As required by the Consent Decree:
The school board discussed a recommendation on the north-side-seats issue in closed session at a special board meeting Monday night but did not take action. It will likely do so at its Sept. 15 board meeting.
The committee looking at options for adding those elementary seats narrowed its choices to two – rebuilding Washington Elementary School and adding a wing to Garden Hills Elementary School; or establishing a Great Campus program, in which Stratton Elementary School, the Early Childhood Center and the Columbia Center would form a pre-kindergarten-through-eighth-grade campus, integrated by architecture and innovative educational programs. The committee recently made its recommendation to the board.
The district's federal consent decree requires it to make a good-faith effort to add two elementary strands – two classrooms at each grade level from kindergarten through fifth grade – in north Champaign.
Discuss.
The district's federal consent decree requires it to make a good-faith effort to add two elementary strands – two classrooms at each grade level from kindergarten through fifth grade – in north Champaign.
Even if there is no student growth in the district and no need for new strands?
"Even if there is no student growth in the district and no need for new strands?"
A consent decree is a response to a complaint. The fact that this consent decree contained this particular remedy implies that there was a pre-existing need or concern alleged in the original complaint, which this action would at least tacitly acknowledge and address.
New school by Parkland, close Carrie Busey? Does that help the plaintiffs?
I hope the legalities of this situation don't overwhelm common sense.
If conditions have changed substantially since the consent decree, I wonder if Unit 4 has gone back to advise of dropping enrollment, etc to try to get some modification to the decree? I realize the Plaintiffs would never accept that, but a good faith effort doesn't mean that what the plaintiffs want necessarily gets done.
About a week ago, Greg Novak posted that he is interested in creating a stronger link between Unit 4 and the city of Champaign planning department. It appears that the time to do this is now. Unless the city comes to a complete turn around and decides that the north part of Champaign south of the freeway is THEEE best place for all future development for family housing, any of the Unit 4 proposals will do nothing to establish walkable neighborhood school configuration because the demographics just are not present nor is the urban design to handle the physical barriers of the streets. This will be more busing. The study of impact fees is 4 years until implementation, which might stimulate such development. So there will be a mismatch of available classroom space and population.
Pattsi Petrie
The consent decree was entered into by the then School Board and plaintiffs in 2002. One of its terms is that the Board must make a good faith effort to add two strands of seats "north of University" . Since then north of University has been defined as a specific area effectively north of University, east of Mattis, south of I-74. Whether or not this is the best point to place a school is not something that the current Board has any option- it is bound by a legal agreement to address this item as stated in the consent decree.
Remember that the Consent Decree was entered into on a voluntary basis - nothing was imposed by the judge on the district. The then Board agreed to do this, and this Board is attempting to carry out their mandate
Greg Novak
It seems like the previous school board really made some poor decisions that tied the hands of the current school board. I do understand the school board has cartons of lemons that it is trying to make lemonade out of. However, if the district doesn't comply with the legal agreement it freely agreed to, it could possibly be extended. So, I think Unit 4 just needs to add the seats and hopefully be done with the consent decree. The great campus proposal sounds like the most solid idea. The north Randolph area will still require busing, but maybe with some good (accelerated, gifted, math/science, foreign language) programs, the district can attract back those who have left for private education. Also, isn't the new alternative high school in that area? Would that be part of the great campus too or is it something different (Columbia replacement)?
Greg Novak's information underlines my concerns and encouragement to work with the city of Champaign. I understand the illogic of the Consent Degree, which will in essence create a situation for which the degree was to eliminate. Until there is a complete description as to how the educational compound will work and what are the benefits, it is very difficult to make a judgement about the alternatives. There is a tendency these days to do a lot of clustering without a means to take advantage of the possibilities. I often reflect that architecture, urban planning, and landscape architecture are all in the same building, but serendipity is rare.
Pattsi Petrie
So, in short, the taxpayers need to drop 60 million for three consecutive bond schemes for buildings we don't want and don't need all to cater to the whims of a set of parents who don't have kids in the school anymore and their chicago lawyers... And we really think that after the taxpayers bend over and cough up tens if not hundreds of millions that the instigators are going to just walk away from the gravy train? Surely you jest.
Pattsi, I have to disagree with your suggestion of working with the City of Champaign. They are already are having to let a contract to deal with development costs. I fear this will just mean another costly contract.
The Consent Decree is driving this train, not need or $'s. The current Unit #4 Board has its hands completely tied by this. Its ok to complain and I have certainly done my share in meetings, letters, etc. However, I think we are at a stage where the best course of action is to document how this all happend, keep the documentation handy so we and our elected Board members do not step into a similar "pile" at some future time.
To Oil Man--the reason for the suggestion to work with the city of Champaign is to help determine which of the two suggested plans might optimize use of the new facilities, create more walkability, etc. This would be associated with the city's plan related to infill and redevelopment. What if the cluster plan wins approval, which it might because this is the trend, and then the city determines that the Neil Street corridor ought to be developed as a business link between downtown and north Prospect. This is a feasible concept that probably would do a great deal to reconnect these two parts of the community and help bridge the highway barrier. But the concept would, in turn, reduce residential population. On the other hand, the city is refocusing on the Garden Hills area. This could easily generate an increase of school-age children. The city of Champaign has already put improved-housing efforts in the area surrounding Washington.
Pattsi Petrie
The board has to make a good faith effort that they tried to get the buildings built.....................nothing more and doesnt the consent decree end this year?
Lots of good ideas Pattsi however, the City sealed it fate and jacked up all the future improvement costs by poor or NO planning on the North Prospect Development. So we now have a classic "highway line development" with lots of T-intersections and poor traffic patterns with no "out of traffic" designed bus stops. Add to that the I-74 barrier to the rest of the city with no ability to cross safely on foot or bicycle even for adults.
The City of Champaign has shown no past link planning for any of its annexed areas business or residential North of I-74 or West of I-57 except at the new interchange which will promote "green" space development. Maybe there has been good city planning but lousy implementation by our hired and elected as you eluded to in another post. of that I have no knowledge but the end result is pitiful and costly to us taxpayers.
Oil Man--I understand your explanations; nonetheless, I am one of those planners who keeps looking for opportunities. And I see one on the horizon with the infill/impact fees discussion and a new comprehensive plan to be developed and approved. If and only if the general public, Unit 4, the park district, water district, sewage district, MTD, and the surrounding communities become engaged, the planning possibilities could blossom or it could be the "same ole, same ole." When I look at the RPC GIS maps, the development looks like a spread out octopus, no infill between tentacles, and no angle connecting roads.
Pattsi Petrie
Dearest Pattsi:
If I might refresh your memory:
--the vast majority of Garden Hills was built without sidewalks for children (and adults) to walk on. This particular subdivision also suffers frequent and severe flooding when it rains, even if it's only a few inches, not a "gullywasher" or typhoon. "Walkability" is not good, and cannot be easily made to happen, in this subdivision.
--Garden Hills School, for the last few years, has been selected at a level of 50% or less when the kindergarten selection/lottery numbers are reported. Take out the gifted classes at Garden Hills School, and it has less than 50% of its total seats full in all grades. And now we're talking about adding even more seats to an already underselected school?? Why am I the only one who thinks this is completely and utterly nuts?????
--The site for Garden Hills School is 5.7 acres and was undersized when it was donated back in the 1950s. How will we add on to Garden Hills School? Will we build in the park area, which floods (and how and where will we replace this park when we build over it?), or will we buy out long-term homeowners, low-income homeowners, and poor black renters? What will we do if the houses we want are mortgaged for more than they appraise for? (Whose bank will take the loss on those houses, or will we be forced to go to eminent domain to seize them?)
--The consent decree is supposed to be about righting wrongs in traditionally African-American neighborhoods. If you will recall from July, when the News-Gazette began a series of stories about Garden Hills, in the 2000 census, Garden Hills is 50% white and approximately 35% African-American. What will it be in the 2010 census? Dunno, but I will be surprised if it reaches an African-American majority.
While I must congratulate the lawyers and the plaintiffs on the fine art they have done propagandizing that Garden Hills is a "traditionally AA neighborhood", the reality is quite different. African-American families have been moving to the area bounded by John, Mattis, Duncan, and Windsor Roads. If the plaintiffs and their attorneys truly were as smart as they like to think they are, they would be protecting Carrie Busey, Robeson, and Kenwood Schools, and they would ditch Garden Hills (if they want to protect Washington because it is in the traditionally African-American neighborhood, hey, I'm cool with that. Just be honest about your reasons.).
I am left with the unfortunate suspicion that the decision has been made to not be logical and do the "Great Campus"; instead, we will go with the worse option and try to do something at Garden Hills. (I'm all in favor of doing something at Washington, but I also think that school needs a new location, perhaps on the site at N. 4th and Bradley).
And God, I hope I'm wrong, and that I have totally misread this situation.
But if I'm right, and the worst decision is made, I'm going to be voting against the school sales tax. I'm not going to give more money for idiotic, hare-brained schemes like this.
One who hopes t---thanks for inside insight. I hope that the members of Unit 4 school board will read and process what you have shared. I am not arguing for any particular option. My major concern is that this decision be done in light of what the city of Champaign is discussing as part of the new comprehensive plan. The Garden Hills area, indeed, does have many design and social problems that were given a great deal of sunshine via the N-G series. Once this information was more generally in the public domain, one would expect the city to act accordingly.
Pattsi Petrie
Keep looking for opportunities pattsi however at some point these governmental bodies have to capitolize on some.
They need to start being concerned about the Holiday Park area,,,I just cut thru there at lunch and the CPD are swarming all around the neighborhood and around Centennial,,,,
Dear Bruce:
Holiday Park is within the area I delineated (Mattis, John, Duncan, Windsor), and Kenwood School is within Holiday Park.
Mayor Schweighart was quoted at some point over the last two years as referring to Holiday Park as "a slum". It was part of a News-Gazette story about real estate values and that neighborhood.
That area has definitely changed in the almost 20 years I've lived here in Champaign, and unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be changing for the better. My child was walking home from a friend's house last Saturday night and was accosted by 3 other youths in front of Centennial High School. He had no money on him, so he couldn't be robbed, and he referred to the accosters as "wannabes" because he had his cell phone out (talking to me on it as I drove towards him; I got to hear the "transaction" going down) and they didn't grab it and run off.
In some hopefully positive news, Columbia School is closing and Imani Bazzell was quoted in the paper talking about the importance of "programs, not seats", so I am praying that the best choice was made and Stratton will be turned into a K-8 school. Not holding my breath, but trying to stay hopeful until the next school board meeting...
First time I've ever posted on here, so be nice...
I'm a Savoy parent with a child who will be entering kindergarten in 2009. We built our home in Savoy in 2001, hearing lots of "soon there's going to be a school here!" talk at that time... but still waiting on that, and it seems like we'll be waiting for a long time. We've seen lots of great families leave our neighborhood and move to surrounding towns because of the problematic school situation here and our lack of proximity (and thus, choice). We love our neighborhood, but private school can be costly, long bus rides for a kindergarten girl make me very nervous, and the fact that our kids will probably not go to the same school as their best friends next door is just sad... so maybe a move is in our future as well.
I'm wondering how many other parents in Savoy feel the same way... and how many names it would take to have Savoy simply detach itself from Unit 4 and get annexed into Tolono Unit 7...
long bus rides for a kindergarten girl make me very nervous
They shouldn't - according to the NHTSA, school buses are eight times safer than cars. It's the safest way to get your kid to school.
Dear Anon 10:54--
was the talk about the school from your real estate agent, your builder, or your neighbors? Had you lived in Champaign-Urbana for any period of time before you built in Savoy, or did you move here from elsewhere?
It would take many names and at least one election to detach, and honestly, do you think your child would have a shorter bus ride if you were in Unit 7?
An attempt to spin the situation positively would be: "our children will have best friends next door and more best friends at their school (wherever school may be)".
Several thoughts here
One of the problems with "Schools of Choice" in Unit Four is that there is little choice, especially if you are a Proximity B family - ie live more than a mile and a half from an elementary school.
Realators have learned to push the "School of Choice" theme - and since the Family Information Center can only deal with a family AFTER they have officially have a Champaign School District address - more than one new family has been less then happy with their possible options after being told they get their "Choice" by their realator - and I don't blame the realators - they have learned how to work with the system
Too often its been an answer of "your option is school X as that is the only school that currently has an open seat for a student of your race at the grade level that you need". We have a waiting list of African American students at Stratton with open seats there - and waiting lists of non African American students at other buuildings - some of which have open seats as well.
As a resident of Savoy who lives in Prairie Fields - we don't have a neighborhood in no small part due to the fact that our children go to so many schools - so their is very little interaction between students once they get home from school. There was a local Fourth of July parade up on Sunflower that my grandchildren marched in - and while there were 30 odd students they came from 14 different elementary schools
I understand the frustration of Savoy parents and I hope that we can do something to address this problem. Attempting to de annext from Unit 4 would be a major project - as it would require not only the consent of the voters of Savoy - but he approval of the Boards of Education of both Unit 4 and Unit 7 - and might require a district wide referendum. Savoy has contributed its share to Unit Four in more then one way - and it needs to get its due.
My .02
Greg Novak