Decision to close Intermediate School tabled to Nov. 9
Emotions were high but the discussion was civil at a special meeting of the Greene County board of education at the Intermediate School in Grand Junction Wednesday evening. An overflow crowd of about 125 persons attended the meeting, which was called to hear public comment and then make a decision on superintendent Tim Christensen’s recommendation to close the building at the end of the current school year.
After nearly two hours of comment, the board tabled making a decision and scheduled another special meeting for next Wednesday at 5:30 pm.
Christensen first presented budget information that led to the recommendation. The district finished the 2014-15 school year with a $244,282 negative unspent balance. The explanation of “negative unspent balance” is complex and refers not to the district’s bank balance (as in a household budget), but to what the state Department of Education allows each district to spend. The district “overspent” what the state allowed; the district still has in excess of $200,000 in the bank.
The district presented a two-year plan to the state’s School Budget Review Committee that included budget cuts in effect this school year. The SBRC accepted the plan, but a requirement is that the district submit a continuing plan to maintain a positive unspent balance in future years.
The plan is dependent on the district’s future budget, which is dependent on certified enrollment.
School districts across the state figure their certified enrollment on Oct. 15. The 2016-17 certified enrollment at Greene County Schools is 50 students fewer than last year, resulting in a projected loss of $330,000 in the state’s per pupil funding.
The school board is “under the gun” to make a decision because a budget must be presented to the SBRC by Nov. 10. The SBRC can extend the deadline in extenuating circumstances, but Christensen said he hadn’t had to ask for an extension before and he doesn’t know if one would be granted.
Christensen offered five suggestions to save money: reduce teachers; eliminate vocational programs (the state requires four areas, Greene County has more than 10); limit student access to college credit classes (for which tuition is paid by the district); share staff with other districts (superintendent, transportation director, curriculum director, business manager, for example; or close a building.
Closing the Intermediate School is Christensen’s recommendation. The 1915 building houses grades 4-6. Closing the building would require that the classroom space proposed to be added to the elementary school as part of the failed bond proposal be completed using funds now available. Fourth graders would attend there, and fifth and sixth graders would move into the middle school in Jefferson.
It might be necessary to use portable classrooms at the middle school to accommodate all the students. Maximum enrollment in recent years there was 343 in 2010-11 (Jefferson-Scranton grades 5-8). The total projected for 2017-18 is 360.
According to Christensen, closing the building would allow reducing staff by one administrator, one custodian and one guidance counselor for a savings of $224,000; savings in utilities of $75,703; and savings in transportation of $33,480. Total savings would be $333,183.
The elementary addition is estimated at $1.4 million with another $90,000 to $100,000 in professional fees. Christensen provided a range of $19,000 to $25,850 in annual cost for portable classroom space, should that be needed. Those costs would come from the district’s physical plant and equipment levy and money from the 1-cent sales tax, not the school’s general fund.
He suggested that the three-story portion of the building be razed (as was done in Scranton and Rippey). The remaining one-story portion, including the gym, could be sold to the city of Grand Junction for $1, sold to a suitable buyer (with consultation with the Grand Junction city council on the intention of the buyer), or demolished. Christensen listed those options in his order of preference.
Christensen’s presentation lasted about 10 minutes. Hard copy of his PowerPoint® slides was made available after the meeting at the request of audience member Denny Lautner.
In the next 90 minutes, 23 persons addressed the board. Some had specific questions about the proposal and about the failed bond referendum (which also would have resulted in closing the building). Others vented frustration or anger about the relationship between the former East Greene and Jefferson-Scranton districts, now functioning as the Greene County district.
Gail Rueter of Grand Junction asked if enrollment trends had been considered in planning for new high school classrooms, remembering a Shive-Hattery consultant predicting years ago that in 40 years the entire Greene County enrollment would fit in the current high school.
Christensen answered that the proposed classrooms would be more suitable for 21st Century education. Board member Sam Harding said that having grades 5-12 on one campus would allow for more flexibility in combining teaching assignments as enrollment declines.
James Holz of Grand Junction said he understands numbers suggest a school should be closed, but he thinks the Intermediate Schools is a political pawn. “If we close down this school, we get temp classrooms in Jefferson, and that’s one reason you’ll use for a bond, which the school board will not compromise on,” he said.
He said the school board sent out questionnaires after the failed referendum but didn’t listen to the answers. One board member had suggested taking the gym out of the proposal for a $15 million project, but other board members wouldn’t think of it. He suggested a phased plan, with classrooms now, a gym in five years, and geothermal heating/cooling after another seven years. “I think if you’d come up with a better plan now instead of being reactionary. If you’d be more forward thinking, it would better for everything. You wouldn’t have to spend money on portable classrooms. You’d get a bond. You just need a little compromise.”
Holz drew applause when he said, “Grand Junction voted 85 percent ‘no’ against the bond. As a Grand Junction resident and a voter, this feels reactionary. We voted ‘no’, so you’re going to close down our school and put us in Jefferson. In the future, I think you need a better plan.”
Former Grand Junction mayor Gerold Herrick said “it seems like you’re kind of ramming it down our throat…. It seems like Jefferson fights Grand Junction. You don’t want to work with us at all.”
Board member Ashley Johnston, a former East Greene board member, noted that she and her husband are East Greene graduates, and her mother and mother-in-law have been longtime school employees. “I know a lot of people feel like we’re retaliating against the community because the bond didn’t pass. And I understand why you feel that. This is not good timing. But we’re down 50 students and we have a problem.
“I understand. I don’t want this building to close either…. I have a lot of emotion to this community and to this building. I’ve really struggled the last couple of weeks about what we’re going to do, what a good solution to this is. I can’t come up with anything.”
She shared advice she was given recently by another former East Greene board member. “Being a board member is tough, but really it’s not, because at the end of the day all you have to do is what’s best for kids, in your heart. Take politics out. Take emotions out, and do what you feel is best for kids.
“Unfortunately, if we don’t do this, we’re going to have to cut teachers and cut programs and that’s not what’s best for kids,” Johnston said.
Tim Bardole, who was on the East Greene board for 16 years until it dissolved with consolidation of the two districts, was critical of the Greene County board. He said the Intermediate School “is very functional as a school building.”
Bardole said he heard before the last bond issue referendum rumors among school employees that if the referendum didn’t pass “they were going to close Junction and use portable classrooms and cram everybody in over there.”
He said the decrease in enrollment shouldn’t have been a surprise in mid-October, and that he was concerned that only one option was given. “It’s concerning. There are always options. Some might not be as good and some might be better, but for a board to make this type of decision, and only given one option….. I never remember a time that we had to make a decision, especially a big one, that we didn’t have at least two and maybe three options,” Bardole said. He was at the Oct. 19 meeting and said he was concerned that the board hadn’t asked more questions that night.
“There are things that can be done. Bring the bond issue down, and make it all about education to start with, and don’t worry about the other stuff,” he said.
Former East Greene board president Marc Hoffman also spoke. Bob Ausberger of Jefferson had suggested the board delay its vote and create a task force to develop a plan to treat the building as an asset, rather than a liability. Hoffman said he agreed with that. He asked if a building study has been done to determine the best that can be done with the money available. He said closing a building may seem like an obvious answer, “but sometimes a third party has some insight when you just can’t see the forest for the trees.”
Hoffman also suggested an independent study to look at enrollment trends to be sure the proposal being considered for the 5-12 campus isn’t more space than will be needed. “I hate to see you hold a building that’s going to hold twice as many students as you’re going to have,” he said.
“I know that you’re on a timetable and you have to deal with this, but I think the faculty, the staff and the tax base in East Greene deserves more than the 30 days notice we’ve been given for this,” Hoffman said.
Hoffman also mentioned that many East Greene voters claim the district is attempting “double bonding,” that taxpayers in the former EG district are already paying a bond issue for work done in the past five years on the school building there, and that they don’t want to take on a second bond for proposed work in Jefferson.
Greene County board member Sam Harding answered that the bonds for that work and the last addition at the elementary school are being paid for with revenue from the one-cent sales tax, not a property tax levy.
At the meeting Christensen also clarified that new developments like the proposed Beaver Creek Windpark add to the tax base in the district, but that doesn’t translate into added revenue for the school. He said what the state allows a district to spend – the spending authority – is based only on enrollment. “There are increased tax dollars coming to Greene County, but it’s about spending authority. The more tax money coming in, that evens the load and lowers people’s property tax. That doesn’t give us more money to spend,” he said.
There were emotional statements about the ways closing a school can negatively impact a community, with Anita Rowe of Rippey saying that “crap moves in” when a town loses the buffer created by a school. “I fought for my town. For the love of God, fight for yours, because you don’t want what we’ve got in Rippey,” she said.
Pat Fields of Paton, whose daughters are open enrolled to Greene County, garnered applause midway in the meeting when explained what he sees as the job of a school board. “I want to thank the board for their job. They’re not here to make you mad or close the school. It’s not their job to make sure a community stays together. That’s the community’s job,” he said.
“Towns survive, even though a school closes. It’s bad, and nobody likes it, but that’s the reality of what we’re facing. I want to thank the board for doing their job. They’re doing a job no one else wants to, and they’re doing it with the best intentions of the kids, and that’s first and foremost.
“I’m sorry, Grand Junction. This was put in motion years ago. They didn’t neglect the Grand Junction building to purposely close it and bring the kids to Jefferson. That started years ago. It’s just the reality of small town Iowa. All I’m saying is ‘give them a break.’ It’s a money thing. They’re doing the best they can,” Fields said.
Dr Steve Karber, who was a co-chair of the Pay It Forward committee that promoted the bond issue and graduated from East Greene, encouraged a larger sense of community. “We have to come together, to think of ourselves as one community. We’ve got to get rid of rivalries and figure out how to come together…. We’ve got to come together constructively to decide together what to do.
“I understand this is a loss, and a lot of us are angry right now. We have to go through a mourning, but tomorrow we have to figure out how to go forward…. I encourage you all to try to meet constructively, and try to come together and solve this together,” he said.
Along with needing a budget to present to the SBRC next week, another reason for a quick decision on closing the Grand Junction building was to be able to start the process of building the needed addition on the elementary school. The timeline is very tight for completion by mid-August.
Late in the meeting Tim Bardole suggested the board vote to move forward with the elementary addition but table a decision on the Grand Junction building. Harding reminded him that that would not provide the savings needed in the general fund.
A decision on Christensen’s recommendation to close the Intermediate School was tabled. The board will meet next Thursday, Nov. 9, at 5:30 pm at the administration building in Jefferson. A decision will be made then.
*For more information on school funding in Iowa, click here for an Iowa Department of Education brief on the subject.
