Orem voter information pamphlet, ballots arrive at homes | News, Sports, Jobs

Genelle Pugmire, Daily Herald

Over the past several weeks, homes in Orem have received post cards, letters, text messages and door hangers encouraging them to vote on Proposition 2 — the question as to whether or not Orem should form its own school district.

On Tuesday, mail-in ballots and a Voter Information Pamphlet discussing the pros and cons of Proposition 2 hit mail boxes. The pamphlet is the official statements from both sides of the issue of forming a new Orem-only school district.

Proposition 2 directly asks, “Shall a new Orem school district be created with boundaries contiguous with the boundaries of the city of Orem? Yes or No.”

The pamphlet also gives the official text of the resolution placing it on the ballot. Mayor David Young, along with council members LaNae Millett, Terry Peterson and Dave Spencer, are designated as sponsors of the request.

It is also Young, Millett, Peterson and Spencer who sponsored the information in favor of Proposition 2.

Genelle Pugmire, Daily Herald

Council members Jeff Lambson, Debby Lauret and Tom Macdonald voted against the resolution.

Those who gave the written argument against Proposition 2 are: Cissy Rasmussen and Aerwyn Whitlock, founders of the Political Issues Committee StrongerTogether; Dom Replogle, an Orem English teacher; Val Hale, former executive director of the Governor’s Office of Economic Development; and Macdonald.

For Proposition 2

The argument for the proposition, and for making Orem its own school district, follows information that was presented in a feasibility study done earlier this year.

The main points of why voters should be in favor of the Proposition and splitting from Alpine School District and have a new Orem-only district include:

• Test scores dropping.
• Seismically unsafe schools.
• Millions of taxpayer dollars going out of Orem to build schools in other cities while some in Orem need replacing.
• Much of those taxpayer dollars are through bond debt already accrued and the potential of a new Alpine School District bond of $595 million.
• Local representation on an Orem-only school board.

“Orem students can no longer afford to wait for smaller class sizes, seismically safe schools and better local representation. Bigger isn’t better. The time to split is now,” the four sponsors said in a joint statement.

Against Proposition 2

When it comes to why voters should mark the “no” box on Proposition 2, the sponsoring group discusses the following:

• Students, teachers and residents are far better served staying in the Alpine district. It would be too expensive with too many disadvantages.
• Claims in the DEC feasibility study are flawed.
• Alpine currently subsidizes Orem schools with $21 million annually. Orem taxes would have to go up by at least 50% to fund schools at the current level.
• Orem-only district would disrupt students, teachers and programs including several hundred students from Vineyard and Lindon that would be affected. School boundaries would need to be changed creating a domino effect.
• Only two seismically-unfit schools remain, but additional needs will gradually arise, leaving Orem to shoulder the cost alone.

“We are not opposed to a future, multi-city district split that is conducted in a rational, fiscally responsible way with Alpine School District. But an Orem-only district is the wrong answer. It’s too expensive, too risky and involves too many unknowns. It jeopardizes the education of our children,” the anti-Proposition 2 sponsors write in the pamphlet argument.

In rebuttal to those arguments, proponents claim that Orem schools aren’t safe and Alpine still isn’t doing anything about it. They believe that ASD is “gambling with student’s lives.”

“If this passes, Orem taxpayers will be on the hook to pay an additional $120 million while receiving back only $20 million,” Proposition supporters said. “Lindon and Vineyard have the same problem. Now, thanks to new legislation, they can join us in creating a smaller district and better education for students.”

At the moment, there is no “new legislation” to help bring Lindon and Vineyard into a new district. State Sen. Keith Grover announced at a press conference on Sept. 21 that he is drafting a bill that would allow that. That is anticipated for the 2023 legislative session.

Those opposed to Proposition 2 say they are confused by the speed of the plan to create an Orem-only district.

Some of the council members supporting the change said they heard from constituents during last year’s campaigning that they would support the idea.

As for the Orem School District feasibility study, opponents say, “A plan may be called ‘feasible,’ but that does not make it sensible, beneficial or affordable. We don’t want the bare minimum of ‘technically possible.’ Our children deserve a school district that is thriving, stable and fiscally responsible.”

Residents are encouraged to read and study the two opposing views in the 12-page pamphlet, make sure they are registered to vote by Oct. 28 and then mark their mail-in ballots. Ballots must be post-dated by Nov. 7 or dropped off in a ballot box by Election Day, Nov. 8.

Newsletter

Join thousands already receiving our daily newsletter.