ShareThis Page
Featured Commentary

Colin McNickle: The school district consolidation question

| Tuesday, Nov. 6, 2018, 9:03 p.m.

There can be concrete benefits to consolidating local school districts in Pennsylvania. But operational concerns — contractual, economic and, to some, even parochial — stand to trump any rush to future mergers, concludes an analysis by the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy.

“Given past experience, consolidations in Pennsylvania seem very unlikely,” says Eric Montarti, research director at the Pittsburgh think tank. “Few consolidations occur because there are deep-seated local objections and serious economic reasons for not pursuing” them.

The commonwealth today has 500 public school districts. But 66 years ago, in 1952, it was one of 15 states with at least 2,000 school districts. Pennsylvania’s school district consolidation was driven by two legislative acts in the 1960s.

By 1972, the Keystone State’s 2,506 districts had been whittled to 528. Those acts eventually paved the way for a reduction to 501 districts.

The current statutory language on “combination of school districts permits two or more school boards to pass resolutions indicating a desire to combine.” The state Board of Education then rejects or approves the request, with recommendations.

That’s how Pennsylvania’s last school district consolidation was effected a decade ago. Monaca and Center in Beaver County combined to form the Central Valley School District, reducing the commonwealth’s public school districts to 500.

That, however, was not for others’ lack of trying. Three Allegheny County districts (Clairton, Carlynton and Moon) sought mergers between 2011 and 2014 but could find no willing partners.

That said, Allegheny County has two districts where part of the education program has been shuttered and students assigned to different districts.

“This occurred in the Duquesne School District and more recently in the Wilkinsburg School District,” Montarti notes. “These occurred outside the current combination law.”

There have been suggestions over the years that Pennsylvania transition to countywide school districts, a la neighboring West Virginia and Maryland, to name two, while in 2007, a plan suggested there be no more than 100 districts, a mixture of countywide and multi- municipal districts. The plan, however, had no legs.

In theory, public school district consolidations should provide cost-savings achieved through greater economies of scale and less duplication while enhancing curriculum offerings.

But, in practice, a quartet of roadblocks persist.

“First, there are union contract differences (including pay scales, work rules, pension and other benefits) that can lead to impossibly difficult mergers of the workforces,” Montarti says.

“Second, school board membership post-consolidation could be extremely problematic, particularly if the districts are very different in size,” he adds.

The third issue could be the possibility of different tax rates and debt levels that could, and likely would, be an impediment to mergers.

And fourth, lest it be forgotten, school districts can be and often are a source of local identity for many communities, “especially with athletics and team loyalty,” he reminds.

“Those obstacles to consolidation have been in play and have largely forestalled voluntary consolidations,” Montarti concludes.

Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me