patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

UPDATED: CH-UH Board Votes Unanimously To Reject Facilities Master Plan Bond Issue

Board members voted no on second reading on a resolution that would have put a $130.6 million bond issue on the November ballot.

 

Published at 9:50 p.m. June 17, updated at 9:09 a.m. June 18

The Cleveland Heights-University Heights City School Board voted unanimously tonight to reject a resolution that would have put a $130.6 million bond issue on the November ballot.

The bond issue, if approved by voters, would have paid for a portion of the controversial facilities master plan, otherwise known as Plan C, a $206.2 million project that calls for renovating, updating and reconfiguring school buildings and closing three elementary schools. The 36-year bond would have meant an estimated 5.9 mill levy, and cost homeowners about $15 more in property taxes per month for every $100,000 of property valuation.

The move came after the board had initially approved the measure on a narrow 3-2 vote on first reading at its meeting July 3.

On Monday night, about 60 people attended a special meeting at Cleveland Heights High School that was called by the CH-UH School Board to hear comments from parents and residents before they made their final decision. All board members were present. About 18 people spoke, and the majority voiced their opposition to the plan.

Eric Coble, board vice president, originally voted yes to the bond issue at the July 3 meeting and spoke first at Tuesday’s special meeting at the Delisle Options Center.

“I know there is a large contingent of the community who feels that this plan is not done yet … and a lot of people are asking for specifically one more year to continue developing it,” Coble said. “There have been a number of people who have stepped up, who have promised, and I think I can use that word, to continue if this is delayed for one more year, to continue to work and give up their time and their efforts to continue to develop this.

“I’m willing to give them that year. So I will be voting no with this with the assumption that we will continue to proceed. This is not us punting, this is not us saying, well this is too hard, we can’t do this. We put in a lot of effort. We put in a lot of time, a lot of money … and we can’t just let that disappear into the mist.”

Board member Nancy Peppler, who also supported the bond issue on first reading at the last meeting, voted no this time, too. She seemed surprised that Coble had made the same decision.

“It’s simply a recognition that the traditional school supporters, and I’m talking about the core people, the 15 or 20 or 50 people who have worked many, many hours over the years to pass operating levies and have been long-term supporters of the schools aren’t fully in support of us going forward this November,” Peppler said.

She said she’d like the board, administrators and others who have worked on the plan to use the extra time to clear up misinformation and confusion surrounding Plan C, as people have expressed a “general support” of the idea.

“I don’t believe that the time between now and Nov. 1 will allow us to first get those people to understand it to the level that they will need to to sell it to their neighbors and friends,” she said.

"I remain committed to (Plan C) going forward, but I believe that we need to take more time to engage those core supporters."

Karen Jones, board president, also voted differently this time and acknowledged that though she believes in Plan C, the board should be unanimous in its decision.

“Whatever decision we make, it needs to be a unanimous decision at best to show that we are united as a board and doing what we believe is best for the district,” Jones said.

Board members Ron Register and Kal Zucker again voted no, just as they had July 3.

"What this presents is an opportunity ... the interesting thing about opportunity is an opportunity is only as good as what you do with it. The fact is often times after a very difficult, arduous process, the first inclination, after a decision is made, is to sit back. And unfortunately we don't have that time to sit back," he said.

"We have our work cut out for us."

Superintendent Doug Heuer, who had recommended the board approve Plan C and the bond issue at the July 3 meeting, said the board will consider the next steps at its Aug. 7 meeting.

"The Board of Education made a decision to not place a bond referendum on the ballot in November. The Board of Education will discuss the next steps of implementing a master facilities plan at the next regular business meeting in August," he said.

Eric Silverman, a former CH-UH board member who shared his opposition to the plan at the last meeting, said he was "shocked" after hearing the vote at the July 17 meeting.

"I'm shocked. That's all there is to it. I totally didn't see that coming," he said.

Jodi Sourini is part of a group of parents and residents who said they would campaign against the bond issue should the board approve it. "Save Our Heights Schools" started a petition and had 127 signatures at the time this article was published from people who opposed the plan. She also attended the July 17 meeting.

"I'm totally shocked but happily so because I think it's the right thing to do for the community," Sourini said, who will be PTA president at Gearity Professional Developement School for the 2012-2013 school year and has a son entering second grade at the school.

She said she had never voted against a school levy or issue before, let alone campaigned against one.

"We will stop the petition because this is what we wanted. This is what we were working for, to have open, honest dialogue," Sourini said, adding that the group may now focus on getting the community engaged in further conversations about Plan C. "I'm proud of the board for making the right decision for our community."

Related Topics: Bond Issue, CH-UH Facilities Master Plan, and cleveland heights-university heights school board

John Hubbard

10:35 pm on Tuesday, July 17, 2012

I truly appreciate the board's hard work on this and look forward to actively supporting a plan that resonates with our community. Plan C had some good ideas in it, and we must address the reality of diminished enrollment and inadequate facilities. I invite everyone who has been following this process to remain engaged and to come to terms with a level of compromise that allows us to support our schools. Thank you to everyone who signed the petition and contacted the board, but mostly, thank you to the CH-UH Board of Education for giving the community the chance to truly be heard.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Garry Kanter

11:23 pm on Tuesday, July 17, 2012

We live in a great community!!!! Yay for the BOE!!!!

Colleen

7:54 am on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Thank you to the BOE for listening to the community and respecting our concerns. It took courage to reevaluate the situation. People need to stay involved in order to develop a solid plan. We can not sit back and let others do the hard work necessary. The urgency remains, our facilities need to be consolidated and renovated.

Reply

Sam Bell

8:19 am on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

I am very proud of all of our BOE members who have demonstrated exceptional perspicacity in reaching their decision. I pledge to continue my involvement in the further development of a facilities master plan, and I hope to find myself surrounded by friends and neighbors doing the same.

Reply

Margaret Hall

9:05 am on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Thank you for listening. Now, hear us again. We do not support Plan C. Do not consider closing schools. Any school closure will endanger any re building plan. If need be, re invent the high school, get that accomplished first, then move on to reinventing the elementary and middle schools.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Betsey Bell

9:30 am on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Margaret, there is no way to move forward with the number of buildings we have. If we are going to move forward as a community we have to be open to all possibilities, which includes perhaps fewer buildings. There is too much space, too many campuses to maintain financially, and opportunities for newness that may be better than we can imagine. Stay open and stay involved... we will get there!!

Comment_arrow

UH Resident

2:08 pm on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Fine, if elementary schools must be closed, let me be the first to suggest putting Roxboro on the chopping block.

Comment_arrow

Garry Kanter

7:26 pm on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Why would you engage with a Terms of Use violator?

Comment_arrow

UH Resident

7:59 pm on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Kids are currently being bussed from North of Mayfield to attend Roxboro. I've looked around for an attendance-density map for the district and I haven't had much luck in finding one, but it's my impression/understanding that (like Gearity) there a lot of kids attending Roxboro that are not from the immediate neighborhood. Overall I honestly think it would probably be a bad idea to close Roxboro, but the above is one of the main arguments used in support of closing Gearity and I'm just trying to play devil's advocate, to stir conversation a bit.

In reality, if an elementary school must be closed, I think that Fairfax would have to be at the top of the list. Next in line? I have no idea. I also think that a middle school should be closed, but I wouldn't even know where that conversation would begin.

One of the things that has made this district unique over the years (its tradition of neighborhood elementary schools) is also what is going to continue to make the school reorganization process very difficult. I don't envy the job facing the planners over the next year, but I do think that they should try to maintain the neighborhood elementary schools as much as possible.

Comment_arrow

Colleen

8:53 pm on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Fairfax and Noble were also on the list for closure in plan C. Elementary schools would remain at the Oxford, Canterbury, Roxboro and Boulevard. Boulevard was chosen due to central location, Canterbury was also due to location and building condition. Oxford is very close to Montecello and has alot of land in addition to being one of the older buildings that residents who participated in surveys said they want to keep.

Betsey Bell

9:33 am on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Our community is so fortunate to have at BOE and Administrative team like this!! Now it is time for the community to step up and help them get to a plan we can all support. The team worked for months before the community paid any attention, which has now delayed this process. We all owe it to them to help get a real plan across the finish line. I promise to help... how about others out there in Patch-land?!!
Thank you BOE... thank you for listening, for caring and for going above and beyond at every turn!!

Reply

CH Resident

9:41 pm on Wednesday, July 18, 2012

This also gives time for the Millikin issue, still in lease negotiations, to hopefully be successfully concluded which would demonstrate the willingness of the district to take the needs of the neighborhoods into consideration when school buildings are closed. Inevitably they will have to be due to declining population.

I think it is important, too, to understand that there have been many many meetings about Plans A B and C that were open to the public. Things heated up and began to move faster as they closed in on Plan C which responded to the feedback they had received from the public who had been engaged to that point. That's when the baby numbers C1 C2 and so forth began to show up in response to all the criticism as more people became engaged and began to realize what it would mean to them.

Not all of those interests can or should be conceded to. And each of them will raise t he cost of the levy that we do get in the end. So this road ahead will certainly be frought with contention.

Reply

John H.

10:26 am on Thursday, July 19, 2012

In response to the comments regarding closing Roxboro, Roxboro was chose to remain open based on a variety of criteria, including building condition and ability to be rennovated, usuable acreage, central location, preference to buildings of the 1920's design, etc. Notice that the district is going to rid itself of the 1970's buildings- Taylor and Coventry closed, Farifax will be closed and Boulevard will be rebuilt. Noble was a easy decision to close too- it sits on the smallest lot, and the renovations that it would require are the most expensive of ALL the elementary schools. It's far for prudent of the district to keep the cheaper-to-maintain Oxford school, than Noble.

Roxboro is also the grounds of Roxboro Middle. A combined K-8 campus is far cheap to administer.

But if I'd have to guess has to why CH-UH is so keen on keeping RoxEl, I'd say it's because it has the best test scores of any school in the District.

Reply
Comment_arrow

UH Resident

12:30 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012

I don't really agree that Roxboro is in a central location. Additionally it's on a smaller lot than every other elementary school in the district, including Noble.

In regards to test scores/state rankings, I've often wondered how much socioeconomic status plays a role. It's probably not politically correct to say, but I do think that Roxboro may have a leg up on the rest of the elementary schools in the district in dealing with a lower percentage of students with disabilities and students coming from disadvantaged backgrounds.

I don't think the fact that Roxboro is also the location of a middle school matters much. But if that's true, I think that UH residents would likely gladly welcome a similar setup at Wiley with physically separate buildings (like originally envisioned in Plans A and B).

In hindsight I'm beginning to think that perhaps Plan B wasn't so bad. I think that the biggest complaint was the grade reconfiguration issue and the fact a few of the elementary school campuses would be shared with middle schools. However as we've discussed that's essentially already been happening at Roxboro for almost century.

Comment_arrow

Amy Mangano

12:45 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012

I am not sure about the K-8 being cheaper. At one point a Pre-K-8 was briefly talked about at Wiley and Mr. Shergalis claimed the costs were way too high, not just to build, but to administer.

Comment_arrow

UH Resident

2:43 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012

I'm fairly certain that K-8 at Wiley was a part of both Plans A and B.

Comment_arrow

John H.

3:07 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012

In general, K-8 schools can be cheaper- because it allows for more flexability if you have one class that's larger than all of the others. In fact, smaller school system across Ohio are building one large K-12 buildings. CH-UH shouldn't do that, but it is interesting to see what others are doing.

Roxboro is not in the middle of the district at all. It's one of the criteria the district looked at- but not the only criteria. It is however, one of the reasons Canterbury was chosen over Gearity.

School performace was not part of the official criteria. However, if it was, Gearity might be one of the schools kept. It's test scores outshine Canterbury. As a Gearity grad myself (Or Belvior, as it was known), I have to question the district's on those grounds- Cantabury's building might be better, but Gearity has the better operation.

Also, if UH is serious about keeping a K-3 school in their city- Gearity's massive 12 acres- second largest property in the district after Heights High- would make a tempting place to construct and K-8 campus in a similar style to the Roxboro campus. Just an idea.

Donna Guilmette

3:48 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012

I think it's really important to not make decisions based upon test scores. We haven't seen the test scores for 2011/12, and the implementation of the ELA groupings and the significant transfer of teachers between buildings and grades were not in effect and, therefore, are not reflected in the previous years' scores.

Personnel and buildings are two separate issues. When buildings are closed, the staffing of every other building changes in accordance with the labor contract. Likewise, we will have new principals at three elementary schools this year.

Reply

Leave a comment