Lincoln
Kids Deserve New School
By
Keith Snyder
I
believe the best and only solution to the Central School situation
is to pursue the construction of a brand new facility. Central is a
tired, 85-year-old building. It was designed in the early part of
the last century to serve the needs of the students at that time. It’s
no shame that we, as a community, would want to pursue a new design
for the 21st century. Does anyone doubt that the needs of the
students in the year 2000 are vastly different than the needs of the
students of the 1910’s?
![](../images/central_school/central1.jpg)
I
respect those who argue for renovation, but there are way too many
problems with that option. Central has so many mechanical and
physical shortcomings that even if the building were to be
"renovated" the only thing likely to be retained would be
the shell. Is it worth millions to preserve a shell? The Central
School teachers offered a thoughtful analysis of the renovation
option and raised concerns that should trouble both parents and
taxpayers. The students and teachers of District 27 deserve a
building that meets their needs and they shouldn’t have to go
through two years of educational and physical disruptions to get it.
My
daughters are the third generation of my family to attend Central
School. It’s a neat fact of family trivia, but it’s not a streak
that needs to be continued to the fourth generation. When I think
back on my years at Central, my memories are not of the building,
but of the great education I received, the terrific teachers I had,
and the many friends I made. The magic wasn’t in the walls, but in
the people. It’s time for Lincoln to move forward, do what’s
right, and construct a new Central School.
![](../images/central_school/central2.jpg)
Keith Snyder, a lifelong resident of
Lincoln, is a member of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations
Board, a state agency that oversees collective bargaining between
educational employers and employees in Illinois. He and his wife
Beth, a reading teacher for Chester-East Lincoln School District,
have two daughters who attend Central School. Snyder is also the
former vice president and nine-year member of the District 27 School
Board.
|
It's
Not Just About Bricks & Mortar...It's About Our Community
By Valecia Crisafulli
The
arguments for rehabilitating and continuing to use Central School
are strong, and they are many.
EDUCATION.
Our elementary students deserve the best possible, updated,
state-of-the art facility for their education in the 21st
century. The architect has said that a rehabilitated Central School
building would give us what we need and want educationally, with no
essential differences from a new building, including the capacity
for the latest technology. Therefore, this is a moot argument.
CONSERVATION.
Probably the most important argument for rehabilitating and reusing
Central School is that it is the ethical thing to do. In the 21st
century, we now realize that the concerns raised for our natural
environment during the last half of the 20th century
extend also to the built environment, especially valuable historic
assets. To abuse, neglect, and destroy our environment is not
responsible behavior. We teach young people to “reduce, reuse, and
recycle.” Yet young people learn more from what we do than from
what we say. Those who do not care to reuse Central School are not
educating our children to be responsible adults.
TEACHER
CONCERNS. Central School teachers have raised a number of valid
concerns regarding the relocation of students during a year of
renovation. The architect has said that relocation would need to
take only one year, not two, as the teachers have said. With almost
two years to plan for the relocation, it could surely be achieved
with minimal inconvenience for students, teachers, staff, and
parents. Many other districts in Illinois have renovated historic
school buildings; the board and teachers need to visit these schools
and find out how other districts handled the relocation issue.
Members of the community could even become involved on “problem
solving teams,” which would be a great educational model for our
students on how to resolve difficult situations or dilemmas.
ECONOMICS,
#1. If Lincoln is going to be able to attract business and
industry, create jobs, increase tourism, grow in population,
increase the sales and property tax bases—all of which are
important economic indicators—then the town must preserve and
enhance its historic resources. There is no alternative. Business
decisions in this century are going to be made in favor of towns
that have a unique, authentic identity and sense of history. This is
not, as some have said, just “my opinion.” It is the conclusion
of nearly every expert working in economic development today, backed
by significant research.
ECONOMICS,
#2. The state’s share of the money will be available to
Lincoln Elementary Schools regardless of whether the choice is for
rehabilitation or new construction. Of the options presented to the
board, the least expensive for local taxpayers is the rehabilitation
and reuse of both Central and Lincoln Junior High. If a new wing is
added to Central to house a gym and cafeteria, then the cost to
taxpayers is about the same as a new building. Other options,
including the construction of a new junior high, will increase the
cost considerably. The public should not be misled by statements
saying “There will be no additional cost to taxpayers.” When the
timeline for a bond issue is extended, that is
additional cost to taxpayers, since the tax levy would be reduced by
that amount if the bonds were not extended.
ECONOMICS,
#3. The architect has said that the physical structure of
Central School can be completely renovated to extend the useful life
of the building another 50 to 100 years. It is not fiscally
responsible for a unit of local government to spend taxpayer money
on a resource such as a school building for many years and then
refuse to maintain and protect that investment.
LACK
OF PLANNING AND INFORMATION. The board has received almost no
information on which to base a decision of this magnitude. A needs
assessment for the district has not been conducted, and future class
size projections have not been presented. This decision could cost
local taxpayers up to $15 million, one of the largest financial
decisions this board will ever have to make. And the decision will
affect this community for 50 to 100 years. Unfortunately, there are
very few historic public buildings left in Lincoln. The board cannot
afford to make a mistake with this one. Once Central School has been
torn down, it can never be rebuilt. State funding will be available
for renovation or for new construction for the foreseeable future. At
the very least, the board should postpone this decision for a
year, conduct an independent needs assessment based on district and
community input, and compile all possible data and information
necessary to make an informed and responsible decision on this
important matter.
It’s
about the future of our community.
Valecia
Crisafulli is director of Downtown Springfield, Inc., and has worked
in the field of downtown revitalization and community development
for over 10 years. She served on the Lincoln Elementary District 27
Board of Education from 1982–93.
|