DOLLARS AND SENSE - THE COST EFFECTIVENESS OF SMALL SCHOOLS - CONCLUSION

 

 

Dol lars & Sense: The Cost Effectiveness of Smal l Schools

Below is the Conclusion found at the end of the report – “Dollars and Sense: The Cost Effectiveness of Small Schools”

Please read the conclusion of this report as it exemplifies how important a small school is to the education of children. Schools, such as Prescott School, are to be treasured according to the report.  

Note:. At times the conclusion mentions the building of smaller schools. In the case of Prescott School and others, the small school is already built!

Conclusion

"Many people know intuitively that small schools work best for children and teachers, but now there is research to prove it. Unfortunately, many communities have already lost their good, small schools because they could not argue successfully against educators and policy-makers determined to implement “economies of scale” through consolidation. Now, it is clear that there are significant diseconomies in large facilities, and that they do not create the best schools in which to nurture or educate children. It is important to preserve good small schools, limit school size, and reconfigure narrow-span large schools to achieve smaller schools within schools. Best of all, this report indicates that creating facilities for small schools can be done cost effectively, and that in Creating facilities for small schools can be done cost effectively, and . . . in fact, the cost of large schools is higher considering their negative outcomes. fact, the cost of large schools is higher considering their negative outcomes. Large schools are expensive to individuals, their communities, and the nation because there are many hidden costs. Most obvious are expenses such as increased transportation, higher administrative overhead, and expenditures for maintenance and security. Other costs of large schools are more subtle: lower graduation rates, higher dropout rates, high rates of violence and vandalism, higher absenteeism, and lower teacher satisfaction. Loss of a school has enormous social and financial impacts on a community, and consolidating schools and districts even erodes participation in democracy; but perhaps most expensive are the costs to society of the consequences of large schools: higher crime rates, increased cost of incarceration, more violence in schools, more families receiving public assistance, and the large number of students whose talents are not fully realized. The goal of this work has been and will continue to be to offer credible analyses that compare the true costs associated with mega-schools with those of smaller schools. Four specific conclusions emerge from this initial phase of work: 1. Communities should treasure their small schools and policy-makers should protect these schools with sound policies and financial support. State legislators and other decision-makers should implement policy that limits the number of students in a facility to the range suggested in this paper, as well as revise acreage requirements, limitations on renovation, and outdated codes and regulations that promote construction of large schools. 2. Districts should reconfigure large facilities serving narrow grade spans into schools with the widest possible grade span in order to create smaller schools within existing facilities. In addition, students and members of the community should make full use of existing facilities for functions and during time periods that extend beyond the activities and hours of traditional schools. 3. The second phase of this work must draw from a more representative base, not just from schools submitted to design competitions for further research and should examine the costs of maintaining and operating schools of different sizes. The analysis must also seek to understand the differences in costs between smaller and larger schools. 4. The second phase should include an integrated and comprehensive guide for the planning, design, and maintenance of facilities for small schools to demonstrate ways in which districts can control costs when building, renovating, and operating good small schools. Dollars & Sense demonstrates that small schools offer the best place to create environments in which students, teachers, families, and members of the community can teach and learn effectively. Furthermore, this report challenges the notion that small schools are excessively expensive by showing that facilities for small schools can be built cost effectively. The message is clear: when thinking about schools and school facilities, think small."

 

CONCLUSION  ABOVE IS ON PAGE 21 OF “DOLLARS AND SENSE, THE COST EFFECTIVENESS OF SMALL SCHOOLS” REPORT

Copyright © 2002 by KnowledgeWorks Foundation. All rights reser

PART #2 "FULL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT ON THE CLOSURE AND LEASE OF PRESCOTT SCHOOL"

This post continues the last part of the report,  "FULL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT ON THE CLOSURE AND LEASE OF PRESCOTT SCHOOL". It includes Sections 5 through 8 of the report.

SECTION 5 — MIS Representatives and Organizational Actions

5.1 Overview

MIS representatives played an active role in securing Prescott School.

Julie Lennox — MIS Head of School

• Signed multiple lease extensions

• Regularly attended MCPS meetings

• Advocated for long‑term occupancy

Martha Newell — Former MIS Officer

• Served on MIS Board with Rehbein

• Lived near Prescott

• Did not publicly support Prescott as a public school

MIS Organizational Actions

2004 Letter Requesting Prescott

MIS formally requested Prescott School before the second closure vote.

2005–2011 Letters

MIS repeatedly requested:

• Lease extensions

• Renovation permissions

• Long‑term stability

• Consideration for purchase

The 2011 letter emphasized the need for a five‑year facility to meet IBO accreditation requirements.

MIS Renovations

MIS made significant changes to Prescott’s playground and interior, some of which were inappropriate for a historic public building.

MIS’s Long‑Term Goal

MIS consistently sought to purchase Prescott School.

SECTION 6 — Financial Impacts, Lease Rates, and Ignored Warnings

6.1 Overview

The Prescott lease resulted in substantial financial losses for MCPS.

6.2 Lease Rates

• Roosevelt School: $1.75/sq ft

• Mount Jumbo School: $2.25/sq ft

• Prescott School (MIS): $0.79/sq ft

MIS received a dramatically reduced rate.

6.3 Math Professor’s Warning

A University of Montana math professor warned:

“If the International School attracts even five additional students… the rental loses more than it gains.”

He warned losses could reach hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Trustees ignored this warning.

6.4 Estimated Losses

The professor later estimated MCPS lost approximately $500,000 in one year due to the lease.

MIS grew to 200 students, likely resulting in millions in losses over time.

6.5 Trustees Ignored Financial Red Flags

Trustees supporting the lease:

• Ignored enrollment impacts

• Ignored transportation costs

• Ignored long‑term financial consequences

• Approved lease extensions

6.6 Additional Financial Considerations

• Increased busing costs

• Loss of neighborhood school value

• Complications from MIS renovations

• Pressure for long‑term lease extensions

SECTION 7 — Community Impacts and Additional Considerations

7.1 Overview

The closure of Prescott had profound community impacts.

7.2 Impact on the Rattlesnake Community

Loss of a Neighborhood School

Prescott served the valley for 135 years. Its closure disrupted:

• Walkability

• Community identity

• Family routines

Student Displacement

Approximately 600 middle school students were bused to other schools.

7.3 Impact on MCPS Operations

Transportation Costs

Costs were higher than stated.

Enrollment Losses

MIS’s growth reduced MCPS funding.

Property Management Challenges

MIS’s renovations complicated MCPS’s long‑term planning.

7.4 Community Conversations

Community members reported:

• Inconsistent closure rationales

• Predictions of closures that later proved true

• Trustees under pressure

7.5 Broader Considerations

Neighborhood schools provide stability and community cohesion. Leasing public schools to private institutions creates long‑term risks.

SECTION 8 — Conclusion and Final Analysis

8.1 Overview

The closure and lease of Prescott School were the result of years of coordinated actions, shifting votes, and decisions that aligned with MIS’s expansion goals.

8.2 Key Findings

• Repeated closure attempts

• Alignment with MIS’s timeline

• Conflicts of interest

• Ignored financial warnings

• Sweetheart lease rates

• Long‑term community harm

8.3 Broader Implications

The Prescott case illustrates the risks of private influence on public school governance and underscores the need for ethical, transparent decision‑making.

8.4 Final Analysis

The closure of Prescott School was not inevitable. It resulted from:

• Strategic timing

• Undisclosed affiliations

• Preferential treatment

• Ignored warnings

• Lack of transparency

The consequences were profound:

• A neighborhood school lost

• A community disrupted

• A district financially harmed

8.5 Closing Statement

Prescott School served the Rattlesnake Valley for more than a century. Its closure and lease to a private institution were decisions that should never have been made without full transparency, ethical governance, and careful financial analysis.

The community deserved better.

This report stands as a record of what happened, why it happened, and how similar outcomes can be prevented in the future.

PART #1 OF "FULL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT ON THE CLOSURE AND LEASE OF PRESCOTT SCHOOL

A  report titled, "FULL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT ON THE CLOSURE AND LEASE OF PRESCOTT SCHOOL" was submitted to the school district recently. The final report is 13 pages. This post will feature the Table of Contents and Sections 1 through 4.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary & Introduction 1.1 Executive Summary 1.2 Introduction 1.3 Premise of the Report 1.4 Scope and Sources 1.5 Overview of Contents

2. Historical Background 2.1 Prescott School History 2.2 MIS Origins and Early Development 2.3 MIS’s Direct Interest in Prescott 2.4 Community Concerns 2.5 Historical Significance of Prescott

3. Timeline of Closures and Votes 3.1 Overview 3.2 Early Closure Attempts 3.3 2003 Closure Attempt 3.4 2004 Closure Votes 3.5 Alignment with MIS Expansion 3.6 Immediate Lease to MIS 3.7 Summary

4. Key Individuals and Trustee Profiles 4.1 Overview 4.2 Administrators 4.3 Trustees Central to Closure 4.4 Additional Administrators

5. MIS Representatives and Organizational Actions 5.1 Overview 5.2 MIS Leadership 5.3 Organizational Actions 5.4 Renovations 5.5 Long‑Term Goal: Purchase

6. Financial Impacts, Lease Rates, and Ignored Warnings 6.1 Overview 6.2 Lease Rates 6.3 Math Professor’s Warning 6.4 Estimated Losses 6.5 Trustees Ignored Red Flags 6.6 Additional Financial Considerations

7. Community Impacts and Additional Considerations 7.1 Overview 7.2 Impact on Rattlesnake Community 7.3 Impact on MCPS Operations 7.4 Community Conversations 7.5 Broader Considerations

8. Conclusion and Final Analysis 8.1 Overview 8.2 Key Findings 8.3 Broader Implications 8.4 Final Analysis 8.5 Closing Statement

SECTION 1 — Executive Summary & Introduction

Executive Summary

This report presents a detailed examination of actions taken by Missoula County Public Schools (MCPS) Trustees and administrators between the late 1990s and 2011, focusing on decisions that led to the closure of Prescott School and its subsequent long‑term lease to the private Missoula International School (MIS). Drawing on publicly available documents—including MCPS Board meeting minutes, Missoulian articles, letters to the editor, MIS communications, and firsthand accounts—this report identifies patterns of decision‑making that raise concerns about conflicts of interest, lack of transparency, and potential violations of public trust.

The findings indicate that several MCPS Trustees and administrators took actions that aligned closely with MIS’s desire for expansion, including repeated attempts to close Prescott School, approval of a lease at a significantly reduced rate, and decisions that ignored financial warnings about long‑term losses to the district. The report also documents instances in which Trustees with prior or future ties to MIS participated in votes or discussions that directly benefited the private school.

This report is intended to provide a clear, factual, and comprehensive account of events surrounding the Prescott School closure and lease, to ensure that community members, public officials, and policymakers understand the historical context and implications of these decisions. The goal is not to vilify individuals, but to illuminate a pattern of actions that had significant consequences for the Rattlesnake community and the broader MCPS district.

Introduction

The purpose of this report is to examine the actions of several Missoula County Public Schools Trustees and administrators whose decisions may have compromised the public trust by facilitating the expansion of a private institution—Missoula International School (MIS)—into a publicly funded neighborhood school, Prescott School. The facility MIS sought was Prescott School, a historic and well‑loved MCPS school located in the Rattlesnake Valley.

Beginning in the late 1990s and continuing through the 2000s, MCPS leadership repeatedly attempted to close Prescott School. These efforts culminated in the 2004 closure and immediate lease of the building to MIS. The timing of these actions closely parallels MIS’s stated desire to expand its grade offerings and secure a larger facility. Within only a few years of its founding, MIS was actively seeking a building that could house its growing student population—and Prescott School became its target.

This report provides a full historical account of Prescott School and MIS, outlines the sequence of closure attempts and votes, identifies key individuals involved, and documents communications and decisions that suggest alignment between MCPS leadership and MIS representatives. It also examines financial implications, including lease rates and projected losses to the district, and highlights concerns raised by community members, educators, and experts at the time.

Prescott School has served the Rattlesnake Valley since 1891 and has long been a cornerstone of the neighborhood. The decisions made between 1998 and 2011 had lasting impacts on students, families, and the community. Understanding how and why these decisions occurred is essential as MCPS continues to evaluate the future of Prescott School and other district properties.

Premise of the Report

This report is grounded in the belief that public school facilities exist for the benefit of public school children. When a public school is closed and leased to a private institution—particularly under circumstances involving conflicts of interest, questionable decision‑making, or lack of transparency—the community deserves a clear and factual explanation.

The central premise is as follows:

• Prescott School was closed and leased under conditions that raise serious concerns about fairness, ethics, and public accountability.

• Several MCPS Trustees and administrators took actions that aligned with MIS’s expansion goals, sometimes in ways that appear to conflict with their obligations to the public school system.

• The consequences of these decisions continue to affect the Rattlesnake community today.

Scope and Sources

The information in this report is drawn from:

• MCPS Board meeting minutes

• Missoulian articles and letters to the editor

• MIS communications and public statements

• Montana corporation records

• Private conversations with individuals knowledgeable about MCPS operations

• Publicly available documents and historical records

Where speculation or opinion is included, it is clearly identified as such. The majority of the report is based on verifiable, open‑source information.

Overview of Contents

The full report includes:

• A historical summary of Prescott School and Missoula International School

• A detailed timeline of closure attempts and votes

• Profiles of Trustees and administrators whose actions were central to the Prescott School decisions

• Documentation of MIS’s expansion efforts and communications with MCPS

• Analysis of lease rates, financial impacts, and warnings ignored by MCPS leadership

• Community perspectives and firsthand accounts

• A concluding analysis of how these events continue to affect MCPS and the Rattlesnake Valley

SECTION 2 — Historical Background

2.1 Prescott School: A Historical Overview

Prescott School has been a cornerstone of the Rattlesnake Valley community since 1891. Originally known as East Side School, it has served generations of Missoula families and has long been recognized as one of the city’s most cherished neighborhood schools.

Two buildings comprise the Prescott School campus at 1100 Harrison Street:

• The 1910 Building, designed by renowned Montana architect A.J. Gibson

• The 1951 Building, designed by architect H.E. Kirkemo

For many decades, Prescott operated as a 1st through 8th grade school, adapting to changing enrollment patterns and community needs. It is considered a “triplet” to Washington and Jefferson Schools, which were also built in 1951 using similar designs and materials.

Prescott’s long history reflects the Rattlesnake Valley’s commitment to neighborhood schools. Since 1915, the valley has relied on at least two schools, and for many years, three. Prescott has consistently been viewed as essential to maintaining accessible education for families in the area.

The school’s closure in 2004—and its subsequent lease to a private institution—represented a dramatic departure from more than a century of community tradition and public investment.

2.2 Missoula International School: Origins and Early Development

Missoula International School (MIS) began in 1995, founded by Meg Langley in her home on Fifth Street. According to Langley’s own account, MIS was inspired by a Washington State language‑immersion model in which she had been a founding student.

MIS initially operated in small, temporary locations around Missoula. As enrollment grew, the school sought a larger, more permanent facility. By 2002—only eight years after its founding—MIS publicly expressed its intention to expand beyond kindergarten and first grade.

A July 20, 2002 Missoulian article titled “International Expansion” reported several key points:

• MIS planned to add grades up to fifth grade.

• MIS hoped to join the International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO).

• MIS anticipated continued growth and needed a building with adequate classrooms and play space.

These expansion goals coincided closely with MCPS’s repeated attempts to close Prescott School.

2.3 MIS’s Direct Interest in Prescott School

MIS’s interest in Prescott became explicit in 2004. In a letter dated April 21, 2004, MIS wrote to MCPS:

“MIS understands that some educational space may be available in the Missoula County School District. Specifically, MIS is interested in leasing Prescott Elementary School for a minimum of two years.”

The letter emphasized MIS’s desire for:

• A unified campus

• Adequate classroom and play space

• A minimum two‑year lease

• Discussions with MCPS committees or the Board

The letter concluded:

“We look forward to reaching an agreement that benefits MCPS, MIS, and the Missoula community.”

Community members questioned how leasing a public school to a private institution could “benefit MCPS,” particularly given Montana’s enrollment‑based funding formula.

2.4 Community Concerns and Perceptions

The 2004 MIS letter was viewed by many residents as unusually bold. Prescott School was a popular, taxpayer‑funded public school with deep historical roots. The idea that MCPS might close it and lease it to a private institution struck many as inappropriate and contrary to the district’s mission.

Neighbors frequently described MIS’s posture as “entitled,” reflecting frustration with the school’s renovations, playground alterations, and long‑term occupancy of a public facility.

2.5 The Emotional and Historical Significance of Prescott School

Prescott School is not merely a building; it is a symbol of continuity, community identity, and neighborhood stability. Generations of Rattlesnake families have attended Prescott, and its closure in 2004 was widely felt as a loss.

SECTION 3 — Timeline of Closures and Votes

3.1 Overview

Between the late 1990s and 2004, MCPS leadership made multiple attempts to close Prescott School. These efforts culminated in the 2004 closure and immediate lease of the building to MIS.

3.2 Early Closure Attempts (Late 1990s–2000)

Under Superintendent Mary Vagner, MCPS repeatedly proposed closing Prescott School. These proposals were met with strong community opposition.

A December 13, 2000 Missoulian article reported:

“A deeply divided Missoula County Public Schools Board reaffirmed a decision made nearly two years ago Tuesday evening, voting to close Prescott School at the end of the current school year.”

This closure was later reversed after significant public pushback.

3.3 The 2003 Closure Attempt and Reversal

Superintendent Jim Clark recommended closing Prescott School in 2003. Trustees Harrison and Hemphill supported the closure.

The election of Carol Bellin in May 2003 changed the Board’s composition. Bellin voted to keep Prescott open, joining Trustees Dussault, Rogers, Kimbell, and Merrill.

The closure was reversed.

3.4 The 2004 Closure Votes

March 25, 2004 — First Vote

At 1:00 a.m., after only 48 days of deliberation, the Board voted to close:

• Prescott School

• Mount Jumbo School

• Rattlesnake Middle School

Trustees voting for closure:

• Harrison

• Hemphill

• Kimbell

• Merrill

July 8, 2004 — Second Vote

A second vote was required due to an Open Meeting Lawsuit.

Trustees voting for closure:

• Harrison

• Hemphill

• Kimbell

• Rehbein

• Bixler

• Toth

Bellin voted against closure.

3.5 Alignment with MIS’s Expansion Timeline

MIS’s expansion goals (adding grades, joining IBO, securing a larger facility) aligned precisely with MCPS’s closure votes.

MIS’s April 21, 2004 letter requesting Prescott was sent before the second closure vote.

3.6 Immediate Lease to MIS

Following the July vote, MCPS moved quickly to negotiate a lease with MIS.

In the May 2004 Board Meeting, newly elected Trustee Toni Rehbein urged the Board to “speed the process up.”

Rehbein had previously served as MIS Board president and vice president.

3.7 Summary

• Multiple closure attempts

• Sudden vote reversals

• MIS’s documented interest

• Rapid lease approval

The timeline demonstrates a pattern of decisions that aligned with MIS’s needs.

SECTION 4 — Key Individuals and Trustee Profiles

4.1 Overview

This section documents the Trustees and administrators whose actions shaped the closure and lease of Prescott School.

Superintendent Jim Clark

• Recommended closing Prescott in 2003 and 2004

• Oversaw sale of Roosevelt School to St. Joseph’s

• Close ally of Trustee Harrison

• Ignored warnings about enrollment‑based funding losses

Trustee Rosemary Harrison

• Supported closure efforts from the late 1990s onward

• Chaired the Board during the 2004 closure votes

• Central figure in decisions enabling MIS’s lease

Trustee Jenda Hemphill (Cummings)

• Supported closures

• Advocated for extending MIS’s lease to five years

• Signed the Roosevelt School buy/sell agreement

Trustee Toni Rehbein

• Former MIS Board president and vice president

• Urged Board to accelerate lease approval

• Approved lease extensions in 2009 and 2011

Trustee Naomi Kimbell (DeMarinis)

• Voted to close Prescott twice

• Immediately became MIS executive director

• Wrote to MCPS asking if Prescott was “excess property”

Trustee David Merrill

• Reversed his vote from 2003 to 2004

• His vote was decisive in the March closure

Trustees Scott Bixler and Joe Toth

• Elected as part of a slate aligned with pro‑closure Trustees

• Supported closure and lease decisions

• 
  

Happy 4th of July! 🧨🎇🎆

 Prescott School Missoula would like to wish everyone a wonderful holiday! May Missoula County Public Schools have a spectacular dynamic explosion of honesty and ethics   😊⚡️☀️‼️ 

Former Prescott School student shares wonderful memories of Prescott in the late 1990's/early 2000's

 

Below is an email sent to the MCPS school district sent to the Facebook page, "Save Prescott School. It is a must read! Such wonderful memories about the Carnival and the poetry class with Sheryl Noethe, etc. Katie Gregory feels the same way many of us do  - we must save Prescott School!

TO: MISSOULA COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS OFFICIALS AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

FROM: Jeanne Joscelyn, Prescott School Missoula advocate

RE: Comment in praise of Prescott School with a picture from a former student, Katie Gregory

 DATE: June 30, 2026

 Dear Missoula County Public Schools officials and Trustees,

 Please read this great post on the Facebook page of “Save Prescott School”.

 The sentiments below expressed by Katie Gregory are typical of most students that attended Prescott School throughout the 135 years of the school. Prescott School has been one of most popular schools if not the most popular school (and some students’ favorite school), within the MCPS school district. (This is before the Missoula International School inappropriately leased the school for about 20 years.) Many people would like Prescott School to be reopened as a school for public school children as was intended when it was built.

 Thank you!

 Below is the post -

(I had permission from Katie to share this with the district.)

 Katie Gregory

Prescott Elementary is a huge part of my family's history. My mother went here, my siblings went here, and I was lucky enough to walk those same halls. Even though it was only 4th and 5th grade, I have so many fond memories of this school.

I loved the awesome hallway library, playing tetherball, and trading Pokémon cards on the playground. In the winter, we spent all our time racing down the epic sledding hill. It breaks my heart to hear that the building is sitting vacant today.

Does anyone else remember the annual Carnival Night? It was the absolute best! Getting to whip-cream someone in the face, doing musical chairs to win a cake, and running from classmates so you wouldn’t get thrown into the carnival "jail." Those nights, along with the outdoor challenges to win ribbons, are things I will never forget.

And who could forget the legendary 5th-grade all-night sleepover before we moved up to Rattlesnake Middle School? They would lay the gym mats all over the floor for us, and the school band would literally play all night long while we stayed up!

I wanted to share this photo from around 1999/2000 to remind everyone of the magic that happened inside those classrooms. This was taken during a poetry workshop with the amazing Sheryl Noethe (pictured in the back left with glasses), who taught us language through poetry and sign language! On this day, she brought in a guest musician to jam on the guitar and inspire our writing.

 

 

June 17th, 2024 email to MCPS Maintenance Director Burley McWilliams regarding the sprinkler issues for the playground at Prescott School

This post highlights an email written on June 17, 2024, to MCPS maintenance director, Burley McWilliams and the Superintendent regarding the maintenance of Prescott School mainly on the outside of the building. Our family had been working on the landscaping for about a year at this point. In this letter we are asking for information on the sprinkler system on the playground. 

The previous renters, Missoula International School, did not take care of the premises, both inside and out. 

Poor maintenance is the key problem at this time and has always been since 2004, the year that Prescott School was first leased to Missoula International School, but especially now as the district is not seeing the value of Prescott School as an assset to the district, which does not make sense for many reasons.

Thank you for reading this email which was sent to: 

Burley McWilliams, Micah Hill, and public comment;

​Burley McWilliams;​Public Comment;​Micah Hill​

June 17, 2024

Hello Burley!

Thank you very much for arranging the painting at Prescott School! The south side of the school looks so much better! The peeling paint was quite a blight. One neighbor told me that she was very happy about the upgrade and I’m sure there are many more happy neighbors!

We also appreciated the painting over of the graffiti on the north side of the building!

With the better weather our family has been working on the front of the grounds with mowing, weed eating, and planting flowers in the planter box.  Additionally, a volunteer has been doing great work weed eating the area by the swings and the bushes around the play area. She has been a big help. And I think  others will join her as the summer progresses.

We also are glad that the district mowed the playground about a week ago (maybe this was Brandon who I met last summer who was such a help picking  up the lawn bags!). With all the rain and the mowing, the area is looking better than it has for a long time!

We were wondering if you had some ideas on what could be next for the summer maintenance or perhaps even some inside maintenance.

We understand that you are short on help, however, there are things that need to be done that may not be too expensive.

One idea we and some neighbors had was to continue working on the area where a sprinkler system was installed last summer. Is the contractor responsible for the sprinkler installation finished with his end of the project? Or maybe the district employees were doing this project? The filling of the trenches and the leveling of the soil need to be done as people could be hurt walking and running on the grounds, perhaps twisting an ankle, etc. With the sprinkler system completed children could safely play sports and other activities on the field. We would be happy to help with this work, along with others, I’m sure.  

With the weather cooperating (hopefully!) I think there will be more volunteer help.

Is there any way we can get access to the outside front faucet for watering the flowers that we planted. Last year we hauled water, however, using a faucet would be a lot easier. We would really like a faucet turnkey handle and would use it responsibly. Perhaps Brandon could help us with this?

Also, we recently purchased a power washer for use on our property. And we would really like to use it to clean off the asphalt around the Prescott School building. We could also use the pressure washer to spray off the bricks on the bottom of the building walls which have mold growing on them. We will need access, i.e. a turnkey handle, to a faucet for these chores, also.

With our, other citizens, and your ideas we could get Prescott School back to the well-maintained school it once was prior to the lease to a private school, which, unfortunately, did not take good care of the building or grounds. And then hopefully discussions of reopening the school can take place😊.

Thank you again for help.

Jeanne Joscelyn, 1335 Clarkia, Missoula, MT 59802 jeannejoscelyn@hotmail.com 406-303-0703 cell