10% full, entirely full? When should we expect new schools or buildings to be completely filled? When built? In five years? 10 years? Thirty years?
How should we handle the time in between? Should we create flexibility in the existing school footprints so that we have some way to have one more person without saying a new school should be built? Should we build that plan in capacity or create barriers that don’t allow for flexibility? Or are modular buildings so bad that we should never put one child in them?
What trade offs are we willing to make with the selected approach? Do we make modular buildings for the in-between time great for kids? Are higher taxes OK to have largely empty buildings? What about higher levies to operate that new capacity?
And how do we make sure we won’t overbuild so that we end up in the same place as pretty much every other district in Washington and Oregon seeing enrollment decline and looking at shuttering schools?
As they say, the devil is in the details. Before making a decision, we should understand the needs and the tradeoffs involved.
Heidi Pozzo
Ridgefield
