10/08/07 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETINGOCTOBER 8, 2007 Center. The Board strongly believes that it is not an appropriate use of very limited public education funds to maintain old buildings that do not best serve student’s educational needs. When considering the renovation or replacement of Marquette, it was important to the Board to recognize that three South Bend schools from the same time period have already been designated as historical landmarks and have been or are planned to be preserved. These three are Jefferson Intermediate Center, Madison Primary Center, and Monroe Primary Center. While the Board recognizes the importance of maintaining and renovating some of their old facilities, they also understand that the preservation of these buildings increased the cost to the school corporation taxpayers. They further understand that previous historical designations have presented challenges in following the proposed construction calendar due to the numerous discussions and approvals that must be received. Our experience in working with the Historical Preservation Commission has shown them to be less than flexible in issuing certificates of appropriateness causing an undue burden on both the school corporation and the taxpayer. The Board believes that the property taxpayers in the school district expect their school taxes to be devoted to the educational needs of our students, not to the maintenance of old buildings. When making the decision as to whether to renovate or replace a school, the Board must consider many issues other than simply, “Can the school be renovated?” Most buildings can be renovated; however, renovation may not be the most advantageous decision. In this particular situation, the cost of renovating Marquette to serve the needs of the children would actually cost more than a new facility. In addition, the Board must consider: 1) the disruption of the educational process, 2) the costs of moving children to another facility or the cost of portable classrooms, and 3” the safety and health of the children if children are kept in the building during construction. In Marquette’s situation, moving students to another facility is not an option as another building is not available. In addition, the Board must look at the building’s ability to meet the instructional need of the teachers and students. Classroom size is critical. New facilities design classrooms of approximately one thousand square feet. This allows for additional storage space in the classroom, as well as for additional instructional space to accommodate various groupings and activities that are now common within our classrooms. Classroom configuration is also crucial. New construction attempts to create square classrooms. This maximizes the teacher proximity to the students both for instructional and behavior reasons. Renovated facilities often result in elongated classrooms where teacher proximity is not good. This would be the case at Marquette due to the limited size of the current classrooms. New schools also provide other instructional spaces such as large group instruction spaces where teachers can pull several classes together for special programs and activities. The students and community of Marquette Primary Center deserve equity. They deserve a new school. It is important to understand that with the help of outside consultants working side-by-side with our administrative staff, the Board has decided that renovation of Marquette School is not financially or educationally appropriate. The Board is committed to the construction of a new school. Whether or not they are allowed to build on the existing site is the question that is before this council. There will be no renovated Marquette Primary Center. That decision has already been made by the School Board. The question that remains is, “Will the new Marquette Primary Center be located in the current neighborhood or will it be forced to be located on another site, outside of the neighborhood? Dr. Zimmerman stated that a vote “yes” to historical landmark designation means no Marquette School at 1905 College Street. A vote “yes” denies the community their right to decide the future of Marquette. A vote “yes” jeopardizes the building projects at Monroe Primary Center, Clay High School, and Washington High School. A vote “yes” denies educational equity for the Marquette students and community. A vote “yes” eliminates the use of the existing site for a school resulting in the need to identify a new site outside the existing neighborhood for a new school. A vote “yes” would lead to a vacated school building which may contribute to the deterioration of the neighborhood. A vote “yes” will inhibit the School Board’s commitment to fostering neighborhood schools. A vote “yes” will necessitate the School Board to reconsider its decision to place a Montessori program at the Marquette School. Dr. Zimmerman advised that a vote “no” to the Historical Landmark Designation at Marquette will allow the taxpayer and voters in South Bend to make the decision on construction of a new Marquette via the current remonstrance- petition process. He noted three questions: What is best for students? What is best for the neighborhood? What is best for the taxpayers? A vote “no” on the ordinance establishing historical landmark status to Marquette and allow the voter and taxpayers to 13