Glen Park parents are not impressed
They doubt study on school's possible closure
Nov. 29, 2011 | 14 comments
New Berlin - The school district's facilities assessment goes well beyond one topic, but the people at this week's listening session wanted to talk about one thing: Glen Park Elementary School.
Specifically, they want it to remain open, regardless of whatever recommendations Chicago-based IFF consulting group makes.
Speaking to the School Board on Monday, Glen Park parents pointed to research that they said indicates that small neighborhood schools like Glen Park are better for students and the community.
An elementary fixer upper
But the bottom line is that deferred maintenance has made Glen Park costly to fix up. The IFF study pegged the cost of bringing Glen Park up to full code compliance and to the standards for new construction at about $4.1 million.
IFF's assessment of Glen Park states: "Overall, the facility appears to be in poor but functional condition."
Joe Garza, who took over as superintendent of schools only this year, said the district can't keep up on preventive maintenance.
Spaced-out projections
Some disputed IFF's conclusion that the other schools have plenty of room for Glen Park's nearly 300 students.
They said that seems to contradict the school administration's contention only last spring that parceling Glen Park students to Ronald Reagan and Elmwood elementary schools would mean an addition would eventually be needed at Elmwood to accommodate growth.
Glen Park parent Rich Tadych was among those troubled by the IFF report, saying that the schools have 1,000-seat extra capacity with which to absorb Glen Park students when only last spring the previous superintendent Paul Kreutzer estimated the extra capacity at 300.
"It seems odd the numbers have changed so drastically," he said.
While he doesn't know how Kreutzer got his estimate, Garza said after the meeting that the IFF estimate of available space is too high. He and the school principals came to that conclusion after reassessing space at each school.
Eisenhower, too?
Glen Park isn't alone among local schools is less than ideal condition.
Eisenhower middle and high schools were also addressed in IFF's report, which has at least considered the question about whether the district's two high schools should be combined.
In assessing Eisenhower, IFF's report states: "Overall, the building is in fair to acceptable condition relative to the other facilities operated by the district."
Fixing up Eisenhower has a price tag of $5.4 million. Rebuilding the pool would add roughly $3.9 million, IFF estimates, bringing Eisenhower's potential total to $9.3 million.
Costly proposition
So if Glen Park stays open and Eisenhower also gets some work done, the question becomes where does the district get the money to fix them.
The district could ask voters for the money in a referendum, but School Board member Art Marquardt doubted it would pass based on the failure of a $29.9 million referendum in Muskego last month.
In addition to refining the space estimate as it pertain to Glen Park students, staff will try to refine the extra costs involved in putting more students into other schools by the time the School Board takes the matter up again on Dec. 19.
NEXT STEP
WHAT: New Berlin School Board discussion and possible action on closing Glen Park Elementary School
WHEN: 7 p.m. Dec. 19
WHERE: New Berlin West Middle and High School, 18695 W. Cleveland Ave.
E-mail Newsletter
Your link to the biggest stories in the suburbs delivered Thursday mornings.
Enter your e-mail address above and click "Sign Up Now!" to begin receiving your e-mail newsletter
Get the Newsletter!
More from News and Features
- Werner vacates Muskego alderman seat sooner than expected
- Share your thoughts on Act 10 with NOW using social media (26)
- News & Notes: May 15
- Ike students team up for academic success
- For West student, this camp is simply out of this world
- Muskego recall effort now limited to Werner's seat
- Police Report: May 14
- New Berlin man charged with sexually assaulting his granddaughter
- The trifecta of invasive plant species (2)
- News & Notes: May 7
14 COMMENTS
Vox Populi - Last edited on Nov 29, edited 3 times in total - Report Abuse
Worse, the community isn't even being given an accurate view of the situation. The new report conveniently ignores work needed on Eisenhower to bring it up to current standards. This explains how this version comes up with a number for repairs that's so much lower than previous estimates of work needed there. So the community will be asked to spend millions to have antiquated educational facilities at one of the high schools. Science labs like they were new in the 1960s? Just what a community needs--if the goal is to prepare kids for jobs and college in 1970. You can almost hear the shouts of community pride at that one. "Expect Excellence!"
As for where the last superintendent got his numbers when he told the community that both Elmwood and Reagan would need multimillion-dollar additions in order to support the students stuffed into them from Glen Park, they do have email in New York. And phones. Why hasn't the board or the current administration asked him? Seems like it's kind of an important point.
All these contradictions should be troubling for the community, and it's good that the Glen Park parents are noticing them. If the last superintendent was doling out false information, why should the community trust what they're being told now? Or maybe the IFF space estimates are just wildly inaccurate. That's pretty basic data. If they blew that, what other information in the IFF report is faulty?
mindyerownbizness - Nov 29, 2011 9:21 PM - Report Abuse
Actually not amusing. Scary. These 50 or so rich soccer moms want to raise my taxes so they can have a Halloween parade and keep their kids safe from the big scary masses at Reagan. Meanwhile the rest of us who either have no job or have to work two low paying jobs just to survive when the economy sucks are just supposed to suck it up, write the check and come along for the ride????
Meanwhile Jane Ford worries that these snobs are not "impressed." Well, I'm not impressed that these "concerned citizens" want to write checks we cannot afford to cash.
Sounds to me like there's room for those kids in other schools. If closing Glen Park makes economic sense and the savings can help get some of the maintenance issues in the district taken care of without socking the bill to those of us who already pay the bill, then what is the board waiting for? Shut it down!
mindyerownbizness - Nov 29, 2011 9:25 PM - Report Abuse
Vox Populi - Nov 29, 2011 10:23 PM - Report Abuse
The last superintendent told the community that closing Glen Park would mean additions would have to be built on Elmwood or Reagan to accommodate the kids. That will cost millions, even if Glen Park is shut down. But now the district has no idea why he would have said that, or where he came up with his capacity numbers, even though the current superintendent was hired specifically because he was so intimately involved in the day-to-day operations? And weren't there board members at any of those public meetings the district held where the superintendent spelled all this out?
NewBerlinJayne - Dec 01, 2011 3:03 PM - Report Abuse
Wow, how thoughtful of you to demonstrate such empathy toward your neighbors :(. I've driven through the Glen Park subdivison many times, and the homes there are nice, but far from affluent. They're mostly the three bedroom, bath and a half ranches that were built in the 1970s and 80s to house middle class families. And given that Reagan currently has an enrollment of close to 700 kids, I think they have good reason to be concerned. There are tons of research proving that kids perform better academically and socially in small neighborhood schools. Let's face facts, given its huge enrollment Reagan isn't a school; it's an education factory. The same is true of Elmwood and Poplar Creek with their enrollments in excess of 500.
Instead of "Expect Excellence," as soon as the BOE approves the closing of Glen Park we can change our slogan to "We Stack 'em Deep and Teach 'em Cheap." That will certainly improve the value of our homes.
mindyerownbizness - Dec 01, 2011 8:11 PM - Report Abuse
Jaynie, where is it written that spending more on education results in better education??
Read this: "Since 1985, real federal spending on K-12 education has increased
by 138 percent. Long-term NAEP reading scale scores and high school
graduation rates show that the performance of American students has
not improved dramatically in recent decades even though education
spending has soared. Policymakers should implement education
reforms designed to improve resource allocation and boost student
performance."
That's sourced from this website if you care to read more: [url]http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/09/does-spending-more-on-education-improve-academic-achievement[/url]
To state that Glen Park kids can't get a great education at Reagan because it's bigger is arrogant and not factual. It's indicative of your snobbery. I know plenty of families who are very pleased with Reagan, including my own.
I'd much rather see Eisenhower fixed and improved than carry on about a small neighborhood of snobs and rich housewives--and those same kids would benefit because they'll move on to Eisenhower anyway.
Vox Populi - Last edited on Dec 02, edited 2 times in total - Report Abuse
Glen Park has better test scores than Reagan, as did at least one of the two schools that was originally lumped into Reagan. Glen Park has and Prospect Hill had smaller class sizes. Well, test scores are supposedly the be-all and end-all for conservatives in deciding whether or not kids are learning, so saying the kids will be fine being jammed into larger classes and a larger school, when doing so in New Berlin in the past has lowered test scores, isn't much of an argument. The way these consolidations have worked in the district say the people in the community worried about the quality of education have reason to be concerned.
There's also a big question about how much closing Glen Park will save. The former superintendent said closing the school would require additions to Reagan or Elmwood, which would cost millions (and disrupt the learning environments). If you save $6 million closing one school, but have to spend $4 million on additions elsewhere and then another half-million to tear the building down and get rid of the asbestos and other hazardous waste (something the previous superintendent said was a real possibility), plus spend additional money for years to come with increased busing, what are you actually saving?
AmberSun - Dec 02, 2011 11:51 AM - Report Abuse
AmberSun - Dec 02, 2011 11:58 AM - Report Abuse
JustinK - Dec 02, 2011 1:31 PM - Report Abuse
As stated by Vox and Amber, we SHOULD be questioning the information and numbers being presented that are paramount to making a very serious decision. I don't understand Art's assumption of where all these savings will be coming from by closing Glen Park, and the School Board has unequivocably failed to provide specific proof or information. If students are tranferred to other community schools, but class sizes remain at or near 25, those teachers will still be working and getting paid, so any salary savings must be minimal. I presume the majority of any savings would be from facility expenses, which again would be partially eaten by inceasing capacities at whichever schools would be absorbing GP students. This sounds like penny-wise and pound foolish to close a school that has served its community proudly and its students admirably.
We already see the development of low-income housing in the community center, where will those future student go to school? It's one thing to plan for dispersement of the 300 enrollment currently at GP, but what about future growth? Sink additional millions to make the remaining 4 NB schools even larger?
I'm a fiscal conservative, that means I hold our public officials accountable to spend our money wisely, not to scrimp and cut vital services, of which education is most certainly one. If the School Board's goal is for a cohesive long-term strategy, I have yet to see it, and until I do cannot justify or support the closing of a well-performing school in the heart of our city to literally save $20-25 on my annual tax bill.