I attended the first of four public forums hosted by District 150 last night. This one was held at Woodruff High School. The school board is trying to convince the public that they’re listening and seriously considering public input in the siting of a new school for the Woodruff attendance area.
And that is indeed “a new school” — singular. District officials said last night that there is funding to build only one new school. That school will replace Glen Oak, Kingman, and Irving primary schools, and White middle school. That covers the east bluff and the north valley, and basically sets up a scenario in which neighborhoods will be competing against each other for the new school.
Generally speaking, those who live on the bluff want the school to be up on the bluff. Those in the valley want the school to be in the valley. Some suggested putting the school near Woodruff and Lincoln schools, saying it’s the most centrally-located site for those above and below the bluff, but others insisted it would not be a good idea to mix Kindergarteners and high school seniors on the same campus.
East bluff residents are still divided between the current Glen Oak School site and the now-defunct Glen Oak Park site. Terry Larson (pictured above) presented 400 signatures from people wanting the school adjacent to the park, and several other people in attendance spoke in favor of the park site. That brought objections from other neighbors, who pointed out that the ground rules specifically stated that the Glen Oak Park site was off the table, and didn’t feel it was appropriate to be arguing for/against a site that is specifically excluded from consideration. Their complaints fell on deaf ears, however, as both the facilitator Brad McMillan and school board president David Gorenz encouraged all neighbors to speak freely on any site they wanted, claiming they wanted to “welcome all comments.”
But it soon became clear that not all comments were welcome. When people started suggesting the school board build two smaller schools (one on the bluff and one in the valley) instead of one large school, McMillan chastised the crowd, saying that they should be “realistic” since the school board had already said there is only funding to build one school. It’s unclear why he didn’t feel it equally unrealistic to suggest a site that has been officially blackballed by the park district and completely out of the school board’s control.
Those who live in the valley suggested the Morton Square Park site and the current Kingman school site.
Most people spoke off the cuff, but a few had prepared their presentations in advance. Terry Larson, whom I’ve already mentioned, was one. Another was Mike Standish, 1515 NE Perry, who put together a PowerPoint presentation with Aaron Moore advocating the Woodruff/Lincoln site. Roberta Parks spoke on behalf of the Peoria Area Chamber of Commerce and said the school board should consider sites that have “better spin-off potential” or potential for economic development around the new school, both residential and commercial. Steve Katlack, 709 E. Frye, put together a handout that advocated the current Glen Oak School site, and addressed all of the school board’s stated criteria for site selection.
The next meeting will take place at Irving Primary School on Thursday, Sept. 27. After that, there will be meetings at Von Steuben on Oct. 4 and Glen Oak on Oct. 18. A final report will be prepared by Nov. 9, which the school board will deliberate on Nov. 19. A final decision will be made by Dec. 3, and that decision will be announced on Dec. 17.
C.J. –
Just curious of something. Last time they held a meeting at Woodruff, a gentleman spoke and had a plan for expanding the current Glen Oak School site south one block to Kansas. I I believe to school would have been to the south and playground and parking would be across Frye (current location of GOS). Just curious if he was there and presented this again. Actually, it isn’t as bad as a plan as most. He received the most applause of anyone there that night even moreso than the speech by Bob Manning.
Chef: The plan at the first meeting held at Woodruff was Steve Katlack’s plan. It would work.
My neighbors around Morton Square Park are not for building any school adjacent to Morton Square Park. The logistics at this time would appear to favor only a school configuration between Monroe and Perry Avenues. South of Morton Square Park is a local historic district. To the North, it would seem that a vacation of streets would be necessary. To go east or west would require some type of closure of Monroe or Perry which I think would affect fire response times as well other traffic issues similar to the current Kellar School configuration.
What happened to the bonding ability from the PBC? Are schools being built with Health Life Safety Bond monies? Other monies?
CJ: Would you be able to put into perspective (probably again), what amount of acreage on a one-level or multilevel school would be required for a 120,000 sq ft facility? How would a neighborhood estimate the acreage in a block to estimate the total acreage needed for such a school in their neighborhood?
Chef — I’ve updated my post to include a link to Katlack’s handout. I think he’s the one you’re thinking of who advocated acquiring property south of GOS. Here’s the link again:
Katlack Proposal
Thanks, CJ. He had a sight plan drawn to go with it. Quite thought out & impressive. I would like to think this is one of the better options and it would have cost less to buyout that block across Frye than the Prospect properties (based on what Steve said the asking price for two properties that were for sale). Don’t think the city would close Frye, but teacher & crossing guard supervision for recess across Frye should be sufficient. Better than crossing Prospect.
It is sad that now neighborhoods are fighting against each other for a school site, East Bluff, North End, and valley. Is it the plan of the PPS to divide and conquer parts of the city? I hope not. I will not be a part of an effort to divide our neighborhoods. We do not need to be “sandbagged”. H.Hein was right. The park issue is a dead issue and we were instructed that the past was not to be discussed.
Also why shoot down someone that proposed to build 2 smaller schools? It would be a great idea. I question the stance of Mr. McMillan.
Marty,
I would suggest that the East Bluff leaders host a meeting with valley leaders to hammer out details of a compromise to present a unified suggestion. This eliminates the conflict. The park site can only attempt to come onto the table if the neighborhoods divide. Which might be strategy or unintentional, I don’t know.
Marty: You are well aware that there is valley support for a new school to be built at the present glen oak site. There is not valley support for a school built adjacent to Morton Square Park. Paul’s idea is on the correct path — let’s support each neighborhood and get the job done correctly.