Topeka ? The choice seems simple: Consolidate school districts and reduce expenses while improving the quality of instruction for students.

Yet anger still lingering from four decades ago tells education officials and legislators that consolidating districts is complicated.

They use code phrases, such as the “C-word.” They talk about feuds between friends and families — rifts that remain today. They have concluded that the state cannot force consolidation from Topeka but must let communities pursue mergers, district by district.

Those views create an education conundrum. The state needs to find savings quickly, but state officials sense political disaster unless they wait for districts to act.

Lending a sense of urgency is a projected $750 million state budget shortfall in the fiscal year that begins July 1. Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and key legislators are prepared to reconsider consolidation, starting this week with a meeting of an education task force appointed by the governor.

Kansas last experienced wholesale consolidation in the 1960s, reducing the number of school districts from more than 1,800 to 305 by the early 1970s. Today, 303 districts share $2.3 billion in state aid.

Dr. Robert Haderlein, a retired Girard dentist, remembers the last round of consolidation as “pretty drastic.” He served on the Girard Board of Education in 1957-98 and on a federal commission that wrote the 1983 “Nation at Risk” report on education.

’60s setbacks

During the 1960s, Haderlein served on a five-member committee that redrew Crawford County’s districts into five new ones based on enrollment, total property values and square miles. The state set a minimum number for each factor and required that each new district meet two of the three — and have a high school.

“You had a lot of districts that did not have 100 students and had no valuation,” Haderlein said.

Feelings were so bad, he said, that some of his neighbors who opposed consolidation told him they despised him every day, except for the day he examined their teeth. Those sentiments remained years after the boundaries changed, he said.

Yet Haderlein believes that without consolidation, the quality of Kansas schools would have declined because some districts would have been too small and too poor to offer a comprehensive education.

“Nothing is 100 percent, but it certainly is successful,” Haderlein said.

Proceeding with caution

Now, said Rep. Bill Mason, a member of the House Education Committee, legislators are becoming more comfortable talking about consolidation as state revenues decline along with enrollments.

“It’s almost a positive to talk about it,” said Mason, R-El Dorado. “They’re starting to see an inefficient delivery system that is costing too much money.”

Two superintendents, Sharol Little of Manhattan and Ken Kennedy in Pratt, have proposed regional education districts similar to those used by large retailers or regional hospitals. Administrative functions would be centralized in a region’s largest district, with the other districts remaining in place to operate their schools.

Little and Kennedy are scheduled to outline the concept for the State Board of Education on Feb. 11.

Sebelius and other legislators are approaching the issue cautiously. Any consolidation must have community support, the governor said.

“To me, this is the place to start and it has to start right away,” Sebelius said.

Others agree that consolidation must not be forced on districts by Topeka. House Minority Leader Dennis McKinney pointed out that financial problems already are pushing extremely small districts to consolidate.

“I’d hate to see the state start pushing from the top down,” said McKinney, D-Greensburg.

Power at local level

Senate Education Committee Chairman Dwayne Umbarger acknowledged that past studies, including one released in 2001, have suggested Kansas has too many districts overall, and too many that cannot provide a good education.

Yet Umbarger would rather let an incentives law passed in 2002 have a chance to work. Under the 7-month-old law, a new district formed when two consolidate will receive state aid equal to what the two districts would have received had they remained independent.

“It’s a way they can say, ‘We can be in the driver’s seat. Instead of forcing it upon us, this is something to our liking,”‘ said Umbarger, R-Thayer.

If the state pursues consolidation, Umbarger added, the goal must be better education, not just saving money.

And Haderlein, the retired Girard dentist, said consolidation should create districts that can provide a comprehensive education rooted in technology skills.

“That’s the thing that’s going to drive consolidation, and the pressure has to come from parents,” he said.

Consolidation is already a reality for four western Kansas districts this year. The State Board of Education is set to review the proposed merger of the Atwood and Herndon districts, in Rawlins County. Both that union and the merger of the Bazine and Ransom districts in Ness County are on local ballots in April.

More consolidation is coming, and the only question is whether the push comes from local communities or Topeka. As much as they want savings to help with budget problems, state officials would rather let local officials take the lead.