By Antonio D. French
Filed Monday, May 08, 2006 at 8:04 PM
Should the story of Grover Cleveland High School end with "...and the school district forever closed the doors of Cleveland in 2006 after nearly two decades of neglect," it would be a sad tale indeed. Labels: Commentary, Schools
Tomorrow the St. Louis Board of Education is scheduled to vote on a recommendation by Superintendent Creg Williams to close the high school at the end of the school year. It would be the 17th school closed by the district in just three years (the 5th south of Delmar).
I accompanied three school board members and two aldermen on a tour of the building today. The terrible physical condition of some parts of the building was obvious. Less obvious were the causes of Cleveland's current state.
The building was built in 1913. It was designed by renowned architect William B. Ittner. It is known by some as the "Old Castle" because of its two distinguished towers. The school was renovated sometime around 1979. In the 27 years since, dozens of school board members, numerous superintendents, and principal-after-principal have allowed the school to slowly slide into an embarassing state of disrepair.
Few people make mistakes in St. Louis Public Schools. For practically every problem you could point to, there is a past superintendent, school board majority or administrator to blame.
But the public doesn't view the schools in the same way as people in district. We see St. Louis Public Schools as a neglectful neighbor that has for years mistreated its children and let its grass grow wild.
Every now and then it comes over to tell us how good it is at all the things it does poorly. Doesn't it know that we've lived here for years? We know this guy. Even if he doesn't really know himself.
Dr. Williams is the fifth superintendent in just three years. He is not from St. Louis and this is his first time heading a school district. So he may not be fully aware of the reasons the general public may not believe him when he promises not to do what the district has done 16 times in the last three years.
At an administrative meeting of the school board last week, Williams publicly agreed with the assessment of Ald. Dorothy Kirner (25th Ward) and board member Bill Purdy, that taking the students out of Cleveland and simply turning off the lights and locking the doors would be a horrible mistake.
"I'm not saying close it, board it up," said Williams. "I think that would be devastating to that community."
He's right. But that reason didn't stop the district from doing it many, many times before.
None of the damage our group saw today at Cleveland resulted from simply old age. Every thing we saw was done by someone's action or inaction.
Whether it was a drainage problem caused by lack of regular gutter maintenance, or moisture in the walls caused by architectural or construction miscalculations when extentions were added to the building, or peeling paint inside the buildings that could easily be scraped and repainted, or racial slurs and curse words allowed to remain on lockers -- every one of those things could and should have been addressed as soon as it was noticed.
By the superintendent's estimates (which I would be interested to see where it came from), it would take $15 million to repair Cleveland High.
So now what? The district (and the community) require a plan that identifies (1) what to do with the students and (2) what to do with with the building.
Does a decision on either need to be made tomorrow? No.
Dr. Williams should learn from the mistakes of his predecessors. To announce out of the blue that a historic school, a landmark, should close forever. And one week later, move to close it before the public has had a chance to give its input is a mistake.
The conditions of the school are very bad. Students and parents deserve much more. But classes are over in about two weeks and the students won't be in the building again for three months. There is time for public deliberation.
The superintendent should provide the public and the Board with some basic facts:
1. What exactly is wrong with the building? It makes sense that an assessment of the building would be made available to the Board (Perhaps the same one that gave Williams his $15 million figure). That assessment should give a detailed rundown of the structural, environmental and architectural problems of the building.
2. How much would it cost to make the top floors of the building fully functional? Cleveland was built to hold 1,100 students. After starting off with 800 students at the begining of the school year, there are now only 600 kids in the building. It seems that "half capacity" could fit in half the building. The worst of the problems are on the subterranean levels (the basement and the cellar which for some reason houses the computer servers).
3. Now how much would it cost to repair the lower levels? This is where the real cost has to be. Fixing the problem of rain collecting around the building and seeping into the walls is going to cost. But how much, and can that work be done over the summer or during the school year while classes are going on in the upper levels?
4. If the students must be moved for the 2006-2007 school year, where? Is Madison School, where the superintendent suggested last week, really the best place to move 600-800 students? First, will they all fit? Second, what about the ROTC program? There are rumors of it being moved to McKinley Classical Jr. Academy. If that's true, what happens to the successful academic program at McKinley?
5. What to do with the building if the students are moved? Without a large investment, Cleveland may no longer be able to serve as a high school. What else can the building be used for? One of the other things on the agenda at tomorrow's meeting is a $325,000 request to build out offices and cubicles on the second and third floors of the district's administrative building located at 801 N. 11th Street. Would it be cheaper and a better use of district resources to invest that money instead in converting several upper floor classrooms at Cleveland into administrative office space?
There are more questions than answers right now about this move and the superintendent should provide as many answers as possible to the Board and the public -- before a final decision is made.
Cleveland High School was allowed to deteriorate over the last two decades. So too has the trust between SLPS and the public. It was even further damaged by the manner in which decisions like this were made by the last school board majority. This Board, like the superintendent, should also learn from its predecessors.
8 Comments:
The school is rotten to the core. The plumbing is bad and the electrical system does not meet the needs of schools in 2006. It is falling apart and must be torn down. Why must we in St. Louis ring our hands time and time when a difficult decision needs to be made. Tear the thing down and build a new one. 15 million goes a long way to building a better Cleveland.
5/08/2006 8:39 PM
Tearing Cleveland down and building a new one is an option. But so far building a new Cleveland is not something the superintendent has put on the table.
If it was proposed for the students to be moved out for two years while a new Cleveland was built, that would be something for the community to hold on to.
But where would the money come from to build a brand new high school?
And does the population trends suggest that a new one should be built in the same spot?
This is not a decision that should be made in just seven days.
5/08/2006 9:04 PM
Anonymous #1 again- The primary issue is get the students out of that hellhole. Williams and the Board must not overpromise the politicians just to curry favor. For once, be straight with people. If it is going to take a bond issue to do a new cleveland and maybe maintenance money for some other schools, then say it. Just be straight and not overpromise.
5/08/2006 9:39 PM
Hmm, where is all the fire and brinstone?
They are going to close a school! Which I believe is exactly the opposite action that four board members campaigned on! Well, it's their mess now, and I have to say, I feel really bad for them :(
5/09/2006 8:30 AM
An upcoming tax increase will support two new rec centers in the City, one north and one south. The northside center is likely in Fairgrounds Park. While a southside center has been planned in Carondelet Park, maybe Cleveland HS could be reused as the southside center.
5/09/2006 11:08 AM
Anony #3, don't bet on any bond issue for rec centers or sports arenas. The support is not there on the board or in the general public.
It would be *crazy* for the Board of Education to ask the public for money to build sports complexes when schools are literally crumbling around students.
Besides, the private sector has already shown an interest in fixing the sports center issue on their own (See http://www.rftstl.com/Issues/2006-02-01/news/news.html).
If this is an area that the business community, including the St. Louis Rams, are willing to fund on their own, why ask taxpayers to do it?
If taxpayers are going to be asked to further invest in SLPS, they want to know that that money will be put into classrooms and improving the conditions of students, not sports.
If Vashon's MAP scores or graduation rate was as good as the record of their basketball team, the district would have an easier time asking for dollars. But that's not the political reality.
5/09/2006 12:23 PM
This Board and Superintendent should remember how stupid everyone looked the last time they were involved in plans to demolish an Ittner Building.
5/09/2006 4:07 PM
Tear Cleveland Down are you people insane. Its a historic landmark! Schools like that are what make city schools across our country so interesting. You can call me nostalgic, but just take a visit to the new Vashon is that what we want to happen to Cleveland. I could understand if someone said the same thing about Gateway it use to be a warehouse before it became a school, but Cleveland was built to be a school. With some effort from the district and the community the school could be beautiful. It has a beautiful auditorium in the center of the school. The problem with the district is about money not about the community members are so concerned about money rather than the state of education and now the state has taken over. I suppose this is really going to work.
12/31/2007 12:46 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home