ASD Board Meeting 05/14/2024

The Alpine School board met and voted to advance only Option 3 for further study, since they are only allowed to advance one option. Here are the key takeaways:

• The vote was a close 4-3 decision, with the board members most vocally opposed to any split voting to advance the option. This begs the question that if they attempt to put an option on the ballot, what are they really trying to accomplish? Are they just actively trying to conflict with or sabotage the interlocal agreements? Confuse voters?
• The district also updated some of the errors made by the MGT study, similar to the errors and flaws pointed out in a previous blog post. Overall, it appears the MGT study was mostly a waste of district money, as the options and financial data was mostly provided by the district, and the survey was far detached from the reality of the voting public.
• The numbers provided by the district (especially all the increases in taxes) are suspect because many of them are speculative, since they will be decided by future boards. A lot of money could be saved by financially aware board members yet to be elected. What is clear is that taxes will go up, whether the district stays together or splits.
• Board member Julie King had some excellent comments (starting at 4:49:50) about how we can save costs. She points out that if the district continues to try to fight the interlocal agreements, this could cost taxpayers and hurt students. "If you bring the problems closer to the people, there's going to be a higher investment in resolving those."
• Board member Stacy Bateman said "it was this board's inability to recognize that representation is an issue and to not act on all of the things that we could that triggered the cities moving so quickly". She also stated that the inability of other board members to consider Option 4 sent a very clear message that "all board members were not in fact looking out for all areas". She continued, "Alpine does not have a monopoly on the extraordinary things that are happening in Utah" and that many smaller districts across the state are fully capable of providing quality education for their students. Not to mention that the resulting districts of a 3 way split of Alpine would NOT result in "small" districts (they would be the 6th, 9th, and 11th largest in the state).
• Board member Joylin Lincoln reminded that all options presented were financially feasible and that "I want us to move forward with kindness and working together". She also pointed out that if the district proceeds with an option that is in direct conflict with the community interlocal agreements, then that is sending a message that the school boar is not interested in collaboration.
• Board president Sarah Hacken incorrectly stated that the bond failed by 600 votes, when it was actually almost 7,000. She also stated that the East area would be disadvantaged in a 3 way split, but that's entirely speculative, and ignores the strength of the Orem area. It's unfortunate that the 2 Orem board members seem to be painting their community in such a bleak way. She tried to make a case for how redistricting affects representation, but her argument quickly dissolved when Bateman pointed out the fallacy that districting was the issue.