Coarsegold candidates air views

Coarsegold parents and teachers get first chance meet school board nominees

Lacey Rees - lrees@sierrastar.com

COARSEGOLD — Five candidates running for three seats on the Coarsegold School Board agreed on numerous items as they answered questions before an audience of parents and teachers Tuesday. The meeting was held at the Coarsegold School cafeteria.

The candidate panel was made up of incumbent Cherie Anderson, former educator Thom Guthrie, incumbent Christine Wilder, correctional administrative assistant Greg Schoonard, and Rivergold School Site Council member Kathy Casey.

Each candidate initially gave one-minute, prepared answers to eight questions which they had received earlier. The questions had been drafted by the Coarsegold Elementary PTA. Moderator was Michael MacChesney, superintendent of Bass Lake School District.

Those questions were followed by one-minute, on-the-spot answers to questions the audience had written on file cards.

The initial questions

Although none of the candidates felt that library books should be censored, they did agree that it is up to the parents to determine whether their child should read a particular book.

Each was asked to share his or her strengths and weaknesses. Mrs. Casey felt her ability to listen, her common sense and organizational skills were her strengths. Impatience to accomplish a task, donuts and ice cream were her weaknesses.

Mr. Guthrie felt his experience and interests were his strengths. He regretted not having $4 million to give to the school, and he wished he still had kids at the school.

While Mrs. Wilder’s strengths were leadership and experience, she admitted she finds it difficult to take criticism.

Mrs. Anderson said she is willing to listen, asks a lot of questions and seeks knowledge and holds to her decisions once she makes up her mind, but she think she takes her decisions too much to heart.

The ability to communicate with people, to manage a busy workload and to figure out solutions were Mr. Schoonard’s strengths. His weakness is that he has a tendency to push the time limits.

Identifying problems

On identifying problems in the district, Mr. Guthrie said, “The district has been uniting more and more with the [Yosemite] high school district.” He suggested Coarsegold quit “drifting” and unite or “be our own elementary school district.”

Mrs. Wilder thought that facilities and transportation needed attention. Concerning the budget, she stressed maintaining the reserve to accommodate for growth.

Traffic, enlarging the Coarsegold cafeteria and transportation were identified by Mrs. Anderson as needing attention. We need to “mind our p’s and q’s or we will be in trouble again,” she said of maintaining the budget.

Mr. Schoonard said the district needed to be prepared for serious growth and get long-term contingency plans. He felt the schools were behind in some subjects, and that curriculum needed to be looked at to meet state standards.

Mrs. Casey was concerned about future growth and the need to monitor the budget carefully.

All the candidates agreed that, given their differing backgrounds and experience, they expected their views to differ and each would not always get his way as they work toward solutions.

They also agreed that the board is the last stop in the chain of command to solve concerns of parents or staff. Especially in problems concerning children, the parents should be referred first to the teacher or principal.

Audience questions

When asked whether they would support merging with a high school district Mr. Guthrie admitted he didn’t know the facts and would look into it. Mrs. Wilder said there is a committee formed for that purpose but has not yet met. She suggested that if it would raise the district’s ADA [Average Daily Attendance] it should be looked into, but in detail.

Mrs. Anderson cautioned that unifying would be a long process, and warned that representation at the lower level would be lost. Mr. Schoonard, while needing more information before making a decision, was also concerned about losing local control. While seeing the advantage to sharing costs, Mrs. Casey couldn’t say “yes” or “no.”

Class size

The prospective board members were concerned about class size but didn’t think the school board has much control over numbers except for budgeting for new teachers.

They agreed that all children have a right to their religious beliefs on campus. Homework, they concurred, is individual for each student. If it is a problem for a student, then the parent should talk to the teacher.

The candidates were asked whether they thought the reconfiguring of the seventh and eight grades to add those grades to Rivergold was a good decision and would they try to reverse it.

Mr. Shoonard observed that Rivergold is happy and Coarsegold is not, but would not do anything to reverse it. Neither would Mrs. Casey. Mr. Guthrie said if the constituency wanted it, he would look into it.

“I stand by my decision,” said Mrs. Wilder. “Both campuses are doing excellent. We need to find ways to manage our growth.”

Mrs. Anderson remembers the decision as being very difficult. Although it divided the community, she says she did the best she could.

How about the arts?

Would the candidates champion the cause of art education? Mrs. Wilder and Mrs. Anderson agreed that the present program would have to be evaluated, while Mr. Schoonard said he would support the art if the budget allowed it. “I am a big believer in reading, writing and arithmetic, the basics,” he said.

Although she is a proponent of the arts, Mrs. Casey said, “the budget is the budget and there is not a lot of leeway with it.”

Mr. Guthrie said he would support the arts if they were truly art, such as drawing or art appreciation, and not crafts. He said that it would need a creative means of financing it.

They all agreed that a board should not micro-manage a school site and that Coarsegold was doing a good job in its requirements to meet the needs of special education students.

Coarsegold needs new playground equipment, they all agreed, but since it is unlikely the funds will be found in the budget, they “need to think outside the box,” said Mr. Schoonard. Those raising funds need to be creative in their efforts. Mrs. Wilder mentioned applying for grants.

A tight budget again was brought up when the panel was asked about more prep time for teachers. They’d love to help but can’t afford it. “It seems all we talk about is budget,” said Mrs. Anderson.

While most agreed that the schools are doing a “great job” of raising the scholastic standards, Mr. Schoonard questioned the “whole business of testing scores. I think funding school on test scores is terrible,” he said, saying that some schools have in the state have so little to work with. He thinks that monetary rewards encourages teachers to “teach to the test.”