ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Saturday, May 11, 1996 TAG: 9605130042
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-9 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
DATELINE: PULASKI
SOURCE: PAUL DELLINGER STAFF WRITER
A steering committee proposal for a $49.8 million school-construction program in Pulaski County got a hostile reception from some School Board members Thursday night.
Board member Jeff Bain said he had an early copy of a draft for a construction program from the Moseley McClintock consulting firm, hired by the previous board to work with the committee over the past year. He said the draft was remarkably close to what the committee ended up recommending.
"Maybe Moseley McClintock is just so darn good that they know just what our county wants," Bain said. "I've got some serious questions about it."
Bill DeJong of Moseley McClintock said the consultants simply suggested some options to the committee. But the various options were studied in detail not only by the committee but at two community meetings each attended by some 300 county residents.
DeJong said there was a long debate about which project should be in which phase of the plan, none of which was in the draft. "The committee went through and worked on it and hatched it out and provided the framework. We didn't provide the framework," he said.
Board member Rhea Saltz said he had problems with the recommendations. "We'll have plenty of time to evaluate this," said board Chairman Lewis Pratt. "And I certainly hope the steering committee was not steered."
The first recommended phase, estimated at $26.7 million, included replacing Newbern Elementary School with a new 400-pupil elementary school; replacing Draper and Northwood Elementary Schools with a second 400-pupil school; renovating Claremont Elementary; renovating and expanding Snowville Elementary; and building a new school to replace Dublin Middle School.
The second $23.1 million phase would include renovating Riverlawn Elementary and Dublin Elementary, renovations and additions at Critzer Elementary, building a new school to replace Pulaski Middle School, and renovating Pulaski County High School.
"There's no guarantee that we're going to come in at $20 million or $30 million or $40 million," Saltz said.
"So much detail work is still ahead," said Superintendent Bill Asbury. "There's so much of that that's going to have to happen, and you'll be right in the middle of it."
"This is just one step in the process," Pratt agreed. "We do appreciate your hard work," he told the committee. "These are just questions. We're asking the same questions that you folks did."
Timothy Jones, a citizen with a daughter at Draper Elementary, said he attended a community meeting where he understood more people wanted renovations than new construction. "I feel like we're getting a mixed message," he said. "I cannot help but feel that the community has endured some double-talk, some discrepancies and possibly some deceptions."
"There's no intent on anyone's part to deceive anybody," said consultant Jim Copeland. "I think it's real important that you all realize this was built around community consensus."
When it turned out that the costs were about the same to renovate or build new schools, he said, the consensus was to build more modern schools that would last longer.
"Again, I just remind everyone that this is just a study," Asbury said. "This is not the final song to be sung on this issue."
He said the county has a right to expect its school officials to provide a vision of the best educational program for county students.
"Isn't that what you would want our School Board and our staff to do, look at the future?" he said. "That is what this process has attempted to do. ... That means in some cases we may need to give up some sacred cows that we've been wanting to keep."
"This is just the first step," said Pratt. "There's a whole lot of work to be done before the first brick is laid."
LENGTH: Medium: 72 linesby CNB