Another election has come and gone, and yet another levy vote has failed in the West Bonner County School District (WBCSD). Sadly, this result was predictable and will continue to be the norm as long as the district remains divided. The reality is that district supporters have waged a battle against half of their own community — one that has included recalling two dedicated school board trustees, Keith Rutledge and Susan Brown, and pushing me out as superintendent. This approach has sent a strong message: there is no tolerance for anyone who sees the world differently. It’s a message that resonates throughout the community, and it has dire implications.
The opposition to alternative perspectives in WBCSD leadership is not only disheartening; it’s a refusal to acknowledge the genuine challenges the district faces. The district has serious issues that demand pragmatic, innovative solutions, yet these have been sidelined in favor of maintaining the status quo. Without drastic, meaningful change, we can expect levy votes to fail again and again. Solutions exist; they are feasible and practical, but they require a willingness to embrace new ideas. Many of these proposals were ones I introduced during my time as superintendent, but, unfortunately, they were met with resistance and scorn.
One such idea is converting Priest Lake Elementary into a district-authorized charter. With its small student population and distance from other district resources, Priest Lake Elementary is not financially sustainable as a traditional public school. Other districts, such as the Filer School District with Hansen, have found success by making similar adjustments. WBCSD would benefit from following their lead, ensuring that Priest Lake Elementary can continue to serve its community in a way that makes financial sense.
Similarly, permanently closing Priest River Junior High School should be considered. While no one likes to discuss school closures, operating a facility that isn’t meeting financial benchmarks and represents a considerable fiscal liability isn’t sustainable. Transitioning the building to a charter or alternative educational organization could relieve the district of unnecessary expenses while repurposing the building for community use.
Closing Idaho Hill Elementary, while a challenging choice, would be another step toward a leaner, more efficient district model. For families who don’t wish to bus their children to Priest River, pods or microschools could provide viable local learning options.
For WBCSD to thrive, the approach to teacher pay also needs to be rethought. Tying a portion of teacher compensation to academic performance and growth is one way to promote accountability and support high-quality education. Teachers would be incentivized to focus on student outcomes while still being recognized for their professional dedication.
The district can also reduce costs by ending unnecessary contracts with outside vendors, such as those for snow removal and field maintenance. These are services that could be managed internally or in collaboration with local resources, saving valuable district funds.
Beyond cost-saving measures, WBCSD should offer parents a greater choice in their children’s education. By creating a hybrid model in which families can select their preferred curriculum and learning modality, the district can differentiate itself from surrounding districts. A tailored educational approach would attract new students and potentially encourage those who’ve left to re-enroll.
Hiring a full-time grant writer is another straightforward, cost-effective move that would provide an immediate boost in funding potential. With a dedicated professional on board to pursue grants, WBCSD could open up new funding opportunities that don’t require tax increases and would help close budget gaps. Moreover, charging the city of Priest River and other groups for the use of district facilities would generate additional revenue, helping alleviate some of the budget strain.
All of these solutions are within reach. They are not mere wishful thinking—they are practical steps that could solve WBCSD’s financial issues and refocus the district’s mission on student success. But the current opposition must take a hard look in the mirror. The teachers’ union and those who led the recall efforts need to recognize the damage they’ve done to the community’s trust and the district’s future.
Acknowledging these mistakes and apologizing for them, while being willing to collaborate, would allow the district to seek out the expertise of those who have proposed viable solutions.
In the end, WBCSD’s future depends on whether its leadership is serious about positive, inclusive change. Only by embracing these solutions and working together can the district hope to pass future levies and secure a brighter future for its students.
