On WCBU radio this morning, the local news broadcast included a story on District 150 and their search for a Glen Oak/White replacement school site. School Board President David Gorenz was interviewed; he said that using the current Glen Oak School site would be “cost-prohibitive” even if they scaled back the size of the parcel they needed.
One wonders on what facts he bases that statement. Is that based on a complete teardown and rebuilding without first doing a “final review” of whether the current building could be renovated? Is that based on 10 acres? 5 acres? What configuration? Does it include selling the properties on Prospect (almost certainly at a loss) that the District bought prematurely? Does that include the $500,000 in City support that Bob Manning is still willing to ask the Council for if the District would come back to the negotiating table? Is it cost-prohibitive because they’re still trying to build a more-expensive “birth-through-eighth” school instead of a K-8 school?
The public is wearying of assumption-based School Board actions.
this is the same short sightedness that the PSB had in initiating the “birth thru how long” principle. Some administrator says “that can’t be done” and it stops there. How can Chicago rebuild their older schools and Peoria can’t? Ken Hinton had a project in mind, and just didn’t do the homework. Location, location, location, Glen Oak school site is the only answer.
It’s not the only answer. It is one that makes the most sense out of those that have been discussed, especially considering there is financial assistance from city government for reusing the GO site.
Where else are these people going to find the 15 acres the say they need (but really don’t)?
Yes, one does wonder what report was done and what the report tells us — supposedly D150 said that Harrison School, the proposed school in the park and possibly two other schools would be discussed at the next Building Committee Meeting on Jan. 5 at 2:00 P.M. (Unless of course they change the Policy at the Policy Meeting on Jan. 4 at 1 pm.)
Also, regarding School Buildings (HB 5416) now known as Public Act 094-0973
Requires the Illinois State Board of Education to adopt qualifications for persons who perform school building inspections.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=094-0973
Wonder how that affects the ‘new report’ about Glen Oak School?
Karrie,
I don’t believe that new law will affect the analysis of the Glen Oak building in the way you are thinking. The school building inspections are more of a cursory check looking for unsafe conditions and violations of state code.
Hinton has already SOMEHOW tainted the BOE minds that a rehab or even rebuilding in that area won’t work – after all, the glorious Hinton Legacy Temple has to be on 15 acres in his mind! ^oo^~
Sounds to me as “Sour Grapes” by the president and others on the school board. I dont even think any in depth study will be done. They have spent BIG $$$ on land at G.O. park site and now what will they do with that? I dont even think the school board will even talk to the city at all on any site.
The only amount of ground around is in / by Sprindale. Would not put it past them to go there.It is a sad sad state of affairs. It is no wonder why that many people are gunshy of #150 and dont voice there opinion, #150 just does what they want and the heck with anyone else.
Hmm sounds to me that since the Board has already spent the money buying property and given up on the current school site, they just should save even more money and build in the park as they wanted in the first place.
Marty Palmer has a valid point about the in-depth study or lack thereof. To anyone’s knowledge, did the BOE contract with a professional school real estate consultant to provide any feasibility studies or analyses? Why is the answer probably “no”?
While we are on the topic of studies, wouldn’t it have been more cost effective for the BOE to contract a marketing survey for the residents of the White/Glen Oak attendance areas to determine their opinions and level of support for proposed sites? It certainly could not have cost $877,000+.
The BOE and District 150 Administration are committed to having their way on this issue. Are they prepared to maintain their position to the bitter end, because the bitter end could very well end up being new members elected to the BOE and demands for administrators to be replaced.
PrairieCelt,
There you go again – making sense to the majority of taxpayers! Spend money to reach an intelligent, supportable building site decision – BUT, when you are King Hinton you already know what the answers are! Besides you have the Peoria Urinal Star blowing in your ear that there is a silent majority backing you. That’s why the King and his court jester went on a willy-nilly spending spree for $877,500 like a couple drunken sailors on shore leave! You know – let’s just get drunk tonight, have some “fun” with no concern about the horrible hangover tomorrow let alone the results of the next short-arm inspection! ^oo^~
Have we all forgotten another potential site – that of the old White School? Those kids would be part of the new school together with the students from Glen Oak. White appears to be on a much larger parcel of land than Glen Oak School with better parking, etc. What about renovating that building or tearing it down and rebuilding? Just another possibility . . .
I thought of that. It’s actually — believe it or not — a smaller plot of land. It’s something like 2.2 acres, whereas the Glen Oak site is almost 3 acres.
Furthermore the White School site with it’s proximity to St Francis has to be in the Sister’s secret acquistion plan once King Hinton puts a For Sale sign out front. That source of funds beats having bake sales to replenish the $877,500 he squandered on Prospect! ^oo^~
Hinton won’t be around for that transaction; at least, not if the rumors of his retirement on 2/1/07 are true. The district can’t sell White School until the outstanding PBC bonds on it are paid off. That won’t be for another several months at least.