Sitting in the Mingus Union High School library on Thursday, May 17, the MUHS District Governing Board watched a recording of the March 28 Arizona House Appropriations Committee hearing on Senate Bill 1254.
The bill, which was recently signed by Gov. Doug Ducey, allows school districts to send consolidation to a public vote through petition after just one of the involved school boards votes to consolidate, as opposed to the previous policy requiring approval of all the involved school boards.
With the consensus of the MUHSD board moving against consolidation, the presentation left board members “offended,” in the words of board member James Ledbetter.
“I had no idea that this happened at this committee,” Governing Board President Anita Glazar said. “So when I watched it I could not believe the things that were said.”
Glazar alleged that members of the pro-consolidation faction had joined with them on an advisory committee to assess the impact of consolidating MUHSD and Cottonwood-Oak Creek School District, but had ignored the committee’s findings when speaking to the Legislature.
“What was delivered to this appropriations committee, I feel to manipulate a vote, was inaccurate,” she said.
School board members complained that Zachary Cohen, an attorney hired by advocates to argue for the bill in front of legislators, had claimed that this change in consolidation process was necessary to prevent a “conflict of interest” from members who would lose their positions if school boards consolidated.
They pushed back against the implication that board members were paid to serve their school district — board seats are unpaid — but out of a sense of duty to the district. Ledbetter pointed out that school board members were not paid to travel to any events, and there was not district money used to fund their operations.
The board also felt presentations before the Legislature expressed it as a given that consolidation would lead to cost savings for the new school district that could be passed on to students, an expectation that a recent report by the consolidation committee casts into doubt, mostly due to pay differences between Mingus and COCSD teachers.
Bringing them into the same pay scale would mean raising COCSD teacher salaries by a combined total of nearly $1 million every year, undoing any savings in administrative costs, according to the report.
“The notion that there would be savings by consolidating down to one school board, I don’t know where that comes from,” Ledbetter said. “Everyone is a little surprised to hear that community members would argue to the Arizona Legislature that there would be savings if the Mingus school board ceased to exist.”
MUHSD board members expressed worry about what would happen to the ClarkdaleJerome School District if consolidation happened, after that district has already voted not to consolidate. Since Clarkdale-Jerome families send their children to MUHS and pay into its tax district, the consolidation would lead to a change in the taxes of Clarkdale-Jerome district taxpayers.
The high school district they had previously been paying for would become a full kindergarten through 12th grade district, even if ClarkdaleJerome students do not reap the funding for the elementary and middle schools.
In the view of several Mingus school board members, this could violate principles of taxation without representation, or Article 9 of the Arizona State Constitution, which requires uniform taxes within a specific district.
“That’s smoke and erroneous information,” said Phil Terbell, one of the leaders of consolidation. He argues that if consolidation goes through, the taxation issue would be resolved through the Clarkdale-Jerome district paying the new unified district funds for each student that attends one of its schools.
“The residents of the Clarkdale district will pay taxes into the Clarkdale district. The residents of the unified district will pay taxes into the unified district. They won’t be paying each other’s taxes.”
Terbell also disputes claims that the consolidation costs would overtake the savings from administrative costs.
“As far as I know there’s absolutely no loss of revenue from the consolidation efforts,” Terbell said.
The two sides disagree on many facts of the issue, contributing to what an ever-growing feeling of bad blood between consolidation advocates and critics, board member said. When the proconsolidation faction sought SB 1254, they did not seek input from those who oppose consolidation or inform them of their legislative plans.
“We tried to include them for 17 months and we couldn’t engage them at all,” Terbell said. “It was only out of necessity that we even got into discussion of a bill.”
Regardless of MUHSD board members’ sentiment, consolidation could be headed to a public vote in the fall now that SB 1254 has passed.
Ledbetter said he believes that since the bill will not go into effect until August and the deadline for the November ballot is in June, the petitions might not be valid even though the bill is retroactive.
The MUHSD board chose not to make any official action after discussing consolidation at Thursday’s meeting.
Jon Hecht can be reached at 282-7795 or email jhecht@larsonnewspapers.com
