FHS Location

[Ruskin]

Interesting article- what Superintendent Bobby New is avoiding talking about is the cost of the infrastructure improvements at the Deane Solomon site. The architects he mentions didn't take that into account when they gave their cost estimates. The city has enough infrastructure needs without pouring millions into a relatively secluded site like that. If that site isn't used (although I think we all know it would be) the cost of finding another suitable site has to be taken into consideration.

The district's estimate of a new school without athletic facilties costing $61 million and with athletic facilities and new administration building costing $86 million are a far cry from the estimate in Bentonville of $100 million (without athletic facilities) for a new high school. The costs of construction and land are not that different just miles apart- I would think that land in Fayetteville would be higher.

The public schools have a funding mechanism in place and it doesn't include being directly subsidized by the University of Arkansas or the City of Fayetteville. For the UA to pay $59 million for buildings that it would either have to extensively renovate or tear down isn't a wise use of it's limited resources. For the city to pay $10 to $15 million for improvements in the short term and much more in the long term isn't a wise use of it's even more limited resources.

[zman9810]

The Arkansas Traveler is reporting that negotiations between the University of Arkansas and the Fayetteville School District have resumed. The Fayetteville High School Select II Commitee is continuing their discussions whether to recommend moving the school away from it's present location on Stone Street or stay there and rebuild. They have a target date of the school board's April meeting to make a decision.

The two citizen groups on opposite sides of the issue are establishing websites to promote their views and possibly raise money. Build Smart is the group advocating remaining at the present location and Students First wants the school to be relocated. Here are links to each site although Students First site is still under construction.

Build Smart

Students First

Arkansas Traveler article

[Mith242]

Yeah I've been getting the impression something has happened recently. Just seemed like the two started talking again not too long ago. I wonder which side started things back up again.

[zman9810]

Yeah I've been getting the impression something has happened recently. Just seemed like the two started talking again not too long ago. I wonder which side started things back up again.

[zman9810]

Three UA Trustees will take a tour of the Fayetteville High campus Saturday morning according to the Morning News. Jim Lindsey of Fayetteville; John Tyson of Springdale; and Jim Von Gremp of Rogers will be inspecting the property.

What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall at this tour- hopefully the their conclusions will be made known to the public as soon as possible seeing as how important this decision is to the citizens of Fayetteville.

Morning News article

[Snaple4]

So has anyone signed up to BuildSmart or Students First? I signed up for BuildSmarts Petition. Though there are many issues with both, I decided to take an "official" stand on the topic.

[Snaple4]

fromJim Halsell <[email protected]>

[email protected],

toJim Halsell <[email protected]>,

dateWed, Mar 12, 2008 at 9:46 AM

subjectFuture of FHS: Why BuildSmart?

Hello from BuildSmart, a local coalition of nearly 800 people supporting the construction of a world-class high school in a central location

[Mith242]

There has been quite a few people who want it to stay at it's current location, which I can understand. I've heard the possibility of the U of A giving up land over by the Agri Park for a new high school. I was just curious to see what people thought of that location. Does anyone think that's a somewhat central location and such?

[OnDickson]

There has been quite a few people who want it to stay at it's current location, which I can understand. I've heard the possibility of the U of A giving up land over by the Agri Park for a new high school. I was just curious to see what people thought of that location. Does anyone think that's a somewhat central location and such?

[andrewjensen]

there are a few aspects of this debate I find noteworthy:

One is the location. If the school district owned land in East Fayetteville and wanted to move the school there, I doubt BuildSmart would have ever been formed. I also doubt any one's opinion in West Fayetteville would have been taken into effect in the ultimate decision.

Another is the price. Even if the UA only paid $40M for FHS (or $30M), that's better than nothing. Imagine the millage debate. "Well, we could have come up with a cheaper millage proposal for you voters, but we chose the more expensive option and we have a group mobilized to pass the highest tax increase possible." Bentonville just shot down a millage increase that would have been smaller than what's proposed in Fayetteville even in a best-case cost scenario (and half of the one proposed by BuildSmart).

Another is the "sustainability" issue. The theory on more miles driven, etc. to reach West Fayetteville. Call me crazy, but what better way to teach kids about the benefits of public transportation than to ride the bus to school every day? The idea of all these kids driving to school in personal vehicles while the price of gas explodes only perpetuates a wasteful culture of consumption, if you really want to get down to it.

I also saw a comment about the millions Fayetteville would lose in property taxes by keeping those 100 acres off the rolls. Again, call me crazy, but there are at least four subdivisions out there (Springwoods, Park West, Barber's defunct project and Mountain Ranch) that would blow up as popular places to build and live if they were nearer the high school. I suspect that would offset substantially any lost property taxes from a new FHS as well as spurring growth in an area poised to expand thanks to Sam's and the Van Ashe extension.

the other day I read a letter to the editor in the NWA Times criticizing the name of the organization "Students First" as somehow implying that anyone who disagreed was putting students last. The same could be said for the name Build Smart, which implies any other decision would be to Build "Dumb."

bottom line is a good old fashioned Fayetteville row is about to happen, which only guarantees the ultimate price will continue to rise while everyone argues.

[Mith242]

I think that is certainly an intriguing possibility. I lean towards keeping the current location, but I could easily be persuaded to support a new location--IF it's a central location, especially one in the heart of town like the Agri Park area. Certainly that is a more central location than the other tracts of land being considered and I actually think you might be able to make a majority of folks happy with such a location. The last I heard, the University wasn't going to consider giving up land around Agri Park, but that has been a while. Seems to me that would be an excellent bargaining point for the school board: if you really want the current FHS site, we need about 100 acres of the Agri Park land for a new High School as part of the deal.

[mzweig]

I would agree with you. I do like the current location. But I admit I'm a little intrigued about what the university might do there as well. But if the high school were to move I do think that the Agri Park area is about the only other somewhat 'central' location they're going to be able to get. Seems like a good trade off to me. While I don't have a problem with the Agri Park per se, most of it is basically just farmland that seems out of place. Especially as the city continues to grow. Seems to me that the university could find a better location further out.

[Mith242]

I believe there's a meeting tonight discussing the future high school issues. I'm not sure when a decision might be made. If the high school stayed at it's current location it wouldn't bother me. But as I mentioned before I wouldn't mind if the university got the land as well as long as I think the high school got a good deal as well. If the high school were to move I would prefer the Agri Park area. I wouldn't be as interested if the high school where moved to the edge of the city no matter what section of the city it would be. But that said, I also don't have really strong feelings on it. I didn't go to high school there and I don't have any kids. So I can understand others having stronger feelings about this issue.

[zman9810]

The recent flurry of meetings and news articles about the possible move of FHS seem designed to give the impression that it is inevitable- nothing could be further from the truth. Without a millage increase a move will not be feasible regardless if the UA makes the mistake of agreeing to buy the current campus for $59 million. There are several indications that point to the defeat of a millage increase to build a new school elsewhere. A millage increase was defeated not long ago and a similar increase was defeated in Bentonville recently. with the current economic conditions few people will want to increase their taxes. There are some who will vote against an increase simply because they hate any property tax. Many would vote against it because they believe moving the FHS location is a mistake and a no vote is a way to see it doesn't happen. Without some type of consensus nothing will be done to improve FHS.

The head of the Select Committee II said recently that it was a myth that the only site under consideration was the Deane Solomon site. Now the committee has narrowed the possible sites to two- The Deane Solomon site and site 11 between Huntsville and Sixth. The district owns the Deane Solomon site and not site 11, so it doesn't seem quite the myth that it was described as. The Deane Solomon site is also described as the most access challenged site for obvious reasons. I would encourage everyone to view the map of where this site is and also a map showing where it is within the district. It is on the west side of I540 reachable by narrow 2 lane roads for miles in any direction. To reach it from most of the the city will require crossing I540 at either the congested Wedington Road interchange, the 2 lane Mount Comfort Road interchange or the the 112 interchange that is also fed by 2 lane roads. I could see using the Deane Solomon site in the distant future when the population west of I540 increases to the point that it could support a high school on it's own, not when the majority of students live east of it.

For the University of Arkansas to spend $59 million on buildings designed with high school use in mind is a serious misuse of the taxpayer money allotted to it. The argument that it is a great opportunity to gain space to expand is false- it may be an opportunity but at much too great a cost. It has been established that the primary value of the FHS campus is in the buildings. In order to expand the university will either have to demolish these buildings or spend large sums to renovate them, in which case they will STILL be high school buildings. What the university would be doing is buying land at almost $1.5 million per acre and then spending more in able to use it. If new Chancellor David Gearhart follows Chancellor John White's lead and goes to Little Rock to stand (and kneel) before the state legislature asking for more money he will have to answer some tough questions and probably won't like the responses he gets back.

If the UA does make this purchase they could have a new recruiting message- something like"Hey, high school students! Afraid you might not like college life? Well, come to the University of Arkansas- we'll send you back to high school!" Sarcasm aside, I still think that a new and improved FHS can be acheived at the present site and that would be best for the community as whole, all students included. I have more to add but seeing as how this post is already long I'll save it for another.

[zman9810]

Let me add that I agree with you, Rod. I have a lot of friends on both sides of this issue. But the University is THE economic engine for Fayetteville. We need room to grow. I have a high school student at FHS--I like having her close by. But the City could come out like a bandit selling this property and I would guess we won't have to pay more than 25% of the cost of a new school because we will get money from the Feds and the State to pay the rest. That means the balance goes in city coffers to do other things with. Meanwhile, the University now can grow significantly from our land-locked position, create more jobs in the area and bring in more students to support local businesses. It just seems like a win all around, other than losing the closeness of the high school to the university.

I don't think people really understand how the funding to build a new school works. We will not spend the $59 million we get for the current high school. I also don't think people realize what a pile of crap the current high school is, how bad parking is there, and how difficult it would be to renovate it significantly while operating as a school. I know it's a tough call but I am thinking we oughta take the money and do something good HS-wise in another location. The closer to downtown, the better.

M

M

[cowbreath]

I guess in the end it is all about money first, and school football classifications second. I wish that the best options would be to keep the current location and build a second school to accomodate the larger or the smaller population of the two. Mega-high schools need to stop. Also, the U of A should stop retro-fitting buildings for admin usage, and if the old high school is for classrooms that makes even less sense. What is the UA worried about if we built a second expandable school? They could still make a push later to buy the current high school 10-20 years later when they really need the land. I still don't trust the UA land management board of trustees because of the member's conflict of interest.

[andrewjensen]

part of the football classification thing is about money, not some misplaced civic pride as some have termed it. If FHS dropped in classification, say to 6A or 5A, travel expenses would jump tremendously (think road trips to Siloam, Vilonia or Morrilton instead of to Bentonville, Springdale and Rogers), and expenses would double with two high schools. Two high schools at a lower classification forced to travel farther for competition is not a smart decision.

The bottom line is that FHS, with flat enrollment growth, and the UA, with bundles of longterm debt, cannot afford to be making luxury purchases right now. The UA can't pay $59M for the high school, that is just ridiculous. The School Board cannot send a millage proposal to voters that is bigger than it needs to be because they can't or won't sell the campus to the UA.

[Stormcrow]

part of the football classification thing is about money, not some misplaced civic pride as some have termed it. If FHS dropped in classification, say to 6A or 5A, travel expenses would jump tremendously (think road trips to Siloam, Vilonia or Morrilton instead of to Bentonville, Springdale and Rogers), and expenses would double with two high schools. Two high schools at a lower classification forced to travel farther for competition is not a smart decision.

The bottom line is that FHS, with flat enrollment growth, and the UA, with bundles of longterm debt, cannot afford to be making luxury purchases right now. The UA can't pay $59M for the high school, that is just ridiculous. The School Board cannot send a millage proposal to voters that is bigger than it needs to be because they can't or won't sell the campus to the UA.

[andrewjensen]

Yeah...because football is THAT important!! Let's sacriface the many so a few have a chance to play a sport.

[Stormcrow]

it's not just football. And please, stop with the jock bashing. There's a pretty definitive link between extracurricular activities and scholastic achievement. Think about volleyball, basketball, baseball, softball, track, golf, soccer, etc. Those sports have far, far more games than football does and when you add them all up that is a significant portion of the student body. Longer trips means later nights, more time on the road, less sleep, more missed class time, etc., etc.

Just what is being "sacrificed" anyway? Fayetteville has a great academic and athletic record at its current, underwhelming facility. To think any of that would suffer by building a new, single high school somewhere else is chicken-little at its worst.

[andrewjensen]

you keep talking about football travel, I'm saying to you the sports classification argument is about a lot more than 5 football trips a year. It's also about all the other sports, which combined have more participants and more travel than football. You haven't addressed this point.

If they want to avoid the "mega" school, don't put the 9th grade there. Plus, if not properly planned, you'll end up with a "haves" high school and a "have-nots." Just look at Springdale, which has divided itself in half economically and abandoned its historical core in favor of white flight. Or look at Woodland vs. Ramay for another stratification of students with factors of race and economics tied to geography. I don't think that should be a model Fayetteville replicates at the high school level.

I guess I just don't see how it's feasible to operate two high schools, let alone construct a new one and renovate another in the current fiscal circumstances. It's not feasible from a tax-funding standpoint, it's not justifiable based on current enrollment numbers or growth projections, and it's definitely not cost-effective from an athletic travel standpoint when you'd in effect quadruple those expenses (double the teams, double the travel).

[Stormcrow]

you keep talking about football travel, I'm saying to you the sports classification argument is about a lot more than 5 football trips a year. It's also about all the other sports, which combined have more participants and more travel than football. You haven't addressed this point.

If they want to avoid the "mega" school, don't put the 9th grade there. Plus, if not properly planned, you'll end up with a "haves" high school and a "have-nots." Just look at Springdale, which has divided itself in half economically and abandoned its historical core in favor of white flight. Or look at Woodland vs. Ramay for another stratification of students with factors of race and economics tied to geography. I don't think that should be a model Fayetteville replicates at the high school level.

I guess I just don't see how it's feasible to operate two high schools, let alone construct a new one and renovate another in the current fiscal circumstances. It's not feasible from a tax-funding standpoint, it's not justifiable based on current enrollment numbers or growth projections, and it's definitely not cost-effective from an athletic travel standpoint when you'd in effect quadruple those expenses (double the teams, double the travel).

[Mith242]

Those are some interesting points. There still are people who live in Fayetteville rather than Benton County. One of the reasons as so their kids can go to Fayetteville. Although I don't know if this happens much now, I think there are some good schools there as well. But you do see it happening with parents wanting their kids to go to Fayetteville rather another Washington County located school. Although sports really shouldn't probably be a factor in this it will. People are proud of the high school sports and Fayetteville in particular. Fayetteville has more State Championships than any other high school. I've even seen some national rankings that easily list Fayetteville is the top high school as far as athletics is concerned. I just don't think people will let Fayetteville slip down from the 7A because of all that. I think a second high school is still considered a possibility. But I think right now the focus is on whether the main high school is going to be located at it's current site or relocated. Whichever happens I still think there's a good chance another high school is probably going to occur sometime in the near future.

[zman9810]

Great public comment session of the Select Committee II tonight at Ramay Jr. High. I would guess by counting how many were on my row of tables and multiplying there were over 120 people there with about half speaking. The comments were overwhelming in favor of keeping the present location- I would guess by a 4 to 1 margin. Admittedly I went with a already formed opinion that the present location is best, but it seemed that the proponents of that position did a much better job of making their case.

I won't try to rehash the entire meeting but a couple of points that I hadn't thought about before were that student parking shouldn't be considered a necessity for every student. Limiting it to upperclassmen or special cases would encourage car pooling, bus riding and even walking and bicycle riding- all good things in a city striving for a sustainabilty image.

Another point was where would the University of Arkansas get the money to pay back the bonds it would take to buy the present site? Raising tuition was option given, not good news for any prospective college students.

Much more was said of course and if it isn't covered in the news I'll try to add to whatever is reported.

[Mith242]

Great public comment session of the Select Committee II tonight at Ramay Jr. High. I would guess by counting how many were on my row of tables and multiplying there were over 120 people there with about half speaking. The comments were overwhelming in favor of keeping the present location- I would guess by a 4 to 1 margin. Admittedly I went with a already formed opinion that the present location is best, but it seemed that the proponents of that position did a much better job of making their case.

I won't try to rehash the entire meeting but a couple of points that I hadn't thought about before were that student parking shouldn't be considered a necessity for every student. Limiting it to upperclassmen or special cases would encourage car pooling, bus riding and even walking and bicycle riding- all good things in a city striving for a sustainabilty image.

Another point was where would the University of Arkansas get the money to pay back the bonds it would take to buy the present site? Raising tuition was option given, not good news for any prospective college students.

Much more was said of course and if it isn't covered in the news I'll try to add to whatever is reported.