Advertisement

Archive for Saturday, December 3, 2011

New building to combine Kennedy, N.Y. schools would face a complicated path

In this 2010 file photo, students leave New York School in Lawrence. A school consolidation proposal would see  Kennedy School and New York School closed, and its students enrolled together in a new school.

In this 2010 file photo, students leave New York School in Lawrence. A school consolidation proposal would see Kennedy School and New York School closed, and its students enrolled together in a new school.

December 3, 2011

Advertisement

Scenarios for school consolidation

Here are four scenarios for school consolidation set to be discussed Monday evening by the Central and East Lawrence Elementary School Consolidation Working Group, which meets at 7 p.m. at Lawrence school district headquarters, 110 McDonald Drive:

• Representatives from Hillcrest School, 1045 Hilltop Drive, suggest expanding Hillcrest so it could accept students from Sunset Hill School, 901 Schwarz Road. Other Sunset Hill students would go to Quail Run School, 1130 Inverness Drive.

• Representatives from Sunset Hill propose expanding Sunset Hill so that it could handle up to 100 Hillcrest students, plus some others from Sunflower School. Closing would be Pinckney School, 810 W. Sixth St., with its students moving to Hillcrest.

• Representatives from Kennedy School, 1605 Davis Road, call for closing both Kennedy and New York School, 936 N.Y., with the bulk of their students attending a new school built at or adjacent to the former East Heights School, 1430 Haskell Ave. Also proposed: Combine Hillcrest and Sunset Hill at the Sunset Hill site, either in an expanded or new building.

• Representatives from Pinckney also suggest combining Hillcrest and Sunset Hill at an expanded Sunset Hill, and combining Kennedy and New York in a new building at an expanded East Heights location. An alternative: New York would close, sending its students to Pinckney and Kennedy; Kennedy’s early-childhood program would shift either to New York or Hillcrest.

(Note: Representatives from Cordley and New York schools have not submitted proposals for group consideration.)

Folks representing Kennedy School have an idea for consolidating schools, taking care of kids and keeping property taxes level.

All it would take is closing their school, closing New York School, and moving the bulk of the students into a new school — one that likely would be best suited for land that would be exchanged with the Boys and Girls Club of Lawrence, stretch into some city-owned property nearby and perhaps include acquisition of a couple of private residences and their lots at the southeast corner of 15th Street and Haskell Avenue.

All with anticipated voter approval of a bond issue.

“It’s tough to make decisions based on what might happen,” concedes Tim Laurent, who has a child at Kennedy and serves as a representative on the Central and East Lawrence Elementary School Consolidation Working Group. “I don’t know that this is the answer … but this is what we thought would be best for the kids.”

The complicated scenario is among four scheduled to be discussed Monday night by members of the working group, an advisory panel charged by the Lawrence school board to recommend a plan for reducing a list of six elementary schools to either three or four within the next couple of years. The plan is due to the board by the end of January.

And while the concept of closing two schools while building a new one isn’t new — it received attention a year ago during meetings of the Lawrence Elementary School Facility Vision Task Force, which worked to balance elementary needs against the district’s financial restraints — the source of support for the latest idea is new.

Laurent and other group representatives from the Kennedy community are the ones suggesting that the board close their school to make way for a new, larger one that would be able to provide long-term security and resources and educational opportunities for their kids and those who would enroll in the decades ahead.

As the district plans for a future where needs continue to mount and budgets are expected to shrink, the “Kennedy Proposal” represents a significant achievement and encouraging step forward, said Mark Bradford, board president.

“It’s in the right direction,” Bradford said.

Looking ahead

Just where such plans might lead — and precisely what site, if any, might be identified — for a proposed new school serving the Kennedy and New York communities remains undetermined. Two possibilities are behind the proposal:

• Raze the existing East Heights building, at the northeast corner of 15th and Haskell, and build a new one there. An architect already has deemed the site possible, but far from optimal. Members of the working group have noted that 4.5-acre site would be relatively small in comparison to those for other “three-section” schools in the district, which are on sites ranging from eight to 12 acres. Without more space, traffic and parking problems could continue. Equity issues could surface if a playground were too small or gym size compromised. Expanding the site would mean pushing into private property to the north, east or both.

• Acquire property southeast of 15th and Haskell, where up to 12 acres could be assembled for a new school that would provide enough room for about 415 students, or 23 per class. The new school would include the district’s Early Childhood Program, an existing preschool for at-risk kids at Kennedy, 1605 Davis Road.

The second option would take some doing, beginning with a likely “land swap” with the Boys and Girls Club of Lawrence, which owns property at 1520 Haskell Ave. that is now used for the club’s Teen Center.

As envisioned, the swap — in its most generic terms — would involve the district giving up its ownership of the East Heights building and site, which already is being leased by the club and used for an after-school center that serves students from multiple elementary schools. The district would get the Teen Center building and site, and possibly pursue potential use of a portion of Edgewood Park, which is immediately west of the city’s nearby East Lawrence Recreation Center, 1245 E. 15th St.

“If it’s what makes the most sense and best serves kids, we should be flexible to see if we could make it happen,” said Hugh Carter, a Lawrence city commissioner and member of the club’s board of directors. “But there’s a long way to go.”

‘I’m not interested’

Located between the Teen Center and the park, however, is private green space owned by David Frayer, a professor of anthropology at Kansas University. He’s lived at 1500 Haskell Ave. in a 105-year-old home for more than 20 years, and he isn’t at all willing to entertain parting with any or all of his house, his barn or his property.

His 5-acre homestead isn’t going anywhere or to anyone else anytime soon, he said, no matter what financial challenges, capacity concerns, equity goals or long-term plans the district might be dealing with.

“I’m not interested in selling,” said Frayer, who helps mow the lawn of a home next door, a smaller property also discussed preliminarily by the Kennedy group as a potential acquisition target. “I’m not sympathetic to it, and I like my place. I don’t know what they can do to force me out, but it’d be a hassle.”

The folks behind the Kennedy Proposal know their plan wouldn’t be easy, no matter where a new school would be envisioned. Long before the concept would require architectural plans or land acquisition or boundary adjustments or public financing or anything else, the proposal first would need to:

• Become part of the overall recommendation from the entire working group.

• Earn endorsement from the school board.

• Be included in a larger bond issue intended to repair, renovate and expand remaining elementary schools throughout the district — a bond issue that would be expected to hold property taxes steady or perhaps enable a decrease, thanks to earlier school bonds going off the books during the next several years.

“It’s a fresh idea,” said Al Hack, president of the board for the Boys and Girls Club.

“They’re certainly thinking outside the box here,” said Carter, his colleague and city commissioner.

“It’s not: ‘Oh, we’re going down the wrong path.’ It’s not like that at all,” said Bradford, president of the school board. “It sounds encouraging and promising, the kind of concept they’re talking about.”

First things first

The Kennedy Proposal, if nothing else, offers a starting point for the working group, Laurent said. Group members have met six times since early September but have yet to formally discuss a specific plan that would accommodate consolidation.

After Monday night, the group will have four scheduled meetings left.

“We wanted to put something out there so we could start discussing scenarios,” said Laurent, whose wife and two oldest children attended Kennedy, and whose youngest daughter is a fourth-grader there this year. “We feel like it is time to start discussing scenarios.”

The meeting is set for 7 p.m. Monday at district headquarters, 110 McDonald Drive.

Schools reporter Mark Fagan can be reached at 832-7188. Follow him at Twitter.com/MarkFaganLJW.

Comments

Ward 2 years, 4 months ago

Wilbur, sixth street is a sad "new urbanism". It's boxes of consumption in drag with a bit of decoration.

0

oneeye_wilbur 2 years, 4 months ago

If New York were closed, it would make one fine dandy Senior Center and Kennedy used for the Boys and Girls Club.

But neither would happen because:

A. New York is on the east side of town and Lawrence and the New Generation do not want to promote the east side of town ,but rather that god awful new urbanism on 6th Street.

B. Kennedy would never work because when the architects and contractors get done it would end up costing 10s of millions of dollars.

Lawrence is becoming more and more a fake European community.

wilbur has a plan , if in fact, a new school is to be built but will not reveal it on this forum as the moles will run with it, put poison in the gopher hole and then revive the plan later to make the public think it is new.

remember, the last bond issues have all been ill conceived and thus the flops that the taxpayers are paying for. The school board has no imagination, the architects have grandiose plans but in the end, end up with nothing short of mundane.

The teachers will always vote Yes for any school bond issue.

0

irvan moore 2 years, 4 months ago

i don't think that what property owners want is of much importance to the school board

0

BobZyeruncle 2 years, 4 months ago

If the landowner is not willing to part with the targeted property, shouldn't the panel take that into account, or are they willing to take on a property rights battle?

0

George_Braziller 2 years, 4 months ago

Closing New York School would mean that kids in East Lawrence would NEVER attend a school even remotely close to where they actually live. Kids who attend Kennedy would be at Lawrence High School but New York students are going to be at Freestate which is on the other side of town.

0

oneeye_wilbur 2 years, 4 months ago

And wilbur was and has been scoffed at by talking about the past two ill conceived bond issues. This school board is not any more astute than the previous ones.

Lawrence High should never have been added onto or remodeled but instead a new high school on the far east side of town. South should never have been torn down but redone into a Senior Center. Adjacent to a park, a grade school and quite frankly near an aging neigborhood, that might even be acceptable to retirees, i.e. Indian Hills.

Instead Lawrence has an old jail for a Senior Center with free bread handouts.

Lawrence High would have become a junior high and Central HIgh School the Admin offices.Sell the Dairy Barn, the real estate deal was already made profitable on it by the former sellers. The next time around the sale is at a loss.

Just curious about the East Heights proposal. Why has the district been spending money on the exterior if there were plans to bulldoze it?

Why isn't for example, Kennedy being leveled and rebuilt? If the district cannot maintain any of the current buildings better than they have been doing, quite frankly, a resounding NO needs to be sent to the school board>

Will this new grade school be named the Mary Loveland School for Academic Progress (or lack of it?).

Whay say Mr. Fagan , where are the notes on the backdoor political meetings regarding this school issue? Who is really behind this?

And wilbur laughs today all the way to Long John Silvers, reminding everyone that he "told you so" about another bond issue. The teachers will all vote Yes.. They ain't educated very much you know!

0

irvan moore 2 years, 4 months ago

why don't we put grades 1-3 in one building and 4-6 in another building?

0

patkindle 2 years, 4 months ago

the majority of our property taxes already are earmarked for the schools how much more money do they need

closing schools and buiilding new ones reminds me of burning down the barn to get rid of rats

maybe we should just get rid of the rats

0

ResQd 2 years, 4 months ago

I'm also disgusted with all the money that is being spent. I'm all for education, but during these economic times, we must be frugal. Stop spending!

0

solsken66 2 years, 4 months ago

The State of Kansas needs to slowly resume increasing school funding to previous year levels in the past before the economic downturn. The state is showing increases in revenue into the coffer. The money needs to go back to Kansas, not to pay outrageous figures to those who come from other states whom are probably owed something from the current governor.

0

buffalo63 2 years, 4 months ago

Don't you mean the SOUTHEAST CORNER of 15th & Haskell?

0

solsken66 2 years, 4 months ago

Vote No to closing schools. A Yes vote would be promising if a bond was proposed to improve the existing elementary schools. The bond would have to go just towards improving elementary schools; not using the funds for some other project which was not discussed or voted on by the taxpayers of this city. Bigger is not always the beneficial answer.

0

wprop 2 years, 4 months ago

pitiful ....build a mega-school where bullying can run rampant.....Mr. Dull is years behind ....we want small schools, tied to walkable neighborhoods........stealing peoples homes to pad vitaes....so mr. dull can be the super in some white suburb......

0

Amy Heeter 2 years, 4 months ago

This idea is stupid. USE 497 closed East Heights and should not get s redo. New York school is a landmark. People don't want to give up their homes. No more money!

0

Richard Heckler 2 years, 4 months ago

The Lawrence school district has paid $1.73 million to purchase a prime piece of property that would be prominent along the proposed route of the South Lawrence Trafficway. At $22,763.16 per acre for unimproved property. NOT a good deal!

At their Oct. 26 meeting, school board members approved the purchase of 76 acres of farm and pasture ground southeast of Lawrence. The property, near the intersection of East 1750 and North 1300 roads, would be just west of where the South Lawrence Trafficway would connect with the existing Kansas Highway 10 east of Lawrence. (Hmmmmmmmm is this pork barrel spending? Can we say more housing projects))

School district leaders said they did not have a firm plan for the property - ( Why was it bought?)

This purchase cost USD 497 taxpayers $22,763.16 per acre. This was not a good price for land for a new school building. The seller has been appointed to the committees pushing the closing of schools in favor of building new buildings.

IF ANYTHING developers should be donating land because they know parks and public schools nearby make their projects far more valuable as taxpayers are forced to be defacto investors without the dividend check.

0

Number_1_Grandma 2 years, 4 months ago

The dog is still chasing his tail here!

NO, to school consolidation; so to build new schools! Live with what you have or forget it. No more bond issues...this money tree has dried up!

HELL NO TO BUILDING NEW SCHOOLS!

0

Richard Heckler 2 years, 4 months ago

School Priorities

To the editor:

Let me get this right. The Lawrence school district approved funds for two sports stadiums to be built ($400,000 each) and yet Superintendent Rick Doll discusses teachers not having items they need (Journal-World, page 1A, Oct. 19)? What’s wrong with this picture?

I assumed children went to school to be educated, not to play sports in luxurious facilities. After reading Chuck Woodling’s description of the Free State facilities in his Oct. 20 column, I was disappointed. I understand some of the funds for Free State came from a private donor. Fine. But to me it seems like it’s a matter of “keeping up the with Joneses” and perpetuating a misconception of what is really important in life.

I know sports are important to a lot of kids. Playing a sport does benefit our youths in several ways. Realistically, how many kids are going to play sports professionally? Or even in college? Yet every child needs a solid education. To my way of thinking, the priorities are turned around. It’s quite unsettling. http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/oct/22/school-priorities/#c1027186 =========================================

New buildings do not improve performance nor necessarily attract new business. What does attract new business and new long term economic growth is an excellent public school education system so I read. We have the enough buildings and as far as I know excellent teachers. This should be the focus NOT the constant spending of tax dollars on new buildings that are not necessary.

0

Richard Heckler 2 years, 4 months ago

Next: *What do you think of a proposed 3-mill property tax increase for Lawrence schools? 74% said it is too much. This money cannot be used for salaries or operations. http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2007/jul/what_do_you_think_proposed_3mill_property_tax_incr/

*Teacher Salary Support Would you favor a sales tax increase to provide more money for Lawrence teacher salaries? 80% or 4,204 said yes. ( If we are allowed to do so) http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2003/mar/teacher_salaries/

0

Richard Heckler 2 years, 4 months ago

Or no taxes need to increase and use all of the existing schools USD 497 owns. Yes do not build new larger schools that in fact may not save USD 497 one thin dime.

I have strong reservations on this "planning for the future" agenda when no one has any idea what the future will bring. Lawrence has dropped over 5000 in population according to local news.

Some things to think about:

USD 497 budgets $4-4.5 million to bus students. The district is charged at a daily rate depending on how many students use the transportation.

*Parents would you be willing to find other means to get your students to school IF it meant keeping all the schools open, allowing more students to walk to school and retaining important subject matter/programs?

Think car pooling,family members ,walking and biking.

USD 497 says it needs $3 million. Can WE come up with $3 million? Possibly if we make sure we get our kids to school with fewer buses.

Next: How should the school district pay for a $16.5 million maintenance backlog in elementary schools? 61% said pay as they go, slowly if needed. This can be accomplished without a bond issue or increasing taxes. It would require devoting $7,000,000 a year for 3 years from existing capital outlay tax dollar sources. This is prudent spending. http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2007/o/how_should_school_district_pay_20_million_maintena/

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.