The Cleveland Heights-University Heights School Board announced the members of the lay facilities committee and established guidelines for group at the board's regular meeting Tuesday night.
School board members debated what the charge of the committee should be, which board members would serve as liaisons, how often members would meet and what their deadline should be, among other topics.
The 25-member committee (two members will rotate), comprised of city officials from district communities, teachers, parents, PTA representatives and more, has its first meeting at 7 p.m. today in the newly renovated Legacy New Tech space.
Though the charge and requests could be clarified or revised before this evening, this is some of what the school board discussed and what they would like the committee to accomplish within 10 to 12 meetings:
- Appoint a chairperson, who will lead meetings and handle housekeeping tasks.
- Review Plan C, the facilities master plan approved by the board 3-2 in July. Revisit work completed by the administration and architects hired by the district.
- Review the list of important values, compiled from the community's suggestions, and attempt to determine the most important or "non-negotiables."
- Community outreach: Determine the bond and budget range, building configuration and timeline (which buildings should be renovated first) that the community would support. Suggest ways information about the plans and the committee's work could be shared with the community to reach the most people.
- Provide the board with a few options of plans the community would support.
- Answer the question why CH-UH needs to renovate the buildings in this particular way — how it would benefit students academically.
- Look at schedules of the Cleveland Heights, University Heights, South Euclid city councils, committee members' calendars and other community events and plan future meeting dates and locations.
For more background on the facilities master plan, visit our topic page.
Board member Kal Zucker also suggested that the committee have flexibility to establish its own charge and focus, in addition to working on the list of what the board wants the committee to accomplish.
Zucker and School Board President Karen Jones will serve as the board liaisons, though any member can attend a meeting. They will be there to provide input when necessary but will not serve as active leaders or facilitators, though they may help start the first meeting.
The board would like the committee to finalize its report four to six weeks before the first meeting in July 2013, when the board will need to start approving legislation to get a bond issue on the Nov. 2013 ballot.
Members of the lay facilities committee
Patrick Mullen, executive director of Reaching Heights
Deanna Bremer Fisher, executive director of FutureHeights
Dennis Wilcox, Cleveland Heights City Council, Vice Mayor
Pam Cameron, University Heights City Council member
Phil Ertel, University Heights City Council member (will rotate with Cameron)
Nancy Levin, director of the Heights Libraries
Eric Silverman, president of the Heights High alumni foundation, former school board member
Brian Schaner, Cleveland Heights Teachers Union vice president
Jane Goodman, South Euclid City Council member
Carla Bailey, CH-UH PTA Council
Jodi Sourini, Gearity Professional Development School PTA
Heather Conwell, Oxford Elementary School PTA
Dallas Schubert, on former facilities committee
Jim Posch, on former facilities committee
John Hubbard, Reaching Heights Board of Directors member
Natoya Walker
Sam Bell, owner, The Lusty Wrench
Cheryl Oates
Krissy Dietrich Gallagher, Fairfax PTA vice president
Dave Tabor, on former facilities committee
Richard Wong, Cleveland Heights planning and development director
Susan Fleischer, co-owner, The Wine Spot
Donna Guilmette, Reaching Heights Many Villages coordinator for Canterbury School
Alvin Saafir, Reaching Heights Board of Directors member
Betsey Bell, Reaching Heights Board of Directors member
James Cull, Cleveland Heights Planning Commission
This is not a cross section, nor does it sound to me like these people were selected for their knowledge of "facilities". They do *not* care about, or represent my interests. And I have tried very, very hard to convey my interests to many of these people. Out of 26 members, by my count: No less than 4 are board members of Reaching Heights. At least 6 are members. Probably more. (For committee census purposes use "5") 4 are city council members. 4 are PTA members. 3 are employees of CH or the libraries 3 people identified only as "on former facilities committee" 2 small business owners 2 people unidentified beyond their names 1 Executive Director of FutureHeights 1 former BOE member 1 teachers' union vice president All the hubbub was about tearing down and rebuilding seemingly usable buildings.This is supposed to be a "facilities" committee! Not a "community pacifying" committee. Where's the architects? Where's the engineers? Where's the Green/Sustainability folks? Where's the project leader that will keep 26 people on task? Where's the researchers? Where's the finance folks? Most importantly, where are the independent *thinkers* ? I am not commenting on these people as individuals, but rather as a collection of people tasked with a huge responsibility. Meh.
She's the so-called "environmentalist" that voted to rezone Oakwood into a Walmart, campaigned on behalf of the developer, and filed a complaint with the Ohio Election Commission against the citizen's group that got the referendum on the ballot. Oh, yes, she's *very* Green/Sustainable. Not.
Personally I don't understand why SE has as much representation on this committee as UH and even CH has. I certainly hope she plays more of a passive role. We don't need the same leadership that has run South Euclid into the ground making decisions for a school district that barely includes SE.
But this committee does include people previously critical of the District's plans. I do believe I remember Eric Silverman speaking out against Plan C. Jodi Sourini, was critical of the closing of Gearity, I believe, so the contingent of UH residents who are upset with the closing of Gearity will have a voice. As far as a voice to fight against the tax increase......that's unlikely. Cleveland Heights & University Heights have always sat on that fence between Shaker Heights (high-taxes, high-end) and East Cleveland (lower-taxes, low-end housing). And for the most part, they do it well. It's one of the benefits of CH-UH.
As John H points out, the current committee includes several community voices who expressed opposition and/or disappointment about the last planning effort. Give us a chance to get going. You may be pleasantly surprised for once.
I hope you are able to apply your varied skills and interests into some amazing things for this biggest-construction-project-in-CH-UH-of-our-lifetimes-by-far endeavor! The word "unleashed" comes to mind. And if we could just round up another dozen (or two) folks like you...