|
By Brenda Erdahl
May 20, 2008
Opponents of a suggestion that the Annandale School District no longer
use the middle school's 1922
building to teach children had their say at a special school board
meeting Thursday, May 15. Of a roomful of citizens, more than 10
expressed opinions about a Facilities Task Force recommendation to
either tear down the historical building or offer it to a group of
community members to preserve as they see fit. The meeting was the
second time board members officially addressed the report, which has
been causing so much debate. It was presented to them for the first time
at their regular board meeting on Monday, April 28, and no decision has
been made whether to go forward with the recommendations. They took no
action again Thursday night, although Supt. Steve Niklaus recommended
they consider settling on an architect soon so they can offer a more
accurate picture of cost. The board could go to the voters with a bond
referendum as soon as December, and if they do, Niklaus would like a
decision by early August on what the final project would entail. The
task force, which was made up of a selection of community volunteers,
was put together to study the district's facility needs. The report's
recommendations included a complete renovation of Bendix Elementary to
make it a more desirable place for parents to send their children. They
also talked about building new athletic facilities and putting a new
roof on the high school. The task force's recommendation regarding the
middle school was to begin phasing out use of the current AMS, starting
with the 1922 building,
as part of a long-range plan to move to a bigger site. The main reasons
were, No. 1, that the site is not only much smaller than the state
recommends for a school of that size, it is landlocked with no room for
expansion. No. 2, the cost to renovate the
1922 building would be $1.2 million to $2 million more than to
simply replace it. Board members endured accusations that they have been
bad stewards of taxpayer dollars for letting the
1922 building become so rundown and that the numbers they quoted
regarding cost were misleading. "If we are guilty of anything, it is
being too conservative, too cheap," Niklaus said after everyone had said
their piece. He explained how the board's goal had been to put off any
major improvements until after the mortgage on the high school was paid
off. That debt will be gone in 2009. As for misleading figures, "these
people worked very hard on these numbers. They worked with Wold
(Architects) and even went and got a second opinion to make sure they
were right. The idea that the numbers were misleading is unfair," he
said. More than one speaker suggested the district intentionally
neglected maintenance issues on the
1922 building because the intent for years has been to phase out
the old building. Niklaus did not deny that that end has been on the
minds of school officials for a long time. It started in 1991, the same
year the high school was built, when the state performed a series of
detailed inspections on educational facilities as a result of a string
of fires in Minnesota schools. Annandale was one of the first on the
list to be inspected. "We thought they were going in alphabetical order,
but found out it was because we had a
1922 building," Niklaus said. The fire marshal at that time
predicted that the state would not allow the district to use the '22
building for more than three more years. "That state fire marshal said
we would have to demolish it. That was not a popular idea. So we decided
to study our options in detail," he said. Eventually the fire codes
started to change, and the fire marshal said if the district installed
sprinklers throughout the building they could continue to use it, except
for rooms on deadend hallways, which present too much of a fire hazard,
Niklaus said. At that time the third floor was closed off because it was
not handicapped accessible. The school board at the time hesitated to
spend a lot of money on an elevator, reasoning that if they did that,
they would want to get everything up to code and that would cost a lot
more, Niklaus said. In the end, the task force at that time decided it
was best to wait. Then the auditorium came along and the task force for
that project again recommended retiring the
1922 building. In 2004-2005, another task force made the same
recommendation, but the decision was to wait until an operating levy was
approved because without money to operate the schools, everything else
was worthless. Other speakers addressed worries that the numbers spoken
of - specifically the $1.2 million to $2 million more to renovate the
old '22 than to demolish it - were "misleading." "Looking at the $1.2
million to $2 million figures is like comparing apples to oranges,"
Elizabeth Cabalka said. "It's comparing completely gutting the building
to tearing it down and replacing it. It doesn't reflect just doing the
deferred maintenance." Basic maintenance would have to include new
windows, tuck pointing, a new roof, a new heating, cooling and air
exchange system, the addition of an elevator and a lift into the lower
gym. But if it were renovated, the task force would also recommend
putting a commons area and cafeteria in the old building because the
current cafeteria is too small, lacks windows, up-to-date equipment and
appropriate airflow, which would increase the basic maintenance costs to
the $1.2 million to $2 million more they spoke of, Niklaus said. Nancy
Hable, speaking on behalf of Amy Sparks, who couldn't attend the
meeting, explained Sparks' reasons for wanting to keep the
1922 building as a place for children to learn. Her reasons
reflected those of several others who spoke that night as well. She
cited the middle school's location in the center of town as one of its
greatest attributes, suggesting the school is a hub for the community
and if it goes, downtown would suffer as well. Ironically, the task
force saw its location as its greatest fault. The middle school sits on
11 acres of land that is surrounded by homes, allowing no room to
expand. The state recommendation for a school of AMS's size is 25 to 35
acres. Its central location also allows students to walk to the bowling
alley for physical education and the Snooty Fox Gallery for art class,
and it is central for students living withing city limits to walk or
bike to school, Sparks said. Obesity is the greatest threat for
children, according to the Center for Disease Control, she added.
Keeping the school centralized promotes walking to school and the
physical health of the students. "Many of us are willing to roll up our
sleeves and partner with the school to help renovate the site," she
said. Throughout the debate a minority struggled to bring focus back to
what they felt should be a priority even above the '22 building, and
that is addressing the lack of walls, doors, windows and pedestrian
safety at Bendix Elementary. "This is where kids learn how to read,
learn how to write, learn how to learn and Bendix isn't a good place for
that," said task force member Jeff Lundquist. "Parents will take their
kids elsewhere if they see it as substandard." Among the crowd was Karla
Wold, the mother of an elementary student, who agreed with Lundquist. "I
understand your passion to save the
1922 building, but I have to speak to what I am passionate about.
I want to make sure we don't lose focus at Bendix," she said.
"Elementary is a critical time for kids to decide if they like school or
not." Before they adjourned, school board members decided they need to
have another special meeting to discuss the task force recommendations
in further detail among themselves before making any decisions. They
were to set the date at their regular meeting Monday, May 19.
|