Editorials
Friday, August 27, 1999

School consolidation
has its down side

The issue: Governor Cayetano has proposed school consolidation as a way for the department of Education to save money.
Our view: The savings may be offset by losing the educational benefits of smaller schools.

THE Department of Education is under the direction of the Board of Education, which is elected and not responsible to the governor. That hasn't deterred Governor Cayetano from offering suggestions to the board regarding ways to deal with budget cuts.

Whether to accept the suggestions is for the board to decide. The governor can't give the board orders. However, the DOE has to operate within the limits of funds provided by the Legislature as approved by the governor.

Cayetano, in a letter to Board of Education Chairman Mitsugi Nakashima, proposed consolidating schools, reducing the number of district offices on Oahu from four to two, raising the price of school lunches from 75 cents to $1, reducing or deleting funds for supplementary, non-academic and administrative programs and reducing 325 vacant non-teacher positions.

Probably the most controversial of the proposals is consolidation of schools. This is hardly a new idea, but it rarely fails to provoke strong opposition. Almost certainly there will be battles if the board accepts this proposal.

In theory, a school where enrollment has shrunk as a result of the aging of the neighborhood it serves could be a candidate for consolidation. This could result in economies in maintenance costs and positions for a principal and clerical staff.

However, there may be difficulties in moving the students to another school that nullify the financial advantages of consolidation, such as a need for temporary classrooms.

But the biggest objection probably is the contention that smaller is better in education, that smaller schools deliver more effective education.

Pushing students into fewer, bigger schools may save a little money but what is the point if the result is less effective education? The DOE might do better by splitting up schools with large enrollments than by consolidating those with small enrollments.

Moreover, whatever savings may be achieved through consolidation pale by comparison with the staggering size of the backlog in school repair and maintenance projects -- $241 million worth.

It is hardly an exaggeration to say that many schools are falling apart. The vice principal of Farrington High says, "Right now, the schools are broken." And the Legislature shows no sign of willingness to address the problem effectively.

Nuclear reactors
for North Korea

The issue: North Korea is threatening to withdraw from a nuclear agreement with the United States, South Korea and Japan.
Our view: Assurance that the construction of two nuclear reactors is being accelerated may satisfy North Korea's complaints.

North Korea has been complaining about delays in implementation of an agreement to build two nuclear reactors in that country, and threatening to withdraw from the pact. Withdrawal would bring friction between the regime of Kim Jong-il and the governments that are trying to deal with it to the boiling point.

The agreement, signed in 1994, provided that North Korea would freeze development of nuclear weapons in exchange for the reactors, plus supplies of fuel oil until the reactors were completed.

The newspaper of the North's ruling party said North Korea has suffered a "huge loss" by ending its nuclear activities. "We have no intention to suffer any more. The relevant institutions in (North Korea), including the military, are calling for urgent measures against the indefinite delay" in the reactor project, the newspaper said.

However, the basis for North Korea's complaints may soon be removed. The chief South Korean delegate to the international consortium building the nuclear reactors said the major phases of construction will probably begin before the end of the year. The official, Chang Sun-sup, said work will be accelerated to satisfy the complaints.

Ground was broken in 1997 for two light-water reactors, each with a rated capacity of 2,000 megawatts, but work was slowed due to heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula and a funding delay. Now South Korea and Japan have completed the required action on the funding of the project, including parliamentary approval, Chang explained, so the work can be accelerated.

South Korea will pay 70 percent, or $3.2 billion, of the total cost, while Japan will assume $1 billion. The United States is committed to supply 500,000 tons of fuel oil a year until the first reactor is built.

Doubts about the nuclear agreement have grown since North Korea a year ago test-fired a missile that flew over Japan and landed in the Pacific. That launch stunned the Japanese and left them much more concerned about North Korea as a security threat.

North Korea now appears to be preparing to test a more advanced missile capable of reaching Hawaii and Alaska. Such a test would further strain relations with Japan, South Korea and the United States and make fulfillment of the agreement even less likely. But the regime has been dropping hints that it is willing to talk things over.

Perhaps the assurance that the nuclear reactor project will be accelerated will get the North Koreans to call off the missile launches. But if they go ahead, all bets are off.

---

Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership

Rupert E. Phillips, CEO

John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher

David Shapiro, Managing Editor

Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor

Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors

A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor