North Mason School District holds
public forum to learn how to engage the public
By Mary Swoboda
Posted 6/17/02
The North Mason School District (NMSD)
held a public forum at the Fire Station on Old Belfair Hwy the evening
of June 11, the stated purpose of which was to find out what the
public considers to be the most important characteristics of a
successful school.
Unfortunately, over 75% of the
participants were affiliated with the district, either as staff, board
members or boosters. They were disappointed with such a dismal turnout
of the general public.
“There’s not many people here;
more than half are from the school,” a district staffer remarked.
Drawing on a parallel between Fire
District 2 and the school district, Chief Mike Greene asked, “How do
we connect with people who vote? Apathy is our biggest enemy.”
District booster, Butch Boad was not
satisfied calling the voting public apathetic. “I’ve seen a lot of
M&O levies pass and a lot fail. The failure is usually a result of
external things beyond the school district to control. For example,
9/11 had a great deal of influence with voters.”
“When voters are dissatisfied,
attendance at meetings like this one and the monthly board meetings
increase,” Mr. Boad observed. “Most voters must be satisfied
because, if you’re satisfied with something, why go to meetings?
Election results ultimately determine if you did the right thing or
not,” he continued.
Chief Mike Greene disagreed. “We
learned a lot of things about ourselves after FD2’s failed election
and it taught us a lot about our community. Community members need to
feel something is relevant to them and their voice is being heard.”
District booster, Pam Merrill added,
“People don’t always see what’s in it for them, and they are
busy. Some people vote no because they’re too busy to find out why
they should vote yes.”
School Board member Steve Rose
thought maybe the school district needs to advertise more. “Perhaps
we need a professional PR guy.”
Mr. Boad acknowledged that the
Belfair Herald prints a lot of information about what’s going on in
the school district, and the district itself sends out information.
“Maybe we’ve gotten complacent
because the school district has been successful for a long time,” he
said.
A district staffer observed that even
when the school district contacted the randomly selected 20-person
focus group members three times (twice by mail and once by phone
call); the most who showed up at a meeting was five. “One focus
group only had ONE person,” she said.
Ms. Merrill suggested the school
district set up a contact list via e-mail. “That might help to let
people know.”
“Not one form of communication is
going to do it for everyone,” Ray Lucas (principal of Sand Hill
Elementary) said, but liked Ms. Merrill’s idea to have an e-mail
contact list.
“We shouldn’t assume all parents
have e-mail,” Mr. Boad cautioned.
“Most parents do,” Mr. Lucas
responded, much to Mr. Boad’s disbelief.
The secondary facilitator, Martha
Wightman said, “Maybe the perception is people can’t distinguish
between a bond and an M&O levy.”
“I must admit I’m one of the
“no” voters,” a community member admitted. “I don’t have a
feel for why the money is needed. I’m on the periphery.” She
wondered what happens to the kids after they graduate. “The only
barometer most of us citizens have are the scores on WASL tests.”
She would like to see ever-increasing scores.
“We spend a lot of time focusing on
real successful kids as well as the troublemakers” while the kids in
the middle kind of drift along,” Ms. Merrill said. “Some parents
seem to have the attitude that schools did them wrong and they pass
this attitude on to their kids,” she continued.
Superintendent Debbie Wing informed
the attendees that 70% of the voters and taxpayers have no kids in the
school district.
Mr. Lucas asked, “How do we make it
relevant or understandable to folks with no kids in school?”
Ms. Wightman suggested that the
school district think about “who we’re marketing to.” For
example, budget information needs to be in plain English for the
general public.
Mr. Boad added, “People feel stupid
and intimidated. It would be good if this information was
deciphered.”
“[NMSD’s] music program is
phenomenal,” a district staffer said, “but people don’t know how
much instruments cost; the costs are incredible.”
“Most people think parents buy the
instruments,” Ms. Merrill added.
“It takes $300 to outfit one kid
for football and $100 to certify a football helmet,” someone else
said.
“This seems extravagant in a day
when every penny counts,” the community member said. “I don’t
think people need to know how much this costs.”
The primary facilitator, Norm (last
name unknown) clarified that a lot of the money for equipment and
uniforms comes out of the ASB (Associated Student Body) fund through
fund-raisers, cookie sales and the sale of ASB cards.
“Levy money pays for things the
state doesn’t pay for,” Chief Greene said. “The simpler you make
it, the better the public can understand it.”
Ms. Merrill asked about impact fees.
“Isn’t that another source of revenue for the district?”
Supt. Wing replied that the County
Commissioners are unwilling to have impact fees assessed. “Impact
fees affect developers only, not individual home owners, she said,
“and [the school district] has to negotiate with each developer.”
“How do you determine a fair
price?” Ms. Merrill asked.
Supt. Wing replied that the amount
has been from practically nothing to as high as $11,000. “In places
where there are impact fees, it’s around $1,200 per home.”
“Impact fees are like free money
we’re not taking advantage of,” Ms. Merrill said.
Moving on, Supt. Wing wondered if it
would be a mistake to tell voters what they won’t get if the levy
doesn’t pass. “[In other districts when this happened,] people
then voted no because they didn’t like to be threatened.”
“Tell people what their tax dollars
are being used for and give them the pros and cons,” Chief Greene
responded. “When [FD2] ran its benefit assessment charge, we told
voters there would be cuts if the levy didn’t pass. It didn’t pass
and we cut.”
“It’s important to give folks
more information, but it’s possible to give too much information,”
a district staffer said. “We need to educate the public on what the
levy pays for, but we need to be very careful about crossing the
line.”
“The public needs to know what
their money is paying for and what will not be funded if the levy
fails,” Ms. Merrill added.
“I think this community will
support a levy, I really do,” Ms. Merrill concluded.
© 2002 Mary Swoboda. Publication
or redistribution is permitted without prior notification provided it
is published in its entirety with no modifications.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
SEATING ARRANGEMENT
A B C
_____________ O | | N | | D M | | | | E | | F L |___________|
K J
I H G
P
A = Norm (last name unknown), primary
facilitator
B = Joan Albers (NMSD staff) C = Donna Ford (NMSD staff) D = Butch Boad (NMSD booster) E = Paula (either NMSD staff or booster) F = Martha Wightman, secondary facilitator G = Pam Merrill (NMSD booster) H = Mike Greene (community member) I = Unknown woman (NMSD staff) J = Mary Swoboda (community member) K = Debbie Wing (NMSD superintendent—came in about 45 minutes after meeting started) L = Unknown woman (community member) M = Ray Lucas (principal, Sand Hill Elementary) N = Jeff Allen (school board) O = Steve Rose (school board) P = Unknown woman (sat behind and to my right near the end of the meeting—I had not seen her earlier)
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]
|