Press enter to see results or esc to cancel.

Park City School District and the Health Department had better figure out what to do with Park City High School amid Covid surge

Cases of Covid-19 are spiking at Park City High School. Currently, 46 kids have tested positive. Normally, more than 30 students with Covid would trigger what’s called “Test to Stay” at the school. This would mean that all students would need to be tested to continue in-person classes. However, due to the language in the Utah Legislation that created the Test to Stay program, if a student hasn’t been in school for the last 14 days, they aren’t counted. Due to the Christmas break, 29 of the 46 cases aren’t counted versus the Test to Stay threshold at PCHS.

So what we have is an outbreak, that can’t be officially treated as an outbreak, because of legislative rules. However, the Park City School Board, School District, and Health Department need to be treating this as a major issue. Covid cases at the high school are going to blow up; Test To Stay will be triggered. The numbers could be so staggering that the Summit County Health Department will have to put in mandates. There may be so many kids out of school that the district has to make alternate plans for remote education.

Why do I say this? The transmission capability of Omicron and personal experience. I got Covid before Christmas. I am triple vaxxed and likely got Omicron while waiting an hour for takeout, while wearing a mask, at Bombay house in SLC. I tested positive for Covid a couple of days later. My kids took a PCR test and tested negative. A couple of days after that, they tested positive. My story isn’t uncommon.

Whether a high school student tested positive on the morning before classes started, and thus they are not counted in the numbers, is irrelevant. Many high school kids are social and likely have spread this to their friends. Their friends will test negative for a bit and then they will test positive. Between the two tests, they will spread it to others.

I would be remiss if I didn’t state that Omicron seems rather benign for many people. It was for my family. However, public policy is not that nuanced. A positive test is a positive test and that will dictate the actions taken. I would guess we will have 150 positives at PCHS within a week. I wouldn’t be shocked if the number stretched to 300 at some point soon.

The question is what the School Board, School District, and Summit County Health Department are doing about this?

Let’s start with the School Board. I was a little shocked that there wasn’t an emergency meeting being held by the Park City School Board. I would think the board would want to discuss issues they find important, given the fact that the high school will likely move to a Test to Stay paradigm. Also, after the debacle at Parley’s Park earlier this year, I would think the board would want to ask some pointed questions of Superintendent Gildea and the district:

  • Have you communicated with the Health Department to ensure there are enough tests (and testing teams) for 1,500 high school students to be tested?
  • If there are not enough tests, and the school goes full remote, has the district communicated with teachers and students on how remote learning will work? Have they planned for reaching out to ELL and disadvantaged students to ensure all students are treated equitably.
  • How will Test to Stay practically work at the High School? Will it delay start times? How do we keep students safe while waiting for testing?
  • For students that choose remote learning, or have to be remote, what plans do we have in place to help hundreds of students continue their learning process?
  • Given the numbers at the high school, can we change any procedures to make students safer?
  • Given student numbers, what can we do to keep teachers safe?

The board may say, we are on top of it, and emailing back and forth to make sure we are in a good place. The problem with that is that it violates Open Meeting laws. The public has a right to know what policy discussions are taking place in an open forum. So, there needs to be an official meeting.

From the School District and Health Department’s point of view, I think their Test to Start program that is available from 7:15 until 9:15 AM at the High School and Ecker Hill is a great start. However, I can’t find any information on Test to Stay protocols, which are likely going to be needed soon. The only mention is that that “At that time [after thresholds are met], Test to Stay protocols will be distributed to families. Compare this to the Alpine School District where they already clearly define what will happen and have a parental consent system ready.

Maybe that’s because Alpine School District has 89 schools and they take it more seriously. However, you’d think with only 7 schools in the Park City School District, we could have a plan ready and posted.

There is a lack of trust with the Park City School District. I ask myself if at 2 PM this afternoon the district gets word that over 30 students at PCHS, that can be “counted,” have Covid, will they successfully execute Test to Stay tomorrow?

Granted, I am a skeptic, but I don’t think so. I think it will be a mess. I hope they prove me wrong. To do that they will need:

  • Top notch communications to the public that explains what is happening and how this works
  • Excellent communciations for teachers/staff to explain how this impacts them.
  • A process for testing all students quickly and efficiently.
  • A mechanism to get parental consent for testing and a way to relay that to the people doing testing.
  • A system for recording all data.

They will need all of this on day one. Whether that is today or next week.

Perhaps I am wrong and we won’t cross that threshold requiring Test to Stay at PCHS. However, we already blew past that, except for technicalities. Perhaps the school district and Health Department have table-topped this, so they have a plan in place that will survive the first encounter with students. That would be great and I would love to be wrong. Perhaps, the school district learned from the incident at Parley’s Park and has spent the month of December planning for this.

However, I fear that the district is so intent on making sure schools stay open that they haven’t accounted for, what seems now, the inevitability.

We should know soon enough.

This is a train headed down the track right toward us. I hope the district has got this. If they do, then it will go a ways toward me believing they have things under control. I would conclude that they have learned from the Parley’s Park incident and it engenders more trust.

If not, it’s likely many key school district players won’t politically survive the repercussions.

More information about Test to Stay is available here.

The Dakota Pacific Project is dead for now. Great Job Park City.

I firmly believe the only politics you can individually effect are local politics. Park City and Summit County residents demonstrated that with the Dakota Pacific project. Kudos to Mitch Solomon, and Friends of Summit County for Responsible Growth, for organizing an overwhelming community effort to Stop Dakota Pacific.

For all intents and purposes, Dakota Pacific is dead. Dakota Pacific has said they are working on a new proposal but that they cannot afford to spend another year working through details. Given that any reworked proposal will likely go back to the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission, there will be more than a year of discussions. Given Summit County is considering a development moratorium for six months, so that County Planners can catch a breathe, it’s likely more like two years for Dakota to come back. It sounds like Dakota’s economics won’t support that. That, in of itself, tells you something.

What that ultimately means is that Snyderville Basin residents have a chance to figure out what the area of land under the UOP should be. It could be a Tech Park. I am in favor of that. This winter so far has shown we have to diversify our economy. It could be a space for both affordable housing and an Olympic Village for the 2030 or 2034 Winter Olympics. If done well, that could solve a number of needs. It could be open space, trails, and an extension of Run-a-muck, if Summit County buys it at a discount and designates it as such.

Regardless, we the people did something special. A month ago the common wisdom was that four of five County Councilors would vote for Dakota Pacific. Today, that is no longer happening. Thanks to the people of the Snyderville Basin caring enough to become educated, showing up, and speaking, we made a difference.

No longer is Summit Couty giving a prized parcel away to a developer. We have the opportunity to make something better.

Thanks to all of you!

KPCW, don’t get bullied by the Park City School District

Over the past two weeks, KPCW did what a competent news organization does. They reported on the actions of the Park City School District related to enforcing masks at Parley’s Park Elementary School. On Thursday, the school district went Full Bully on KPCW. Their lawyer sent a letter to KPCW. PCSD’s lawyer, Joan Andrews, writes:

“Specifically, on November 17, 2021, you [KPCW] published in various media, including on your website and Facebook pages, the following statement: ‘During Tuesday’s Park City school board meeting, board member Andrew Caplan said Parley’s Park Elementary School did not violate the county mask order and called reports of violation fake news.’ This statement is demonstrably false and on behalf of the Board of Education, we demand the immediate retraction of same. More specifically, at no time was the term “fake news” used by Mr. Caplan. The use of this term appears deliberately calculated to create the belief in the community that Mr. Caplan is opposed to Summit County Public Health Order mask mandate, which he is not, nor is the Board as a whole.”

KPCW responded by saying, “The articles and broadcasts of which your client complains are truthful and accurate. Moreover, KPCW’s use of the words “fake news” is a fair and accurate representation of board member Andrew Kaplan’s comments during Tuesday’s meeting and such use absolutely was not ‘a deliberately calculated’ attempt to imply Mr. Kaplan or the board is against the Summit County public health order mask mandate. Despite our belief that KPCW could correctly continue to use those words, we have decided it is even more accurate – and in the listeners and readers’ best interest – to use direct quotes from Mr. Caplan instead of characterizing them.”

The Park City School District’s lawyer argued that KPCW used the term ‘fake news’ to imply Mr. Caplan and the school district were against mask mandates. KPCW argued that the term was accurately used to characterize Mr. Caplan’s comments.

I don’t believe KPCW is trying to say that Mr. Caplan, or the district administration, is against mask mandates. I think KPCW is saying that Mr. Caplan implied that the school district followed mask mandates at PPES from day one, when all signs point to the fact that they didn’t. If they didn’t follow the mandates, then they broke the law.

However, what I find rich from the Park City School District lawyer’s letter was the bullying from an organization that is responsible for teaching our children.

Park City School District’s lawyer writes, “In the meantime, the Board has asked me to convey that Board members and District administrators will not be engaging with KPCW with respect to its repeated queries for comment, appearances, or other interactions, at least until we have clarity around the outcome of the review of what happened during week one of the Parley’s Park Elementary School mandate. The Board and District will continue to communicate on matters of importance to their constituents through other channels.”

Did the school board members take the Welcoming Schools training? That statement from the Park City School Board is pure bullying. “Leave us alone or you’ll lose access to the school district!”

If I were KPCW, I would say, “That sounds fine PCSD. We, as a news organization, will continue to report the news. We are ready to speak to you whenever you are ready. We’ll continue to report the news based upon your school board meetings and your public reporting requirements.”

KPCW is frankly above this fray. KPCW reports the news and it appears the school board doesn’t like it. They seem to view it as some sort of vendetta against them. There is no vendetta; there is only the hope for honesty. KPCW is reporting on what they are seeing, hearing from people on-site, and comments from our community.

KPCW, please don’t back down against these threats. If the school district won’t speak to you, that’s their loss.

KPCW, you are doing great work in our community. You are the best news source in the Wasatch Back.

If you don’t fight for the people’s right to know what is happening, who is going to do it?

Most of us trust you far more than we trust them.

Keep up the good fight.


Video of Park City School Board Meeting on 11/16/21 Open Comment on PPES situation

On Tuesday, the Park City Schol Board met and a number of parents attended to speak about the lack of enforcement of the Parley’s Park mask mandate. A few supporters of the school board spoke as well.

For some reason, the Park City School District no longer records videos of meetings. However, we were able to capture most of it.

I apologize for the quality. I arrived late, there was no place for a tripod, and I didn’t have the sound configured correctly until halfway through. So the video isn’t great. However, if you are interested, you definitely see a lot.

Pictures say a thousand words. I wish the school district would record the video portion of all meetings.

The Summit County Health Department needs to get its stuff together on Covid boosters

For those not aware, Utah Governor, Spencer Cox announced yesterday that all Utahns were at high risk for Covid-19 and thus anyone could get a booster shot. With that news, I registered online with Summit County for a booster shot and arrived at the Summit County Health Department for my 11 AM appointment today. After waiting an hour in the packed health department, I was ushered back to the nurse.

She gave me a funny look and asked what my profession was. I said, “software developer.” She said you don’t look like you have a high BMI. Do you have diabetes? I said no. She then asked why I was there to get a covid booster. I said, well, I really don’t want to be here. I had a bad experience with side effects for the Moderna shot but that I am in my kid’s hockey locker room with 15 kids and I just want to do everything I can to not get, or spread, Covid.

The nurse then explained that I couldn’t get a booster, even though the Governor had OK’d it yesterday. She said that Summit County needed to complete a health order and that if she gave me the vaccine that it could be malpractice. She said they had plenty of doses, but there was no way she could do it. She said they had a meeting this morning and that was the official rule. She was very nice about it, and I realize she probably would have given me my booster if she could have, but those were the rules. So I was polite and left.

But I am furious.

There is no excuse for the Summit County Health Department to have not had a signed health order ready to go as of 8 AM this morning. It makes me wonder whether they will have anything signed today. It is Friday, after all. Will they get to it next week? Well, it is a holiday week. So, I wouldn’t count on it.

This is such a charged issue. The Governor, who is Republican says “vaccine boosters for everyone.” Summit County, which is Democrat-run, can’t be bothered to be ready. What sort of bizarro world am I living in?

The real problem is that I don’t really want to get a booster. When I received my second vaccine dose I was in bed for the next day, wearing socks on my hands, because the chills were so bad. Yet, I sucked it up, because of risk factors in my life. Hockey locker rooms are really small. One of my son’s teammates came down with Covid this week. I don’t want to get or spread Covid in the locker room if I can help it. Oh and I’m also spending time with my wife’s aging parents over the next ten days. I don’t know what extra protection a few days of a booster could give me, but I assume it’s something.

It’s just unconscionable that Summit County wasn’t ready to give boosters to anyone who wanted one on day one. For the record, I am pro-vaccine for me. I am pro-choice for you. I just wanted to get a booster and protect myself and those people around me.

Summit County robbed me of that choice. Maybe someday in the future, I’ll try again to get that booster shot. Until that point, what the Health Department did to me today, and potentially others made us all less safe.

Random thoughts from Yesterday’s Park City School Board Meeting

Yesterday, the Park City Schol Board met in regular session. As usual, there was a period of open comment. Yesterday’s open comment was centered on concerned parents about the handling of the PPES mask mandate and people in support of the school board. It was an interesting exchange between the School Board, parents, and board supporters.

I won’t rehash the arguments, as most of those, in both directions, were covered in the Park Rag Comments section on our previous story. I’ll also post a link to the meeting below, in case you want to “watch” for yourself.

However, here are some random observations from the meeting:

  • There was an opening statement on the topic from the school board. It was, “We think it is important to acknowledge that there have been some questions related to the public health order at Parley’s Park and the school’s initial response. While we acknowledge this and we are conducting a review of the process, we have been advised that we not make further public comment on the matter. Please rest assured that we will continue to work closely with the state, county, and health department as we continue to prioritize the health and safety in open schools.”
  • Brad Asay, President of the Utah American Federation of Teachers Utah, brought up the teachers’ angle on this. He spoke about the transparency and processes of the district during Covid and how that has impacted teacher safety. I had been thinking about the kids but teacher impact is a good point.
  • School Board member Andrew Caplan responded to Mr. Asay, “The notion that is been in the public and reported on that we are not in compliance with the state, county health codes is incorrect and that is a fact and that fact is backed up by the four inspections done by the county health department. So, anyone who believes that we were in violation of the county mask mandate or there was anything around that, that is simply not factually correct. I just want to clarify that. The popular narrative right now… we have received a number of emails upset with that notion, and rightfully so, had we been in violation, had we not been following the county rules, people have the right to be upset. But to imply that it is an unsafe work environment or to imply that we were not following county/state codes is simply not correct. I’m sorry you had incorrect information.”
  • The problem with Mr Caplan’s statement is the timeline and perhaps the parsing of words. Is the school district in compliance with the health order today? I would sure hope so. Were they on November 5th when the health department arrived on the scene, after KPCW called them out? I would sure hope so. The real question is whether they were in compliance during the first week of the mask mandate and whether the school district’s actions contributed to lack of safety. If measures weren’t in place day one, it would be like a restaurant that kept chicken at 50 degrees, food-poisoned some customers, heard the health department was coming, and made sure the chicken was then cold enough. Then when the restaurant manager was questioned they used the excuse that they meant to tell the kitchen staff that chicken should be at 36 degrees but it may have been misinterpreted. In the real world, regardless of that excuse, the restaurant is still getting shut down. Maybe PPES was in compliance on day one, but from everything I have read it wasn’t. Until this KPCW article is refuted in detail, the school district has a problem.
  • There seems to be some discussion over the communication of what a mask mandate is. I know when you are running an organization like the school district, things get complicated. However, to an average person like me, if someone asked me what a mask mandate in a school was, I would know. “Everyone wears a mask over their nose and mouth.” That’s not hard from a layperson’s perspective. The school board would likely ask, “what are you going to do about the exceptions?” I would then turn to the actual law. I’m not a lawyer but I can read. It took me almost 3 minutes to Google and find section 4 of the Health Order where the lawyers have specifically stated the exceptions. Strangely enough I don’t find any references to parent-related exceptions.
  • School Board President Erin Grady said that she has been to all schools in the last few days to make sure they are ready for a mask mandate. I appreciate that, I really do given the circumstances. However, it’s almost Thanksgiving. The time to do that was before Labor Day and it probably really isn’t her job.
  • I really appreciated that the school board would allow people to speak a little bit over their 3 minutes of allotted time. It allowed people to finish their thoughts.
  • I thought having two police officers there was a little over the top. I remember a sheriff deputy being at a County Council meeting once, but that was due to a specific threat. Maybe this is normal for schools, but it seemed a little weird. I do have to say the nice officer did help my 7-year old find the bathroom.
  • Here is the link to the meeting
  • So, if you’re like me, the craziest thing with the meeting link is that it is on Youtube. As you start to watch, you’ll see video. You’ll see school board members speaking amongst themselves. Then, as the official meeting starts, they cut off the video. We are left with audio only on Youtube. It’s not because they don’t have the equipment to do video. It seems it’s because they don’t want to be ON video. It makes it hard follow which board member is saying what. Stepping back to 30,000 feet, this is a metaphor for the transparency people are seeking from our school district.

Park City School Superintendent Dr. Gildea has lost our trust. Now what?

We at the Park Rag have been critical of the school district in the past. The 2015 bond was a disaster. The school district has hurt substitute teachers (and our kids) by hiring a temp agency to manage substitutes and caused a substitute teacher shortage at the worst possible time. They inexplicably tried to keep teachers’ kids out of schools and then apparently didn’t tell the truth when called out. And let’s not forget the magic rock.

That’s not to say that they haven’t had their successes. Teachers got a raise. We made it through the 2020/21 school year with in-person classes and minimal disruptions. The new bond proposal focused on facilities and passed overwhelmingly. We still have some great teachers (though some have left) and a cadre of wealthy above-average Lake Wobegone kids to keep our rankings relatively high.

But when Parley’s Park elementary came under the supervision of officials from the Health Department, after superintendent Gildea instructed teachers and staff not to enforce a legal mask mandate, our limited remaining trust in the school district administration was lost.

Regardless of your feelings about masks, the Republican-led Utah Legislature made a law allowing local health departments to determine school rules under certain circumstances. The Summit County Health Department used its authority, granted by the legislature, to make rules intended to protect students and staff. According to news reports, Dr. Gildea actively prevented those rules from being implemented.

As an aside, KPCW has done a fantastic job covering this story (Michelle Deininger at KPCW has been amazing on this coverage). We would also be remiss if we didn’t acknowledge Summit County attorney Margaret Olson for calling it as she sees it when she said “…it’s apparent that things went terribly wrong.”

The superintendent has floated various explanations. In our view, none of them can possibly excuse this behavior. If Dr. Gildea was unsure of the law, it would have been trivial to call Summit County and resolve any questions as soon as she became aware that the mandate might need to be implemented. The superintendent has wavered between claiming that the mandate is legally unenforceable to saying she was misunderstood and that the school needs a “reset.” At some points, she appears to have contradicted herself within the same day.

Dr. Gildea’s response might best be characterized as panicked, defiant, and incoherent. The school board, on the other hand, could best be characterized as absent. That’s right, not a word about the situation. Not an explanation, not an apology, not even some boilerplate that says “we look forward to clearing up this misunderstanding and want to make it clear that the health and safety of our school community is our top priority.” Maybe they’re tired of all the criticism, or exhausted from pushing the bond through, or just sick of doing a thankless and unpaid job. Unfortunately, however, it’s a job they signed up for, and they owe the community an explanation. If none is forthcoming, people will assume the worst.

While the past is concerning, the future is equally worrisome. Our community just handed an open check for $79 million to the Park City School District. The district believes they have a mandate for an additional $40 million more to add on to our schools. Do you want someone you don’t trust administering that? The district previously was cited for awarding inappropriate contracts that violated Utah state law. Are we OK if that happens again? Given recent events, would we expect anything different? What else could happen? These are the questions asked when you lose trust.

It hit home late last week. My wife and I were discussing the issue while our seven and nine-year-old ate breakfast. They are the consumers of school and they have a right to know what is going on. One of the kids looked up, his eyes in shock, “Mrs. [insert his teacher name here] didn’t do what’s right?” We were mortified and quickly explained that it wasn’t his teacher. Yet, should we be less mortified that we were discussing his teacher’s boss? Sometimes kids bring out the truth. We as humans all have flaws, but when you run schools, you can’t defy the Health Department. You can’t have the Summit County Attorney speaking about criminal liability in reference to your school superintendent’s actions.

As the old saying goes, “never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity”. Unfortunately neither malice nor stupidity, regardless of which was responsible here, is acceptable in a school superintendent (or board).

So, now what?

The question to ask is whether we need a different superintendent. The people responsible for that answer are our elected school board. If you asked them, they would tell you they can’t speak on the issue of personnel matters. However, if they aren’t actively discussing this question, we likely need a different school board, too.

We expect a lot out of our kids. We expect them to be honest. We expect them to tell the truth. We expect them to follow the rules. We expect them to stand up for what is right.

Don’t we expect the same things from those who are responsible for their education?

Opposed to Dakota Pacific? The deck is stacked against you.

What a surprise. Summit County moved the Dakota Pacific meeting from November 17th to December 1st.

Why would they ever do that?

It could be because there was a problem with the meeting space or because a County Councilor couldn’t make it.

However, my bet is it’s because Summit County wants to hamper the campaign against the development.

Let’s take a step back and talk about who is FOR and AGAINST this development.

In my opinion, on the FOR side, we have Dakota Pacific, Summit County Planning Department, and most of the Summit County Council.

On the AGAINST side, we have the people.

What the County seems to be doing is an age-old tactic. There is a petition against the effort with more than 3,000 signatures. Countless letters have been written against the development. Over 500 people were likely to show up and speak against Dakota Pacific on November 17th.

So, if you are a government organization that doesn’t like the way things are going, what do you do?

Postpone and delay. Change the playfield. I can imagine the County Council saying, “How can we vote for a proposal when 500 people, over 3 hours, speak against the development on November 17th? What can we do?” Then someone says, “delay it.”

What Dakota and Summit County are likely doing is fivefold.

  • First, they want distance between all the negative letters to the Park Record and the vote.
  • Second, they want to line up their own positive letters in the Park Record that can be run right before the vote.
  • Third, they are depending on Thanksgiving to remove the energy.
  • Fourth, they need to line up people to speak at the meeting in December 1st.
  • Fifth, Dakota is likely slightly altering their proposal with something that will “sound” better than the current proposal and will allow the County Council to say that they are voting for this proposal because Dakota is working with them and this new shining thing makes it worth it, even though the public is against it.

It’s all theater designed for them to find a way for the Summit County Council to vote for a bad development.

If you are against Dakota Pacific’s proposal, you have work to do.

  • If you have written a letter to the Park Record, you need to write another one. There are so many reasons to oppose this devleopment. There have to be other points that you didn’t bring up the first time. Letters matter.
  • If you haven’t written a letter, write one. It doesn’t have to be complicated. Three sentences that explains how you feel about this development is all you need. Here is how you do it. https://www.parkrecord.com/opinion/letters/
  • Keep emailing the County Council. It probably won’t make a difference because, although they are supposed to represent their electorate, they don’t seem to be doing that here.
  • Watch for changes in the last minute and don’t let those change the debate.
  • Most importantrly… Show up on December 1st. Your voice matters.

It’s hard when the people are fighting against government interests. Government has all the power. We the people don’t have the power, but we do have the numbers.

Dakota Pacific’s development would negatively alter the corridor to Park City. It will negatively impact traffic. It will negatively impact water. It will negatively impact our schools. It won’t put a dent in affordable housing. The people have shown they are against this. We need to keep up the fight. We can stop Dakota Pacific. We can’t allow the powers that be to go against what people want and continue this horrible development.

They are trying, but we need to say no. Keep up the good fight.

Basin Rec is asking for up to a 10% increase in employee salary

I love Basin Rec. Their children’s sports programs are great. Their people are great. Their facilities are great, except for the cancerous indoor field. Today, however, let’s talk about their request for salary increases.

During today’s Summit County Council meeting, their proposed budget is requesting a 5% cost of living adjustment and up to a 5% merit increase. A potential 10% increase in salary. That’s Crazy.

I have checked with various people around the Snyderville Basin and few people are getting 5%. No one I spoke with has the potential for a 10% increase in salary unless they are self-employed.

Perhaps Basin Rec is asking for 10% in hopes they get 5%. The problem is that it makes the public begin wondering if Basin Rec is living too high on the hog.

In some ways, Basin Rec is a favored child of Summit County. Everyone wants trails. However, as I look across the Basin at fancy metal signs and piles of wood for construction, I wonder if our tax dollars are well spent. Many of us begin asking those questions when things go too far.

The potential for 10% raises is too high and it shapes my impression of the organization.

Why I voted for the Park City School Bond

There are no good or bad ideas. There is only execution.

So, I voted for the $79.2 million Park City School Bond. I wanted to give them the chance to execute.

I fought the 2015 school bond tooth and nail. The process they used was manipulative. After attending almost every meeting, I wasn’t convinced that it wasn’t corrupt. It was a total and unmitigated disaster.

I don’t get that feeling from this bond.

I do have the nagging feeling that this will be a little bit of the dog that chased the car and finally caught it. I explained the changes that will be coming to Jeremy Ranch Elementary to my oldest son and he asked how long until they are done. I said about two years. He said, “Good, I won’t go to school there anymore.”

No matter how you feel about it, the bond is going to pass. That has to feel good for the school district and school board.

However, the real challenges are ahead.

We have to expand the high school. We have to move 9th graders to the high school. We have to expand Ecker (not part of this bond but will be paid through taxes and bake sales). We have to expand Jeremy and McPolin elementary schools. We have to expand Trailside and Parley’s elementary schools (not part of this bond but will be paid through taxes and bake sales).

Can the school district execute that? Can they do it within budget? Can they do it on time?

Most importantly, can they increase the educational value to our students? They need to ensure that $129 million actually translates to helping our underserved and/or ELL students in getting a better education. Likewise, the rest of our students should have improved outcomes, as well.

$129 million+ is a lot of money on buildings if there isn’t an educational advantage. I look forward to understanding how the school district is planning on quantifying improvements in education.

I believe the Park City School Board and School District will look at tomorrow’s victory as a success. I look at it as a challenge.

I voted for this because I wanted to give our district a chance.

Now they need to return the faith.