School Directors Will Limit Closing/Consolidation Options By Next Week
Armstrong School District Superintendent Dr. Stan Chapp asked school board directors at their regular monthly meeting last night to begin eliminating some of the eight proposed school district options recommended by L.R. Kimball architects two weeks ago. He asked for their pros-and-cons, and also if they know of any land available for purchase, due to the fact that all options call for a new junior-high or senior-high school.
by Jonathan Weaver
Time is winding down for local residents to consult their Armstrong School District board representatives about some recent possible school consolidation options.
School Superintendent Stan Chapp directed Board officials to contact him by Friday or Monday, February 20 ‘at the latest’ with their opinions in regard to eight District configurations mapped out by L.R. Kimball architects. The options were laid out nearly two weeks ago and architects requested further input to keep the process going.
Project Manager Brian Hayes was in attendance for their regular meeting last night.
“They are still pretty-broad options. We’re kicking around where students would actually attend, breaking up some of the townships and municipalities. We want to narrow down these options,” Hayes said.
In all the possibilities, architects recommended closing Shannock Valley and Kittanning Township Elementary, Kittanning Jr. High and Ford City Jr.-Sr. High schools, as well as building a new high school to stand with West Shamokin 7-12. Other options include: changing Elderton K-12 into a K-6, building a new junior-senior high, converting Kittanning Senior High into a junior-senior high or even building a new senior high for the entire district.
Board Director Sara Yassem requested more-detailed cost projections from L.R. Kimball architects and Reynolds Construction Management officials. She was also concerned if the remaining $72 million bond money available would be enough to cover any of the building options.
The looming deadline made Board Member Sara Yassem ask for more detailed cost-estimates and also the difference of converting Ford City Jr-Sr. High into strictly a junior high school compared to converting Kittanning Senior High into such, as recommended by architects.
Hayes said Ford City has smaller rooms than Kittanning, but that architects would compare both and present them to the Board at a special meeting as early as next week. The firm also hired to renovate Kittanning, Ford City and Elderton two years ago, Hayes said projections were based on figures calculated at that time and would not ‘drastically’ change cost estimates.
“We said we would refine some of these cost estimates, but they’re not going to sway drastically in one-way or the other that would essentially change the value of that option and make it suddenly cheaper or more-expensive,” Hayes said. “We believe we’re not doing anything different than we did last time around.”
Board Vice-President Chris Choncek said requests for detailed cost-estimates are only a ‘distraction’ from the current brainstorming discussions.
“I understood these to be very good ballpark projections, but they’re ballpark, and they are to cause us to have some discussions and start thinking of the future and what this District might look like in the future,” Choncek said. “I’m not naïve to think that that’s the bottom-line number – it’s going to adjust one-way or the other – but I perceived the purpose of those numbers is for us to start discussing the future and where we need to go – nothing more, nothing less. And I’m comfortable with that.
“That cost is front-and-center in my mind…when we get to that. I don’t think we need to get bogged down and distracted with that right now,” Choncek added.
Board President Joseph Close said he is confident in the architect firm’s projections.
“I got to trust L.R. Kimball that they would give us accurate figures, that if we would send something out-for-bid, that it would come back fairly-close to projected at,” Close said.
Close assured Yassem not to worry if the remaining $72 million bond issue – which was retained by Board directors in a 7-2 vote last night – would be enough to cover construction or renovation costs.
Chapp also asked Board members to contact him if they have any news in regard to available vacant property that would be suitable for building a new school, to which Board Member Stan Berdell said that he has been in contact with a land-owner who owns 66 acres along Route 422 in Manor Township.
The property is said to be near the intersection of 422 and Red Mill Road. Berdell did not want the owner’s name to be released.
“They are very-willing to work with the school district and make the property available at a very, very reasonable price,” Berdell said.
Although water service is available, sewage service would have to be installed by Kittanning officials.
Close and Chapp appreciated the update.
ASD Director of Business Affairs Eric Brandenburg said Gov. Tom Corbett's budget proposal gives the District more subsidy money than last year, but does not account for the District's rising retirement costs.
In other news, Director of Business Affairs Eric Brandenburg told school directors that the District would profit from Gov. Tom Corbett’s recent budget tabulation, but have also lost nearly $2.5 million in subsidy since the 2010-11 school year.
He said the $602,000 in subsidy above last year’s budget will ‘be a wash,’ though, when the District factors in retirement rates and cost projects, which are estimated to be between $650-700,000.
“The ‘retirement’ is the killer – when it’s going up 3-4 percent a year, it’s just outrageous amounts of money,” Brandenburg said. “It puts us in a bad situation.”
Armstrong is projected to receive the same amount of basic education subsidy as last year – $28 million – and an increase in transportation subsidy – since the State just recently finalized figures from two years ago – but no money toward Accountability Block Grant services, of which include professional development services and software installation.
“I think now until this budget is passed, we need to do everything we possibly can to get a hold of our legislators. This budget’s got to get better for us,” Brandenburg said.
Chapp also hopes for budget adjustments.
Brandenburg is to get more information on the proposed changes at a meeting of the Pennsylvania School Board Association next week.
Armstrong School District | jweaver February 14, 2012
By nonamerequired, February 14, 2012 @ 9:17 AM
Do Snyders own this land, Stan?
By newvoice, February 14, 2012 @ 12:00 PM
If they vote to close your school..STOP doing business with the ones that vote to close it.Don’t vote for White or Pyle (they are the reason your school wasn’t remodeled)….Make your money and your vote talk.
By sunflowers, February 14, 2012 @ 12:01 PM
The 422 option is pretty neutral.I still think it will be built on the hill off 66 between Ktg & FC. At this point what does spending another million matter.
This is what people voted for, I just hope in the long trem it helps control costs. It’s ironic they’re using the money borrowed by the old board.
By fatboyonthehill, February 14, 2012 @ 12:40 PM
“God created the idiot for practice and then he created the school board.” – Mark Twain
By Jan, February 14, 2012 @ 12:46 PM
@sunflowers: There is no irony in spending the money that the old board borrowed. They borrowed it, it’s too costly to return( and get nothing) and there isn’t another district that wants to use it because they can borrow $ at a lower rate than what the ASD has. Can’t sit on it without penalty and interest….so what would you propose they do with this money? They were handed a huge problem and now they are attempting to figure out what they can do with it without costing the taxpayers more money.
By Jerri, February 14, 2012 @ 12:47 PM
sunflowers-What did people vote for? Not to spend money! They didn’t vote to build a new school! Tell me where and when that was? Go look at the Snyder Seven’s literature. NOT ONE THING about a new school! And the hill off 66 would be a nightmare. There’s no infrastructure to it. Why do you think it’s still for sale? And be prepared to pay big bucks to get the “donated” land prepared before ground can even be broken. That donated land has already cost us $7 million in lost fees due to White and Pyle’s illegal interference doing their bidding for the very same people so graciously donating this land. They are the ones that got Stan Stan Snyder’s man to run for school board. And what’s the rush? They don’t want to hear from any of us. The other school board took 11 months before they even committed to spending money. This school board has had a handful of meetings.
And why does Choncek even talk? He goes around in circles trying to get his own way. He didn’t attend one committee meeting in the last two years but now he wants committee meetings held every week. It’s so they can rush at closing schools for this next school year. Not his own kid’s of course, How dare they be treated the way he treats others kids. No, they deserve better.
By samkirk, February 14, 2012 @ 1:04 PM
What’s the big rush? Why isn’t this going on referendum? These new school options have only been made public over the last few weeks!
This is a travesty! These peoople aren’t looking out for the public!
I smell “arbitrary and capricous”! Chase McClister if you don’t sue this school board, you should be disbarred!
By bleedpurplengold, February 14, 2012 @ 1:16 PM
I believe in the consolidation of the schools in this district. Everyone has to realize that it is for the better of our students and children that attend this area and may/will in the future. After talking with many students that have graduated from these local schools with smaller classes and few options of the upper level math, science and language classes, it has hurt them in their some in being prepared for their college courses.
All of the parents, grandparents and others need to let go of the idea of being rivals and holding onto what is so many years in the past. We in this county can no longer afford to support so many schools in need of repair and not to mention the cost of running/staffing and etc that it cost to have only a handful of students in many classes. Please for the shake of the students and the future please take off the blinders and see what is best for all involved.
By bleedpurplengold, February 14, 2012 @ 1:20 PM
Before I get attacked on a personal level for the wording in one of my sentences I apologize. I was trying to say… it has hurt them some in being prepared for their college courses based on students from larger school districts/states.
By cartman, February 14, 2012 @ 1:35 PM
They are using the money borrowed by the old board because they can’t give it back. I have trouble understanding the renovate/remodel mindset. Why would you want to send your kids to a crappy old school? It seems as though some have never left their youthful high school days. It’s time for Solakian philosophy to go bye-bye!
By Kittanning Lady, February 14, 2012 @ 2:10 PM
They, Amy Lhote,Chris Choncek,Jim Rearic,Joe Close, Dr.Paul Lobby, Stan Berdell, Larry Robb, WILL RAISE TAXES!! They will do just as they did for WestHills! RAISE OUR TAXES TO BUILD A NEW UNWANTED SCHOOL!!
By billybob65, February 14, 2012 @ 4:16 PM
I love it when Joe Close sticks his foot in his mouth! Now he has complete trust in Kimball and Associates staying at bid. Wasn’t it just a few months ago that Close and the others were saying they couldn’t trust Kimball! No wonder Lobby lpols disgusted every time Close opens his mouth
Choncek calls wanting more information a distraction. Translation “just gimme my new school! Waaaa!!”
Sara Yassem should be commended her tough questions and the reluctance of Close and Choncek to address them show that she is the one that’s truly looking out for the taxpayers
Sara yassem is to be commended for asking for more details on costs. It’s too
By JornJensen, February 14, 2012 @ 4:17 PM
newvoice – Why remodel all under-utilized schools and still deal with out-of-control costs?
Downsize, consolidate, remodel and fill the few schools that are selected to remain. Demolish or sell-off the rest and help pay down the loan.
By Lancret, February 14, 2012 @ 4:45 PM
Who owns the land?
Plain and simple.
Answer the question.
Until that question is answered, put the brakes on this whole thing. It sounds like things are getting a bad odor to them.
By egnahc, February 14, 2012 @ 6:04 PM
Neutral location and serious savings due to duplication of services and staff reductions. To top it off, this will set off a great academic advancement through more current course availability and a gradual increase in new courses. Its comical that one is arguing against closing the oldest building in the school district and the building likely in the most disrepair. Who contacted Yassem? You cannot count 1 man as ‘constituents’, even if he calls you 3 or more times a day. Someone once told me FC is built with firebrick to last 100 years (much of the building has reached 100 years – 1908 – and most of the rest of the building is close = 1920s). It also likely has an original tile roof on the front of the structure that is beyond life expectancy. It gets a lot worse when you step inside… Let it go.
By the way…when I cast my ballot, I was also voting to close the green monster. We’re running out of time for a big 2012-2013 savings!
By egnahc, February 14, 2012 @ 8:04 PM
And calm down on the whole ‘everything is a conspiracy’ theme. I think its now getting clear that the West Hills conspiracy isn’t going very well. I see we are now shifting to a Snyder conspiracy. Most of the folks that follow these comments are too bright to be baited into conspiracies, threats against school board member’s businesses, and the KittanningLady’s general ‘I heard the new board and the new school will set in motion the apocalypse’ tone. Common sense will prevail and we will downsize while providing more opportunity. If the Snyders throw some land at us at a reasonable price, so be it. Contractors and cement block suppliers still have to be low bidder.
By rocket, February 14, 2012 @ 8:27 PM
The property they are talking about is owned by the First Church of God, Kittanning formerly owned by Maxine Boarts. Unless they are talking about the large treed area behind Energy Savers… of which I am not sure yet who owns -be, or the property across from Barker’s owned by Stiller’s Motorsports. Maybe Mr. Berdell would like to give the land he just purchased across from Kittanning Township Elementary School? All crooked. All of it.
By Gracie, February 14, 2012 @ 9:04 PM
Armstrong County Plat Map…..66 acres across from Barker’s…..Snyder Armclar Gas Co.
By Jerri, February 14, 2012 @ 9:49 PM
Jan- You are incorrect in your statements concerning the remaining bond money.
First, it is absolutely not true that Dr. Chapp went to ARIN. Solak told ARIN that the district would be in touch with info once it was verified that the IRS would allow this No further contact was ever made.
Second, the previous board made a resolution to begin the steps toward approaching ARIN and school districts across the state. Administration never moved on this because they knew the new board wanted no part of this.
Mr. Chris Brewer of Piper Jaffrey said due to our projects being stopped it was likely the IRS would approve us selling the bond money to another district. Again, this board stonewalled any attempt to even investigate if this was possible. Deny it all you want but you and I both knew before the elections changed the board that these people just wanted their hands on that money for their own purposes. That’s deceitful.
Also you are very wrong about the rates also. You are not including the 35 percent interest reduction due to Build America stimulus that the previous board acquired. That is equal to 18 million dollars reduction in interest. Combine that with the current bonds rate and the ASD could offer a very attractive package to Other school districts. But that will never happen because this board had it planned for over a year to take that money. They never cared about saving money for the taxpayers. They just had their own agenda
By JornJensen, February 14, 2012 @ 10:04 PM
Samkirk – agree with you – too important to rush this AND too important to just trust 9 people to decide for us – we need a real binding referendum to vote upon. I insist on one of those choices being no new school, repair/remodel a few of the buildings and downsize (rightsize) into those buildings and get rid of the rest to help pay down the bill. Put another half-dozen choices on there with that one, including a new building somewhere and so forth. Let the registered, tax-paying voters decide!
Yes, we have to spend the borrowed money – no other way to get rid of it, but use downsizing to pay it back – DO NOT use the taxpayers to pay it back – downsize NOW!
bleedpurplengold – Great post – well-stated. Most of us understood what you were stating.
By Frog, February 14, 2012 @ 11:03 PM
When are some of you people going to learn that the era of community schools is over? It doesn’t matter if you are rural like Armstrong or in the city. I love how Yassem is whining about making Ford City the junior high instead of Kittanning High School. Uh, hello? Are you serious? Look at the age of Fc compared to Kittanning. You need to get over it.
As for complaining about the board “doing” the same thing as the old board as in building an unwanted school, they have to do something with the bond money, whether the taxpayers like it or not. If they can build a new high school and consolidate and close 3 high schools and do it with the bond money, I say go for it. It’s time something is done.
I am all for community schools, I think it is better, but I’m sorry, this area cannot support it. It’s time that people realize that and learn to deal with it. The Armstrong County that people knew from the 70′s and earlier are gone, and they are not coming back, and if they do, I doubt it will be in my lifetime.
By Frog, February 14, 2012 @ 11:05 PM
Also, demolish the closed buildings so we don’t have a repeat of what happened in the 90′s.
By scott_starr, February 15, 2012 @ 6:16 AM
I seem to remember someone giving a very well documented and researched overview of the Retirement Issue at Elderton High School to the previous board about the costs and why EHS should not be reopened….. Glad the Business Manager is on track now, 2 years later….
Some other Snippets:
1. I don’t trust Kimball to give accurate numbers.
2. My guess is Yassem was fed those questions, but that’s OK. Vetting the cost is always a good idea, I actually support her questions.
3. I am actually in favor,if building is an option, to use the Lenape Site. Especially if they are going to start this half day program (which I don’t agree with).
4. I’m sure after the meeting some dilligent person went to the CourtHouse to find out who owned the land. I have no idea who it is. However, I think before ASD purchases land the board should look to sell off the other undeveloped land that ASD has on the books.
It’s time to make the hard decisions. I ask the ASD Board Members to do the following:
1. Give the public the criteria which will be used to determine if a school stays open or not.
2. Accurately and fairly apply the criteria.
3. Accurately discuss the costs. Show the folks what will be the long term costs to keep all schools open as well as build new. Also, show what would be the ASD budget if schools were not consolidated over the years.
4. Pull out the old demographic estimates done under Kerr ( I don’t remember when) which show that we are indeed following the trends predicted 5 – 10 years ago.
Someone on the ASD Board should do some homework, make a nice powerpoint presentation and explain the issues in black and white. Show how the budget will increase, how the proposed plan will mitigate the increase and so on.
Make sure to document the numbers also, I’d even check Solak and see what is in those folders he’s carried around over the years.
By Kittanning Lady, February 15, 2012 @ 6:22 AM
Unless this board gets the same treatment the old board got and get dragged into court ,the new school will be build. My only concerns is how high are our taxes going to be raised? and how is this going to effect the children.And will this indeed save the taxpayers in the long run ?or,are we all just being lied to.Wasn’t it said that school buildings are hard to sell?I would like to know who would want to buy them?They will sit abandoned unsold until the boro gives the Armstrong School District an order to demolish it because of safety reasons. That expense will also fall on us the taxpayers.
By DANBOY, February 15, 2012 @ 7:30 AM
Does one ever wonder how someone can buy a Catholic Church,turn it into a cheerleader and dance academy to take advantage of the local high schools cheerleader squads for their personal gain and then criticize the Snyders. What have you done for the local economy???? OH YEAH I guess you have to be a School Director to be an avid sports fan for your alma mater
By JornJensen, February 15, 2012 @ 8:15 AM
egnahc – Agree with your comment on ‘enough with the conspiracy and etc.’, but this is a comment board, so we all have to put up with those rights to those comments. Much better to present plans and ideas to help solve this grand problem.
All the more reason for a referendum for us all to vote on – my one vote and all of your one votes count as many as any one Snyder vote. Get it folks?
By jerry6, February 15, 2012 @ 8:21 AM
When the new high school is built, I wonder how many kids will be in this school, of which I am in favor of building. If this includes 9-12 grades from Elderton, Kittanning and Ford City, it doesn’t seem like a lot of students. How much did it cost to build West Shamokin and how much did it cost to build that school.
By bweitzel, February 15, 2012 @ 9:49 AM
Someone mentioned this in a previous post, and I thought it was a great idea – ask the students for their input.
A group of students from each school could work together and perhaps give us all some insight into how consolidation and/or community schools are affecting their lives. After all, they are the ones affected by the lack of academic offerings and long bus rides.
I think most people would be surprised at the number of kids who do not see the ASD through the provincial glasses worn by so many adults in the area.
By JornJensen, February 15, 2012 @ 10:53 AM
bweitzel – That would be me that suggested that, and I am a firm believer in what I suggested. Have the affected people provide input. Same goes for taxpayers.
By elderman, February 15, 2012 @ 11:35 AM
Reply to Jan; in your post of February 14, 2012 @ 12:46 pm you state “They borrowed it, it’s too costly to return (and get nothing) and there isn’t another district that wants to use it because they can borrow $ at a lower rate than what the ASD has.” Unfortunately, that is the picture that the current board majority is presenting to the public; that their only option is to use the borrowed monies. But they have done NOTHING to advertise, promote, or encourage other districts across the state to look into taking the borrowed monies from ASD. They want to build a new school and are using the borrowed monies as an excuse to do so!
Following are some points that should be considered before the board majority rushes us into a costly, ill-conceived, and unnecessary building project.
1. At the Feb. 9, 2011 ASD board caucus meeting, ASD board President Mr. Close made the motion to rescind the previous board’s action of making the remaining bond monies available to ALL Pennsylvania school districts. He stated that the directive had been carried out and no district had shown interest. NOT SO, as prior to Mr. Close’s statement, ASD Superintendent Dr. Chapp stated that the funds had been offered only to the local ARIN unit. It was NOT DONE statewide so the previous board’s directive was never carried out. There are roughly 480 other school districts across the state who were NEVER informed that ASD was making the monies available.
2. What exactly did ASD Superintendent Dr. Chapp offer to the member schools of the local ARIN unit? If he offered the remaining monies at the same percentage rate that ASD got in issuing the bonds, then ASD would stand to profit due to the fact that the Build America Bonds had a 35 percent rebate from the federal government on interest paid. This rebate would go to ASD who initially offered the bonds, not to the district that might enter into an agreement to take the monies from ASD. Bond counsel in the past has stated that the IRS would take exception to a borrower (ASD) making a change of use of monies to show a profit. Therefore, the bond monies could and should be offered to a secondary borrower at a rate reduced by the proceeds of the 35 percent rebate (with no financial loss to ASD in the process). Mr. Brewer or Mr. Frederick could make this calculation of a reduced interest rate to a secondary borrower. During the caucus meeting, Mr. Frederick quoted a bond index in citing a current bond offering rate of 4.25 percent, not far from the rate that the Build America Bonds were secured at. The reduction in the offering rate to offset the rebate may make ASD’s offer very attractive and might quickly get a taker.
3. Further, Pa. Senator Don White, Pa. Representative Jeff Pyle, and the voting public according to ASD board election results were insistent that the renovation projects not be done and the bond monies defeased. The previous board minority (Close, Rearic & Choncek) was also of this opinion and repeatedly stated that due to economic conditions we should “DO NOTHING AT THIS TIME.” Once it became clear that the procured funds possibly could be used for building projects they insisted that they should direct the use of the monies. As such, at one time, they were as a group comfortable with the 10 to 12 million dollar loss that would be incurred through defeasement. That same 10 to 12 million dollars could also be applied to further reduce the interest rate in ASD’s offering to other districts. Remember, Senator White and Rep. Pyle stopped the renovation projects because the taxpayers could not afford to pay back the bond issue. When they took this action, they were aware of the defeasement costs. On his website, Rep. Pyle has a news release that details his opposition to borrowing the bond money due to the state of Armstrong County’s economy and tax burden. In this press release, he specifically states that he did not take his action as an endorsement for building a new school. At a recent public meeting at the Burrell Township Firehall, I asked Rep. Pyle if the taxpayers could continue to count on his opposition to spending if there were a way for the district to economically divest this money and his answer was yes, he would oppose the spending!
4. The board majority cited two major obstacles in their opposition to making the bond monies available to other districts, both involved timing.
a. First was that there had been no other district coming forth to pursue the bond money and time was of the essence. As discussed above, presenting the monies at the proper attractive rate to school districts might get an immediate response. Additionally, the offer should be made statewide to all school districts. This could be facilitated through ALL the ARIN units, through the PSBA, and through the involvement of Senator White, Representative Pyle, and Pa. Senator Jeffrey E. Piccola who is the chairman of the Pa. Senate Education Committee. Senator Piccola will be receptive to this as he teamed with Senator White and Rep. Pyle in asking the state department of education to look further into the ASD renovation program.
b. Second was the timing of submitting a request and getting a ruling from the IRS on a change of the use of the Build America Bond money. Mr. Brewer indicated that getting a ruling could take 9 months or longer. Again, we have high ranking state officials; a State Representative and two State Senators who through their actions now have a vested interest in this and could be asked to intervene with the IRS and request an expedited ruling on change of use.
5. A final reason cited by an ASD board member for keeping the bond monies was that if interest rates were to rise, then ASD would need to borrow money at a higher rate for future building projects. This is in direct conflict with the reasons for stopping the renovations stated by Senator White, in direct conflict with the news release on Representative Pyle’s website, and in direct conflict with the results of the last ASD board election results.
6. Before any new buildings should be considered, the board should look at “right sizing” the district. The 435 square mile size of ASD makes closing buildings onerous to those in outlying areas with students burdened with long bus commutes and parents unable to fully participate in their child’s educational process due to time and monetary constraints. South Bend Township is one area that is very apparent. Former Superintendent Dr. William Kerr acknowledged in his Kerr Report that first proposed closing Elderton Sr. HS, that busing South Bend students to West Shamokin was too far. But the board majority at that time chose to ignore that aspect of his report. South Bend is not the only problem area, the board should look at all the outlying areas, change district lines possibly reducing the area of ASD, to send students to the schools nearest them. The board needs to look at these areas and quit trying to force a square into a circle template. One need only look at a map of ASD and the surrounding districts to realize that it make no sense to bus students over 30 miles when a neighboring districts buildings are 3 to 5 miles away.
I feel that the board should reinstitute a resolution to make the bond money available to other districts across the state. I am aware that there are time constraints so this should be done immediately. Making these funds available to all other districts at the proper rate may reveal a district anxious to secure these borrowed funds. This will remove the concocted immediacy that the board has imposed on itself and allow the district to move forward with a well thought out plan that considers all students and taxpayers. There is no reason to rush blindly into a building project. Armstrong County’s economy has shown no noticeable improvement. In fact, only days ago it was announced that the Reesdale Power Generating operation would be closed with a direct loss of 60 jobs and an uncounted number of support jobs. The loss of jobs will result in further population losses and makes paying for a new school more expensive for those who remain, unfortunately a disproportionately high percentage of retirees. Do not be fooled by what the ASD board majority is saying, the option of ridding ASD of this debt is still viable if they would put aside their desire to build a new high school.
By Jan, February 15, 2012 @ 12:17 PM
@bweitzel & Jorn:
I also think this is a good idea. I suggest that we all contact our board representative and make that suggestion that they form a student group to take part in discussions.
By JornJensen, February 15, 2012 @ 2:01 PM
Dr. Stan Chapp and school board directors – only a few weeks ago, you started a brainstorming session on a ‘clean slate’, a whiteboard, and here you are now forcing a choice among the 8 options presented by ‘hired’ architects. Dr. Chapp – under your picture, above, it states that all 8 choices involve a new junior-high or senior-high school building – what happened to the choice of no new building, downsizing into what we already have and demolishing/selling off the excess buildings/land? That choice would not involve any donated or purchased land. HOW DID WE ALREADY GET DOWN TO ONLY THOSE 8 CHOICES FROM A CLEAN WHITEBOARD BRAINSTORMING SESSION (one session)? HAVE YOU CLOSED YOUR BRAINS? What’s going on here? Why can’t the tax-paying public and students be involved in this process?
By nonamerequired, February 15, 2012 @ 3:10 PM
I never once said the word conspiracy. I am not acting like real life is a Mel Gibson/Julia Roberts flick about conspiracies. I do, however, think its ok to look deeper into issues, and wonder about all aspects of such a big deal and a big problem facing our communities. I also don’t think it makes me a conspiracy theorist to wonder who’s holding hands. I value honesty and things done above the table. Hand holding occurs in every form of government and it’s ok to be aware of who will benefit from this decision, and how much.
By cartman, February 15, 2012 @ 3:25 PM
@Kittanning lady
Are you in love with Solak?
By jerry6, February 15, 2012 @ 6:58 PM
I was on the Armstrong school district web site and got my answers to how many kids are in grades 9-12 for the area high schools. If a high school is built for grades 9-12 for the three high schools they would replace, there are almost 1600 students with a projected loss of 250 students by 2015.There are about 3000 kids in grades K-6 and in grades 7 and 8 there are about 960 students. Although all of the students in the Elderton high school would not all go to a new high school. Some of these kids would go to West Shamokin, I guess.
By JornJensen, February 16, 2012 @ 8:09 AM
elderman – Thank you for that presentation. I learned a lot. I agree with and support your position. I was one of those duped into believing that we were stuck with this money.
Now, the BIG question – How many on our school board can even comprehend what you’ve stated? How many high-paids in administration can comprehend it? The answer scares me. NO NEW SCHOOL!
By Jan, February 16, 2012 @ 8:20 AM
@elderman: This may be a first but there are parts of what you state that I agree with. I’m not so sure that “at this time” we should be investing in new buildings, even though I’d love to see that for the students in the future. I also firmly believe that we should not renovate any of the old schools. When the referendum vote was taken, it was unanimous that the taxpayers did not want to renovate and I still agree with that- however, defeasement, which was thought could be an option proved to be too costly a return. My question to you is this. What “if” the district advertises the bond money to all schools districts in PA and no one wants it- what do you propose we do with the money then? That is my biggest concern. The bottom line is that we have too many old buildings with few students in them to keep open- this county can not afford that either. We need to consolidate buildings and any way you look at it- there will be people upset with a decision. I would agree that certain areas need the option of transferring to other districts to accommodate travel,but then again, I’m not privy to what this would cost or how much $ the ASD would lose in doing this.At this time, we have 4 high schools (3 with jr. highs)1 jr. high and 3 elementary buildings under discussion.What would you propose is the answer to consolidating these schools? There are issues with KHS, FCHS and Elderton as per buildings. There are issues with Elderton Elementary, Kittg. Twp. and Shannock Elementary.What do we do with these students? I think this is an $80M question.
By JornJensen, February 16, 2012 @ 9:42 AM
Jan – New building would be nice, but, the harsh realities of our area can not be overlooked. Mostly retirees, not enough ‘fresh’ tax income-type jobs to ‘pay the bill’, declining enrollment, big – almost $3/4 million pension bill looming, property taxes too high, on and on.
Those who think that a new building ‘will bring the people’ are dreaming. Long-term work brings people.
The answer to your question of elderman is that we need to do what we said we’d do – advertise the loan availability across the commonwealth and offer in the rebate savings as incentive. Not doing that is not really trying. The second answer to your question is that if all of that fails, then it is wholly apparent that we’re stuck with the money – use it to downsize into selected buildings and use the savings of downsizing (these taxes are already being collected) to pay back the loan.
But, if people in power have an ‘agenda’, then these things can be ‘massaged’ to fit their agenda. Example: If the agenda is a new school, then offering the money to only ARIN would certainly result in ‘no takers’, so ‘we did what we said we’d do.’ We need to advertise the money commonwealth-wide.
In the downsizing of the ASD, logic surely states that students going to schools in other districts that present less travel distance and time is the correct way to go regardless of imaginary boundaries. This is not about which district ‘gets the money’ from ‘an area’, it IS about educating students cost-effectively. If a student can travel a lesser distance to school, then there should be a transportation cost savings to taxpayers, regardless of district.
To your $80 million question – we have more schools than students to fully occupy them. Select school buildings that will ‘stay’, move students temporarily to other buildings that will not stay long term, update the buildings that will stay, move the appropriate students into the ‘stay’ building and sell off/demolish the buildings not needed. Do this one-at-a-time for each ‘stay’ building. Like PennDot says, “Temporary inconvenience for a permanent improvement”.
By The Phantom, February 16, 2012 @ 10:48 AM
I’m very impressed with the healthy debate/tone of this thread. I’m thinking that more of us are on the same page (No Big Renovations/No New School) than we think. I personally would like to see an official explanation as to what is wrong with these buildings and then make a good choice of what buildings to use and then Remodel them much like Jorn has stated.
By Jerri, February 16, 2012 @ 11:15 AM
Gracie-Surprise, surprise. Proof that Snyder’s own the 66 acres Berdell is saying could be donated for the new school. Conspiracy theory? I think not!
Oh, and to add to the posters that brought up the Snyder emails and Snyder connection to L R Kimball architects, I have another tidbit for you.
When Chase McClister deemed Elderton High School a commercial property (thanks to a relatively unknown change our former commissioners did to the variance law just in time to do this), the Planning Department delayed the approvals on the project for over two months. Later, Rich Palilla was overheard telling the architects that while Elderton people were passionate about their school “those of us on the other side were just as passionate”. One more reason Palilla should be fired.
Anyway, the Planning Commissions delay caused just enough time for Corbett to get into office and the Dirty Don White could have a sit down (or drink or two or three or..) with acting Secretary of Ed. Ron Tomalis. Acting means he’s looking for votes to be put into the position.
Then unbeknownest to the school district, White and Pyle get their buddy Jeff Piccola on board and write a letter saying there should be more public input. Apparantly 3 act 34 hearings and 50 public board and committee meetings weren’t enough. The rest is history with the Dept. of Ed. turning down Elderton’s project and putting the others on hold. Funny thing is, the Elderton project had been approved by the very same department of ed in the fall!
Exactly as Randy Cloak had planned with the aid of White’s office and his buddy Joe Pittman, White’s Chief of Staff.
And the Snyder connection????? Drum roll please…..Denny Snyder’s son-in-law was on the Planning Board at the time.
By Jerri, February 16, 2012 @ 11:24 AM
danboy-What is it with you and Solak? What does him buying a church that the Diocese of Greensburg abandandoned have to do with any of this? And to answer your questions, besides bringing employement and providing a place for our kids to be involved in something positive, buying that church changed that building status from non-profit (non-taxable) to on the Armstrong County property tax rolls. How much did Holy Trinity pay in taxes vs. what Solak pays per year? Put your personal feelings aside and stay on topic.
And before you start with your imagination, I am not Solak. Although I am sure you won’t believe that as Solak is obviously responsible for everything in the world, avalanches, tsunamis, mind control, blah, blah. PlEASE!
You still have not answered my question. Many people remember you at the FCHS auditorium ranting against Lenape Vo Tech being considered for a half day in any shape or form. We remember Chuck Pascal’s arms flailing wildly screaming “flip flop” at Solak as you spoke. Now relative silence. How do you feel and if you changed your mind, what changed? Do you think it is right that this was done without public input and without official votes from the member school districts?
There is a Lenape JOC meeting tonight. Are you planning to attend and speak your thoughts?
By Jerri, February 16, 2012 @ 11:29 AM
@jan Please copy the referendum question with the source you found it on that shows a question referring to renovation?
Again, the referendum question that was voted DOWN was on if people wanted a new school.
The people that voted for the Sinester Seven were deceived as they voted NOT to spend money. I still have their campaign literature. It says clearly they don’t want to lock people into “30 years of brick and mortar.” The denied a new school all along and now in less than two months, they only have options involving a new school.
I would much rather have a solid school renovated than a cheap school shoved down our throats just because they can.
And by the way, did you tour all the schools you are cutting down? Did you sit on committee meetings with architects? I’m guessing no.
By Jerri, February 16, 2012 @ 11:32 AM
By the way, I say Kudos to Sara Yassem as she is the only board member asking the tough questions. It is nice to have someone looking out for the taxpayer. Too bad the Silent Seven don’t want the real answers.
By Kittanning Lady, February 16, 2012 @ 12:32 PM
@cartman I don’t even know this man ,How dare you say such a thing to a married lady who has been married for many, many years and takes the vows I took to be married to my husband seriously in front of my Lord and savior!
By Kittanning Lady, February 16, 2012 @ 12:34 PM
@ All It has been said “I don’t see how we can build this NEW SCHOOL WITHOUT RAISING TAXES! Be ready to pay up.
By Elderton Parent, February 16, 2012 @ 1:21 PM
Great post Elderman!
It is all getting uglier by the minute. People need to be paying very close attention to what is going on and who is making the decisions.
By kwiss4, February 16, 2012 @ 1:26 PM
Thaat White canvas sure disappeared quickly with the donation or low price of the land. No more blaming the old board, new board has the money in their hands which is what they wanted all along, any decisions they make now are their responsibility. Mr. Brandenburg stated that the PDE has put a stay on construction projects, maybe this board needs to contact the PDE and ask for their help one more time.
By Amandacrksd, February 16, 2012 @ 1:26 PM
If we are burdened with this money, which I do not believe we are and if we are even thinking about building a new school then lets do it right. Lets make it fair for every student in the ASD, build a centrally located school in the center of the district which is along rt422 in Kittanning twp. doesn’t take a rocket scientist to find the center of the district that is easy. Make this central high school for every student in ASD including West Shamokin students, this way every student in ASD has the same opportunities. The high school students from the northern area would be traveling the same distance as the students from the southern area and the students from the eastern area would be traveling the same distance as the western area. Leaving West Shamokin a high school if a new school is built for the some of the students in ASD is not fair to those students, the students at the new high school are going to have more opportunities, and in a few years West Shamokin will be in the same situation that Kittanning, Ford City and Elderton are in right now. Make West Shamokin a K-8th for Dayton area and Shannock area, and no I do not agree with the architects that this cannot be done, when I proposed this idea to a board member they said but what about the home ec. room and shops, 7th & 8th graders have to take these classes, so therefore these rooms would be utilized. Make Elderton a K-8th for Elderton area and Kittanning twp area, same goes for this building home ec and shop rooms would be utilized. Make Kittanning high school into a junior high for Kittanning area and Ford City area. With this proposal you can sell or demolish Kittanning junior high school, Ford City high school, Shannock elementary and Dayton elementary. Make Kittanning twp elementary into your administration office which would also be centrally located in the district. What I want to see in this district is fairness, something that has not been happening for many years in this district. A centrally located high school means just that centrally located, fair to every student of our district! But there is just one problem with this plan and actually all the plans that have been discussed, I also talked to Rep. Pyle and yes he also stated to me that he wants the money given away, he stated we couldn’t afford the renovations and we surely cannot afford a new school. And he also stated to me that he does not agree with the closing of Elderton High School, he stated it was unfair to those students due to the long bus rides, which ends up hurting them academically. Probably the best solution to the problem in ASD would be to divide this district, it is way too big, but I also do not know if this is even an viable option. One thing that does really bother me about all this is, when the previous board proposed the renovation packages everyone posting on here stated that we couldn’t afford them, that are taxes would go up, it was stated that the previous board was pulling the wool over our eyes when they said taxes wouldn’t go up, but now you want to use the money to build new isn’t our taxes going to go up. Several stated that this is why people are not moving to this area because we already have higher taxes than other areas, even if we build a new school which we all know is going to raise taxes it is only inevitable. A new school is not going to bring people to this area, and the high taxes are going to chase them away along with many people who already live here. We need jobs, businesses and economic growth, maybe until that happens all we should do is let our schools the way they are, no renovations, no closings and no new school. All we seem to do in this district is run around chasing our tails and provide entertainment for the other districts.
By nonamerequired, February 16, 2012 @ 1:31 PM
Thank you elderman!! That was most informative, and I hope that people are taking note.
By nonamerequired, February 16, 2012 @ 1:58 PM
Also, @Jan, I understand your question about what should we do if the bond is shopped around and still noone wants it. I think the plans they already have formed is what the answer is for them. However, on another issue, don’t you wonder why they are acting as if they must keep it, and most of the public believes we must keep it, when in reality, that’s not the truth? Doesn’t it make you think about other thingsk they have said as well? Demand honesty from politicians who work for us and DEMAND REFERENDUM!
By billybob65, February 16, 2012 @ 2:30 PM
FYI. Did you know that there is a public school corruption hotline for western Pennsylvania set up by the US Attorney General?
It’s interesting that the Washington Posts says its the only school corruption hotline in the country and was just created recently
The number is 412-894-7515. You don’t have to leave your name
By futureconcened, February 16, 2012 @ 4:14 PM
The Architects need to think out of the box on the reconfiguration of ASD. Why are they advocating two 7-8 schools? I thought that the consensus of the public in the Kittanning attendance area was that the Kittanning and Ford City schools were too old to continue to use? I propose that the 7-8 grade students from the entire district attend West Shamokin, the district’s newest secondary level school. Though it’s capacity is only 730 students and there are an estimated 950 students to be housed, the building was built with future expansion in mind, so just add on. A Google search puts Craigsville Road in West Franklin Twp at 30.9 miles from West Shamokin High School. Just the same distance that the outer reaches of South Bend students traveled to that school. The distance of busing is a non-issue as already proved by the consensus of the district.
Senator Don White and Rep. Jeff Pyle have the ear of Senator Piccola and could make the case that we would be condensing the district into fewer buildings and that the proposed buildings to be closed were all eligible for reimbursement. They could make the case that this makes the most sense and should be encouraged by the state.
If my tax dollars are going to be used to build a new 9-12 high school, then I contend that ALL ASD high school students deserve the opportunities the new school would offer.
What could be fairer than ALL the 7-8 grade students together at West Shamokin and ALL the 9-12 grade students in the new 9-12 high school?
And one has to wonder how you can justify putting 7-8 grade students into the Kittanning Sr. High School that has been presented as so unfit to use that the district must build a new high school.
By devitt, February 16, 2012 @ 4:43 PM
I think there is alot of good information being exchanged here, and I hope the people (the taxpayers) are taking notes.
These current options smell as bad as the last load of laundry that was brought in with the last board.
No new buildings. No new school. Give the money back like the people voiced in the election. I know you cannot give it back, but at least make an attempt to offer the money to other districts which will be at a lower rate.
Stop the madness!
No new buildings.
By billbell, February 16, 2012 @ 4:47 PM
I’m betting that a lot of the majority who voted in this new board thinks as I do and are also getting impatient…Whatever this board is planning on doing, I hope they look to save money soon. One of the reasons I voted for them is because I thought they would right the wrong that was done and close Elderton for good. Almost every deficit this district has advertised correlates to to the reopening of Elderton- from the zero capital expenditure budgets to the 2+ million scheme by the old board to sell taxes to the 2.5 million deficit that is projected for this/next year. It doesn’t take much to connect the dots; if Elderton remained closed, it’s likely this district could have more easily weathered the financial crisis incurred by the state and it’s own doing.
To the new school board: Get serious and start saving money immediately by closing Elderton; you already have the plans to do so. Then get on with whatever other “right-sizing” that is needed.
By egnahc, February 16, 2012 @ 5:29 PM
No money…raise taxes…property tax reform…Consider that the renovation plan was closing 2 schools and supposedly saving enough money to pay down the 80 million. Imagine what closing FC, KJHS, KT, EHS, Admin, and Shannock will save. Another publication quoted 3 million in operational savings (I would assume that to be gas, electric, general maintenance on buildings). I do not think that we have an idea yet of what the savings will be when considering reduction in staff. Its a poor economy and all, but even with some minor repairs, we’ll still be left with very old and worn buildings in another 10 years. We have 70+ million now – make the fix now. Common sense tells you that less buildlings=less teachers, less duplication of services, less energy costs. I think the board needs to present some very clear numbers in regards to the great savings that can be achieved through serious consolidation and a new building. I don’t know any people who want a ‘showpiece’ high school but rather a lot of people who recognize the savings of a new building and consolidation.
And I thank God for all of the people that had a hand in stopping the renovation mess – leaving that many schools open would have never been sustainable.
By nonamerequired, February 16, 2012 @ 5:51 PM
In the Leader Times today, there was an interesting article. Page A5, entitled “Analyst says schools’ options becoming scarcer”. It states that due to Tom Corbett’s budget proposal, even wealthy districts who previously had reserve money, may be forced into cutting certain programs. Programs such as language, and AP classes. Now if the wealthy districts, which Armstrong County is NOT among, have to cut classes, wouldn’t it be good deductive reasoning to assume we will have to make changes as well? If I recall correctly, the arguement of a new school was that it would benefit students because a bigger school can offer better classes, and curriculum that we don’t currently offer. I don’t think that will be the case due to Tom Corbett and the new budget. What we will end up with is a new school, new tax increase, and students that have the same curriculum as before. These state budget cuts are something that MUST be taken into consideration. If language and AP classes are on the chopping block in wealthy districts, then things will surely change here as well. I never bought into the reason people want a new school for football, but if it is, we may not be able to afford any type of sports program, period! Think about all of these things!
By Jerri, February 16, 2012 @ 6:30 PM
I like where billybob65 is going. We need to make these people accountable!
Dr. Lobby said he’s only heard from one person. Berdell has said people understand. Really?
Since the new board is rushing through things so quickly, it is obvious they don’t want to hear from you. They’ve changed meeting dates so not only does it make it impossible for live tv broadcasts, it also gives very little time for people to react to what they vote for. There’s only 4 days between open caucus and the regular meetings
It was Rearic, Close, and Choncek that pushed for time limits on public speaking. And don’t forget the infamous walk out by Rearic and Rupp and then later Chincek and Waratuke at a board meeting at West Shamokin. All because they didn’t want to hear what was being said! Then they emailed the newspapers to cover themselves by saying the public was nasty
So for all of you that would like to share your opinions with the board. I will save you some trouble
The newest board members don’t have their contact info public but you can reach all board members at once by emailing ASDBoardMembers@asd.k12.pa.us
While you’re at it email these people and tell them how you feel also. I’m sure they would greatly appreciate the opportunity to help their taxpayers
Senator Don White. dwhite@pasen.gov
Representative Jeff Pyle. jpyle@pahousegop.com
Armstrong County Commissioners. commissioners@co.armstrong.pa.us
I will find phone numbers and list them another day!
By maddog, February 16, 2012 @ 6:50 PM
Three words for the new school board:
REFERENDUM
REFERENDUM
REFERENDUM
Nuff said!
By ASDpayer, February 16, 2012 @ 7:22 PM
Put the hs in the center of the district. That makes sense, as many have suggested. But make sure it is the population center of the district, and not the geographical center.
By cartman, February 16, 2012 @ 7:48 PM
Why do some of you act as though a new school is something evil? It would be great for the kids and the area. It is not some short of conspiracy, but an effort to come into the twenty-first century. I’m old, and this has been going on since I was a kid, while other communities pass us by. For crying out loud!!!
By billybob65, February 16, 2012 @ 10:37 PM
@cartman. The whole point is not that any one idea is evil. The point is that the new school idea is unnecessary. With more and more technology being used, we don’t need new buildings to offer new programs. Technology is the future, isn’t it? Also how much do you really know about our existing buildings? Are you an engineer or architect that has personally been in each building? This out with the old we want new attitude is wasteful and expensive. We have perfectly fine buildings that just need some upgrades. Years of purposeful neglect has resulted in people thinking that new is the only choice. It’s not. Do you think you should demolish your house because it needs a new roof, furnace, or windows and build new? Do you think you should knock your house down because your kids moved out? Think about it. Which is more economical?
@ASDPayer. Your comments say it all. The building shouldn’t be I’m the geographical center but the most populous? Did you ever think that attitude by our county’s leaders have put us in the backward position this county is in? Look at Butler, Indiana and other counties. They allowed development in many areas and supported growth popularity in all their county. Thus they are prosperous counties in general. Our county has been waiting for the West Hills dream to grow for thirty plus years and all we have to show is an overpriced elementary school and Walmart
From your comment I assume you live in this Armstrong County utopia. One of those “it’s ok to raise taxes as long as the new school is in my own backyard people”. You sound like Amy Lhote
By Bison4ever, February 16, 2012 @ 11:45 PM
Thank you Jerri for sharing that information. I have just e-mailed the current board to show my support, and to Sen. White & Rep. Pyle to again thank them for listening to their constituents and stopping that insanity of the last board. As a parent and taxpayer, I still have confidence that the current board will get us back in the right direction, wherever that leads us.
By Jan, February 17, 2012 @ 8:37 AM
@Jerri: I think that both you and I know what the referendum question was all about. It was a ploy- or farce. First of all, as the question read:
Shall debt in the combined sum of
One Hundred Fifty Five
(155,000,00) Million Dollars for the
purpose of financing the
construction of (i) a new
comprehensive junior/senior high
school building, and (ii) an Elderton
K-6 building be authorized to be
incurred as, or (as appropriate)
transferred from nonelectoral debt
to, debt approved by the electors?
We all know that the $155M figure for a new comprehensive high school fell out of the sky and it was the belief of the last board that if people voted against this referendum question they were in favor of renovations. In essence,the question was a ploy to trick people but no one fell for it.Hence, in my mind and the minds of many- the question was misleading and bogus!…and it was ALL about renovations.
By kwiss4, February 17, 2012 @ 8:48 AM
Gov. Tom Corbett’s proposed 2012-13 $27.1 billion budget calls for a one-year moratorium on PlanCon funding. How will this factor into any plans for the district?
By JornJensen, February 17, 2012 @ 8:58 AM
Bison4ever – I don’t share your confidence in the new board and I believe there are many others who do not share that confidence. Rushing the choices, using the same architects, only talk of a new school, land magically appearing and so forth.
Jan – Agree with your comments on the recent referendum. It was poorly worded and aimed at ‘no real choice’.
I’ve stated this before – 3 simple referendum choices and see what the taxpayers say:
1) Community schools, all of them fixed up, at $xxxx.
2) Consolidation into a new school at $xxxx.
3) No new school, downsize and fix up what we need and sell-off/demolish the rest at $xxxx.
Three easy choices – nothing hidden. The community schoolers could choose #1, the new schoolers could choose #2 and others could choose #3 – then tally them up and learn the true results of a real referendum. Go with the majority rule thing. REFERENDUM! REFERENDUM! REFERENDUM! Agree, maddog.
And, yes, I EXPECT school board members to read the KP and the comments of concerned taxpayers, but I’ll also email them – thanks Jerri for that information.
By DrDeer, February 17, 2012 @ 9:28 AM
What is the total cost of:
3 Varsity Football Teams
3 JV Football Teams
4 Varsity Basketball Teams
4 JV Basketball Teams
4 Varsity Softball Teams
4 JV Softball Teams
2 Varsity Wrestling Teams
2 JV Wrestling Teams (not sure of this)
4 Varsity Volleyball Teams
4 JV Volleyball Teams
Not sure how many Soccer Teams and any other sports not listed.
All must have uniforms, equipment, insurance, playing fields, bus transportation, coaches etc, etc, etc. In this area this is what it’s all about. Little Billy or Sally may not get to start. I have one word, intramurals.
By JornJensen, February 17, 2012 @ 10:23 AM
cartman – Please define ‘great for the kids’. What value does ‘great for the kids’ provide? What about ‘great for the fixed-income retired seniors struggling to pay their real estate taxes’?
Understand – this is not a ‘growth’ area. We need to live within our means. When some factory brings 500 good-paying jobs to town and a bunch of young, kid-producing people with it – maybe then we need to think about ‘building up’ a school system to accomodate.
By Jan, February 17, 2012 @ 11:33 AM
@kwiss: Indeed Gov. Corbett’s moratorium could dampen any visions for building. Unfortunately, as much as I support this new governor, I am very displeased to see him cutting the education budget once again.At a time when we should be bolstering education and providing our students with a top notch curriculum to compete in this global world- we’re taking a step backwards.I’d like him to explore the Welfare system a little more and see where cuts can be made there rather than in education.
@Jorn: the referendum questions could be simplified:
1) Build a new school or 2) Consolidate the schools we have.I see no point in renovating old buildings.
By Jerri, February 17, 2012 @ 11:42 AM
Jan-Where in the referendum wording does it say one word about renovations? It doesn’t. That is your interpretation. It said new school and the voters rejected it.
You can argue over the technical costs so remove that and see what the cost of a new high school was estimated at. Keep in mind that this is the exact same architects working for the current board. They came up with the costs not the previous board directors. The previous board instructed them to come up with current costs based on the most recent new school plan from the ASD. That was the 2007 charette.
The school district had absolutely no choice in the wording of the referendum. That was the county’s doing. From what I hear, the directors themselves wanted it stated more clearly. I am sure Chase McClister had something to do with that part of the referendum since he is unfortunately our county solicitor.
By The Phantom, February 17, 2012 @ 1:22 PM
I agree with Jan and Jorn. That referendum question was to tip the scale in favor of remodeling. However,I am starting to believe the new board is using the ousting of the old board members as a referendum towards building a new school.I myself think the ousting of the old board was a sign that our community doesn’t want to spend vast amounts of money on either “at this time”.
Jorn… I like your idea of the 3 questions to find out once and for all. very simple indeed!
By JornJensen, February 17, 2012 @ 3:40 PM
Jonathan Weaver – The Joe Close statement of “I got to trust L.R. Kimball that they would give us accurate figures, that if we would send something out-for-bid, that it would come back fairly-close to projected at.” – was that verbatim (exactly as spoken by Joe Close) or is there reporter error in the writing of Mr. Close’s statement?
By JornJensen, February 17, 2012 @ 3:43 PM
Kittanning Lady – If you are truly concerned about taxes going up, then you’d better get with the group that wants neither the spending on all community schools nor the group that wants to build a new school – both of those will break the backs of the taxpayers. Get with the downsizers.
By wakeup, February 17, 2012 @ 4:42 PM
Wow…it is truly amazing that this same argument has existed in this county for over 3 decades and contrary to last years changing of the guard the argument lives on with no end in sight. Armstrong County is a battlefield that outside families do not want to raise their kids in, that is a fundamental reason the county cannot retain or attract young people. Fathers and mothers will travel miles to work so they can raise there kids in the “right community” with the “right school system”.
This IS NOT about a NEW SCHOOL with a pool, football field etc it is about building a school so that the next board cannot come in and “de consolidate”. Just like what happened to Armstrong Central and Elderton. Other than splitting the district up into respective community districts it is the only way to move past this age old argument.
You build it the issue dies once and for all. If you just shuffle kids around to “renovated” schools they will be shuffled back in the future. Not real fair to those kids is it? Finish it once and for all and stop the conspiracy side show.
By Tankster, February 17, 2012 @ 5:40 PM
I hope Jan, Scott and others see ASDpayers comment and understand and see that the West Hills pipe dream is alive and well. This not conspiracy talk from a Solakian, because my views differ sharply with Solak. But, I will say that he was not wrong about their being a high-status clique out there who are still pushing for West Hills to become a reality. I cannot say if anybody on the current board is part of this nor do I think any of them are. People of this district and “this side of the river” better be alert because the West Hills dream is still alive. These people who back this stuff do not care about the “other side of the river” and won’t care in the future about “this side of the river” because they see personal gain in this.
Stop the madness of what is right, and like the poster stated above, put the new school and even other things, throughout the entire county/district so everybody may proper a little.
A choice of West Hills or property owned by friend or colleague is not accomplishing any thing for the good of the children or academics. It will be done for some people to make others become more wealthy on the dollar signs on the taxpayer’s money.
By sid87, February 17, 2012 @ 6:31 PM
I get so sick of hearing that this or that isn’t fair. The fact is, life isn’t fair people! The fact is, regardless of the location of a school building, some kids will have a longer bus ride than others. Like it or not, we are not “entitled” to anything! This line of thinking is what is wrong with America! Unfortunately, the district isn’t in a position where they can simply do nothing. There are a number of costly repairs that need to be done to our current buildings just to make them safe for our students and staff. Unfortunately, these repairs would only serve as a temporary band aid. Within a short amount of time, we would be facing additional costs for additional repairs. If another district would end up taking the remainder of the 80 million, how would we pay for these repairs? My guess is a tax increase. Use the money to build a new building for grades 10-12 from Kittanning High School and Ford City High School. Renovate/convert current Kittanning High School to middle school for grades 7-9. Close Elderton High School and move those students back to West Shamokin where they should have stayed anyway. Close Shannock and Kittanning Township Elementary schools and redraw lines to send those students to the remaining elementary buildings which would receive minor renovations as needed. This would produce a district with 5 elementary buildings, 1 middle school (grades 7-9), 1 senior high building (grades 10-12) and 1 Jr/Sr high building (grades 7-12). This would reduce our total building inventory from 12 down to 8. I obviously don’t have concrete numbers, but anyone can see this model would easily save the district a considerable amount of money each year through staff reductions alone, not to mention other avenues such as utility costs. Many would be amazed at the amount of money the district spends on utility bills each year! Maybe someone could get those numbers and share them with us. I’m sure someone will argue that transportation costs would be higher. This may be true, but the savings would easily cover any additional costs and then some. Like I said, life isn’t fair. But, if you still feel that you live too far from your community school, you could always buy a home which is closer… there are plenty for sale in the county, and unfortunately, I don’t see that changing either.
By admin, February 17, 2012 @ 8:02 PM
Jorn – We have inserted the piece of audio from the meeting from which the quote was taken. Go back to the story and click on the link where the quote is written. While it differs slightly in sentence structure, I believe the quote is an accurate portrayal of the comments made by Mr. Close.
By rfullerton, February 17, 2012 @ 9:50 PM
Okay maybe this is a really stupid question as I am not originally from Armstrong County (have only lived here 17 years) and really was not in touch with any of the West Hills building project or even the WSHS for that matter…. but…..what is wrong with using the West Hills property for building if we already own it? Same goes for additions to WSHS? Wouldn’t additions to those properties save money?
@sid87: Well stated.
The mentality of this district still never ceases to amaze me…it is scary and sad for the kids. I am grateful that I will have my kids out of here before next year. I carefully chose a district in Lancaster for my son and passed up more attractive properties in lesser districts. I am sure that many people do/are doing this with the ASD.
By devitt, February 17, 2012 @ 10:22 PM
@sid87
Okay, so life isn’t fair. So life was not fair when elections took place and the plan to renovate the schools was put into motion by elected leaders. I saw a whole faction of people cry foul and that they were not being treated “fairly” and asked for an intervention by government to stop what they deemed unfair.
I am not saying the plan was good or bad. But, saying that life is not fair and you just have to accept things is such a bogus line to try and sell to the people on this matter.
Right now, we have another out-of-control school board who is already showing signs of cronyism with land deals and questionable options with the architects.
Is this fair or unfair?
I think it is a matter of perception.
“Life is not always fair” is a such a ridiculous premise in trying to bring some type of sanity to this school district.
By worthingtonman, February 17, 2012 @ 11:25 PM
@admin
When using quotation marks, the words in between should be verbatim. If you are looking to present something as an accurate portrayal but with different sentence structure, you should not use the quotation marks.
By admin, February 18, 2012 @ 12:46 AM
Thank you for the lesson. However, I will assure you that we are more accurate in our quotes than the other media who listen to what you say, write down what they think you said, and publish it as an accurate quote. Since rarely do people speak in actual sentences, it would be very hard to understand the exact lengthy quote of most people. For this reason, our report heard on newscasts of WTYM is exactly what they said. I believe our reporting to be accurate.
By JornJensen, February 18, 2012 @ 8:25 AM
Admin – You’ve answered my question and I appreciate the accurate response. This comment board is already up to 80 comments and I’m sure that it won’t end anytime soon. It’s either this topic, jobs or the expanding drug culture that are the top topics in this area. To me, this school thing and school taxes is the most important – we make the wrong decision, and you can put the fork in the area for good.
Even though this is history and we can’t do anything about it other than learn from it, Armstrong Central was 20 years too late when it did come about (per other districts down the valley) and should never have been disbanded when it was. For education, the end of Armstrong Central was the great failing of this this area.
By jerry6, February 18, 2012 @ 9:00 AM
You people who constantly critize the Kittanning Paper on their grammar and spelling and all of that should realize you are getting a free paper. You have the chance to blog your opinions for free. Where else can you do this. So, stop complaining about little things and get out and do something to improve your community and help someone else. Look in the mirror.
By sid87, February 18, 2012 @ 11:15 AM
@Devitt
So, just to be sure I am clear, you are of the opinion that we should send the money to another district and do nothing with our current inventory of 12 buildings? Keep buildings open which are in failing condition and graduating classes of less than 30 students. Buildings which consistently have less than 10 students in a class? I just want to make sure that is what you are saying should be done.
By JornJensen, February 18, 2012 @ 12:11 PM
Jan – WRONG on a couple of counts:
1) A referendum can’t be as simple as you propose just because you “see no point in renovating old buildings”. There appears to be at least 3 distinct routes, maybe more. Maybe some others can suggest some. As I stated, 1) Community schoolers and at some cost projection. 2) New schoolers and at some cost projection. 3) Downsizers and at some cost, maybe even savings, projection. You HAVE to include cost projections in a referendum so that people can choose in an ‘informed’ manner. If you choose this, it will cost you this, and so forth. One ‘downsizer’ idea presented in this string of comments above is to add to the new Shannock school – that is not building a new high school somewhere – that is downsizing and ‘rightsizing’. If adding to the new Shannock building is the correct way to downsize, then so be it.
Public buidlings are built to a much longer life expectancy than most private homes. They are ‘fixable’ and ‘upgradable’. If you take the attitude that over 100 year-old buildings are scrap, then we need to tear down the White House and the Capitol buildings in Washington, DC., and replace them with double-wides.
2)WRONG on Corbett. He is doing the fiscally responsible thing to cut education AND welfare, especially the welfare ‘cheating’ as you suggest.
Government in this country has been fiscally irresponsible for ages, and so have the people who have voted for ‘more and more for me’ from the government. Take the looming, near $3/4 million pension thing coming at us in the ASD – what will that do for better education? Corbett is doing the correct thing to bring us back into fiscal responsibility – time a bunch of others learn that.
By devitt, February 18, 2012 @ 3:53 PM
@sid87
Let me be crystal clear. I am not of any opinion at this time.
All I am saying is that your reasoning and logic is failed. I do not go with the context of “life is not fair” so just ignore an issue or a problem and let it go.
You made no sense in your first post.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:12 PM
It’s been a very long time since I posted on this blog, but after reading this thread, I have a lot to say!
There is an awful lot of misinformation being thrown about on this thread and it concerns me greatly when seemingly intelligent citizens are being misled and getting fired up for the wrong reasons. I implore every concerned taxpayer to make the effort to show up at as many board meetings and hearings as they can so they can form their opinions based on the real facts, not whatever snippets our local journalists decide to seize upon or the arguments posted here, which may or may not be based on fact.
I know, everyone is busy with jobs and family, but if you are passionate enough to be reading this, then you owe it to yourself to go and witness these things first-hand. Also, there are at least three local journalists at each meeting – read all of the articles to get a broader perspective. There is a lot of testimony and discussion being had at these meetings, and witnessing it all allows one to form intelligent opinions, not ones derailed by propaganda.
As I said, I have a lot to say so there will be numerous postings forthcoming. However, don’t take my word for it on anything. Go to teh meetings and learn for yourself. Don’t sit there and ask why the public can’t have input. You can – at every meeting.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:14 PM
Last year’s referendum indicated that the majority of voters did not favor spending $155M on a new school. Nothing more, nothing less. Anyone who claims that the vote meant that a new school is not wanted, or that renovation is wanted, or anything else is simply stating opinion, not fact.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:17 PM
Snyder bashing is childish and pathetic. I don’t personally know a single Snyder, but it seems to me that they provide employment for a lot of families and provide at least their fair share of charitable support around here. Hating someone because they are successful is pathetic, and there seems to be a lot of that going on in this county, whether the target be the Snyders, the “elitits,” or the “power brokers.” Get a grip on reality. Now if you can provide facts of corruption or wrongdoing instead of only speculation, let’s hear it. That’s a whole different story.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:33 PM
Those of you saying that new board members pulled a bait-and-switch are painting an interesting picture but it is not based in reality. Their “do nothing at this time” and “stop the madness” could very well have been genuine. However, the game changed between campaign time and now. During the campaign, NO ONE knew that defeasement or giving the money to other districts were not viable options.
With all fo the complaining going on here, no one seems to be able to put forth a valid argument against what the school board is currently doing. They have asked for options and are in the process of evaluating options (which, I might add, is in stark contrast to the previous board, which basically dictated the options to the architects). No one is breaking out their shovels just yet. “What’s the rush?” you ask. Well, I think (and I could be wrong) we are paying about $3.2M per year in interest on the bonds. Whatever the amount, it is money down the drain every day.
As for all of this talk about offering the money to other districts statewide, again, it seems that most of you aren’t aware of or are simply ignoring key facts. It has been stated that the outgoing board made a resolution to offer the money to districts statewide and it has been alleged that this hasn’t been done. First of all, let’s all recognize that it is well within the rights of the board to change direction (kind of like re-opening Elderton). Second, I was there, and I remember Dr. Solak basing the whole idea on the premise that we could offer the money to other districts within ARIN IU28 (Armstrong and Indiana Counties) without violating the bond rules. Whether the resolution included a statewide component I am unsure, but the board has been strongly warned by their bond counsel that doing so should only be done with IRS approval, which, they advised, would take a MINIMUM of 9 months and possibly YEARS. The Superintendent indicated that he had followed through with the resolution and tehre were no takers. Is he telling the truth? Well, I don’t know. Do you?
Some of you say we should go down the road of unloading the money to another district statewide. So basically, yuo want to wait 9 or more months to POSSIBLY get IRS approval, wait an unknown number of additional months to find a taker (which the district’s financial experts stated would likely not happen because of interest rate trends). How many years do you suggest we pay millions in interest with nothing to show for it? It was clearly stated by the experts that we could not make an attractive offer (even with the 35% discount provided by the federal government) given current interest rates. Yet some of you here claim to know better and are spreading rumors to the contrary. The district has already wasted $8M of the original $80M. How much more should be put at risk? For a bunch of people claiming they are interested in saving money, some of you sure are quick to let more of it trickle down the drain.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:35 PM
Members of the board have repeatedly said that they would not support any option unless it can be shown to reduce district operating costs enough to offset the project costs. Of course, you only hear that if you show up at the meetings. And for the renovation crowd, if you believed that the old board could pay for the renovations without raising taxes, why don’t you think the new board can do it? They have the same bond issues to pay for and few buildings to run and maintain.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:37 PM
The whole West Hills empire conspiracy theory is wearing quite thin. I personally couldn’t care less what your hairdresser’s cousin’s neighbor’s sister-in-law said she heard Amy Lhote say. Again, go to the meetings people. You won’t see any monsters on either side of the arguments. What you WILL see is honest questions being asked and ideas being debated openly. Yes, really. Right here in the ASD.
Who owns the land proposed for the new school? Who cares? If it’s obtained at a fair price and it’s in the right location, I don’t care if Bernie Madoff owns it. It’s irrelevant at this stage of the game, and just because you want to know so you can build your conspiracy theory, it doesn’t mean Mr. Berdell owes you any more information. Deal with it.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:41 PM
I agree with some of you that full trust in Kimball is a bit unsettling. However, some of you would not be happy no matter what the board did with this. If they fired Kimball, I would expect some of you to criticize them for wasting more money by abandoning the architects that have taken us this far, or firing them out of spite, or whatever. There is one reason to stay the course with Kimball, and that is that the board could take advantage of a facility study at no cost, which apparently was part of the existing agreement. Again, you would only know this if you attend meetings.
@ The Phantom “I personally would like to see an official explanation as to what is wrong with these buildings…”
One was provided in great length and detail by the district’s building manager at one of the January meetings. Again, if you want the facts go to the meetings and then decide.
Can everyone be trusted? Probably not, but forming your opinions based on this blog is like getting your national news from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:43 PM
As for referendums and giving this to the school kids as a project – both have their merits. I’m not against an honest referendum but 1) I think state law places serious restrictions on what can be on a referendum; while it sounds quite sensible it may not be possible and 2) Somebody has to write the referendum and as divided as opinions seem to be, half of the people would oppose it on principle. As for the school kids, while this may sound harsh to some of you, I did not cast my vote for knowledgeable, intelligent, professional adults so we could let children decide our fate. Besides, if we can’t all have trust in our elected board, what makes you think we would all agree on the recommendations from this board of school children? Or even the makeup of the board? Or the location of the meetings? Etc.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:44 PM
@Elderman – While we are obviously on opposite sides of many of these arguments, I would like to say that you obviously do your homework and your arguments often have more substance than most others on your side of the issues. Personally, I am interested in exploring options of changing the size of the district. However, I am not exactly optimistic that a fair deal could be struck (but it sure would be great if it could).
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:44 PM
I’d like to address the debate of a new school attracting business and families to the area. Without a doubt, I say that a new school is CRITICAL to that happening. Some of you say that we need the jobs first. All other factors being equal, it is a fact that companies would rather locate in an area with good schools. It not only serves as a pipeline of educated employees, but it makes attracting employees from other areas much easier. Quality of schools is among the top factors that influence where a family will locate. No, buildings do not educate students, but unless we can say that our curriculum is top shelf, which sadly we cannot, “curb appeal” plays a big role. And I’m not just talking about physical curb appeal. I’m talking about real opportunities (academic and extracurricular) and class sizes that aren’t a joke. I don’t believe we can compete with surrounding districts in a cost-effective manner with our current configuration.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:45 PM
@Amandacrksd-
One centrally located high school? All we heard for the past two years from the renovation crowd was that our district was way too big for a single high school. And now it’s a viable option? I disagree.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:47 PM
@Jerri –
I would like televised or radio broadcast board meetings as much as anyone. But please don’t try to blame the new board for the absence of broadcasts. Under the old board, broadcasts became VERY spotty and unreliable, even on the KP’s website. I don’t claim to know the cost implications or reasons why the meetings are not being broadcast. I would like to see it happen one way or another. However, keep in mind that we don’t have a God-given right to broadcast meetings. If there are technical or financial reasons why it can’t be done, then people should get out and attend meetings. That is, if they truly care.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:47 PM
@billybob65 –
I’m sorry but cartman is right. Schools should be near population centers, regardless of how those centers came to be. That being said, it needs to be feasible for all attendees. To have both, we probably need to redraw the district one way or another – which is also on the slate of options being considered at this time. And no, I do not live in East Franklin Twp. I live in Manor Twp and would have no issues sending my children to a HS at West Hills should that be deemed feasible.
By Elliot, February 18, 2012 @ 8:48 PM
@jornjensen –
I think you and I have very similar opinions, but I fear some of your recent posts are based on faulty information and a little bit of paranoia (and I say that with all due respect). There is no “rushing the choices” or “only talk of a new school.” There is talk of numerous options for configurations, all of which include a lot of building inventory reduction. You may not agree that a new school is needed, but the architects do, and so far I haven’t seen them do anything that smells bad (believe me, I question the wisdom of keeping Kimball, but I think there are valid reasons for doing so). And yes, based on the facts presented by the experts, we do have to keep the money, regardless of what you may read on this blog. That being the case, I say new $65M building is better than a bunch of fixer-uppers at the same cost. And again, no 500-job producing company will come here given our current school configuration.
By Tankster, February 18, 2012 @ 10:40 PM
rfullerton I could give example after example of how the West Hills clique has tried to move anything economically productive to that area and to heck with the rest of the county. Some of the affluent people will tell you themselves that their cause really has nothing to do with better academics or creating or creating a better learning environment for the children. They will also tell you that they know nothing of the issues concerning the issues dealing with education. They see this as a means to increase tax revenue for that area and possibly use the school as a means to draw in more tax money for THAT SPECIFIC AREA. The sickest thing that some of them will tell you is that they really do not care what impact or happens to the communities “on the other side of the river.” It has been ploy based on greed and shutting out other areas of any type of economic development.
This is no conspiracy. Many of them have no problem expressing this opinion, especially those who have a few friendly swigs of spirits. This pipe dream, rfullerton, is not something. It has been around for decades and those behind these beliefs are ruthless.
It is time for a new high school, but not in West Hills…..no way!
By JornJensen, February 18, 2012 @ 10:45 PM
jerry6 – If your comment is aimed at me, then you missed the point of my question. I think Admin caught it. I was not criticizing the KP. I do appreciate the KP’s work and am willing to pay for it if that is what is coming. No problem, it is worth it.
By cartman, February 19, 2012 @ 11:39 AM
JornJensen,
Your attitude as expressed in recent posts does nothing but keep alive the Solakian dream of another debacle like in the nineties. It is basically just the renovation scheme with different wording. Get the old buildings bandaged up a little, then the same clowns can come along and de-consolidate once again. Further, I do not share your sense of hopelessness for the county. Perhaps a decent school system would hep to make us into a bedroom community. The county should not just roll over and die.
By JornJensen, February 19, 2012 @ 5:54 PM
Elliot – Excellent assembly of comments – read them all. Because this is the most critical topic of this area in the past and for the future, the voters need to decide how to proceed, given a ‘group’ of well-defined and priced choices. We can’t just entrust 9 people with this critical decision. I agree with you that people should appreciate successful people, not dislike them. These successful people are those who bring jobs for the rest of us.
I’ll do as you say – I’ll try to make it to some meetings. I’ve only been able to attend one – that final one of the last majority – and that was a waste of my time.
I understand your point about ‘build it and they will come’, but the property taxes will be so far out that no one can sell their places and no one would buy their places. Further to that, my point of lack of right-to-work law prevents Pennsylvania from getting much of a fair shot at any manufacturing coming our way. Although confidential, and I can’t give details, a company located in Pennsylvania has just bought a large piece of capital equipment, but not for installation and operation in Pennsylvania – it is going to a location in the Dallas, Texas,
area, but no address is yet established because they haven’t built the building yet. This is truth, believe me or not. And Texas is a right-to-work state. I’ve informed Senator Don White of this situation.
Cartman – No, no please – no way wanting to keep alive the Solakian Dream. What I propose in downsizing and rightsizing is keep only what is absolutely necessary and tear down/sell the rest, otherwise, we’d just be back to the same old, same old – community schools that we can’t afford. There’s a grand difference between what I propose and the Solakian Dream. I understand your concern that if we do not have just one new high school that “the same clowns can come along and de-consolidate once again.” I agree with you on that concern and I don’t know how to stop that other than de-powering local school boards and have all major decisions made in Harrisburg.
I do not have a sense of hopelessness for the county – I have given commissioner Battaglia contact names and information of people in other areas of the country that have been and are successful in attracting work. I maintain that work is the basis for growth, not spending your way to it as the current administration in Washington, DC, seems to believe. Through a club, I have been involved with the Tourist Bureau to help bring people to the area (visit) and spend their money. So, I am very much pro-Armstrong County.
As I’ve stated before, Armstrong Central was 20 years late and should never have been dissolved. Having been educated further down the Allegheny River valley, I went through a ‘joining of school districts’ and it was the right thing to do then – they were preparing for the population loss as the baby-boomers were winding down on ‘growing the population’.
By scott_starr, February 19, 2012 @ 8:57 PM
@tankster:
If what you say is true, give names, and what was said to YOU. No hearsay please.
By JornJensen, February 20, 2012 @ 10:39 AM
Elliot – “You may not agree that a new school is needed, but the architects do, and so far I haven’t seen them do anything that smells bad”. So the architects know better than the taxpayers of the area? Are any of the architects tax-paying residents in the ASD?
Of course the architects think that we need a new school – they are architects – they are in the business of designing new schools for a fee and they can earn more money doing a new building! Yoi!
I’m starting to believe Kittanning Lady and the Solakians that the ‘silent seven’ were planning a new school all along. We taxpayers voted down the $155 referendum because we didn’t want a new school, nor did we want to waste $80 million trying to keep community schools alive. The referendum wasn’t worded to include ‘the rest of us’. The thing is that both choices (the Solakian many community schools and the new school only crowd) puts knives in the taxpayers’ backs. Downsizing and rightsizing into a few of the better buildings salvaged will allow the district to pay back the $80 million with savings (reduced costs while NOT giving taxpayers rebates) rather than sticking more knives in taxpayers’ backs.
When, again, is the next school board meeting? I’d like to try and attend.
By Wile_E_Coyote, February 20, 2012 @ 11:38 AM
Eliot, you are the man, nice job putting some facts out there… I still say problem #1 is the size of the district itself. Measure it anwyay you want, it’s not right sized (anymore).
Once you reorganize the size of the district itself, then you addess the longer term issues of what building(s) to keep / maintain, what buildign(s) to eliminate, how to consolidate (in existing buildings, expanding or renovating existing buildings or by building a new school or schools)… and what can and cannot be afforded….
And I will say that some of your points made me laugh out loud. Not so much because they are funny (they are sad really), I laughed because they were true. The Hatfields and McCoys attitude there is just beyond silly, it is embarrassing. It’s obvious by reading comments on here as I have for quite a while now and you see that many (not all) are only seeing and hearing what they want to. It’s sad to watch the amount of dysfunctionalness from a distance…
By for the children, February 20, 2012 @ 2:24 PM
Elliot,
Your comments are well thought out and right on the money.
To all,
Over the weekend I got together with some old friends. Naturally our discussion eventually turned to the state of the ASD. For the most part we agreed as a group that the ASD is in disarray. The most disturbing comment came a friend who works at a private college in the area. He said it is discouraging to him, as a graduate of the ASD, that his school will not give an application from a student in the ASD much more than a glance. The reason, the curriculum in the ASD is not rigorous enough to compete with the majority of the school districts in the Western PA area. This is the depths to which we have fallen as an school district. What hopes can our children have if we continue down the same road we have traveled for the last 30 years. Give the new board members a chance to create the educational opportunities our children deserve.
By JornJensen, February 20, 2012 @ 5:44 PM
By for the children – I know, let’s spend a bunch of money on buildings – that will fix our education dilemma!
Repeat – downsize and rightsize into what we have, get rid of the rest and offer a wider curriculum for a larger group nestled together.
By Elliot, February 20, 2012 @ 6:04 PM
JornJensen-
(and everyone else)
There will be a non-voting meeting this Thursday at 6:00 PM at the administration building.
By Tankster, February 20, 2012 @ 6:45 PM
@Scott
I am not into hearsay, but I am also not going on a blog and to start dropping names of private people who are not posting here. If a person or another person mentions the name in passing commentary, I will point it out, but most of the names have not even been mentioned on here. I think we will see more if they begin a plan to go to build at West Hills. I can tell you that there is a place on Water Street in Kittanning where there is plenty of West Hills support and dreams being discussed. I have yet to hear anything about how this is going to be beneficial for the children in regards to academics during these discussions. I have heard about what the new school could possibly do for growth in the West Hills area.
I have also heard a comment to the effect of “It is not my fault that they live in (——-). Have them find their own things to bring growth.”
It was the attitude of not wanting a new school but winning some type of contest.
I guess we shall see. Let’s hope for a new school and school directors who are looking out for the interests of the entire district.
If a new high school goes to West Hills, then this deal was done way before the last elections took place. I think it would be appropriate at that time to start bringing up these specific conversations of who said it and what was said before the decision was supposedly even made.
By Kittanning Lady, February 20, 2012 @ 7:11 PM
To everyone who went to a school in the ASD and graduated close your eyes remember when you were in your high school class? Now remember the walls the desks the windows the whiteboard etc..?And your teacher?Now think of a renovated school new windows ,furniture,white board etc.., Now think of yourself in a new school building you have walls furniture ,whiteboards etc…, and the same teacher. How does this better the education for our children? As I said before buildings do not teach children teachers do .Renovations were cheaper the new school WILL RAISE OUR TAXES !DON’T LET THEM FOOL YOU!!!!
By sid87, February 20, 2012 @ 7:31 PM
@ Devitt
No opinion eh? I think you stated in your Feb 16th post “No new buildings. No new school. Give the money back like the people voiced in the election…” Hmmm, that sounds like an opinion to me! So, which is it, no opinion, or do nothing? For the record, I never said anything about ignoring an issue. The intent of my “life isn’t fair” comment was to point out that some people feel as though they are owed something for nothing. If my post didn’t make sense to you, maybe you should read it again. I don’t really know how I can be more clear.
By Jan, February 20, 2012 @ 7:53 PM
@Jorn: The next meetings of the ASD are:
March 8: Caucus Meeting
March 12: Regular Meeting
7:30- Administration building.
By sid87, February 20, 2012 @ 8:07 PM
@ Elliot
I couldn’t agree with you more. All of your comments were spot-on!
By scott_starr, February 20, 2012 @ 8:27 PM
The issue has now changed based on the current situation. It is no longer about to build or not to build, it is what to do with the $80million which was borrowed.
The previous board, through, shall we say, less than infallable logic Borrowed $80 Million to renovate and expand already underutilized schools.
FACT: We have/had $80 Million borrowed to fix or build schools. This was done via Bond Issue which once past a certain time frame can not be given back or the bond cancelled.
FACT: The majority of the Tax payers did not want this money borrowed. However, using the logic of the illogic,THe previous board said if the voters rejected building a new school for $150 Million the voters MUST want $80 million spent on renovation.
FACT: The previous board, Rose, Jim et al. got creamed in the last election.
FACT: ASD still has the $80 million bond issue to deal with.
FACT: ASD could shop the bond issue to other districts, requiring and 8 – 9 month approval process and some reduction in interest rate.
For Confirmation: Some say the shopping of the bond issue was not done in good faith, this needs figured out. Hearsay does us no good.
FACT: The new board put all options on the table to decide what to do with the cash.
FACT: until the one unknown ( the veracity at which ASD shopped around the bond issue) is solved. We can say that the current board is doing what MUST be done by law….. Spend the $80 million.
FACT: The current board or the previous board, ASD still has an $80 Million bond issue to deal with.
This all boils down to one point. Regardless of who is/was in power ASD has an $80 million bond issue to deal with. Face it, if the current board memebers did not win election the $80 Million would already have been spent.
I have stated this from day one, since becomming involved in this issue ( and have been very consistent). FIX THE CURRICULUM BEFORE BUILDING OR RENOVATING. At the least start talking about the new curriculum while building.
THe curriculum can and will affect the layout of the building.
We have smart kids in the district, stop selling them short with a bad curriculum.
By Elliot, February 20, 2012 @ 8:40 PM
JornJensen-
Characterizing my opinion as “build it and they will come” is fairly accurate as far as families go, but in the case of businesses I recognize that there are other obstacles. In the context of attracting busines to the district, I guess a more accurate summation would be “don’t build it and it’s another reason not to come.”
“So the architects know better than the taxpayers of the area?” – Well, yes. How many of us know how to properly fit buildings to educational programming or navigate the PlanCon process? We hire professionals to advise us – nothing wrong with that. And of course they are out to make a buck, but in this case they are likely to earn the architect’s fees on $80M whether that $80M includes a new school or not. And again, since we have to spend this money on buildings (new or renovated), why not do it right, build a new school and end 40 years of a huge waste of human energy?
I understand that you want to downsize and reduce costs – so do I. And if we didn’t already have the money, I would be all for taking more conservative steps (and I believe the board would as well). Under your plan or mine, we reduce costs enough to pay for the bond (and spend the same amount). I guess what I’m saying is it’s the same “knife” in the taxpayers’ backs either way, so why not make the most of it? I don’t believe that downsizing and spending less than $80M is an option.
By Norman_Bates, February 20, 2012 @ 10:15 PM
Why would anyone even think about a school out on 422? Its a deadly enough to drive out there, let alone the day when kids will be making the walk home from there. And believe me the day would come when a kid would start to walk home after school some night…. Safety should be first, not lining the pockets of RICH !,, Folow the Money and the dots will line up…..
By maddog, February 20, 2012 @ 11:06 PM
Lol Elliot. It must be desperate times when school board directors have to do their own public relations on an anonymous blog. Deny it if you want. It’s easy to tell exactly who you are.
By Jan, February 21, 2012 @ 6:44 AM
@Scott: I agree with most of what you say and in fact, I believe that Mr.Robb stated at a special meeting that the board needs to look at the long range plan for the district so that it can come up with the short range plan. Many factors will drive what happens in the short term.
Let’s face it- no matter what this current board decides to do with the money, people will concoct all sorts of thoughts on why/why not the taxpayers are going to be shammed. It’s a lose/lose situation for them and this all occurred because of the past board’s $80M bond issue that needs to be spent or sold to another school district. If the Governor places a 1 year moratorium on PlanCon, there will be little chance that another district will want the money.The bottom line: this current board was put in a difficult situation that they now must decide on how best to use the bond money. I totally agree that the district needs to focus on curriculum to help our students be more competitive in post-secondary education or the work force.You are correct in that this will drive what/where the students go to school.
I also believe that we need to know what type of savings will be incurred by closing schools- this hasn’t been discussed. It may just defray the overall cost of building a new school, should it come to that. We can all speculate on what we think but the bottom line can’t be known until we have more facts on money saved on closing schools and money spent on a potential new school.
@Norman_Bates: agreed that 422 is not an attractive road (I travel it everyday) however, one consideration is that “if” a school were built in that area, lights would be installed so that may just help make the road safer. Also- since the school could be located on 422, there is little likelihood that students would be walking.
By JornJensen, February 21, 2012 @ 8:32 AM
Elliot –
So we agree on some key points and disagree on some. Not sure what your interest is in this, or your background – I have made mine clear on this site – I’m a taxpayer that brings every tax dollar that I’m obligated to pay from outside Pennsylvania and from outside of the United States – every tax dollar that I bring is ‘fresh’ money to this area, to the commonwealth and to the fed. I feel that I am over-taxed for the value that I get for the money.
On the ‘build it and they will come’ topic, high taxes negatively affect both families and businesses – they just won’t locate here. Rather than the negative of “don’t build it and it’s another reason not to come”, can we compromise on “downsize, improve the curriculum, get our finances in order and show prospective families and businesses that we have our act together – come on in.”?
I realize that we can’t compromise on one new building versus downsizing into what we already have – you’ll stick to your guns and I’ll stick to mine. I don’t understand what is so ‘right’ about building a new school versus renovating a few of what we already have. Does a new building improve our education? Remember, a new building will take years – remodeling a few existing buildings can be done now.
I’m glad that we agree on reducing costs enough to pay down the bond – and use the bond to ‘fix’ or ‘do’ the brick and mortar part. Like you, I believe that we’re stuck with the money even though we haven’t bit the bullet, taken the 9 months and advertised the money statewide.
Regarding our friends, the architects, whatever we do, remodel or new, try to get them to sign a contract to pay all overages – that will get us a more accurate estimate than we got on the last two schools.
I agree with you that if we’re stuck with what’s left of the $80 million, spend it and pay it off on savings rather than raising taxes. It’s time for a school board and an administration to make the really tough decisions – are they up to the ask?
I plan to be at Thursday evening’s meeting.
By Elliot, February 21, 2012 @ 9:20 AM
Norman Bates-
Find us a poor person who owns 66+ acres and I’ll stop thinking your post lacks any logic whatsoever.
By worthingtonman, February 21, 2012 @ 9:24 AM
@admin
What gives? You allow alot of these threads to go on and on when people are clearly trash talking families such as the Snyders. Personal attacks are levied against school board members( yes I am guilty of that one myself). How do you decide who can be slammed and who can not? Just curious.
By Elliot, February 21, 2012 @ 9:33 AM
Kittanning Lady-
You are absolutely correct. Buildings themselves do not educate people. However, they do help dictate how the education is provided, what resources are used in the process, and at what cost.
Please explain to us, how is $80M in renovations cheaper than $80M in new construction?
By Kittanning Lady, February 21, 2012 @ 10:40 AM
@ Norman_Bates,You have brought up a good point!One that I had not thought of.I have had 3 friends and 1 relative have wrecks on that stretch of highway.One friend did not make it he passed away.You are correct students will walk down the highway,They also will be driving to and from school either to work or after school activities. These are inexperienced drivers.Trucks travel this stretch of highway and do not respect the speed limit.This is a disaster waiting to happen.This makes me think does the school board majority,Amy Lhote,Chris Choncek, Jim Rearic, Stann Berdell,Larry Robb, Dr.Paul Lobby,and Joe Close, have our childrens safety in mind? or do they just want their new school no matter what?They WILL HAVE TO RAISE TAXES EVERYONE DON’T LET THEM FOOL YOU !!!!
By admin, February 21, 2012 @ 10:41 AM
@worthingtonman – It is a simple explanation, but not a simple operation. We are getting hundreds of posts per day which is wonderful. Interaction is important. However, because we do not employ a social meda director, it all has to be handled internally as we have time. Often a series of posts will be approved based merely on the fact that there was no improper language used, not necessarily on content. When I have time to go back over the comments, I occasionally find that a series of posts took on a life of their own. This is simple to do because posters get wrapped up in the passion of the moment. Please keep in mind that you are commenting on the issues…. and try to keep personalities to a minimum. The one thing that is not appropriate is for to assault a family member of another poster, or even the family member of someone contained in the article. This is not a venue for making slanderous statements. I cannot guarantee we will catch every occurrence, but I will say that it if we do, we will stop the comments on that article. Let us all keep focused, learn from each other, disagree in point with each other, but hold ourselves above slanderous remarks simply because we disagree.
By Elliot, February 21, 2012 @ 11:23 AM
maddog –
Okay, exactly who am I? You better be sure.
By Norman_Bates, February 21, 2012 @ 1:17 PM
Well it’s Normal for people not to see the big picture, kids will walk, parents will not pick them up, it’s a unfortunate fact in life. The kids safety should be number one but of course it will not be. Big $ agendas will prevail, corrupt ideals and small minds. This county needs not only upgrades in the school system but also should be trying to encourage another university to the county. Every county around us has a higher education system in place. We have a few rooms from IUP, really ? We are losing so much secondary $ leaving the county. Would be great to have all the $ here for rentals and spending throughout Armstrong. Imagine the tax money…
Then again why would certain people want a bunch of educated people all making over 100k , to live here. They would start to take an interest in the community and possibly run for office. Guess I answered my own question…..Sometimes it better to keep your foot on a person to keep them down….people need to wake up, and realize the big picture here…
By samkirk, February 21, 2012 @ 1:31 PM
@Elliot An 80 million dollar renovation is cheaper because there will never be a new high school built for 80 million. No way! Besides maybe someone here knows the answer. Isn’t it true there’s not 80 million to spend anyway?
By Jerri, February 21, 2012 @ 2:10 PM
Elliot- I disagree with you on your comments regarding a new school and how it dictates education. When a student is sitting in a new school classroom vs. a renovated classroom. Tell me what is the difference in educational resources. Unless you are counting the lack of new educational materials purchased in the new school because there is no money left?
Also you are very incorrect on the architect fees. They were already paid for their share of the renovation projects. That’s a large part of the $7 million used from the $80 million. They will ten receive another 6 percent or so for fees for the new projects. Tell me. What’s 6 percent of $70 million? Check this out with the architects maybe you’ll have your eyes opened
To Elliot or whomever commented about Corbett’s moratorium on PlanCon and letting other districts take all or part of the ASD’s bond money: there are many districts across this state that have projects started Corbetts actions won’t affect those. I think the fact that the sneaky seven voted down to even try to rid the district of some of the bond money speaks volumes. It says they wanted the money all along for their new school. The fact that Sara Yassem was lanced in that other local paper for wanting to rid the taxpayers if the financial burden of this bond money also speaks volumes. If she is being attacked by Mike O’Hare , then you know she was trying to do best for the taxpayers
By Jerri, February 21, 2012 @ 2:15 PM
Once again I ask. Jeff Pyle where are you???
You said taxpayers couldn’t afford to spend $80 million! YOU costed us $7 million in fees! You said your attritional committee said spending that money would raise taxes every year!
Jeff Pyle. It’s election time. The voters said NO to spending. Where are you?
By JornJensen, February 21, 2012 @ 2:20 PM
Elliot – Couple of answers to your question of Kittanning Lady:
“how is $80 million in renovations cheaper than $80 million in new construction?”
1) It is cheaper in renovations because we can do it now and effect the savings in downsizing/rightsizing sooner. A new school is how many years out realistically? 7 years? What do we do in the meantime to cut costs and to start payback of the loan?
2) Renovations can be held to $80 million or whatever number is left or whatever number you want to use – when you’re nearing running out of money, you stop. You do a prioritization and the items lower on this list have greater risk of not getting done if you overspend earlier on the list – but, you can control the outlay of cash.
A new school held to any number? Any recollections of the ‘adders’ on West Hills? Once you start a whole new building, there’s no justification for stopping, so the ‘adders’ pile up and you sock it to the taxpayers. That’s why I’d want architects to sign a contract to pay for adders if their cost estimates are ‘off a little’, like millions of dollars.
See you Thursday evening.
Admin – Agree 100%. Use this site to solve problems, share ideas, communicate and disagree cordially. Personal attacks are not necessary and only increase conflict – doesn’t help to solve any problems. I apologize to anyone who may think that I’ve ‘attacked’ them.
By Jerri, February 21, 2012 @ 3:06 PM
Elliot- in response to your comments to me regarding live televising of school board meetings, do I need to remind you that it was the previous school board that made them possible? Solak and Stitt argued for years to have the board meetings made live. The Kerr administration and the Rupp, Close, Choncek and Rearick majority didn’t want it. Do you think it’s a coincidence that as soon as they got in power again, they changed the board meeting dates to make it impossible for live broadcast?
Your references to spotty telecasts must be referring to what happened with the tapings of the meetings when hundreds of HERO members attended. The district was recording the first hour or two of meetings. Then playing it on Saturday mornings. Kerr was superintendent. Funny those were the only times there ever were sound issues. Kerr didn’t want the public to hear what the Elderton speakers were saying. Close, Rupp and company saved their nastiness for when the cameras were off. Hundreds of people witnessed Close saying he didn’t need to worry about any area but his own or telling people if they don’t like it to move. Or my personal favorite example of rudeness telling a father at the podium that he didn’t need to worry about what bus she rides. He’ll know when the school bus ” you know that big yellow thing with wheels” pulls up in front of his house
It costs nothing for Family Life TV to broadcast live So what’s the board’s problem?
Your comment “We don’t have a God -given right to broadcast meetings.” sure explains a lot. It appears you attend meetings because you’re sitting at the table. You really should watch for such slip ups
By JornJensen, February 21, 2012 @ 3:32 PM
maddog – I, for one, do not know who Elliot is, but I appreciate the communication because it is well-presented and appears well-informed. The KP site has turned out to be a wonderful tool for this sort of communication – we can’t all be in one place all of the time. If Elliot is a school board director, then fine – I appreciate that and the communication.
I just struggle with how we started out with a clean-slate brainstorming session some weeks back and then two weeks later, the edict comes out to close nominations on one of 8 choices that all 8 involve a new building only. What did I miss here? To me, that’s a snow job, more than we’ve had this entire mild winter.
By Kittanning Lady, February 21, 2012 @ 5:08 PM
@ Elliot,Please tell us where the school board is going to get the money to build a new school ?,since you seem to know so much(please do not think I am being rude as you can not tell the tone of my voice by typing). I have read your comments and you seem to know a lot,please tell me how a new school can be built with the remaining money without raising our taxes? not being rude,it just seems you know a lot.
By jerry6, February 21, 2012 @ 5:10 PM
All of a sudden you people are worried about kids riding buses on 422. Why wasn’t you worried about the kids riding buses on 422 to Elderton high school? They have been doing that for years. Now that someone talks about building a new high school along 422, now the road is dangerous. When they closed Elderton, a lot of parents on this side of Elderton were glad. You people never worried about that road till now. I think you are showing what the problem really is with you people. You are mad because Solak and Stitt are no longer there. Solak got the $80 million and you Solak supporters didn’t say too much about it then but now that they have to do something with it, why not put it into a new school rather than put band aides on these old buildings.
By admin, February 21, 2012 @ 10:48 PM
Let’s quit guessing identities. Elliot is NOT a member of the school board. Let’s stick with the information contained in the posts.
By admin, February 21, 2012 @ 10:54 PM
As I said in an earlier post… enough of the identity guessing game. Let us stick with the information contained in the article and the response via posts. Elliot is NOT a school board member. Enough said!
By Elliot, February 21, 2012 @ 11:23 PM
Jerri-
No, actually I am referring the past two years when Stitt and Solak were in power. It seems to me that broadcasts wbecame rather unreliable. As for what you allege about Rearic, Choncek, and Close opposing the broadcasts, it is my understanding that they opposed entering into a contract for the broadcasts because they felt that the contract was unnecessary, not that they wanted to avoid broadcasts. It sounds to me that they had a valid point.
I don’t know why it would be implausible that the meetings were changed for valid reasons. I imagine some of the board members have demanding jobs.
As for what nasty things may have been said, I can’t comment on that other than to say I don’t condone it. Tensions run high and it definitely comes from both sides.
Admin – You are uniquely qualified to answer some of the questions about the broadcasts. What are the issues that prevent consistent broadcasts? How does the change in meeting times affect your ability to do this?
By Elliot, February 21, 2012 @ 11:30 PM
SamKirk –
With all due respect, that is just your opinion. Other districts in our region have recently built larger schools for less money. The names escape me right now but I’m sure you can find them on the ‘net with a little effort. I think one was Moon Twp. I’m sure someone on here can help me out with the name of the other one.
You are correct that we now have roughly $72M left. One of the options buys a new school and a remodeled Elderton K-6 for $65M. Yes, there may be overruns, which can also happen with renovations.
By Elliot, February 21, 2012 @ 11:49 PM
Jerri –
Regarding my point about the relationship between the building and education – what I mean is that educational opportunities can be provided in a new consolidated building more cost effectively than in four scattered buildings. Yes, these savings can also be realized by simply consolidating, which brings me back to my question, “Why renovate when you can build new for the same money?” Besides, $80M in renovations has been defeated by the PDE and the voters.
Yes, I imagine the architects will get more design fees. That point is largely irrelevant because their original designs have been rendered useless (by the PDE and voters) and we will pay them for more design work regardless of how the money gets spent.
I find it interesting that you call this board the “sneaky seven” and then in your very next post chastise THEM for being rude to people. Once again, they voted to discontinue the process of finding a taker for the bond money because it was turning into a potentially expensive exercise in futility. Drawing the conclusion that it proves they “wanted the money all along for their new school” is purely speculation. As for Mike O’hare, implying that he is the antithesis of saving the taxpayers money is rather illogical. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that the local newspaper would benefit from an improved economy with increased jobs, commerce, retail, advertising, etc.?
By Elliot, February 22, 2012 @ 12:01 AM
Jorn Jensen –
I don’t think we need to wait until a new school is built to start realizing savings. There are intermediate steps that can and should be taken (e.g. closing Elderton HS). And I believe the architects have stated a completion date of Fall 2015 if we proceed in a timely fashion.
You are much more optimistic than I am about being able to control costs of renovations. I think it’s pretty unlikely they’d vote to stop any project due to an overrun – renovation or new construction. In theory, you may be right, but I’d be amazed if it happens in practice.
And so, I advocate a new building: same bond money, same cost reductions, and an end to the territorialism.
By Elliot, February 22, 2012 @ 12:16 AM
Kittanning Lady-
The district already has the money. Bonds were issued under the previous board and the money must be used for building projects. There is a possibility that the money could be transferred to another district (effecively getting us out of this mess) but, for various reasons detailed in earlier posts, it was not likely to be successful. Besides, if we unload the money, then what? Most people seem to agree that we have to do something, and whatever that is will require money.
You ask how a new school can be built for the remaining money. A new HS alone can be had for around $55M (other districts have recently done this). The plans being contemplated here estimate a new HS and renovated Elderton K-6 for around $65M (this is only one of the options being considered). The bond payments will be made by cost reductions brought about by building closures. This is a primary criterion stated by several board members – that the projects must pay for themselves.
By JornJensen, February 22, 2012 @ 5:48 AM
Jerri and Elliot – I’ve also heard the Joe Close comment, ‘didn’t need to worry about any area but his own’, second-hand, from a poster on the KP site. We batted that one forth and back for a number of postings.
I’ll repeat my comment on that situation – If a school board director doesn’t feel that they represent every square mile of the ASD, then we don’t need them on the school board.
Test that by coming up with a name and ask yourself, ‘Does/did this person represent every square mile of the ASD?’ If they do/did not, then you’ll find the roots of the ASD problems.
By Lancret, February 22, 2012 @ 6:17 AM
I am just wondering why they do not utilize the property they have now and build the new school at Lenape? There is plenty of property already owned there and there are lots for sale near there if more property was needed.
By nonamerequired, February 22, 2012 @ 7:48 AM
Jerry6, Elderton HS isn’t right along 422. It’s in a town off of 422, and there are obvious differences. I actually didn’t really think of any safety issues when I heard about the 66 acres, as I was thinking of other things, however I do have a question. If they would choose that location, who pays to alter a major highway? I would assume turning lanes, lights, etc. need to be put in. Also, what is the water and sewage source there? Is it public sources, or on lot sources? Are these taken into the architects considerations?
By jerry6, February 22, 2012 @ 9:12 AM
Kittanning Lady: YOur comment on you are worried about the kids walking to school is funny. There aren’t many houses that near to where this school on 422 would be built and I know of not that many kids who live in this area that they would be walking to school. Before any one gets all upset over a new school, we need to be told exactly how much it would cost and how many students would be in this school. It it is only 10th-12th grades, then do the math. How many kids from Ford City, Kittanning, KT kids from Elderton would be in this school. It isn’t any mega school like people think. Wait to hear all of the information before you jump to conclusions.
By Elliot, February 22, 2012 @ 10:11 AM
Lancret –
I believe the land at Lenape is not quite enough to build a new school, based on what I’ve heard at various board meetings.
By admin, February 22, 2012 @ 10:22 AM
The former board continued an established schedule of the third and fourth Monday of the month, except for unique situations such as a holiday. When the decision was made to attempt live broadcasts, it was based on that schedule. Kittanning has always been the first Monday; Ford City had moved their meetings from the first Monday to the second Monday to accommodate broadcasts as well as their own internal procedures for paying bills; We had the third and fourth Monday available so it was a good fit.
We have had some problems with the live broadcasts, but we were working together with the school district to resolve the issues. Internet protocols are difficult to manage between platforms, but a healthy relationship existed between their IT staff and ours. We were solving the problems as they occurred.
Then the new board took over. There was no communication between them or us. We heard them announce that they were changing the meeting schedule. Their caucus meeting now conflicts with an established rebroadcast of a church service that has been done for 20 years. Their public meeting conflicts with Ford City Borough. Also, there has been a lack of attention by anyone on this board to the overall “media” production, so their own audio/visual departments are not as receptive as they once were to us. Please do not misconstrue that comment. We still maintain a working relationship, which is evidenced by WTYM starting to carry the audio version of their ASD-produced TV program Education Today starting on March 7 at 12:30 PM. However, when there is not emphasis put on a production, it suffers. This is the case now. This board is not concerning themselves with internal or external media. Furthermore, there is no active plan in place that when an emergency happens in the district, the information is properly disseminated. Dr. Chap’s office is closed to all inquiries during those periods, and local administrators are not permitted to release statements or are too busy handling the problem. I have spoken with Dr. Chap about the issue, and he was very non-receptive. So from the top down – the Board, the Superintendent, and into the individual schools – there is no media emphasis — not even a controlled one such as was the case under Dr. Kerr. If anyone in the District feels this is not the case, I would be glad to discuss it openly or privately with them.
I also want to say that this issue is not specific to ASD. It is in every small municipality in the county, including the county itself. I have offered to hold seminar luncheons with officials to give them some helpful advice on working with the media in general. There does not have to be the continual polarization and friction between the media and the government. Working together produces an open, transparent atmosphere where ideas can be debated and progress can be made.
This was much longer than your inquiry probably required, and I apologize for that. One last thought… Wednesday nights are totally open on any week. Perhaps the Board could keep that in mind if they would consider changing their schedule at some point so we could work together again.
By Elliot, February 22, 2012 @ 10:24 AM
Jorn Jensen –
I agree with you about school directors and who they represent. However, the territorial mindset does not start with the board members. It is rampant among the citizens of the county. You and I see this area as a single community. Many others, sadly, do not. In the past, it may have been difficult for a board member to even get elected if he/she did not promise to fight for their small part of the county. I think the new voting districts have changed that significantly, and I think minds are starting to open a little bit.
I guess what I’m saying is that, like it or not, elected officials are a reflection of the people who put them there – and sometimes that’s pretty darn depressing. Just look at the ignorance that is frequently displayed on this blog – those are our neighbors.
On the bright side, I can honestly say that there has been more open-mindedness and civility displayed by the board these past three months than at any time in the past two years.
By Elliot, February 22, 2012 @ 10:32 AM
Admin -
Thanks for the explanation. In my opinion, it would be very difficult for a single station to carry live broadcasts of every government meeting – way too much coordination needed among groups. However, I would think it possible to run the taped meetings the next day or evening, or whenever your schedule permits. I’m not sure if you are currently doing that.
As for the board meeting changes, again it seems completely plausible that the feasibility of broadcasting live meetings is not the number one factor when setting meeting times/dates. And that’s okay with me. People need to realize that there are bigger, more important things in this world than themselves and if witnessing the meetings is really important to them, they should make the effort to be there live.
By jerry6, February 22, 2012 @ 1:09 PM
nonamerequired??? I was not talking about Elderton High school. I was talking about the ride on 422 to Elderton High. I know exactly where Elderton High is at. I don’t know where you got the idea I was talking about the school. I was talking about 422 and the ride to the school.
By wakeup, February 22, 2012 @ 2:03 PM
Can you really control costs in renovations? Have you renovated an old building. Remodeling always leads to unknown costs and over runs. You never know what you find when you open up a wall that is 50 to 100 years old. One big word is ASBESTOS?
What is the difference to a child in a new school compared to old? Ask the kids that are in a science, the arts or computer lab in Pine Richland to attend class for a week in Ford City and then lets ask them? Look at the tools that are available to those kids because the schools infrastructure supports it.
Is a new office building more efficient that one built in the 50′s? Which cost more to maintain 5, 10, 20 years out? Part of the problem with this district is we fail to look past the present.
I also love those that fear the “west other side of the river” but when a location on the east side is proposed there is a huge conspirracy.
By cartman, February 22, 2012 @ 4:30 PM
I think I know exactly what will happen. There will be consolidation into old buildings. That is so lame that nobody will like it. That unhappiness will be reflected in the election of a backward thinking board that will deconsolidate, putting us right back where we are now, after a lot of expense and aggravation. If this chance to do something right is blown, and I think it will be, the district is done for.
By kwiss4, February 22, 2012 @ 5:23 PM
Elliot,
You are incorrect in the 65million for new high school and new k-6 in elderton. The new school is 69 million plus a new k-6 in elderton for 15 million and 4.5 million for athletic fields. That comes to 94.5 million.
By forward, February 22, 2012 @ 5:42 PM
Wow, that Jorn, now he has ‘fresh’ tax dollars, much fresher than the rest of us I’m sure. May we all feel shame when writing out checks for our taxes that our money is not as fresh as his. This is in addition to all his other great feats. Impressive to say the least !….Oh yes, I do know what he means when he talks about fresh money, but isn’t it something how everything the man does is so special.
Also, the admin has a tough enough task going through all the lengthy comments on this blog, and he provides us with the forum to speak, so let’s please all respect that and not give him a rough time. I believe that he is doing the best job possible…..Well, that is, unless Jorn was to do it………..
By Lancret, February 22, 2012 @ 5:57 PM
There is plenty of land owned by the district at Lenape. And if that is not enough, there are parcels for sale near that site. I am sure if they knocked on a few doors or made a few phone calls to buy some surrounding land, people would sell it at a reasonable cost.
This would be much cheaper than trying to purchase an entire plot for the school, the fields, etc. You already own most of it at the Lenape site.
I am not understanding this.
I am going to put a phone call into one of the directors and ask for an explanation.
This is not sounding right at all. If you already so many acres (let’s say 3/4 of the land that is needed) and there is additional land for sale and some that could be negotiated, then why would you not try that route first?
By sid87, February 22, 2012 @ 8:47 PM
The argument that 422 would be a poor location because of all the kids walking is ridiculous. How many students do you see from West Shamokin walking along route 85 before or after school???
By Tankster, February 22, 2012 @ 10:31 PM
There is no conspiracy concocted about the “west side of the river.” History shows and proves it to be true to a degree. They got stifled in their push to put the YMCA over there, because people spoke up. If you look at the same people who were pushing to put the YMCA over there then you have most, or at least some, of the people who are now attempting to sway the board members to put a new high school over there.
I laugh at these people who keep wanting to use the word conspiracy and then say it is just based on hearsay. If you are active in county events or even have a wide social network, this is not something that is covered up that is not discussed in open discussions. There are people who openly state unequivocally that they have talked to board members and other people in influential positions to get that school in West Hills. And whether you like it or not, some of these people will also tell you that is basically time for some areas within the county to sink and for others to rise to bring prosperity back to this county. You can agree or disagree with this thought process, but it is the belief of some heavy-hitters out there. Speaking just for me, I do not have a problem with an area enjoying some new growth, but not all of the growth, especially the big-ticket items. I am for a new school. That I can agree entirely with those people. It is time for this to occur. I also think the location is a key factor in this. Put in the most populous area so more people can flock to that area from the other areas? What happens to those other areas? Are we going to keep offering things like ARC Manor to them?
I think Jan and Scott both have mentioned the Lenape area like somebody did above. There is plenty of land around that site. I think having the new high school and the Lenape Vo-Tech in the same vicinity would be OUTSTANDING in regards to academics and training. Then we may not hear all of this fuss about full days and 1/2 days. If we are going to do it, let’s do it right. What about the land for sale right at the Edgewood intersection? Berdell somehow stumbled on this ONE property site. Has anybody else on the board talked to any other landowners or real estate people?
Dr. Lobby has a large circle of contact I would suppose. I do not mean that in a bad way. Has he made any contact to anybody about possible available land up by Lenape or the surrounding area?
How about some of these other directors coming to the table with any information they have discovered.
I would also urge the public in general to contact the ASD Board if you own land that you may want to negotiate for in regards to a new high school for Kittanning, Ford City and Edlerton, and I would include West Shamokin. There has to be more than just one site to be looked at in this entire district.
By Elliot, February 22, 2012 @ 11:14 PM
kwiss4-
Please read my post carefully. I said “renovated Elderton K-6″ not “new K-6.” You are talking about an entirely different option than I am. I am talking about the new 9-12 HS for Kitt/FC, a renovated Elderton K-6, and KHS renovated into a 7-8. Total cost is $64.5M plus about $5M for athletic fields. (I did forget the fields in my earlier post.) Speaking of athletic fields, it is my understanding that those estimates included artificial turf at a cost of $1M, which would likely be removed to trim costs. However, those savings may well be offset by the addition of a field house, which I understand was not included in the estimate.
While I used this as an example, there are several other configurations being contemplated, one of which is as you described. However, I’m guessing it will not receive much further consideration due to the cost.
By Elliot, February 22, 2012 @ 11:19 PM
Lancret-
As for the land at Lenape, I am only stating what Dr. Solak has stated at board meetings. I don’t know anything about available land adjacent to the ASD property. I hope you’re not referring to the residential building lots across the street. I think the asking price on those is somewhere around $35k for about a half acre. If you are correct, I agree that it would be a fine location.
By nonamerequired, February 22, 2012 @ 11:32 PM
Well, jerry6, what I mean by that is that there are obvious differences between a school being located right along 422 and one being located in a town off of 422., as far as safety is concerned. ie bussing / student drivers. No more, no less. Students from all schools travel that highway. I also wasn’t one that said my major concern was safety, although of course it is a concern for all schools. I would assume if they choose that location, the board will take all precautions with lights and turning lanes and make it as safe as possible. Am I allowed to say, with no backlash, that whatever they decide, I think the taxpayers deserve the reasoning behind any decision made, and also a cost breakdown of anything they choose to do, whether it be downsizing, consolidating and remodeling, versus a new school. I also think any tax paying resident should be allowed to voice their opinion based on their decisions, and have them respectfully heard. And I’m also going to state one last time, even though my name wasn’t specifically brought up, I am in no way a conspiracy theorist. I respect anyone who makes an honest living, whether they be millionaires or work at McDonalds. I appreciate anyone who pays taxes and doesn’t look for a handout. However, I am a tax paying resident who would like to know where my tax dollars are going. My taxes are roughly 400 dollars per month on top of my mortgage, and I expect the people who are using those dollars to tell me where they are going, why they are going there and who all benefits from them.
By nonamerequired, February 22, 2012 @ 11:58 PM
And also before I get any backlash for saying safety isn’t a concern of mine, of course it is. I almost hate writing anything on here because there is usually immediate backlash from those who disagree. What I meant by that is I may not be sure of the board and their intentions at this point, but I do believe that they would take every step necessary to ensure all students’ safety.
By Jan, February 23, 2012 @ 7:43 AM
Did some research regarding a question that Elliot asked about other schools in western PA who just completed new buildings.
Bethel Park HS: Total cost: $87,673,451(18% under budget)
Included: 326,000 sq. ft. structure.(much more than we would need)
96 classrooms ( grade 9-12)
8 lane swimming pool
2450 seat gymnasium
3 fitness rooms
1286 seat auditorium
small theater
TV studio
700 seat cafeteria
Demolition of 8 old buildings
378 space parking lot
8 tennis courts
3 full size practice fields
new baseball field for 9th. grade
New lights for stadium and new parking for stadium
Moon Twp. High School (9-12th)
281,200 sq. ft. structure
Total cost: $42,750,000.
850 seat auditorium
State of the arts facility
450 student cafeteria w/ food court
8 lane pool
new gymnasium
demolition of old buildings
Renovation to old high school for Middle School
Point: if these schools, with all the excess that this district isn’t looking at can build at these costs- I feel pretty certain that we should be able to build for much less and if the architects can’t do this- then perhaps we need to look at architects who can. If it was going to take $80M to renovate all of our schools, then I would think we could close,demolish and build a new HS at much less.
By kwiss4, February 23, 2012 @ 7:52 AM
I apologize there is an option that says a new high school could be built for 65 million plus 5 million for athletic fields. What is unclear is does that 65 million number include the cost to renovate KHS into a 7-8 and Elderton into a k-6? It was stated at one meeting that Elderton would need 800 thousand in renovations, I don’t recall if a number was given for renovation cost for Kittanning.My original point is that all of this can not be done with 65 million dollars.
By kwiss4, February 23, 2012 @ 8:01 AM
Lancret,
Every study has stated that building at Lenape and the ASD taking over the operation at Lenape was the way to go. We have students from two of the sending schools opting to send students to another Tech school and we have Lenape piloting a half day program, I think you may be on to something, even though it has not been discussed in a meeting.
By Kittanning Lady, February 23, 2012 @ 9:55 AM
@Jan LIES!!!!! The bid for Bethel High school was 18% under bid .I went to the Bethel High School Website ,scroll down to the last page under COST It states!!!! That when the entire project is completed the total cost of the project will be 91 MILLION DOLLARS! paid for by a 25 YEAR ,94 MILLION DOLLAR BOND.Once again Jan, lies.
By Kittanning Lady, February 23, 2012 @ 9:57 AM
Oh ,Incase anyone caught it and will be nasty about it .The school is Bethel Park High School
By Elliot, February 23, 2012 @ 10:14 AM
Tankster –
I agree with your point about evaluating several sites. What makes you think the board will not do this? Obviously, in a list of possible sites, one of them has to be mentioned first. Since that site happens to be owned by Snyders, everyone gets bent out of shape. I too expect the board to evaluate all reasonable options. It is very early in the process. The district footprint could even change before all of this plays out, making some land less desirable and other land more desirable.
On this subject, can someone please explain to me how the placement of a school impacts that township’s local economy? I don’t see any stores springing up around West Hills because there are schools there. Does the township receive additional tax money from having a school? I’m not out to sink any area of the district, but I’ve always believed that it is not the purpose of a school to make a community viable.
By Elliot, February 23, 2012 @ 10:27 AM
kwiss4 –
According to the information first presented, that $64.5M does include renovation of KHS into a 7-8 and renovation of Elderton into a K-6. So,the total project cost, with athletic facilities, is roughly $69.5M. I’m not sure if that is the best option, but it is one option.
Jan –
Thanks for posting your research on Moon Twp. and Bethel Park.
By JornJensen, February 23, 2012 @ 11:40 AM
Jan, nonamerequired, Elliot and some others – You folks are starting to sway me toward a new school – excellent arguments (or positions on the topic). The synergy at Lenape makes great sense to me as I’m a strong fan of what Lenape VoTech brings to the workplace.
nonamerequired’s position, as stated slightly above here is exactly the same as mine – “taxpayers deserve reasoning…..”, “I appreciate anyone who pays taxes and doesn’t look for a handout.”, “I expect the people who are using those (tax) dollars to tell me where they are going, why they are going there and who all benefits from them.”
Great words, nonamerequired!
Tax abuses are one of the many causes of anger in this country these days, and a cause of the great divide among us.
My concerns with the new school idea is, what are we going to do, financially, from now through the 7 years to get into a new building?
How are we not going to have the financial disasters of the West Hills project?
I like Jan’s comment regarding the architects – “if the architects can’t do this – then perhaps we need to look at architects who can.” To that, I’d like to add, “and who will take full responsibility and liability for any overages.”
Remember, architects are no different than anyone else out there wanting to sell you something – doesn’t matter if you can afford it or not.
forward – I’m glad that you like my ‘work’ so much – you obviously read it. Hope to see you at the meeting this evening.
By Lancret, February 23, 2012 @ 7:09 PM
I am wondering that myself why Lenape is not even being discussed but they kick up a pebble and find this land to buy on Rt. 422. Questions need answered. I could care less what Solak said. He was just trying to protect the community schools. I see no reason why Lenape is not on the top of the list. We would have a great anchor for our entire district having a Vo-Tech and high school in such close proximity. Does anybody know if any other districts have that type of set up? Sounds like a win-win to me. Cuts down on your transportation. Gives students many options to explore.
By GetSmart, February 24, 2012 @ 6:20 AM
@ Jan:
A little additional info: Don’t forget that the Bethel Park Building project originally came in much less than the numbers you gave. And,it wasn’t overuns that jacked up the cost. They elected to UPGRADE to include additional expenses like making the halwayys 2 feet wider than needed, extra quiet floor materials, green items, etc., etc. I believe they elected alnost $10 million in upgrades, because they could afford it. The Bethel Park number could realistically have been much, much lower.
By Elliot, February 24, 2012 @ 11:11 AM
Lancret -
Warren School District has this type of setup. The VoTech is on the same campus as Warren Area HS (and an elementary school).
Aside from the amount of land available, the issue may be that a site somewhere to the east would be preferable in order to better accommodate some of the students from the current Elderton attendance area.
By Jan, February 24, 2012 @ 1:36 PM
@GetSmart: I think I added that Bethel Park came in 18% under budget and yes- you are correct- the building project there was built with environmentally green products: they pulled out all the stops. Of course, it is a richer district and can afford to do what they did. My point in providing the information that I did was that if these two schools,( and I’m sure there are others) can build what they did for the cost they paid- we as a district should be able to construct a school to meet our needs for much less. Hays was the architect for one of those schools- off hand I can’t recollect which one.
@Kittanning Lady: go back and re-do your research. The figure you gave is after they added the additional “environmentally friendly” building products. The original cost came in 18% under budget. To say I am lying is negligent on your part. You don’t like what I have to say? Don’t read my post. Like anything else- you need to read the fine print.
Regarding Lenape and the property surrounding it- there really isn’t enough land there to do what some people propose. Besides a building, you need to think about additional parking, athletic fields, etc. and there is just not enough property to do that there- although, like many, I think it would be an excellent place to build a new school but it’s just not suitable for our needs.
I like that the school board is doing it’s due diligence and investigating all avenues before making any type of decisions- this is what a good board does.
By Lancret, February 25, 2012 @ 4:02 PM
There is plenty property up by Lenape. It is true that the land which is currently owned may be not enough, but it would be wise to purchase the remaining land needed. That would cut costs rather than buying a entire plot in another area. They have sewerage in place. Lenape makes the most sense, so I want to hear more discussion on that location.
By forward, February 25, 2012 @ 4:27 PM
jorn, What you call work, I call ” your opinion with a dose of self praise included “. I just want to help you get noticed more so I call attention to the braggadocio that you always include in your comments.
Hey, I’m just trying to help others see how special you are.