District 150 not required to replace schools

UPDATE: Some of the following information has been disputed. Please see this follow-up post.

District 150 has been holding community forums to get input from citizens on where they would like a new school located in the East Bluff/North Valley area. At each forum, citizens have been told that the Illinois State Board of Education requires that the Kingman, Irving, and Glen Oak school buildings be replaced. For instance, one of the slides in their presentation is titled, “Buildings to be replaced per State.”

I’ve learned not to trust the school board when they tell me something is required by the state. Not long ago, Superintendent Hinton went on the radio and said the state required any new school to be built on 15 acres or more. It turned out that wasn’t true.

So I wasn’t surprised when I discovered that the state actually does not require that the buildings be replaced. I spoke to Lou Ferratier in the Illinois State Board of Education’s School Business and Support Services division. He said the buildings need to be either repaired or replaced, but the state does not require replacement. This is clear even from reading the applicable section of the state’s School Code (105 ILCS 5/17?2.11):

For purposes of this Section a school district may [emphasis mine] replace a school building or build additions to replace portions of a building when it is determined that the effectuation of the recommendations for the existing building will cost more than the replacement costs. Such determination shall be based on a comparison of estimated costs made by an architect or engineer licensed in the State of Illinois. The new building or addition shall be equivalent in area (square feet) and comparable in purpose and grades served and may be on the same site or another site.

Here’s how much the state has approved for District 150 to expend in fire prevention and safety funds (acquired from District 150 via FOIA request):

School Approved Expenditure
Glen Oak Primary $8,373,980
Harrison Primary $12,261,377
Irving Primary $6,794,380
Kingman Primary $6,474,213
Total $33,903,950

The school can use that money to fix up the schools or replace the schools. They can build several smaller schools or one big school. The only requirements are:

  1. Their buildings are brought up to code regardless of whether it’s through repair or replacement,
  2. The replacement school(s) be used for the same purpose (elementary school), and
  3. The replacement school(s) have equivalent aggregate square footage.

Here’s the deal: the reason the school district says they need to replace the school buildings is because, according to their last “Health Life Safety” report completed by STS Consultants, it would cost more money to repair the buildings than to replace them. However, that’s based on their reported replacement costs, which are obviously too low.

For example, the reported cost to replace Harrison School was about $11.8 million. But the school district asked for $21 million from the Public Building Commission to build a replacement Harrison. Cost to renovate? $11.98 million. That’s a $9.02 million difference. Yet somehow, replacing is supposed to be cheaper than renovating.

District 150 is trying to use the state as a scapegoat to deflect criticism of the school board’s decision to replace buildings that aren’t required to be replaced.

7 thoughts on “District 150 not required to replace schools”

  1. CJ – I can repair your old computer with a new Hard Drive and more memory, but after I am done, you still have an old computer. You can spend a couple hundred bucks on the thing and end up with a computer worth less than $200. Same with a beater car or a run-down house.

    Sometimes it is more fiscally responsible to buy new.

    I am not making and remarks about whether Dist 150 estimates are accurate or not. Just trying to point out that there might not be a dollar for dollar comparison.

  2. We can argue about whether they should be replaced, but the main point I’m trying to get across here is that it is the district’s decision to replace them, not the state’s. The district should not be deceiving people by saying the state requires them to replace the buildings. They should take responsibility for their own decisions.

  3. @anon e mouse

    Newer does not always equal better. A building is not a computer. The school district needs to do what is most fiscally responsible for the citizenry it serves.

  4. Isn’t part of the new school grand plan a way to avoid facing failing grades/no adequate yearly progress on No Child Left Behind? I think if you close a school and open a new one then you wipe the record clean.

  5. kohlrabi — A+ on your homework assignment.

    Now, who is going to use all of the PBC’s bonding authority — D150 or the Museum Group?

Comments are closed.