Utah
Amid ‘tension’ in Alpine School District, board votes to study potential district reconfiguration
Estimated read time: 4-5
minutes
AMERICAN FORK — Even after Orem Proposition 2 — a measure that would have split Orem from the Alpine School District — failed on the ballot last November, it could still be in the cards for the district to divide in the future.
The district’s board of education on Tuesday voted unanimously to begin studying the reconfiguration of the biggest school district in the state of Utah.
“What the board decided to do … they voted to have staff start looking into what the process (of reconfiguring) is,” said David Stephenson, Alpine School District spokesman.
Basically, the process of reconfiguring hasn’t begun, but the vote was to have district staff review things such as what Utah Code says about reconfiguring the district.
Stephenson said the hope is for the information gathered from the review and a timeline for reconfiguration — deemed by a third party — to be presented to the board in September.
“They’ll review that information in September with the potential, after we go through whatever the process is, to have some form of a reconfiguration on the November 2024 ballot or not,” Stephenson added. “What happened … was to simply start the process of looking at what the process is, if you will.”
Processes aside, board member Mark Clement said the vote to look at a possible reconfiguration is based on what he feels is “tension” in the district.
Although the district has flirted with potential reconfigurations since 2004, Clement said that the recent trajectory of the district is signaling change may be necessary.
“More recently, it is becoming increasingly apparent that there are different needs in different parts of the district,” Clement said.
There’s this kind of a tension that we felt it’s time to give the residents a chance to make a choice.
–Mark Clement, Alpine School District Board of Education
In the rapidly growing west side of the district, Clement said that there is a need for new schools and residents are “kind of demanding” a faster building schedule.
“Which is difficult since our bond didn’t pass this last fall,” Clement said, referencing a proposed $595 million bond that would’ve gone toward building new schools and repairing existing ones.
At the same time, Clement said schools on the east side of the district are facing declining enrollment, and residents there want to keep their small schools.
“Last fall … Orem wanted to create their own district. One of their arguments was they didn’t want their property taxes going to build schools in the west, right? And I think residents in the west kind of feel like, ‘We don’t want our weighted-pupil-unit funding to go to supplement schools in the east that are small,’” Clement said. “There’s this kind of a tension that we felt it’s time to give the residents a chance to make a choice.”
Whether or not voters in the district want to split, Clement said the board believes it was time to give them a choice.
Both Clement and Stephenson said, at this point, the board doesn’t know how exactly the district could be reconfigured — a piece of the puzzle the district says will be put into place by the third party.
“Our public would like to trust that what our recommendations, and what we put forward, is reliable, and I think that that will only happen when it’s done by a third party,” board member Ada Wilson said during Tuesday’s board meeting.
As far as the magnitude of a reconfiguration, Clement said he doesn’t believe anyone is considering a four-way split, but that a two- or three-way split could be feasible.
What I would hope is that when we’re done, we will be able to move forward together … It would just allow us to move forward in the work we need to do without constantly questioning.
–Mark Clement, Alpine School District Board of Education
He said it’s possible there are other cities in the district that, like Orem, would like to be their own, single-city district.
“We would kind of want this third part to work closely with citizens and city leaders from all sorts of municipalities and then come back with a recommendation or two,” Clement said.
From there, the district would pass the final recommendation to Utah County officials, who would then decide whether to put it on the ballot for voters in the district to decide.
Clement said the soonest that reconfiguration could go on the ballot would be 2024. If its approved, he gave a rough estimate that the new districts would be in operation in 2028.
From the perspective of a Utah County resident, Clement said it would be difficult for him to vote for a district reconfiguration because he sees “great advantages” in the scale of Alpine School District.
“What I would hope is that when we’re done, we will be able to move forward together — as opposed to always bringing this question up: ‘Well, it would be better if we had smaller districts; or, if Orem had their own district, then we wouldn’t have to close schools,’” Clement said. “It would just allow us to move forward in the work we need to do without constantly questioning.”
“If we can move forward … whether as a single district or as smaller districts, I believe we can be more effective at really improving student outcomes.”