By Philip Haldiman, Independent Newsmedia

Jennifer Younathan is on the fence.

A product of the public school system, she sends her 6-year-old son to Sunset Heights Elementary School in the Peoria Unified School District. But she is not sure if she will send her 3-year-old to a PUSD school when the time comes.

Recent bond failures that would have brought needed funds into the district have left her considering options other than the public school system for her children.

After residents voted down a $198 million bond last year, she and other PUSD parents in the northern part of the city were thrown into a process of redrawing district boundaries to alleviate school overcrowding in an area that has been experiencing explosive growth. About 750 students will be forced to attend different schools in the coming school year.

However, Ms. Younathan obtained a variance that kept her son, Daniel, at Sunset Heights. But after the school board rejected putting a new bond in voters’ hands, May 11, she is considering sending her children to a charter school.

Ms. Younathan has become disillusioned by the system and lost some faith in elected officials.
She said she is dismayed at the thought of going through another map redrawing, which is a possible fallout of delaying a bond to 2018.

“I am a proponent of public schools, but if it is going to mean rezoning as a solution to growth instead of fighting for our money to build new public schools, well, I want better for my son,” she said. “It is nice to have school options, but I really have to think clearly about what to do next.”

With the expansion of school vouchers and more educational options, charter school enrollment has consistently increased over the years, while public school enrollment has plateaued, according to the Arizona Department of Education. The 2016 bond would have funded the construction of two new schools in north Peoria, as well as improvements throughout the district.

But with no new bond funding coming  into PUSD for more than a year, the charter school option could become more attractive to parents. Consequently, because funding  is based on enrollment, it could have a domino effect if more students leave the district.

Jan Wilson, treasurer of the political action committee for the 2016 bond, said there is real frustration among parents and teachers with the inability to do what is right for the children. She said a division has been created by partisan politics that is leaving the door wide open for parents to choose charter schools over public schools. Politics should be kept out of education, she said.

“It’s like, will the real good guys please stand up? At end of the day when you are making decisions, the question should be, is it good for the kids? Period. If it isn’t then you don’t do it,” Ms. Wilson said.

Peoria City Council member Bridget Binsbacher, who represents the Mesquite District where much of the population growth has occurred, had two children graduate from PUSD and two currently attending.

She said PUSD has a long standing history and loyal families that continue to support their award-winning schools. Peoria offers some fantastic alternative educational options, but she said, it is up to parents to make choices they believe are in the best interest of their children.

“The challenges that come with growth are best dealt with as they arise, and delaying any solutions creates a risk of compounding the problems, ultimately putting the burden on Peoria’s families and educators,” she said. “Although the city and the Peoria Unified School District are separate entities, we deeply value our relationship and truly appreciate their efforts in working through these challenging times.”

Two weeks ago, the PUSD Governing Board was divided on putting a similar bond on the ballot that would have funded four new schools, voting 3-2 in opposition.

Governing board member Monica Ceja Martinez, who ran her recent candidacy in support of a bond, now says the proposal did not represent the district as a whole. It would have been irresponsible to support a bond based on emotional feedback from the north, while disparities exist in other parts of the district that need to be addressed, she said.

“I had to make a very difficult decision with the information that was provided to me,” she said. “I compared the city of Peoria data to what Peoria Unified district provided, teacher feedback, and the community members that were not represented.”

Competition was fierce for tax measures on the November ballot, with the PUSD bond fighting against another city measure to bring more amenities to Peoria, particularly in the north. Additionally, voters had the option to vote for a $141 million bond to fund educational institution West-MEC.

Ms. Ceja Martinez said the 19 percent margin failure of the 2016 bond was too much to risk a bond in 2017, and the district did not provide data via a community survey or host a community forum to asses the possibility of winning a bond at the ballot box.

“The spread from the last election was too large to overcome. I did not believe we would have won,” she said. “I will be the first one to walk door-to-door and host a series of events to inform the community about the needs of our district that I spent my whole life in.”

President Beverly Pingerelli concurred this year was too soon for a new bond, and the committee needs to meet over a longer period of time so all stakeholders are represented.

“I believe that not all community stakeholders have been adequately represented in this process, and I believe the process has been rushed to meet a hard deadline with the county,”  she said. “We need to bring all stakeholders together — Democrats, Republicans and Independents — to better prioritize the needs and develop a consensus supported by all community members and therefore make it more likely to pass in 2018.”

Superintendent Dr. Darwin Stiffler stated in an email  now the district has its sights on the general election in 2018. The district plans to modify the process and incorporate feedback from various stakeholders, he said.

“While the need is imminent, we are focused on the future. The district will continue to support our community and do what is best for students,” he said. “We are pleased that the Governing Board desires to look at a November 2018 election and will work towards this expectation.”

Governing board member Judy Doane said  she believes the district will be able to handle a bond in 2018.

“I know it’s going to be hard, but we need to do what’s best for the entire community, our children and our families. This debt, yes it doesn’t happen all at once, but we are accruing debt faster than we can pay for it, and it will accrue to future generations. Our children will be paying for this when we are dead, so we need to be very wise. Now we’ll have time to speak to those who would knee-jerk a no vote.”

Ms. Younathan appreciates the concern of being equitable to all parts of the district. She said she might be able to hold out for a 2018 bond — but the proposal has to be strong.

“I’m not sure what I am going to do yet,” she said. “It will depend on what happens with the whole picture. It depends on if I see we are getting cooperation across all political jurisdictions.”

Philip Haldiman can be reached at 623-876-3697 or phaldiman@newszap.com.