ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, March 6, 1997 TAG: 9703060055
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
DATELINE: CHRISTIANSBURG
SOURCE: LISA APPLEGATE THE ROANOKE TIMES
The Montgomery County School Board considered changing its position on how the construction of three new schools should be funded. Though the motion to pay for a new high school near Elliston with state bond money failed, the discussion raises questions about whether the dream of building four new schools will come true.
The plan for new schools in Montgomery County may be back under construction - again.
Tuesday night, the School Board considered splitting a new Shawsville/Elliston high school from the proposed three-school building project. The motion, which failed by a 5-4 vote, would have asked the Board of Supervisors to obtain Virginia Public School Authority bonds to pay for the high school.
Originally, the School Board wanted to build four schools in five years, and hoped its funding source - the Board of Supervisors - would support the entire package.
More than a year ago, the Board of Supervisors opted to start with the new elementary school in Riner by using Virginia Public School Authority bonds.
Some School Board members want the same action - which does not require voter approval - used for the new Shawsville high school. The issue raises questions about how the building plan will be paid for, whether some officials still are committed to building four schools, and whether community members will keep their patience while waiting for relief from overcrowded schools.
"If I had my druthers, it'd be the Blacksburg middle school that would go next," said Roy Vickers, who represents the town. Politically, though, the new high school in Shawsville should be constructed next. For one, he said, the land has been purchased.
The new middle schools in Blacksburg and Christiansburg still could be considered on a bond referendum in the next few years, he said.
"We all know the majority of residents live in Christiansburg and Blacksburg, so if you want to pass a bond referendum, those are the two schools you want to keep together," he said.
Board Vice Chairman David Moore said including only two schools in the referendum would be an easier cost for voters to swallow.
Member Wat Hopkins said he didn't like the idea of telling the Board of Supervisors how to fund the schools. Last month, the School Board passed a resolution that said it supported any method supervisors choose to get the schools built. It also asked an architectural firm to develop preliminary drawings so that voters could visual the schools if a bond referendum was held.
But Mary Beth Dunkenberger, who represents the Shawsville-Elliston area, said the Board of Supervisors has dragged its collective feet on the new schools.
"Taking this step would be a positive thing. It's going to take some action on our part to get it started," she said.
Vickers said a majority of the supervisors would not support a three-school referendum, but would support the option to start building the new high school now.
During a discussion held during a Board of Supervisors meeting in January, a majority showed strong support for a referendum.
But Wednesday, Supervisor Jim Moore told a few members of the School Board, "I think there's been some shift" in opinions. He also said there has been no guarantee that all three schools would be included in a referendum.
Tuesday night, School Board Chairwoman Annette Perkins warned of people's reactions to this discussion: "You're going to say some very important things to people in all the communities by going forward with this," she said.
The School Board will discuss the issue again at its meeting in two weeks.
LENGTH: Medium: 72 linesby CNB