Increased drug and alcohol abuse. More teen pregnancies and suicides.
Those are a few of the possible results the proposed high school boundary changes could bring to northern Davis County, some residents told the Davis School Board on Tuesday.Not to mention the division of a community - Clinton - that says it's tired of being treated like "the armpit of the school district."
The occasion was a public hearing at Clearfield High School. The topic was proposed changes in high school boundaries involving Layton, Clearfield and Davis high schools.
The changes are necessary to accommodate a new high school under construction in north Layton. Officials plan to open the new school in August 1992.
Under the proposed changes, about 17 percent of the graduates from Sunset Junior High would go to Clearfield High. The rest would attend the new high school.
All of the 17 percent are from Clinton.
"This will place a considerable burden upon this small number of students and could seriously hamper their social and emotional growth and development," said Larry Jay Davis, spokesman for the concerned Clinton residents.
Davis was backed by more than 50 Clinton residents - including the mayor - in attendance at Tuesday's hearing.
The new high school boundaries go south from the Weber-Davis county line along the Denver & Rio Grande Railroad tracks to 800 North. Students living east of the tracks would go to the new school. Those living west would remain at Clearfield.
The Clinton residents propose that all of Clinton be shifted to the new high school.
Mayor Steve Weller said he's tired of having his community constantly divided by elementary and junior high school boundary changes.
"Maybe instead of getting on the bus and going along with the program, it's time we drive the bus," the mayor said, to the approving roar of his constituents.
Darrell White, a district consultant who worked with a citizens committee in formulating the boundary proposal, said the Clinton residents' suggestion was considered by the committee and remains "a workable alternative that the board can look at."
Layton resident Colleen Watt said teenagers are vulnerable to social disruptions, which could result in increased incidences of drug abuse, promiscuity and depression.
Also concerned about the boundary changes were several residents who live in the Oak Forest, Rolling Oaks and Bay View subdivisions along Antelope Drive in east Layton.
The proposed boundary between the new high school and Layton High goes up the middle of Antelope Drive, resulting in a split-up of North Layton graduates, 24 percent of whom would attend Layton High, while 76 percent would go to the new high school.
Residents along Antelope Drive pointed out that about 12 students a year from their subdivisions would go to a different high school than their peers, resulting in possible negative social and emotional impacts. The residents suggest that both sides of the street attend the same high school, be it Layton or the new one.
Eric Bixby, a ninth-grade student at North Layton Junior High, told the board that his friends, whom he considers family, would all go to the new high school while he would go to Layton High.
"I'm pleading with you . . . don't separate me from my family."
Another resident asked the district to allow a phase-in period so that students currently in junior high school can choose which high school they will attend.
School Board President Lynn Summerhays said the board will consider all of the suggestions - as well as any that come up at the next public hearing - before making a final decision in June.
The next - and final - hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, May 21, at Layton High School.