Meet your candidates

COARSEGOLD — This year there are five candidates running for three seats on the Coarsegold School Board. Two of the candidates, Christine Wilder and Cheri Anderson, are incumbents, while Greg Schoonard, Kathy Casey, and Thom Guthrie are new applicants.

A candidates night was held a couple weeks ago where those running were given one minute to answer questions posed to them. The Sierra Star wants to give those candidates a written forum in which to further clarify their views.

In order to give Coarsegold readers further insight into the views of candidates running for Coarsegold School Board, the Sierra Star has posed four questions to each candidate.

Following is a short biography of each candidate followed by their answers to the questions.

Cheri Anderson — She has lived in Coarsegold for the past 26 years. She has been married to Smoky for 24 years and they have four children. She has been a Board trustee for the past four years and has been enrolled in a “Masters in Governance,” a multi-coursed training covering key areas of boardsmanship. She also attended a legal seminar which covered the top legal issues concerning California schools.

She represented Coarsegold School District at the county level as the clerk of the board sitting on the Discipline Review committee and is a part of the Family Life Committee. She has also attended special education meetings given by the Madera County Office of Education.

She lives and works in the Coarsegold area, making her readily available to her constituents.

Kathy Casey — Mrs. Casey is the wife of Matthew and the mother of two children, ages 9 and 6, who have both attended Rivergold School since kindergarten. “I am a regular attendee of Coarsegold School Board meetings, the fund-raising chair for Rivergold PTA, and I volunteer twice weekly in my children’s classrooms,” she says.

She just completed her two-year term with the Rivergold School Site Council for which she was elected. She is still serving on the district’s Facilities Committee as well as the Technology Committee for which she was appointed. She has been a lifeguard at the Yosemite Lakes Park pool for the last two years and is currently assisting on the Pool Committee for Yosemite High School. She is a candidate because, “I care about children and the future of Coarsegold School District,” she says.

Thom Guthrie — Dr. Guthrie has a bachelor of arts in speech, plus masters and doctorate degrees in school administration. He and his wife moved to Coarsegold three years ago. Besides being a teacher, he served 20 years as a principal and/or superintendent in several small school districts.

“I’m ready to serve kids, parents and staff,” he says. “After spending a total of 30 years in the classroom and in public school administration, I want to give back to our community from my experience and knowledge by serving on the board. I promise to be logical in my decisions, responsibilities, finances and always keep the education of youth in mind.”

Greg Schoonard — “My wife, Jan, and I have been married for 15 years, says Mr. Schoonard. “We have two wonderful children: Jennifer, 10, and William, 8, both of whom attend school in the Coarsegold District. Coarsegold became our home more than six years ago when we built a home here as the result of a promotional opportunity.

“I have served as a peace officer for 13 years with the California Department of Corrections. I currently serve as the warden’s administrative assistant and the public information officer for Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla.

“I graduated from San Diego State University with a bachelor’s degree in journalism and English; and a minor in Spanish. I also earned a master’s degree in public administration from California State University at Bakersfield. I have served on a school board previously for a small private school, and I previously served as a part-time instructor at Bakersfield Junior College, where I taught entry-level criminal justice courses.

“When it comes to elementary school education, I believe that schools should emphasize the basics: reading, writing and arithmetic. If we fail the children of our community in this regard, then we are setting them up for failure in life.”

Christine Wilder — Mrs. Wilder has lived in the Coarsegold community for 13 years and has been married for 25 years. She and her husband have two grown sons, both of whom attended Coarsegold Elementary.

Before she was a board member, she helped to form the PTA at Coarsegold School and served in a variety of positions on the Executive Committee. She served on the School Site Committee, Facilities committee, Family Life Committee and the Curriculum Committee.

She has been a trustee for nine years, has served as board clerk and is now its president.

She has earned her master in boardsmanship and is enrolled in the Master of Governance program with the California School Boards Association. She has also participated in Eastern Madera County School Boards Association workshop events.

Where the candidates stand

Question No. 1: What do you see as the procedure for developing policy and administrative regulations? Who develops them and who monitors them and how does the Board make sure they are being carried out without micro-managing?

Cheri Anderson: Policy development at Coarsegold Union School District begins with a “Sample Policy”, which is developed by CSBA (California School Board Association). The sample policies contain language which is legally correct and has legal references. Then the policy is brought to an open meeting where community members, staff, administration and Board members discuss the policy. The policy adoption process has a first and second reading in addition to Board policy workshops. The site principals and staff follow the administrative regulations. Students, parents, community members and/or staff may request a policy be placed on the agenda for discussion.

Kathy Casey: The Board establishes policies which provide direction for the district. Most Board policy and administration regulations are already in place. It is the Board’s responsibility to continue to update and change policy as dictated by the needs and desires of the student, staff and parents.

The enforcement of policy should be left to the site principal and staff. Communications between site staff, parents and Board members are essential and will assure that policy will be carried out without micro-managing.

Thom Guthrie: District policy and regulations should be already established. An idea or program presented to the Board or administration and deemed by either to be good for students and the district would be put on the Board agenda for discussion and action.

When adopted, the plan’s monitoring becomes the responsibility of the administration. It is also the responsibility of the administration to honestly report to the Board enabling its members to ask questions and determine whether the program is progressing as envisioned.

Greg Schoonard: Development of district policy and administrative regulations, must be done as a collaborative process involving parents, teachers, administrators, district employees, students and other concerned community members. All interested stakeholders must have the opportunity to take part in the process. In fact, in my experience as a public administrator, policies and administrative regulations are more readily received by the people they impact when they know that they have had the opportunity to be involved in the process of developing them.

Therefore, policy and administrative regulations must be presented and reviewed in sessions that are open to the public. I support the current district practice of scheduling policy workshops to review policy and hash out the language in open, public session. This often involves multiple “readings” of the policies with opportunity for comment and revision. It is a cumbersome, but necessary, process.

Policies and administrative regulations are living, breathing documents. They should be constantly open to review and revision, as the need arises.

All interested parties must monitor implementation. Anytime someone believes that a policy is not being observed, or is being violated, they should attempt to resolve the concern at the lowest level possible. The concern should only become a Board issue after district staff has had the opportunity to review the issue and have attempted to resolve it at the lowest level possible in accordance with district policy.

Christine Wilder: The Board works to develop policy with the superintendent and administration. Input from staff and community is also sought. The Board at regular Board meeting and at policy workshops hears comments. The current Board has worked hard this year to review our policies. Policy must be reviewed to ensure current laws and standards are met. The superintendent and administrative team is confident that Board policy and administrative regulations are carried out.

Question No. 2: What are your specific five-year goals for the district? In other words, where do you see the district in five years. How would you help to influence the Board on that five-year plan?

Cheri Anderson: Due to the hard work of the students, parents, community members, staff and administration, Rivergold was honored with the Distinguished School Award. I know that Coarsegold School can also be recognized for the same honor. So, while Rivergold retains its Distinguished School status, I believe Coarsegold School will also be named a Distinguished School.

After the fiasco of having financial problems, the budget is once again healthy. Maintaining that balance is a priority. A library which is open before and after school and affords an atmosphere of learning. Beyond a five-year plan, my vision is that every child be a reader, able to seek out knowledge and become a life-long learner able to reach intelligent decisions on their own.

Kathy Casey: I look at the future of Coarsegold School District with great excitement. I partner this excitement with concern of “REAL” rapid growth. The physical upgrade of the Coarsegold campus should be an immediate priority as enrollment continues to rise. To maintain the high academic standards that have already been established, we will need to continue to provide a positive learning environment. The rate of growth of this community will influence the decisions we make as a Board.

Thom Guthrie: My vision for five years is: 1) to stress standards in classroom teaching; 2) to make a final decision on the relationship with Yosemite High School District; 3) the district’s growth and management of it; and 4) possible new school.

Greg Schoonard: Regarding specific five-year goals for the district, I have three specific things in mind:

First, upgrading the district curriculum. If we expect our students to achieve excellence, then we must provide them with the resources and materials that they need to achieve it. It was recently brought to my attention that the fifth-grade science textbook has only one section in it that meets current state standards!

Textbooks are expensive and publishers have struggled to keep up with the ever-changing state standards, however, this situation is unacceptable. There are other areas in desperate need of upgrading as well. We cannot afford to continue to fall behind in these areas. This is a disservice to the students.

Second, we must resolve the physical plant issues that have been identified by the School Site Council at Coarsegold Elementary. This will require the commitment of resources. These are difficult fiscal times, but we owe it to the students and the community to upgrade the parking lot, retrofit the cafeteria for multi-purpose use, remodel the office, library and restroom areas of the main administration building to make them more “user friendly.”

Finally, although we will have to make difficult decisions regarding spending, I want to ensure that five years from now, that the district remains financially solvent and healthy. This will require discipline, looking for creative solutions that may be “outside the box” of past practices, courage and leadership.

Christine Wilder: Vision of the next term would include alignment of the curriculum to state standards; improving our technology, libraries, materials and support of staff and student; and improve facilities and transportation, plan and prepare for growth.

The district is moving forward in all of these areas. I continue to support the hard work that the committees are involved in. I will continue to encourage the Board to seek recommendations from the committees. There are no quick fixes for long term goals.

Coarsegold School District prides itself in establishing annual short-term goals and, on the horizon, long-term goals for our school district. The areas that I believe need to be highlighted are: 1. Curriculum — The goal would be to align curriculum and curricular materials to the content standards to maximize every student’s potential in school.

2. Assessment — Continue to evolve assessment systems that measure student performance and hold our organization accountable.

3. To provide staff development opportunities to focus on high performance organization and to provide the resources necessary to recruit and retain teachers.

4. To provide a beginning teachers support system that adds necessary skills to their portfolio to achieve results, which will benefit the overall organization and students.

5. Develop a comprehensive master plan, which would include a third comprehensive campus in the next five years to deal with the growth that is currently occurring in the Coarsegold area.

6. Expand transportation fleet to accommodate state of the art equipment and growth.

7. Budget — Develop a budget, which implements Board priorities and goals. This budget would maintain a high level of fiscal accountability.

Question No. 3: How do you feel about a middle school? Do you feel it would be beneficial to the district? Do you think each school should keep its K-8 configuration or develop a middle school on other property?

Cheri Anderson: I believe a middle school will be advantageous to the district and will eventually become a reality. The problem is we don't have enough ADA [Average Daily Attendance] to warrant the school now. I personally think, before the Board goes to the voters to ask for another bond issue for a middle school, they need to set aside a portion of developers’ fees to help pay for the school. Currently CUSD is planning on improving Coarsegold School with parking facilities in addition to a stage area and building improvements. After these improvements are completed, the facilities committee will again make its recommendations to the Board.

Kathy Casey: My dream would be to see two K-5 sites and a separate 6-8 site. I believe a middle school environment will be academically and socially beneficial and will best prepare our children for the challenges of high school.

Thom Guthrie: Development of a middle school would make reasonable sense to me. The state suggests larger campuses for junior high students. A middle school (sixth, seventh and eighth grades) or junior high (seventh and eighth grades) would allow more age-appropriate subjects to be offered and taught. If we decided to keep K-8 schools, we must develop equal programs, not necessarily duplicate, and an open enrollment for all students.

Greg Schoonard: Regarding the building of a middle school, of course it would be beneficial to the district, however, the benefits must be weighed in light of the cost.

Schools are extremely expensive to build. Voter-approved bonds often finance them. Bond passage is no easy task. Although significant growth is occurring in Coarsegold, it is difficult to project how long the growth will be sustained and what impact it will have on the district in the long run. For the time being, I believe that the district should develop master plans that provide for expansion for both campuses on the current sites.

Christine Wilder: The facilities committee will help determine if the district will stay with K-8 or develop the middle-school concept. The district has a working facilities committee in place. This committee is comprised of the superintendent, administration, parents, staff and community. Some of the many issues this committee looks at are configuration, site location and growth patterns, funds, and the list continues. The committee will make a recommendation to the Board. The Board will take comments and recommendations from a wide variety of stakeholders.

Question No. 4: How do you personally feel about unification with Yosemite High School District. Since a petition has to be presented to the Madera County Committee on School District Organization before a feasibility study can be done, would you sign that petition?

Cheri Anderson: As a private citizen, I do not believe unification with Yosemite would be the best thing for children. As a private citizen, I would not endorse this move. I believe there would be a loss of representation at the local level. Will the new Board be comprised of representatives from Raymond, Oakhurst, Ahwahnee and Bass Lake? Will they determine curriculum, facilities, staffing, budget etc. for Coarsegold School District? Will our developers fees be kept separate, or added to Yosemite’s developers fees? If they are co-mingled, will Coarsegold School District suffer? Just a few questions I currently have. But, my opinion is just one of many. As a Coarsegold Board Trustee, I have been elected to represent my constituents, and I will do so.

Kathy Casey: Of course, I would sign a petition. We should always ask questions. There are some real money saving benefits to unification as well as concerns for local control. Mountain Area unification has been looked at before and will continue to be an issue as our community continues to evolve.

Thom Guthrie: I approve of the committee that the Board has put in place to look into unification. I’m concerned that if we do unify, we will have Oakhurst interests making many decisions for Coarsegold Elementary students as well as for Oakhurst and Coarsegold high school students.

I would support unification only if Board members were elected from the different zones. I would be more inclined to support unification if all YHS-area school districts were to unify.

If both the high school and the Coarsegold Boards conclude that unification would be a positive move, I would vote with the majority to send the petition on unification to the county.

It should be noted that unification will not save any money; all income will be the same and will only be spent differently.

Greg Schoonard: My ultimate decision will be based on the feedback that I receive from the community and from the results of the study that is currently being undertaken. There are pros and cons. Ultimately, the voters would have to decide if the Board decides to move forward with the idea.

I believe in strong local control of our schools. A clear and powerful negative would be the potential loss of local control. Unification has this potential. It should be approached with a great deal of caution.

A clear benefit would be an increase in the amount of funds available per student based on the average daily attendance. Another benefit would be an increased ability to share resources.

Ultimately, I will make my decision based on what I believe is in the long-term best interest of the students and the district.

This is not the first time that unification has been considered. It has been considered previously, and the research has indicated that unification would either not be possible or would not be economically wise or feasible. I have no objection to a feasibility study being completed on this — as long as it is done in a fair and unbiased manner, and, as long as we ensure that all the stakeholders are invited to take part in the process.

Christine Wilder: At this time I believe it is premature to give an opinion one way or another about unification. Our school board engaged in a process where we are jointly establishing fact-finding committees who will research the feasibility of combining the two districts. Currently, our districts have many similarities. We share a superintendent, business services, transportation services, and food services, to name a few. These cooperative efforts have saved both districts revenue over the long-term and have allowed the Coarsegold District to recover from an ailing budget that was in excess of $200,000 in the red and yielded a qualified budget for our District.

The process that is in play now, is that we are establishing committees. These committees will come together and analyze the 10 criteria, which is established by the state for potentially unifying a school district. Questions range from size of a district to the financial ramifications of putting together these two districts. Once a study has been completed by our fact-finding committee, at that time, the Board would make an informed decision as to whether we should unify our district.

Once that decision has been made, the Board would petition the county to evaluate unifying the two districts under a Tompkins Unification. This would involve the county Committee on School District Organization and would indicate that both districts, through a majority vote of the Board of Trustees, supports moving forward with a unification bid.

The county committee would have at their disposal the study of our fact-finding committee and would probably do some initial studies on their own to evaluate the feasibility of unification. The county committee, if they indicated they supported the direction, would move it on to the state Board of Education, who would evaluate it based on the criteria established by the state and come with a ruling. Once all of these committees have done and completed their work (if one of these committees says no, the process stops) and all of these hurdles are passed, then this would go to a vote of the people. Voters of Coarsegold School District and the voters of the Yosemite High School District would have an opportunity through a majority vote to combine the two districts.

It is too early to say definitively whether this is in the best interest of our school district. Ultimately, our concern is how this impacts students and our curricular offerings. I believe, indeed, if we determine that this is best for our school district, we will move forward, and if not, we will stop the process and thank the committee for their efforts.