Where They Stand on Central School

Former district 27 board members express views

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?

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.

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 21^st 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 21^st century, we now realize that the concerns raised for our natural environment during the last half of the 20^th 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.

For other views on Central School, see Letters to the Editor.