Chronicle Editorial

CAL football decision a tough one
 
Dwindling participation numbers have forced action at CAL regarding the future of the football program. The fate of the 2015 season will be determined during next week’s school board meeting, but it’s clear the decision won’t be an easy one by any stretch of the imagination.
                CAL’s football team has fallen on hard times over the years. Low numbers have affected the program’s ability to succeed on the field, but the Cadets have shown improvement during the past two seasons. Testimony from players at a special community meeting last week proved there was still pride and commitment to the program, and it was evident the players wanted to continue their pursuit of a gridiron victory in 2015.
                However, that possibility is extremely jeopardized by low turnout. CAL finished the season with just 10 healthy players in 2014, and the coaching staff has reason to believe it could happen again next fall. It’s simply hard to compete when you only have two reserves on the bench.
                Four possible situations were discussed at last week’s meeting. CAL could drop the football program, share with Clarion-Goldfield-Dows, do nothing and continue the program as-is, or field only a junior varsity squad in 2015. The last possibility seems like the best option moving forward. The school could field a team while simultaneously keeping its options open for the 2016 season. Redistricting occurs that year, and CAL could join up with another district like Hampton-Dumont without making that team ineligible for playoff contention.
                Monday’s decision won’t come easy. It’s clear CAL would love to keep their eight-man program alive, but that might be nearly impossible if history is any indicator of future participation numbers.
 
Budget proposal raises alarms for Iowa schools
 
     Gov. Terry Branstad’s proposed budget has led to several criticisms during the past month, but none have been as heated as complaints over education funding.
     The governor suggested increasing supplemental state aide by 1.25 percent for the 2015-16 school year. The number is quite modest by anyone’s standards, and it has created backlash from both sides of the political spectrum recently. Many lawmakers and school administrators claim Branstad’s budget would lead to fired teachers, outdated classroom material, crowded classes and fewer choices for students. They fear the meager funding increase could force property tax hikes to generate additional revenue, which never sits well with taxpayers no matter how hard you sell it.
     Those fears were reinforced recently by a survey of Iowa’s K-12 superintendents. More than 200 responded to the poll, and all but one said they opposed the governor’s budget. Seventy-two percent said their district would be forced to raise property taxes while 73 percent said they would need to lay off teaching staff and raise class sizes.
     Lawmakers have rallied around the outcry and pledged to fight the governor’s plan in the months ahead. Trimmed budgets typically receive heavy criticism, but this issue is particularly controversial. Our elected officials have pledged to improve Iowa’s school system and this budget seems to backtrack on those goals in the immediate future.
     Increasing supplemental state aide to 3.5 or 4 percent could help ease opposition to Branstad’s budget. Ninety-six percent of survey responses felt K-12 education funding needed to increase between 4 to 6 percent next year, but that seems unlikely. It’s clear the governor wants modest growth and escalating numbers too drastically could increase the threat of a veto. Lawmakers must proceed with caution and find common ground to please both sides.
     Investing in Iowa’s K-12 schools is an important step towards strengthening the state’s prospects for future success. Branstad’s budget falls short of those goals, and increasing the current budget proposal will be vital for both students and our state.