1) great job, keep up the good work District 186. AKA  September 20, 2009, 11:38 am

2) District #186 is at a critical juncture in the state of our facilities. As a district are we willing to commit to the future of this district and commit to bringing our schools to the twenty-first century or will we become a district of urban decay? It is time to be bold and do what is right for the families and the city of Springfield. The quality of facilities is a determining factor for attracting and retaining families in #186. We need to work together to create a vision for our facilities and consider all options for funding and not rely solely on a referendum. Kathy Fetter-Instructional Coach  September 20, 2009, 3:19 pm

3) What is the cost of air conditioning all existing district schools? Air conditioning needs to be a top priority (and taken care of before any new building begins). concerned  September 21, 2009, 9:32 am

4) Unfortunately, I was unable to attend Tuesday's meeting that discussed the options, and was unable to review the repeat on cable TV, because I do not have cable. I was hoping that you could answer a few questions for me:

The 6th day attendance figures printed in SJR for the high schools indicate that there are 4400 children attending high school, and 1200 plus at the freshman level. My question is how would the proposals be modified to account for 4800 rather than 4200 (3 @ 1400) students. Note: I know that the district has had an issue with graduation rates, but on the optimistic side if retention improves, it would appear the current proposals would be overcrowded from day 1.

Second, in the mean time, what measures are being taken to alleviate the pressures that come from overcrowding at SHS (too few textbooks, classes with more than 33 students (which is probably too many anyway, too few classrooms or lockers, students having to eat lunch in a hallway or on the stairs)?

Third, if it is true that a student at Lanphier was qualified to take Physics AP but was not offered the course when another school offered it, why couldn't the student be bused to the appropriate school? I know that Physics AP has been an issue in the past, my friend whose son attended Southeast HS, enrolled him at Lincolnland and drove him out there for the physics class at night. This was quite a feat as both he and his wife work full time and have two other children. We bus for career training, why not for advanced classes? Rachel Doctors  September 21, 2009, 3:18 pm

5) The talk of building a new Springfield High is maddening, dishonest and just plain wrong. We have a HUGE problem in our district with students transferring into Springfield High leaving Southeast and Lanphier with a deficit of more talented students and inevitably more involved parents (while Superintendent Milton says the practice has stopped - it has not). This in spite of the "substandard" building Springfield High now inhabits. Until the transfer rate OUT of Springfield High tops the incoming rate talk of a new building should be halted. In other words, how bad could the facility be if concerned parents want their children attending Springfield versus the much newer Southeast or much closer Lanphier!? Rob First  September 21, 2009, 4:13 pm

6) First I totally agree with Rob First statements....Second the amount of money this district is going to ask to pass on a referendum is rediculous and I as a tax payer I will do all I can do to defeat this obscene amount of money this superintendent wants us to ok...its just nuts...We dont live in silicone valley .He needs to go back to Michigan and try and pass such a ridiculous amount there! Ron Schwermin  September 21, 2009, 5:15 pm

7) Please, build a new facility on Koke Mill !!!! a district 186 parent  September 21, 2009, 5:43 pm

8) I would like to know if there are going to be boundary changes involved with any of the 3 choices. My family purchased a home in a certain area to assure that my children would go to a specific high school. If the vote is to change location and build a new high school does this mean that if we are currently in one high schools boundaries, that this may change? parent of a soon to be high schooler  September 21, 2009, 6:02 pm

9) I second First's comments. this discussion about a new high school has been going for more than 20 years. Instead of trying to build 3 equal high schools, how about building one high school or a number of different high schools, 1 for the arts, 1 for math/science, 1 for technological sciences. this would give students/parents either no choice or many choices.

Also I second the comment above that noted that the numbers do not add up, if the 6th day attendance records were 4200 enrolled in conventional high schools and 200+ in alternative ed, how will a plan that is for 4200 students solve the over crowding issues? sam  September 21, 2009, 9:18 pm

10) Let's focus on the positives. Does anyone have a favorite among the three options? Or even a favorite portion of one of the options? Peter  September 21, 2009, 10:11 pm

11) It's really a bad time for improvments, considering the ecomony,
not to mention whats going to happen with healthcare reform,
How would this effect everyone.
The prices of everything keep fluctating,
I would update energy in existing schools, remodel, add the handicap access.

Adding a new school on the westside, consider the sink holes, bussing, boundaries, Is the policies going to change, if so students and parents should be able to pick the school there child would go. lindyann2005@yahoo.com  September 21, 2009, 10:25 pm

12) Squeezing $260+ million out of Springfield taxpayers is going to be a very rough sell. Is there a plan B or C or D or E of F when you don't get what you want?

The State is going to increase income taxes, the Feds are going to get you one way or another for the free health care, and the county wants increases for sewage. Now #186 wants what is left from your paycheck. Ain't nothing left. Enough  September 21, 2009, 10:39 pm

13) I think we need 4 high schools at least.

It seems to me that Springfield keeps growing and growing but no new schools are being built for the bigger population. Instead Chatham, Rochester, New Berlin, Pleasant Plains, and other surrounding towns get our overload of children. The houses being built around the edges of Springfield have some of the largest amounts of property taxes yet their money goes to the surrounding towns because they are zoned to go to school in those towns. Those towns have very nice, newer schools and are even building bigger schools. As Springfield builds more houses around the edge of town those schools continue to grow.

Why can't Springfield build more schools so that we can get some of those people back in our schools. Shouldn't we be providing for our own? They have Springfield addresses and if a new school on Kokemill was built then some would be closer to Kokemill than the schools they attend now. Is it possible to change the boundries to include some of these people? GO186  September 21, 2009, 10:40 pm

14) As a parent in district 186, my preference on the current proposals would be to build a new high school on the west side of town and to use the old Springfield High as the new Lincoln Junior High.
Susan  September 22, 2009, 7:59 am

15) I believe a complete review of the school districting should take place. Think progressivly for a change. Chatham schools and Rochester schools are expanding every year, why? because Springfield has let their tax base pay for it. I live off Toronto Rd and North Cotton hill Rd, clearly in the city of Springfield, yet I pay over $ 4000.00 a year in property tax, alot of it to pay for Chatham schools. Most of the Lake Springfield area is in Chatham schools or Rochester schools. Let Chatham pay for Chatham and Rochester pay for Rochester. If you did, Springfield would have the money to build better, and provide the quality education that people are seeking in Chatham and Rochester.
A fourth high school is a must. Bobby O  September 22, 2009, 8:11 am

16) Take a page out of Lincoln Way Schools and Normal Community. Build 2 NEW Schools that are IDENTICAL. Merge the 3 High Schools into the 2 New High Schools. That will cut back on at least 6 million dollars of work you need to do at the current buildings.

This way it will stop the numerous Transfers, cut back on Adminstration, coaches, etc. Having them the same will prevent the Jealousy of one school having something the other doesn't.

FIxing up the OLD Lanphier and Southeast is not the way to go, eventually those buildings will fail, the longer we wait to build, the more expensive it will be.

Some people will say that the larger schools will hurt the athletics, I do not believe them. THey can still be in the CS8, it may allow them to be more competitive, and the only time travel may be an issue is during playoffs.

The time to consolidate is now, don't let the alumni of the high schools stop it. Look to the future, not the past. Lisa H  September 22, 2009, 9:10 am

17) Too many people think new buildings are a panacea. Looking into the future means looking at reality and alternatives. Most of the arguments for new facilities are circular logic equipped with an abundance of tautology. Sadly, the desire for new buildings is status not academics. Building programs are feel good for a few people especially the sports fanatics but not a good reason to raise taxes in an area of economic decline and in a bad economy.

We hear we need new buildings to bring people into the district and we need new building because they are overcrowded. This is a non-sequitur not a justification. A building program is an emotional high for a few people. What did building Southeast High School do for problems in the district? Did it solve academic problems? 186 participated in the vocational/career center and didn't support it instead put in their own programs to compete. What did building that facility accomplish? It is absolutely underutilized. We hear the classrooms at SHS are crowded yet we hear smaller classes are coming. Are we going to build a big high school with big classrooms and transition to smaller classes and learning academies? I bet the big empty retail store on Outer Park and MacArthur could be quickly and cheaply turned into classrooms. Isn't there an empty grocery store behind JC Penny that could also be remodeled into a learning academy?

Some of you are confused about district boundaries and taxation. District boundries are set by state law. Your kids go to school where property owners pay the tax. Building new buildings will not bring students into the district from Pleasant Plains, Chatham or Rochester. Families have to move to homes in the 186 area to bring in more people and the homes in Springfield are on the decline. The tax base in 186 is eroding and will continue to do so.

Cleaning up discipline in the district 10 years ago did more for the district than any building program. New revenue will not be forth coming. Within the boundaries of 186, expect continued social decline as the economically depresses areas continue to creep westward as the tax base moves out of the district.

What does 186 need? Social skills classes and more occupational education, more IMSA and AVID programs. The health programs at Southeast are great! Occupational education is essential. Face facts, Illinois is on the decline and the best thing for many of these kids would be to train them for jobs in areas of higher employment.

I want to see realistic planning not pie in the sky wishful thinking planning. I will actively work against any tax increase. We need solid leadership and management not higher taxes. We need better leadership on the school board. Mike D.  September 22, 2009, 12:14 pm

18) Option B includes relocating Lincoln Magnet to what is currently Springfield High School. Does Option B also include a plan to add 9th-12th grade at Lincoln Magnet? If so, what is the projected number of students that would attend Lincoln 9th -12th grade?

How is the $55,000,000 HVAC project being funded? Are there other funding alternatives that might lessen the blow of a property tax increase? Amy M.  September 22, 2009, 12:22 pm

19) I think the students should have some say so in this, it's their future we are talking about. a parent  September 22, 2009, 12:23 pm

20) I was at the meeting heard the information and I came to the conculison that Plan B is the way to go. We're willing to do whatever it takes to make this option the final option!
It will pay off in the long term. John Pavelko  September 22, 2009, 3:45 pm

21) Please build additions at the present locations. There is adequate land to expand at all three school, especially at SHS. Students do not need to be transported to the far west side of Springfield. How many more times are we going to turn our back the city center? Pete Harbison  September 22, 2009, 5:07 pm

22) Tax increases will be a hard sell, regardless of how esthetically appealing all these new and better buildings look on paper. These kids need better teachers, teachers who care. They need smaller classrooms, not bigger schools. They need the motivation to go to school every day and aspire to be something more than what I see coming out of these schools nowadays. These big beautiful schools are not going to fix the problems that are under the roofs of the current schools. Kids in elementary and middle schools now are going into high school and can't read or write at the levels they should be. How much money is it going to cost to fix these problems. How much money is it going to cost if we don't fix these problems now. Shouldn't we be worried about the future of these kids right now and then move forward. springfield parent  September 22, 2009, 5:13 pm

23) First of all, you need to keep all 3 High Schools separate. If you combine schools, it would be 7 or 8A in athletics. That means TRAVEL....LOTS AND LOTS OF TRAVEL. If we keep the 3 existing schools, you MUST abide by the boundaries. Dr. Milton, you must STOP transfers! Lanphier has suffered athletically, and academically because kids who belong at Lanphier, are transfers to Springfield and/or Southeast. Next, kids that have no business in school because they have been discipline problems elsewhere and are 17-18 years old, but are academically 9th graders, are walking those halls causing trouble! EVERY SINGLE DAY!! It's disruptive, dangerous, and It's not fair to students who want to learn!! It's also not fair to say you don't want these kids to become statistics, because they ALREADY ARE! And BY THEIR OWN CHOICE! I just had a child graduate from Lanphier, and have a child there now. We are about to send another. I know first hand what I'm talking about because I also work for the Police Department. In order for this to work, you need to abide by the boundaries and weed out kids who have no intention of being "students". I for one am sick and tired of hearing about how bad Lanphier is and trying to defend it! Sir, you need to roll up your sleeves and come to the school and start weeding the kids out so the Public Schools to which you are ultimately responsible for, can thrive like you envision!!! Please feel free to meet with me at any time. Rob Fleck  September 22, 2009, 6:32 pm

24) I will not vote for a tax increase unless the school board guarantees that the same educational opportunities will be offered at all the high schools. It is very apparent that there is a large, vocal, minority that preach how we need a west-side school. They say this is for the "good of the city" - well I say they are pushing their own personal agenda. These people want the best for their kids and don't really care about the rest of Springfield's students. I refuse to let non-west-side students suffer so that others can get their precious new school. I would prefer that the school district sell their west-side land and use the incredibly large profit to upgrade the facilities at all our schools and focus more on student learning and success rather than getting the latest and greatest new trends. I will not be voting for a tax increase unless I see that the entire city is going to benefit. Springfield Resident  September 22, 2009, 9:07 pm

25) How can you talk about spending all this money on a new high school when your also talking about shutting down schools that are IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD!!! Laketown Parent  September 22, 2009, 9:09 pm

26) I like plan B best but would prefer there to be a better plan for the exsisting SHS building.Lincoln Magnet seems best left small.

Maybe it could be used for an alternative high school for those students who are not working out at the other high schools such as Rob Fleck mentioned above. I am sure administration offices could use some of that space also. Parent of 3  September 22, 2009, 9:46 pm

27) As a lifelong citizen of Springfield, I am appalled that you would consider closing down a school in the center of town in favor of building a new school on the far west side. This furthers the division of central, east, north & south from the affluent elitist far west side. I am not being sentimental about SHS - I graduated from Sacred Heart Academy. I just feel this would be a huge mistake, and further fracture our city. There has to be another way. Kate Hawkes  September 23, 2009, 12:49 am

28) Reading the above comments, I can't believe how many parents are upset about the possible effect on athletics. School is for education! What about art? Music? Football - are you serious? If the only way your kid can get into college is on a sports scholarship, maybe he doesn't belong there. disgusted  September 23, 2009, 12:56 am

29) It would be helpful to have more information posted on the District's website and more detailed answers given to the questions being raised:

1) where do the children live - by neighborhood (density plot map)

2) number of school age children over the last 20 years by neighborhood, (whether this year's increase is a blip)

3) A description of how the school district's boundaries came to be:
e.g. the State Legislature established the Springfield School District by special charter in the late 1880s. All land in the state of Illinois was divided into school districts prior to the establishment of many cities. The City of Springfield is governed separately and is not connected politically to the School District. It is difficult to change the boundaries of the school district, even after a land parcel has been annexed to a city. This process involves the State Board of Education.

My point being is that when difficult but important questions are raised full answers should be given. sam  September 23, 2009, 8:00 am

30) I agree that we should reinvest in our existing city high schools, not build further west. Springfield High in particular has plenty of vacant and underutilized land that could accomodate new structures to complement the existing historic school building. We need to reinvest in the city, not contribute to more spawl development. Use the existing infrastructure, and boost the property values of the surrounding neighhborhoods. Mike  September 23, 2009, 2:08 pm

31) Improve on the schools we already have and stop wasting tax money that we don't have. Building a school in Kokemill is going to cause even more debt. Not to mention building a new school in Kokemill we seperate the rich from the poor even more. Stop this waste  September 23, 2009, 6:25 pm

32) What if the referendum doesn't go through? Is there another way to get the money for one of these plans? Is there a way to maybe do both a referendum and some fundraising money?

Maybe everyone who wants to transfer to another school could pay money to the build a new school fund? Parent of 3  September 23, 2009, 8:57 pm

33) How is it that Chatham can build a new school for under 40 million but your proposal is just under 60 million?
Why is the number that I keep seeing is over 260 million but if you look at the facilities commitee breakout on your website the total that would be from referendum is 165 million which would give you the new schools along with a lot of updates to other schools? Please explain the Health Life and Safety funding for the other updates. Is that bonds or some other funding that has been secured already and would not go into the tax increase to residents? civilone  September 23, 2009, 10:30 pm

34) After watching the recent BOE meeting at least four of these members do not have a clue what is happening in District 186. The District has done a superior job of getting information out--if people are not voicing an opinion--its their own fault. The problem with the city is people will not support a tax increase for anything positive, and we keep holding on to tradition. Good thing Sangamon State University broke tradition and became the U of I in Springfield, and they build some great buildings out there too because if you build they will stay or come. It is time for this BOE to step up, but since some of them do not have a true understanding--I highly doubt they will actually get a decision. Let's make the committee board members--sure they can make a decision as a cross-section of community members. "Frustrated by the wait and see'ers"  September 23, 2009, 11:01 pm

35) I am against moving LMS or other magnet schools & offices into the existing SHS. SHS is an icon of downtown. Remodel or upgrade. Both of my children attended Lincoln Magnet and did amazing. This is mostly due to the size and caring of the staff and faculty. If LMS was moved into a bigger facility to add more students, it will loose its edge and the 1 on 1 needed to make it successful. With the state of economy, go with the less expensive options. I vote for remodeling the 3 schools. WHen money allows, perhaps buidling a magnet-type (similar to LMS), AP or freedom of choise HS on the west side property. The athlectic facility is also a good idea for use by the middle and HS that do not have the gyms, fields ect. I cannot afford nor support a tax increase. I suggest that students who play sports should also have to pay a larger fee to offset costs & raise funds. Renters and those that do not pay property taxes should also have to pay a larger fee if they have students attending 186. Single Parent  September 24, 2009, 12:29 pm

36) To Frustrated. New buildings, a large increase in budgets, expensive dorms, coffee shops, new athletic programs and adding freshman and UIS has seen a decline in on campus student. UIS has grown primarily through on line courses. In 1995 when it became UIS, there were 4400 students and few on line classes . Today UIS has just under 4900 students. If you build it they will come is simply not true. Former SSU faculty member  September 24, 2009, 4:20 pm

37) Has there been any analysis of what a new high school on the west side will do to the diversity of the new and existing high schools? Wouldn't a new high school on the west side look much different than the remaining three? Is that want Springfield needs? Marcel  September 24, 2009, 4:59 pm

38) If a county wide SALES tax of 1% were passed as state law allows the Springfield School District would receive about $9 - $10 million per year in new tax revenue. A portion of this money could be dedicated to retiring existing bond debt thus REDUCING OUR PROPERTY TAXES. Say the district committed $7 million per year to fund facility improvements and 40 year bonds were issued this would provide $280 million. Note property tax bonds are usually issued for 20 or 30 years. Sales tax bonds are issued for 40 years. This sales tax would exempt food, medicine and large ticket items such as cars, boats etc. If an average family spent $30,000 per year on purchases (not including food and the other items listed above) the added tax would be $300 per year - less than $1 per day!

It seems to me we have enjoyed the investment and sacrifice made by those who paid for the buildings a generation ago but yet this generation only wants to know what's in it for them today. It's our turn to step up and do the right thing. We have good teachers that are limited by very poor facilities. They do a good job with what they have but how would you feel if your child went to school in a closet? It happens everyday in the Springfield School District. Nobody is proposing an extravagant building but only an up to date facility with enough room for the students and teachers. As far as sports are concerned childhood obesity is a huge problem in this country. We should be doing everything possible to support kids playing sports. They excersize and learn life lessons in responsibility, work ethic and team work. Today's overweight kid will be your medicare/medicaid expense tomorrow. Why not now?  September 24, 2009, 6:12 pm

39) Why will it take 8-10 years to implement the Health, Life and Safety funded air conditioning of existing schools?
How can we even think about building another posh new school on the west side when existing buildings (not just the High Schools) are substandard and contributing to Urban decay. Do you really expect the voters with children suffering in those schools without air for the next 8-10 years will approve such a plan?
The last tax increase referendum failed miserably because the voters felt there was too much waste in the district. Voters thought the district was too top heavy with administrative salaries. Did the district listen and cut out waste and nonessential positions?
Talk about a tough sell...
Let's take 8-10 years improving the essential Health, Life and Safety funded issue of air conditioning while we build a brand new state of the art high school funded by raising your taxes. And to add insult to injury, let's build it on the West Side.
From the comments being shared in this forum, I don't think the majority of Springfield is buying it.
Thank you Rob Fleck, Springfield Resident and Mike D. for speaking up so eloquently. We can only hope the district listens and refuses to waste our tax dollars on nonessentials like feasibility studies and a new west side high school. Concerned  September 24, 2009, 7:09 pm

40) I believe the last tax referendum passed everywhere EXCEPT THE WEST SIDE. Been There  September 24, 2009, 9:40 pm

41) It is my understanding that all of the surrounding school districts in Sangamon County are in favor of the1% sales tax idea. If there is a commitment from the surrounding districts, it seems to me to be a no brainer that this is a tremendous way to have a dedicated stream of funds for facilities. I wonder if our School Board will ever make any decisions on facilites??

Facilities Committee: $0.00
Architecture Firm: $100,000.00
School Board that can't make a decision: PRICELESS!!!


I agree with Why Not Now  September 25, 2009, 9:41 am

42) Given the failure of previous referenda regarding additional funding for education programs (not facilities), the proposed options are all too extensive and too expensive with respect to the potential for approval of another District referendum. The Committee needs to determine the highest priority within the least expensive of the options, and consider adding some programmatic funding issues -- restoration of funding for school libraries, music programs, school counselors, etc. The replacement, expansion, rennovation, restructuring of all 3 of the existing high schools are laudible goals, but cannot be considered the highest of priorities in terms of seeking and obtaining approval of a property tax increase referendum. Kurt DeWeese  September 25, 2009, 11:36 am

43) Regarding the choices of remodeling or constructing Springfield High School, I support remodeling at the current location. First, of course, there is the matter of tradition and history.

Second, and more important, there are problems with moving the high school to the far western edge of the city. Students who aren’t upper middle class whites may find it difficult to get to school and even more difficult to participate in before and after school activities.

Third, and still more important yet, is financial. Now is not the time to be increasing taxes or incurring large debt. The other options are much more affordable. I suspect a referendum to raise taxes to support the building of a large new high school on the far west side will fail by a large margin.

Option A is the most desirable as it preserves the present high schools and keeps the costs at a level Springfield residents are likely to support.
Richard L  September 25, 2009, 11:44 am

44) The comments about not pursuing facility improvements because of the current economic conditions are extremely short sighted. These decisions will effect our school district for perhaps the next 75 years. History tells us the economy will always rise and fall but does that mean we stop investing in our educational infrastructure? If we stop who loses? Students lose! The real question for our School Board is do they have the wisdom to let the voters decide this issue for themselves. I'm troubled that many school board members seem to think that this is thier decision. It most certainly is NOT thier decision. Let the people who elected you decide this issue for themselves! My prediction - this board lacks the courage to put this issue on the ballot so voters can decide. The past 3 years has shown us that several board members have other political agendas. PLEASE DO SOMETHING  September 25, 2009, 3:03 pm

45) Ok let me get this straight......we can spend $0.70 on the dollar to remodel a nearly 100 year old SHS building that will still have inadequate parking, no athletic fields, class rooms that are too small and a facility that meets about 29% of the facilities committee recommendations.....OR we can spend $1 to develop a brand new school with adequate parking, all the necessary athletic practice fields on site, class rooms that are NOT too small and a facility that meets about 70% of the facilities committee recommendations not to mention the ability to use the current SHS for a magnet middle school or high school. I don't now about anyone else but it seems to me to be a huge waste of money to invest the $0.70 on the dollar when you can build new for $1. Common Sense  September 25, 2009, 3:22 pm

46) The dist should not worry about building new schools or remolding since most schools do not have enough text books for every student!!!! parent  September 25, 2009, 7:53 pm

47) A new school to replace Springfield is not a good idea the"rich kids" don't deserve any better or more than the other 2 school. Springfield High has just as many gangs and troubles as the other schools. Morale at the other 2 high schools is bad now give the "rich kids" a new building will causes even more trouble in the dist!!!! J   September 25, 2009, 7:56 pm

48) During this current economic strife it is unthinkable to ask the taxpayers for more money. Suck it up and make do with the resources available until we are truly into a economic recovery. Consideration of the well reasoned comments of Mike D. should be taken under review. Chris B.  September 26, 2009, 8:39 am

49) Ms. Watson, You wrote in your answer to Rachel Doctors statements that imply 186 is letting classroom space sit empty during the day. There is no reason why those principles couldn't be applied now with the current buildings. It makes me wonder how competent the administrators are in the district. Springfield High Parent  September 26, 2009, 11:14 am

50) All three schools need to be updated and given more classroom space. Many of the classrooms are too small for today's kids and the sizes of classes - especially at SHS. We do need to make sure there are offices for traveling teachers with desks, phones and computers. Each school needs adequate gym space so that all students can take gym. We are not promoting health for life when we have some kids who do not take gym. We do not need one school to seem as though they are the chosen ones. Desks need to be replaced and made for current sized high school kids.

High schools must have adequate room for in-school suspension and study hall. If used correctly, both of these can be viable and helpful in advancing our students.

We need to make sure that we have continued access to current technology. One of any new thing (i.e. Elmo) per department just isn't sufficient. Each room should have active boards and each teacher should have a laptop. Middle school students have been given laptops - high school students need them too. They come to the high school and we are still teaching many things as though we were still in the 1980's. Instead of spending money on textbooks, the computers can have the e-books - this is more cost efficient and will help every kind of learner.

The committee absolutely must address parking issues - if anyone visits SHS - he or she may not be able to find a parking space. Students do not have access to many school parking spots and off street parking is quite limited.

What I think is most important though, is making a decision and standing by it. The community wants a board that can make decisions and stand by them. I wish you well in your task.



A district employee  September 26, 2009, 3:02 pm

51) I am confused on the true costs of these plans. The downloads you have available to look at do not show the 260 million you have estimated. They have listed 160 million. This 160 shows each highschool, several grade schools and gyms at the middle schools. So, where is the other 100 million coming from? I know in the Civilones comment above you said the 160 was not including everything. So what could be another 100 million? Where can we see all the true figures for the new schools? You guys want to know all our concerns and questions about these plans and this is a big concern. I can not figure out what could cost another 100 Million. another parent  September 26, 2009, 10:40 pm

52) The very last thing the District needs to spend money on is a "state of the Art athletic facility". Where are our priorities?? Aren't we supposed to stress that education comes first?? Any inteligent tax payer is not going to support a tax increase that goes towards an athletic facility over education improvements. Lets get our schools in line first, then consider athletics.

And this is coming from an avid sports fan. 186 employee  September 27, 2009, 4:28 pm

53) NOBODY IS PROPOSING A STATE OF THE ART ATHLETIC FACILITY!!!!!!!!!

Just consider SHS sports teams: Boys and Girls basketball teams practice in a church in the New Berlin School District, the boys and girls soccer teams practice at an elementary school miles from the SHS campus, the baseball team pracitices in a public park that is too small for varsity baseball. All that is being proposed are ADEQUATE FACILITIES!!!!!!!!! Southeast High School has a great athletic facility - it's simple and certainly not "state of the art" but it gets the job done. Why shouldn't all the high schools have adequate facilities on thier own campus? D186 Supporter  September 28, 2009, 7:31 am

54) Is there any way that I can see the break out of where the money is being spent? If 260million is the most expensive option I want to see where the money is going. I am sorry if your pdf file only shows 160million being spent but that is not the larger scope of work. If that option is on the table than why not put it out there for people to see where their money is being spent or would be spent. I am confused on how you can tell me that 60 million will be for a new school but you can't tell me how much of that is labor or materials or land. I will not accept any options until you show me everything. Please explain and if it is already out there tell me where to find it. civilone  September 28, 2009, 10:48 am

55) I like how the plan seeks to improve all current high schools as well as building a new one for population growth -- for a total of 4. That will make all 4 high schools more attractive options for all of the students as well as bringing this metropolitan area to the forefront of making the completion of education a genuine option. Move 186 forward  September 28, 2009, 10:53 am

56) You are not answering civilones or my questions. I am still confused! Ok the file you can look at on here says 160 million! Did you guys not say in the newspaper that the most expensive option would cost over 260 million? It feels like you are avoiding this question. People are more willing to vote yes to a referendum if the cost is lower. I know I would feel better knowing that the district is being conservative and not spending money that doesn't need to be spent. So again!
My question is how are you getting an extra 100 million? I can't imagine that programs cost 100 million dollars extra! another parent  September 28, 2009, 10:05 pm

57) It is time for Springfield to move forward, and substantially invest in the future of our education system and it's facilities. Two of the three high school facilities are inadequate now. Plan B calls for basically 2 new high schools (SHS & LHS) and a substantially new SEHS. It just doesn't make sense to renovate old schools, and buy urban land to build needed facilities that will still only meet 29% of the committee's targeted needs when we already have the land to build on and can consolidate other facilities into adapted existing ones and can meet 67% of the targeted needs.
Say no, to two or four high schools. Lincoln Magnet should not expand into a high school. As a matter of fact, the Lincoln Magnet experiment should be objectively re-evaluated altogether along with District transfer policies, gifted schools, charter schools, etc. But don't get me started there....
I agree that funding and the referendum are major obstacles. There are many opponents to higher taxes for public schools within the city-including many west-siders who currently support the private school systems, low and fixed incomers, etc. But people, this is an investment in our community! The better our education system - the better our community as a whole. We need to explore the County-wide tax and new bonds to replace expiring bonds and figure out how to fund this in a responsible way. We are all probably a little leery of handing a big pot of money to this BOE, and the plans are not perfect or even complete, but the fact is, the needs are there, it's long overdue and continuing to do nothing is not an option. Move Springfield, IL forward  September 29, 2009, 12:22 am

58) Are you serious? $70 dollars/per 50 million for a 100k valued house. So someone who owns a 200k home wants to raise their taxes over $700 per year. No one thinks that number sounds excessive? Let's find out how we can cut that number down and while we are at it let's try to find some money so that we have enough books for every student. The day that a child cannot do their homework because they don't have a book but they get to walk down a freshly painted hallway is the day I will send my child somewhere else.
I don't mean to sound harsh or selfish but I need to see some internal changes before approving any new building or remodeling project.
We need to improve the system before we do an "extreme school makeover". just me  September 29, 2009, 9:47 am

59) To "just me"....you raise important issues but we have to attack problems faced by our school district from every available angle. Don't we owe our students that much? I agree we need to be sure we have adequate teaching materials but that doesn't mean we turn our back on substandard facilities. You need to know something regarding how to pay for this. We can increase the sales tax by 1% and provide property tax relief at the same time! The entire sate of Iowa funds schools this way. Champaign County just passed the sales tax in April. See my comments above (number 38)....we can fund MAJOR improvements to our school infrastructure AND LOWER PROPTERTY TAXES AT THE SAME TIME. We need to DEMAND that our BOE pursue this option. Did you know every school board representing the county schools support the sales tax increase but it couldn't be put on the ballot last November because our BOE said no! The sales tax option is our best opportunity for long term property tax relief. At the very least we need to demand that our BOE give us, THE VOTERS, the opportunity to vote on this issue in a general election. Why not now?  September 29, 2009, 4:42 pm

60) Dr. Milton, times are tough, but for the future of our children, I am willing to increase our prop. taxes, if the job is done right. The existing Spfld. high school, is the ideal location and size to extend our Lincoln Magnet program. The property on Koke Mill is already owned by the district and is the logical and ideal space to put a complete academic and athletic facility,along with adequate parking necessary.. Trying to peace meal a renovation and adding on to the current school is simply unrealistic and not something I would be willing to raise my taxes for. If something is worth doing, please lets do it right. Thank you mrs. Mcallister  September 29, 2009, 5:32 pm

61) Why did our board of Education say no to the sales tax increase? ?  September 29, 2009, 9:05 pm

62) What do these things have in common?

Memorial Stadium
Lee Elementary School
Washington Park
Eisnehower Pool
Robin Roberts Stadium
LLCC
Hobbs Park
Vredenburg Park
Hope Church (outside of the school district)
Centennial Park (outside of the school district)

Answer: SHS home game and practice locations.

No one is asking for state of the art athletic facilites. How about just facilities so 14 and 15 year old kids don't have to find rides all over the city to practice ahletics..

IF SHG can do it why can't we?  October 1, 2009, 9:53 am

63) "All of the options include continued use of SHS as a student attendance center."

If it is alright for SHS to become a student attendance center and to be used for Lincoln School, why isn't it alright to just keep the Springfield students there??? I am confused! (If it isn't safe enough for SHS students than how is it safe enough for Lincoln students?) a mom  October 5, 2009, 9:31 am

64) There are some very good and insightful comments. First of all, I would like to commend the Board for seeking input and providing us with the place to post and view feedback. I think this is a very positive step in the right direction.
Next, I'd like to point out that the High School with the most requested transfers in is the least adequate facility. I guess it isn't about the building after all. Please keep the tradition of Springfield High School in it's present location.
With that said, I can see the need for a new High School. I don't agree with the location...The Koke Mill high school sounds like it will cause more of a rift and keep the current divisions in our city. The sale of that land in a good economy could probably finance the district's needs for many years. I'm just not sure if the timing is right now. Maybe, after we fix what we already have within the district and the economy is in better shape.
I, also, agree that we need to ask for the kids input. Thanks for listening!  October 5, 2009, 11:23 am

65) Thanks for listening i agree with you, i posted that our kids should have some input in this as well because it is their future we are talking about. Think about it they made sure the kids got to vote for the president, i think they should have a vote at each school and/or let them post their opinions. a parent  October 5, 2009, 1:56 pm

66) What is taking so long for the facilities decision to be made? These discussions started in 2007. If I'm not mistaken, $100,000 was paid to a consultant to tell the district what was best.

The school board is elected to make the tough decisions. Please make a decision without worrying about the next election. Had a decision been made, we may have stayed within the 186 boundaries. The inability of the school board to make a decision was the deciding factor for us. Your kids deserver better! Please do what is right for our future! Build a new high school on the west side! Got tired of waiting and moved to another school district  October 5, 2009, 2:42 pm

67) My two options: 1. ONE fantastic, up-to-date, modern high school. 2. Funding by sales tax increase. sdb  October 5, 2009, 8:14 pm

68) Interesting,

South East High School is 5.73 miles from Rochester High School.

The proposed west side location for a new high school is 15.05 miles from Pleasant Plains high school.

Both of these facts were obtained from mapquest.com.

Why is the west side location an issue of being too close to the 186 boundaries when the current site of South East is SIGNIFICANTLY closer to Rochester?

Wake up Springfield! DO THE RIGHT THING! Frustrated Parent who's eyeing Plains High  October 7, 2009, 11:10 am