Break up the School District Now!
Inside Liberty Watch Today - Jan. 9, 2006
Breaking up the Clark County School District was in the news again last week. You may remember that the Legislature allocated $250,000 to study ways to bust up the fifth largest school district in the nation, a cause Senator Sandra Tiffany has championed for years.
UNLV professor and gubernatorial candidate Dina Titus quickly recoiled at the thought of a breakup and ventured outside of her political science area of expertise. She told the Sun that if the CCSD were broken apart, the district would "lose the economy of scale and exacerbate the differences between the haves and have-nots." Furthermore, Titus believes four or five smaller bureaucracies would replace the CCSD bureaucracy, with services being duplicated.
This is a common argument from those who support having the biggest school district money can buy. Even Republican Lt. Governor Lorraine Hunt chimed in with Titus: "Incurring more bureaucracy is not the answer. I don't want more governments and more fiefdoms."
Assembly Majority Leader Barbara Buckley made it three-of-a-kind telling the Sun, “breaking up the district would result in four inadequate districts with more bureaucracy.”
At least these three gals acknowledge that CCSD is a bureaucracy and from the tone of their comments they believe bureaucracy is bad.
But, splitting up CCSD doesn’t automatically mean that each smaller district would have the luxury of needing a 162-page Administration Telephone Directory like CCSD currently does.
Would each small district administration organization chart look like CCSD’s, with the Board of Schools Trustees at the top along with Board Legal Counsel? As well as having a Superintendent, would smaller districts have a couple of Coordinators, along with an Assistant to the Superintendent and MPS Management Representative? Would small districts require a Community and Government Relations officer, a Diversity and Affirmative Action officer, an Education Services officer, a General Counsel, a Research, Accountability and Innovation officer, and a School Police Services officer?
I’m not sure each smaller district would have a couple of Deputy Superintendents, five Regional Superintendents, an Associate Superintendent for Student Support Services, an Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Professional Development, an Associate Superintendent for Human Resources, an Associate Superintendent of Facilities, and an Assistant Superintendent for Technology.
CCSD also has a person heading up Business and Finance Services and a Business Manager. The General Manager of KLVX also occupies a box on the CCSD org chart.
Of course we have not listed anyone who actually comes in contact with students. And the positions mentioned require plenty of support staff, office space and supplies. Is this bloated organization chart what Ms. Titus means by “economy of scale”?
The stories of kids not having enough textbooks are true. But who needs books when you have hundreds of high-paid bureaucrats.
Lt. Governor Hunt’s answer to all of this is: "If it's broke, let's fix it," she told the Sun. "We need a new business plan for the School District.” She thinks letting the principals have power is the answer.
Barbara Buckley feels the same way: "Instead of deconsolidating, I favor giving more authority to the principals and the regions."
Ms. Titus is also in favor of giving more power to schools.
What these ladies miss is that competition is what will make breaking up CCSD beneficial to students and parents. If parents can vote with their feet, the education product will improve. Giving principals more power does not force them to improve their schools if parents and kids remain a captive audience.
Economist Hans Hoppe explains: “Any monopoly is ‘bad’ for consumers because, shielded from potential new entrants into its line of production, the price for its product will be higher and the quality lower than with free entry.”
The Legislature must give parents the freedom to choose. Buckley, Titus and Hunt are all pro-choice. They believe women have a right to choose whether to be parents or not. Why don’t they want to allow women the right to choose the best education option for their children? With competition, the layers of bureaucracy would fall away. Why? The individual districts couldn’t afford it and still provide a quality education product. The Legislature will approve a set amount of funding for southern Nevada schools. The money would presumably be divided up on a per pupil basis.
What everyone recognizes, even these three politicians, is that bureaucracy does nothing to aid in the education of a youngster. It is dead weight. Thus, if school districts were competing for students (and therefore funding), the individual districts would keep their administration spending at a minimum and put more money into the classroom. They would be forced to. Ultimately, parents would demand to see an accounting of how the money is spent in competing districts prior to making a decision on where to enroll their kids.
High performing districts would attract the most students, the most funding and ultimately the best teachers. No, not all districts would be equal; some would be better than others. But, the competition would weed out bad teachers and lazy, uncreative administrators everywhere, with all students benefiting.
Parents that place a high value on education will sacrifice to move into high-performing districts. Parents that couldn’t care less will send their kids to average or below districts. Those who argue for one big school district say this is unfair, but, as is now, the entire district doesn’t perform.
CCSD is like a retail store where the boss’s office takes up 80 percent of the operation while consumers are left to shop in the remaining 20 percent of the store. You can do that when you have a monopoly. But, the percentages would be more than reversed if there were competition.
According to a 2004 Nevada Policy Research Institute study, Nevada Public School Performance, parents in Clark County favor breaking up the school district by a 2 to 1 margin, the NPRI study found. In Washoe County the ratio is 5 to 4 in favor of splitting that school district.
There is no magic number as to the optimum number of school districts, only: the more, the better. With thousands of people moving to southern Nevada each month, now is the time to give parents a choice.
Doug French, Liberty Watch Columnist
