CCMIN120694 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mike Dennis, 3768 Nichole Avenue, repreSentative of S.O.S., believed that the School District program for expanding its elementary schOols is seriously flawed in prioritization and location. He believed the next site should be Del Prado, not Stoneridge. He proposes a campaign to inform the general public and to slow the District's efforts to sell the Del Prado site. He further proposed a community-wide poll to determine attitudes on a new school bond and residents' interest in a school site selection Committee for the next elementary school. S.O.S. does not believe the Stoneridge site is needed. He indicated a budget of $40,000 is proposed for S.O.S. to cover the costs of polling, demographic review, bond fund analysis, and newspaper advertisements. He urges cooperation Of all parties. Christine Bourg, 4512 Second Street, member of General Plan Steering Committee and teacher at Walnut Grove, indicated her surprise at the School District plan to keep Walnut Grove at 850-900 students. She related the problems with overcrowding. She indicated the preference to have fewer students rather than money for materials. Parents are willing to donate money for materials and equipment, but can't donate for new schools. She urged the School Board to wait to hear the results of the proposed survey anc~ delay building on the Stoneridge site. She believe it is a bad location on the outskirts of town. The Del Prado site has students ready to attend and is centrally located. She described problems with commuting to Walnut Grove and children having to cross Hopyard Road. She further requested the School Board to consider teacher input in the school site process. Judy Markolf, 3164 Thisfiedown Court, member of the School Board, indicated the question is not a simple trade of one school site for another. She stated that the school impact fee agreement which was negotiated with the developers requires the School District to seek State funding for new schools. She believed using the Del Prado site would nullify the agreement. Ms. Markolf stated that reducing enrollment at DonIon and Walnut Grove would not allow qualification for State funding. If the School District does not get State funding, there will not be enough money to build all three proposed schools. A bond issue would be required to provide the funding. Mr. Tarver indicated he was part of the negotiations and a.~reed there is a requirement to li~tvc gutnl faith ~ffort to get State funding. He did not believe tl~at the agreement required the District to put the City in a bad position in the way of services for schools in order to get that funding. He also stated that the schools were to be built when needed, not ahead of the student enrollment. Mr. Roush agreed the agreement required a good faith effort to obtain State funding, but did not recall a requirement that schools be overcrowded in order to accomplish that. Ms. Markolfrequested the City Attorney to review the agreement, because there was also a provision that the School District would not lower the enrollment that exists in the District. 12/06/94 - ll -