In January, the Park City School Board made changes to their enrollment policy for teachers. The school district claims that they were only ensuring that their policies matched the Utah State code. I continually hear from school officials “that nothing has changed.”

Unfortunately, it seems something has changed. Teachers across the district are getting requests denied to allow their children to attend the same school where they teach.

Whether intended or not, our community is now seeing the impacts of this policy change. I am now aware of two people at Jeremy Ranch Elementary who are being forced to leave due to this policy. I won’t name their names because that is their business, but I will tell you that kids like these individuals.

I know of others across the district who are likely to follow. In our comments section, a teacher’s partner wrote that their family had to move out of Park City due to high rental costs, and now they are fearing that their kids won’t be able to attend Park City schools. Can you imagine what pressure that is putting on their family?

Frankly, this whole thing is asinine. I don’t know if the district is really trying to sync up policy, don’t like teachers being at the same school as their children, are making a power play, or whether our schools don’t have room for a few more teachers’ children. Regardless of the reason, this is crazy.

The school district needs to save face on this. What I HAVEN’T heard them say is, “we think we will retain and attract the best teachers if we ensure their children can attend the same school that they teach at.” They need to say that. Then they need to amend the policy to state it. It’s that simple.

If they don’t, we are learning that the district doesn’t want teachers’ children to attend the same school where they teach. Then next fall, when our children show up for school, and beloved Ms. Johnson or Mr. Baxter isn’t there, we’ll know why.

Likewise, when the district “can’t find enough” teachers, again, we will know why.

The School District and School Board made a mistake on this — for whatever reason. It can happen to all of us. But now they need to fix it.

For years, Park City teachers, regardless of what zone or district they live in, have been able to bring their own children to attend the elementary school where they teach. Allowing this is really common sense – it makes teachers’ lives much easier (imagine trying to arrange dropping off your kids at another school when you’ve got to be in 30 minutes before class starts during ski season!), and it helps attract top talent from our local community (we’ve got lots of local teachers who aren’t doing it for the money) and outside districts. If you have younger kids in the district, you know very well that many of our most beloved teachers have or have had kids in PC schools.

Then in January, the Park City School District (PCSD) passed changes to policy 10010. In specific, they changed the rules for PCSD teachers. No longer could those teachers depend on the district allowing their children to go to the same school that they teach at (or any Park City school for that matter if they live out of district). Here are the changes (strikethrough and red indicate removal and additions).

By striking through “that have been declared closed to open enrollment,” the district appears to intend not to guarantee a spot at the teacher’s school. By adding, “The exception is not a guarantee of admission to an otherwise closed school…” it drives home the point. They don’t want this to happen.

For those that don’t follow our schools quite as closely, what is a closed school? No, it’s not due to Covid-19. It’s a school where the district has determined there is no more room. It’s an arbitrary number that the district reports to the state. If a school is “open to enrollment,” then children from outside the PCSD area can attend Park City Schools. As stated before, even if a school was closed, generally, teachers could count on their kids attending the same school they teach at. Now, that opportunity seems highly unlikely.

By the way, as of now, all Park City schools are closed to open enrollment. I’m not sure that’ll remain the case. If so, I’m not sure what that means for any teacher who has children entering the district.

Now that the district has decided to revoke that privilege from teachers, citing enrollment, cost concerns, and policy alignment, we are left wondering why. To us at the Park Rag, this doesn’t pass the smell test.

1: Park City schools have slowly trended down in enrollment over the last decade or so. We’re an increasingly rich and retired community, and when a median home costs $1.5 million, there aren’t a lot of families with kids that can afford to live here. Even the district itself predicts declining enrollment going forward. We don’t have a problem with capacity, though the distribution of students between schools may need some tweaks.

Here is a Park Record article on the subject. Here is another.

2: Per pupil funding is minimally affected by allowing out-of-district teachers’ children to attend the school they work at and not affected at all by in-district transfers – the state allocates the same money per child for the school regardless of whether they are a teacher’s kid or live in the district. There’s not a money problem here.

3: According to our sources (teachers and district employees) in-district transfers to ostensibly closed schools have been approved this year – while teachers have been denied. It would be great to let anyone enroll anywhere, but if we’re going to give preferential treatment to any group in enrolling outside of their district or zone, it probably should be teachers.

Given the reality that other districts in Utah are now paying as much as or more than PCSD, and that we can’t hope to recruit the best of the best teachers (especially if they can’t bring their kids…), being able to enroll your kids at your school is a very effective way to attract top talent. It’s also a benefit that has been provided for years that is suddenly being taken away for no apparent reason.

We reached out to the school district for comment. The district responded, “The Open Enrollment Policy at PCSD was updated in January 2021 to ensure that it is aligned to the Code as well as for clarification of the enrollment paperwork process, which remains the same as it has previously, other than asking that employees complete the 1-page enrollment form annually…Adjustments in the language were not intended to adjust/alter educators’ or staff participation in the process or their ability to apply for enrollment. The district and school board see open enrollment as a positive and the policy reads, ‘In order to enhance the district’s ability to attract and retain qualified employees from outside district boundaries, the children of employees who work at least three-quarter time shall be allowed to apply to attend schools within the district.’ District employees are encouraged to submit their Open Enrollment application in the event they are interested in having their children attend a Park City School. The process, parameters or practices related to staff’s open enrollment has not changed meaning – as long as space is available – which has always been the standard practice – students are able to be enrolled within the schools.  Once a student has been enrolled, they matriculate with their grade level and enrollment capacity is reevaluated at times of transition such as K-5, 6-7, 8-9, and then 10-12.” The response in its entirety is at the conclusion of this story.

While this makes it sound like nothing has changed, it feels like it has. We’ve heard from teachers who have been denied enrollment for children at the school they teach at. We’ve seen letters telling teachers to apply to other schools in the district and they may get the children into those schools if the school is open for enrollment. This doesn’t appear to match the process that was in place previously. Finally, if the change was all about getting paperwork in order, why change pieces of the policy to exclude closed schools from teachers?

It doesn’t make sense to someone on the outside. Perhaps the district received a legal recommendation stating that they couldn’t provide these benefits to teachers. Perhaps the district feels they’ll get more out of a teacher if their child isn’t in the same school. Perhaps they are posturing for a bond offering (or something similar) based on the fact that we need to expand schools and they want to be able to say they are doing everything to limit enrollment. Or perhaps they really did just want to clarify the policy and disrupt a bunch of teachers lives.

Any way you slice it, it doesn’t seem like good policy. It is starting to impact teachers as they contemplate next year. Some of our best teachers may decide to go elsewhere because they work at Trailside and can only get their kid into McPolin — or perhaps nowhere in Park City.

The district needs to provide some clear reasoning for this decision backed up with facts, not just hand-waving about money concerns, crowding, or policy. Nothing kills morale like unpopular policy changes made without a clear rationale. If we want great teachers in the future, we need to do right by the ones we have now.

Think this is outrageous? You can make your voice heard by contacting the school board and/or superintendent Gildea here: https://www.pcschools.us/school-board/members/

Response from the School District to a request for a comment:

Open Enrollment is governed through Utah Code and is available state-wide as a practice in Utah:https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title53G/Chapter6/53G-6-S402.html?v=C53G-6-S402_2019051420190514
The Open Enrollment Policy at PCSD was updated in January 2021 to ensure that it is aligned to the Code as well as for clarification of the enrollment paperwork process, which remains the same as it has previously, other than asking that employees complete the 1-page enrollment form annually. The enrollment paperwork is helpful in that we then have a record of the number of students who apply from out of boundary or via Intradistrict transfer annually. 

Adjustments in the language were not intended to adjust/alter educators’ or staff participation in the process or their ability to apply for enrollment. The district and school board see open enrollment as a positive and the policy reads, “In order to enhance the district’s ability to attract and retain qualified employees from outside district boundaries, the children of employees who work at least three-quarter time shall be allowed to apply to attend schools within the district.” 

District employees are encouraged to submit their Open Enrollment application in the event they are interested in having their children attend a Park City School. 

The process, parameters or practices related to staff’s open enrollment has not changed meaning – as long as space is available – which has always been the standard practice – students are able to be enrolled within the schools.  Once a student has been enrolled, they matriculate with their grade level and enrollment capacity is reevaluated at times of transition such as K-5, 6-7, 8-9, and then 10-12. 

While staff’s children are enrolled at the school sites, the educator or staff member maintain their professional responsibilities during contract hours meaning – attending meetings, preparing for classes, holding parent conferences, or recording student progress, and their children may enroll in the community education after school programs held at each site or may participate in other activities such as YSA while their parent is working on Friday afternoons.  Those supports remain in place as we move forward as well.  
We will also be piloting a fee-based before care program for working families to provide earlier drop off, breakfast, and supervised care for our community as well as for staff members who may wish to participate in that program. 

After the news broke that Park City School District’s substitutes would no longer be working for the school district, we reached out to the Superintendent’s office to see if they had a comment on the situation.

Dr Gildea’s office responded quickly with the following comment. We may not like the decision to do this but we appreciate the quick response.

We have heard from our educators and staff for multiple years that there have been a shortage of substitute roles across PCSD – teachers, instructional assistants, etc.  We have tried a variety of strategies to recruit and retain including shifting the pay rate without improved results.  Last year, we began to explore an outsourcing service.  

The benefits of the service include: pay is more frequent (bi-monthly versus monthly), incentives and bonuses are available which is not possible in the public sector such as attendance and days worked incentives, early retirees do not have a conflict with URS if they work for a private entity, and there is a more targeted recruitment and attention paid to the temporary workforce.  

An RFP process was followed, and EduStaff was selected by HR/Ops team/Business Services Team in October 2020 as the preferred vendor for this process, and they will launch their services in January 2021.  Because they are a separate entity, they do require their own intake application for confidentiality purposes; however, the placement remains within PCSD and works to maintain sub preferences for sites, etc. 

In the meantime, PCSD has also added permanent building substitute teachers to support each school site. Those roles will remain in place to cover preventive quarantine educators or longer-term sub placements. The goal is to provide a seamless learning experience and continuity for our students.  We are working with a new strategy to better support our schools. 

Let me know if you have additional questions.

It’s hard to believe that PCSD students are into their third month of in-person school – that’s a huge victory for kids, the district, and working families.  In-person school tops our household list of things to be thankful for this year.

That’s due to hard work (and some luck) at many levels – and a group that has played an outsized role this year — substitute teachers. Subs fly under the public radar most of the time. They’re not your kid’s daily teacher, and you’ll often never meet one. They don’t usually sign report cards and your child might not remember their name.

But this year more than ever, subs are critical. If a teacher isn’t feeling well, or their child at the high school is quarantining, they have no choice – they can’t come to work. That means subs have to step in to keep the school functioning.  Many subs also work long-term jobs of 3 or more weeks, sometimes the entire school year. 

It’s news to no one that teachers are underpaid. But subs do much worse – $13-15 an hour, with no benefits. That’s right, you can literally start for the same amount at Smith’s. Subs receive no benefits whatsoever – but they come to work anyway, because they’re parents and community members who care deeply about kids and education.

So when PCSD announced that effective January 3^rd, the entire substitute teacher corps would no longer be employed by the district, and instead would work for a 3^rd party temp agency called EDUStaff, based in Michigan, our reaction was disbelief.  Every current sub must reapply for their current job, including spending hours on an online application (literally, we spoke with a sub who is on hour 3 and at step 10 of 22) and an in-person interview – which conveniently can only be scheduled during the school day. 

The district claims that they need more subs and that hiring this 3^rd party company is a way to get them. 

At the Park Rag, we have a number of questions about this:

• Shouldn’t our first priority be to retain the subs we have? Many subs feel disrespected and unvalued. One sub we contacted told us “I didn’t sign up to work for a temp agency.” They take pride in working for the district, even for minimal pay and respect. Many may quit. 
• If hiring more subs was a priority, why didn’t this happen over the summer? Why change the entire system in the middle of the school year? Subs and teachers tell us they had no warning of this change and were never consulted until the announcement dropped – the day before Thanksgiving break. 
• Where was the outreach to parents and community members? We can’t recall hearing a word about substitutes on KPCW, the Park Record, or via direct communication from the district. Our natural sub pool lives right here in Park City – but it doesn’t appear PCSD ever reached out to them.
• EDUStaff presumably makes money on this arrangement. Why not try raising the sub pay, advertising for subs, or paying referral bonuses to teachers/subs who recruit new substitutes? This is money that could be used to actually solve the problem.

When you’re in a hole, stop digging. Low pay, low respect, and little or no effort at recruiting/retaining subs has indeed resulted in a shortage.  Throwing the subs we have further under the bus will exacerbate it. 

At a macro level, this may be just as bad. Making a fundamental change on the night before schools go on Thanksgiving Break is ill-timed. It feels like an action a large corporation would take when it’s trying to get away with something. It doesn’t engender trust with the public.

We hope that the Park City School District will reconsider this decision. If not, the substitute teacher shortage may become even worse. No one likes to feel treated like crap.

Note: You can read PCSD’s comment on the issue here.