An outpouring of public concern was expressed last week when cuts were proposed to help control Morenci’s school deficit. Nearly a hundred residents attended a school board meeting and many had an opinion to express.

The Observer has been chided for mentioning only two alternatives in an editorial last week—cutting administration or cutting classroom staff—but the options go much further, as suggested by residents. Options include seeking wage concessions from school employees, eliminating the high school principal position instead of the elementary principal, reducing the benefits package of staff members, and bypassing staff cuts and instead riding it out with a million-dollar fund equity. Additional possibilities have been suggested by residents who didn’t speak up at the meeting, but have voiced their opinions privately.

The uproar that ensued when the cuts were announced, and the question, “Did you consider this...?” suggest that the budget balancing process lacked openness. We aren’t suggesting that everything was handled in secrecy, but involvement with the entire school board should have come earlier.

Likewise, a discussion of financial troubles could have taken a more open route. Maybe some ideas offered by the public would have led to a more satisfactory resolution. As it stands now, a lot of community members are not at all happy with the proposed cuts.

Probably the worst outcome of the budget problems would be a rift between the administration and the community or a split among board members themselves. Everyone involved needs to adopt an attitude of “I respectfully disagree,” but stay together through tough times.

The problem with the district’s financial situation—and that of many other districts—lies beyond the board and administration. Our elected officials must realize that school funding as it currently exists is failing.

As board member Ivy Hutchison and teacher Kim Mohr suggest, start calling or writing.