[Masthead] Overcast ~ 61°F  
High: 68°F ~ Low: 57°F
Thursday, Apr. 28, 2016

Marshall school board selects property to pursue for new elementary facility

Friday, July 31, 2009

In closed session Tuesday, July 28, the Marshall Board of Education authorized Superintendent Craig Noah to negotiate for the Banks property and pursue the possibility of purchasing additional land from the Church of the Nazarene, according to a news release from the district.

The pursuit of real estate is in preparation for building a new upper elementary school if voters approve a bond issue the board plans to place on the November ballot.

The board had considered five properties for the future site of the new school. The Banks property is located near Stone Hedge Country Club on South Business Highway 65.

During open session Tuesday, the board selected a construction management firm to help finalize plans and cost estimates for the project, deciding to hire Titan Construction if fee negotations are successful.

The board earlier selected ACI Frangkiser Hutchens as the architect for the project, which would also include building additions at Benton and Northwest elementary schools.

The total cost of the construction project is expected to be about $18.5 million, according to ACI's preliminary estimates.

Contact Eric Crump at marshalleditor@socket.net

Related stories:
5 sites under consideration for new school, district plans to form community advisory committee for bond issue:
www.marshallnews.com/story/1549746.html
Marshall school board selects construction management firm for proposed building project:
www.marshallnews.com/story/1558057.html


Comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on marshallnews.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

the people in this town have said time and time agian about this "New School" BS NO why aren't the elected people listening to us? FFS they wanted to put all the schools out at the where 240 and 65 meet. LEAVE IT ALONE

-- Posted by Selmac8 on Thu, Aug 13, 2009, at 10:04 PM

I bet that the bill fails......Spending money on just three grades is not a very good idea and then you add putting money into buildings older then dirt is even more crazy.

-- Posted by Taurus13 on Sat, Aug 8, 2009, at 2:07 PM

Let me throw this scenario out there. Let's say we build the new school then one of the large employers in this town suddenly closes up and people leave. Factories are closing up left and right in this country now days. There's no guarantee new businesses which employ large numbers are coming into the area. If one of the major employers closed up, other businesses would be affected and Marshall would turn into a ghost town. How would the school pay for the multi-million dollar building then? I am concerned about getting into so much debt when the economy is so unstable. People getting into more debt than they can handle was a contributing factor to this countries current economic situation. The moral of the story is "don't bite off more than you can chew".

-- Posted by kmt202 on Fri, Aug 7, 2009, at 10:19 PM

Sorry that should have been everyyear except 1

-- Posted by Gal66 on Fri, Aug 7, 2009, at 2:05 PM

I thought Readers numbers were strange also because I have always heard that Marshall is underpaid compared to state averages, so I too was researching them.

There seems to be a glitch on the Mo Dept of Education site. (Scary isn't it) If you look at the school report card it will verify Readers numbers. But if you click on the "more data" at the bottom you will see different numbers for the state totals. This is the same on all the schools. They are supposed to reflect the same numbers I believe but don't. We can't assume which are right. If you look closely the numbers from 2004 on one report are exactly the same as the ones for 2007 on the other. And 2005 and 2008 are very similar. It looks like someone didn't transfer numbers over properly when updating numbers. Who's to say.

I think the numbers Reader was going by were wrong because it looks like a clerical error but we can't say. No one's right or wrong just misinformed but our Department of Education.

-- Posted by a realist on Fri, Aug 7, 2009, at 1:54 PM

Reader101,

Why do you not say anything about the fact that our school district has made an improvement every year for the period from 2002-2008 yes they still have work to do but progress has been made.

Also you state that the The only category Marshall is above state average is in teacher and administration pay.

You are wrong !!!!

(14) Average Teacher Salaries

Missouri 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Average Regular Term Salary $38,214 $39,078 $40,383 $41,750 $43,236

Average Total Salary $39,786 $40,685 $42,063 $43,524 $45,027

MARSHALL 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Average Regular Term Salary $35,938 $36,645 $37,064 $38,786 $39,766

Average Total Salary $40,132 $40,685 $41,087 $43,064 $43,957

.

.

.

.

.

(15) Average Administrator Salaries

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Missouri $71,279 $72,821 $75,176 $77,639 $80,208

MARSHALL $69,556 $71,484 $68,749 $72,841 $74,773

-- Posted by Gal66 on Fri, Aug 7, 2009, at 1:34 PM

While everyone is debating new buildings, there are other concerns about this school district that should be a priority. Most importantly, student performance. Marshall is below the state average in all student performance categories, MAP scores to high school graduates going on to college to average ACT scores. In fact, the Marshall school district has been given a deficient in adequate yearly progress on MAP scores. The only category Marshall is above state average is in teacher and administration pay. Will a new building(s) remedy this situation? This issue ought to be the priority, be addressed and remedied first. This information is available on the Missouri Dept of Education website.

-- Posted by Reader101 on Fri, Aug 7, 2009, at 10:53 AM

You are right Jebbs. I don't mean to offend my comtemporaries. I am one of the blessed ones.

-- Posted by red dog on Fri, Aug 7, 2009, at 7:33 AM

I may be wrong here and I am sure Eric will be able to go back and check.

I think when this was voted on last time the bond issue would have raised taxes on a $100,000 home less than $30 for the year if that is the case I just dont see how anyone could not afford that.

I know for a fact that I blow way more than that in a years time on crap I don't really need and I bet that about 99% of all people do.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Fri, Aug 7, 2009, at 6:56 AM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
I do plan to do a story soon on the recent history of school bond votes, and I'll find out what the tax impact would have been for each. I talked with board President Larry Godsey and Superintendent Craig Noah yesterday to get responses to a number of questions and concerns that have been raised. One thing Dr. Noah said was that the district would help property owners figure out what their tax difference would be if the bond passes.

Red Dog I am glad that you are able to work part time in order to make ends meet. Not everyone is so fortunate to have good enough health to be able to work when they retire. What are those people supposed to do to help them pay the increased taxes?

-- Posted by jebbs on Fri, Aug 7, 2009, at 6:33 AM

writerintraining - I believe the Church of the Nazarene owns land next to the Banks property. So, probably the possible purchase would be to increase the land plot being discussed for the school.

Still think there's enough room between the Central Office and High School to build.

-- Posted by Gamera on Thu, Aug 6, 2009, at 8:32 PM

Will there be an anti-school bond committee this time? All the "NO" vote peoople need to get together and organize. Air your thoughts to your fellow voters. Come on folks. Let's see your proposal(s). The supporters of the issue will be out in force when the issue gets on the ballot. Will the "anti" crowd be as public?

I have always voted for the kids. I am retired. I am on a fixed income. I own property. I work part-time here and there to make ends meet. How can anyone that considers all the facts be negative about this issue?

-- Posted by red dog on Thu, Aug 6, 2009, at 4:27 PM

Do we need a new school. Absolutley. Am I going to vote for one - absolutely not. I for one can't afford any more taxes and the school is the biggest part of the taxes now. Does my mother need groceries. Absolutely but she won't be able to get them if her taxes are raised much more. There are a lot of things that are needed but if people don't have the money they don't. I bet that most of the people that are for it are 1) not property owners or 2) not on a small fixed income. There has been discussion in the state that schools can be funded through sales tax. That way the people that have money and spend it will be the ones paying. I wish more people would push our representatives and senators to pass this so the burden does not keep falling on people that are already stretched to the breaking point.

-- Posted by jebbs on Thu, Aug 6, 2009, at 6:03 AM

My vote is YES. If you can't see how badly we need new schools you just aren't looking. We not only need an upper elementary but also a lower elementary and a middle school. By the time we get those in Marshall the high school will be falling down around our great-grandchildren's ears. And only because some feel they need to know, I am a property owning tax payer with children too old to benefit from any new schools in our district. I had to laugh when someone said something about driving to BFE to get to the new school. Unless you're on a skate board it really shouldn't take that long, no matter what side of town you live on.

-- Posted by JustFYI on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 9:31 PM

We also ran a story on June 8. In that story, we included details of the financing, with information on how the available dollar figure is calculated and the fact that the school board was actively looking for additional sites to consider.

http://www.marshallnews.com/story/154581...

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 9:11 PM

I am not originally from Marshall, but I now work and live on property I own in Marshall. Yes, I will pay for the new school because it is desperately needed!!!

-- Posted by snorkel on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 8:24 PM

What is the purchase from the church for?

-- Posted by writerintraining on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 5:59 PM

LAMR asked

"How many of the people posting here in favor of the new school are actually property owners and will paying for this mega school?"

I am and I would be glad to do it!!!!!!

And I have not had a child in this school system for years.

Also everyone that has persional property pays school tax.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 4:19 PM

I have two questions, What is the cost of remodeling the current buildings? How many of the people posting here in favor of the new school are actually property owners and will paying for this mega school?

-- Posted by LAMR on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 2:33 PM

Eric,

I tell you I really think if someone was to give the Marshall School District all the money and the land to put the school on with no strings attached some of these people would cry about something!

Some of the people in this town are so out of touch, it's like they are scared of progress.

I tell you it will be another 20 -- 30 years before the kids in this town get a new school and it will cost a hell of a lot more money then.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 1:55 PM

As someone had mentioned in the past what about a large area such as farm ground for future expansion, future country school consolodation, and plenty of parking or playground area? Marshall is surrounded by corn and soy bean fields. I am sure if the area farmers or landowners were aware that the school was to purchase land and knew what their budget would be someone would step forward with a great offer. There needs to be choices to where the future site will be not for it to be set in stone that it will be south of town. Many disagree about this location.

It seems to me none of this has really been made public except through the newspaper. Why the Hush -Hush after all it is the taxpayer's money and vote?

-- Posted by Tito on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 8:47 AM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
To be fair, the school board holds monthly meetings that are open to the public. The board sought likely locations for the project and five property owners came forward. We published a story about the available sites June 23 (www.marshallnews.com/story/1549746.html) and on July 31 a story about their decision which site to pursue (www.marshallnews.com/story/1558876.html). The process has been open and anyone with interest in suggesting a site or offering one for sale had opportunity to do so.

WTF,

As to a new school I see we will just have to agree to disagree.

Let me ask you a question if the site by the Country Club is not a good site then please tell me where you think a good site would be if you thought we needed a new school.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Aug 5, 2009, at 6:36 AM

Gal66

The location by the country club is too far out of town and no we DON'T REALLY NEED a new school.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Aug 4, 2009, at 11:44 PM

Response by Eric Crump/Editor:

The architects have advised the school board that expanding the proposed building is not possible with the amount of money the district will have available.

really? how so? what are the details here? how much money does the district really have available for anything here, considering they have a major lawsuit over their head and shouldn't even be thinking about doing something like this?

so we should just settle for "something" instead of truly solving the problem? hmmmmmm ...

i vote no. bring it on again, put it on the ballot in november, i think by now you're gonna see a resounding noooooooooooooooooooo.

-- Posted by buffetandtrump on Tue, Aug 4, 2009, at 12:41 AM

OK Gal66, thanks.

-- Posted by Dawson16 on Mon, Aug 3, 2009, at 7:02 PM

Dawson16 sorry the only part of my post that was to you was the first part about when the school was built.

The rest of it was for all the others crying about the people around the country club.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Mon, Aug 3, 2009, at 8:44 AM

Gal66,

You need to read my posts again. I've never said anything bad about people living in nice houses or driving nice cars. Please don't accuse me of such.

-- Posted by Dawson16 on Mon, Aug 3, 2009, at 8:30 AM

Long Bottom Just where in the center of town do you think a school can be built?

-- Posted by Gal66 on Mon, Aug 3, 2009, at 8:23 AM

Dawson16,

The new high school was started late 1974 or early 1975 the first graduating class at the new school was 1977.

The main problem with this town is, has been and always will be the jealousy between the haves and the have nots!!!!!!!!

You people need to grow up and think a little bit about some things.

#1 just because someone lives in a nice big house and drives nice cars does not make them rich in most cases it just makes them in debt up to their A**.

#2 Does it really make a difference where a new school will be?

What really maters is we REALLY NEED a new school!

-- Posted by Gal66 on Mon, Aug 3, 2009, at 8:20 AM

Hey Long Bottom - Just where in the "center of town" is there a piece of property big enough? Come on people, be realistic. There is not any space inside town - close to everyone - available.

-- Posted by outsidelookin'in on Mon, Aug 3, 2009, at 7:51 AM

We need one big school K-12. Needs to be in the center of town. That way everyone that is not in walking distance will have to get a ride or take the bus. Personally when my child starts school I will take him. I don't want him to get confused on which bus takes him where. I really don't wanna have to travel to BFE to take him to school when he becomes of the right age. Also taxes are freaken nuts. They are going to go up even more. I went to small schools my hole life and they were not the best schools.I got a good education and now have a good job. Its all about the teachers. If you got a good teacher that is willing to take the time to help a child it doesn't matter what the school looks like. I will have to give a big NO on the VOTE until they find a much better location for the school!!!!!

-- Posted by Long Bottom on Mon, Aug 3, 2009, at 6:57 AM

Bueker would be best suited for Grades 7 and 8. Students in Grades 5th and 6th still need at least some play ground time, something that Bueker does not offer at the present time. If a new building would be built, 5th through 6 grades deserve consideration. Bueker still needs to be kept in use, no matter what.

-- Posted by farmer'sgranddaughter on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 11:45 PM

About the new school issues, I agree with blogger Slater to a point it is Administrators that think their is a bottomless pit of money not teachers.

Noah & Russell are new so they need to spend more time surveying exactly what the community wants not what THEY want. Besides Russell does not even live in Marshall or send his own children to Marshall Public Schools so how does he know what the community needs? People need to attend the school board meetings and voice their concerns!

Blogger Little Miss Me made alot of good points about a K-8 building not just a new buiding for some of the elementary grades but ALL. Worth reading maybe the school board, Noah & Russell could consult with her!

-- Posted by Tito on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 4:07 PM

Here's a thought --

Maybe the plaza buildings aren't up to city code. Or the company is behind in taxes.

Then the city can start the process of tearing down the buildings and/or acquiring the property.

It would be similar to what was done with the McClure house but different in that the city would have to become the property owner.

And then the school district could acquire the land for the new campus.

Easy as pie, eh? (Yes, I'm being sarcastic and I know it's far-fetched but, hey, the improbable can happen!)

-- Posted by Dawson16 on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 12:39 PM

You're right, stealing is not the way to do it, but it is unfortunate the owners of the Marshall Plaza don't care that the building is a blight on our community. It is really bad advertising for our city.

A campus in the same area would make so much more sense than somewhere way across town.

Where there is a will there is a way.

-- Posted by judgmental bast*** on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 12:04 PM

"1. the reason for student populations rising is....blackouts and long winters."

I've yet to see anything about population projections but it does sound like there is a lot of *undercover* work going on in Marshall..

"2. enjoyed the post about how we could "steal" the land away from the owner. That's a positive message our schools can teach our kids. If you can't get what you want through reason, just steal it."

Greg, you must not be keeping up with the law of the land these days. The Supreme Court has ruled it's fair to steal anyone's land for about any reason. Positive message or not, it's what America has become. These kids will learn it sooner or later. Might as well see it first hand. We're all socialist now..

-- Posted by Third Child on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 10:33 AM

I love how new posts raise new questions and ideas to ponder yonder.

1. the reason for student populations rising is....blackouts and long winters.

2. enjoyed the post about how we could "steal" the land away from the owner. That's a positive message our schools can teach our kids. If you can't get what you want through reason, just steal it.

3. bus issue. I can see the point of the post. Since the busses drive by, why can't they pick up our kids on their way back to the school. It shouldn't cost money...but it does. I recall studies showing that more gas is used during stops ans starts. More kids to pick up equal more stops and starts which equals more $ spent which in turn equals higher tax dollars. Also, I believe it's UPS that encourages their driver to avoid left turns to avoid crossing traffic and spending time waiting. Those issues were made thinking about time and money. Same could be said in this case.

And 4. Land. Land is the one thing on the planet that is slowly being taken up but is not being replenished. If the owner isn't selling then it doesn't matter how many people suggest the poroperty. We all know of houses in the area that are run down and need to be torn down. BUT if the owner, who often does not live in the community doesn't sell, then we all have to look at the run down site and say "why doesn't someone do something"? Well, they can't.

All the sites mentioned are good sites on the surface. But, if the owner won't sell, or the cost is way overvalued, or the site won't work for various structure, location or ecological reasons, it's just a wash. It won't work. Again, those with the knowledge have the power. Our administrators, city inspectors and such can look at a property and see what we don't see. Face it, some locations may look good and make sence, but not all of those locations are good locations.

NOW another though on Bus Stops, one solution could be a neighborhood pick up spot. For students that live within one mile, spots could be designated as the neighborhood pick up and drop off. Just a thought.

Now, we ALL know it does no good to moan and gripe here. Do yourselves a favor and go to a school board meeting or call the powers that be and ASK the questions you pose here. I've been to a few of these meetings, and once the "kids come first" moment is over, the room empties to the sound of crickets. Go to the meetings, ask the questions and get involved. You shouldn't moan if you are a couch quarterback

-- Posted by Greg House on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 10:11 AM

How much are they paying for the Banks site? I would be interested to know.

For once I agree with third child.

-- Posted by judgmental bast*** on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 10:04 AM

After looking at an aerial view from Google, I wonder why there was no mention of putting an L-shaped building behind the Central Office and High School. The space there is equal to or slightly bigger to that of Bueker from the air.

A novel idea would be to build a new middle school there. Move 6th through 8th grades when open and move the 5th grade "trailers" to other buildings temporarily (one year).

Let me explain.

Since there are people of the community want to see/save Bueker because of its memories, renovate it after that opening the new building. The building would be empty get things up to stuff like removing mold that shut down a room a year or so ago. Make the auditorium look good for community events. When renovations are complete, reopen Bueker as a 3rd through 5th grade school.

So, you've centralize secondary education and place upper elementary in one location. After which you have the 4 elementary building that you could close one to renovate and/or expand depending on budget at that given time.

Seems like it would bring in the new and work with the old at the same time. Plus, it has worked with some common sense elsewhere.

-- Posted by Gamera on Sun, Aug 2, 2009, at 9:58 AM

Eric, will look forward to seeing what you find out about the plaza property.

Kathy, I believe it is for sale. For the right price.

I did a little backtracking and found this. Read the comments of Jay (James) Barton and John Q.

http://www.marshallnews.com/story/145071...

-- Posted by Dawson16 on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 11:05 PM

The government takes land by eminent domain all the time. Condem the Plaza as blighted property and just steal it like they do to a little guy. At least this would actually be for the benefit of community instead of greedy developers and casino operators..

-- Posted by Third Child on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 9:57 PM

SCHOOLS AND BUSSES AND SUCH

Gee, I rediscovered if you ask the right people you get an answer.

The State says they will pay for each child that rides who lives a mile or more away. That would be why the school board requires the children to get there on their own if they live within a mile. That would be dollars talking.

Remember folks, money talks. It don't sing, it don't dance and it don't walk.

Now that I know it is only a money thing, I want it changed. Here in town, there are at least three busses that go by my house each day, morning and evening. What would be wrong with picking up everyone that wants a ride?

Would the School Board change the requirement? I suspect the cost will be minimal. Concerned citizens, push the School Board. Better yet, push the State and the School Board.

IT'S YOUR SCHOOL SYSTEM. GET INVOLVED. QUIT TALKING AND START DOING.

In the words of Earl Pitts, "Wake Up America".

-- Posted by red dog on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 6:32 PM

JB, I'm also in favor of using the Marshall Plaza land - that would be a great location! But I thought it was prohibitive because of something. Cost, perhaps?

-- Posted by Dawson16 on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 3:34 PM
Response by Kathy Fairchild/Staff writer:
The Marshall Plaza land isn't in play because 1) it isn't for sale, and 2) the last time there was any discussion about using it, the price on the table was roughly $5 million dollars. I don't think that's changed.

Instead of adding on to Benton and Northwest schools why don't we just make the new building bigger. Make it a 1-6 grades and tear down some of these old eye sores school buildings. Buildings like Northeast need to go!

-- Posted by Taurus13 on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 3:02 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
The architects have advised the school board that expanding the proposed building is not possible with the amount of money the district will have available.

I think the high school property was purchased with expansion in mind. However, instead they expanded athletic fields.

I realize it may be expensive, but I would rather see the district purchase Marshall Plaza shopping center and the old Walmart. Replacing those with a beautiful school campus, would remove what is now a blight on our town (with the exception of the new aldis). I cringe everytime I see that rotted out Marshall Plaza sign and empty store fronts.

Think how nice it would be to have a complete school campus all in a row - for travelers to see as they drive in town.

It could take a while but a plan to put a 3-5 and 5-8 school in those places would be great.(Maybe eventually a walking bridge could be built to cross College) Then the K-2 students could perhaps stay at the better elementary schools (neighborhood schools for them??)

Maybe the alternative high school could be put at Bueker since the district is so intent on keeping that old relic.

More food for thought.

-- Posted by judgmental bast*** on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 2:21 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
I'll double check Monday, but I believe the Plaza possibility was investigated and found to be not feasible. I'll see if I can find out why.

Question and Answer time

Q.1 Is our school system working as is?

A.1 Yes.

Comment: I got a couple of old cars that will keep working as long as I throw money at them.

Q.2 Do we need new buildings for our kids

to get a quality education?

A.2 No.

Comment: A quality teacher can do the job

almost anywhere the right enviroment

is present.

Q.3 Why do we want to build then?

A.3 Because.

Comment: Because why? Could it be because we

want the kids to have the best

learning environment possible?

Q.4 Is now the time to build?

A.4 Probably.

Comment: I haven't seen anything getting

cheaper lately and I heard something

about interest free money.

Q.5 Why can't we just go ahead and build

a complete facility?

A.5 Something about bonding capacity.

Comment: Talk to someone who knows for more

information on this.

-- Posted by red dog on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 11:16 AM

buffetandtrump, you said:

"i've been thinking that for days, that noah and russell are new to the area ... they just don't understand things here. to reply to one poster .. no we aren't stuck in our ways, this just doesn't make any sense at all. not at this time. especially with a huge lawsuit hanging over our heads."

I believe I agree.

-- Posted by Dawson16 on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 10:40 AM

red dog,

What you described about using the MVC field for football, the park for tennis courts, etc. brings back some nostalgia for me. That's how I spent my high school years. Ever so lovely in fall to walk across the MVC campus on the way to an Owls game.

But much as I love nostalgia, that's going backwards and we can't do that for this situation. The athletic fields are in place and I think it's a good thing to have them close to the school itself.

However, better future planning could have been done when the high school was built. We could have had the land across the highway (behind the stadium) and had the elementary campus there, instead of that huge, who-wants-to-go-there, most-goods-from-China, super store. (Sorry, personal feelings being interjected)

Not sure when kindergarten actually started here in town. It was in place in 1961 when I went to kindergarten at Eastwood.

An excellent and thought-provoking post you had.

-- Posted by Dawson16 on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 10:37 AM

Greg House, good post.

I agree with you on #8. You can't please everyone all the time. Impossible.

Disagree with you about settling things over a beer. Beer usually creates problems rather than solving them. (And those Rose Garden pictures were among the most stupid I've ever seen.. but that's politics and another topic for another day)

You're close on the time the new high school was built. It would have been a year or two later than '73. I believe the first class to graduate from there was the class of '76.

And I'll throw out a bone for everyone to chew on. If student populations are growing, what is the reason?

-- Posted by Dawson16 on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 10:17 AM

Well said, House.

-- Posted by born-n-raised on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 8:52 AM

I am always amazed when people do things or jump to conclusions before all the facts are gathered. What do we really know at this time?

1. Student populations are growing.

2. School classrooms are remaining the same. (Buildings don't grow unless they are built on to.)

3. The newest school we have is MHS and was built in 1973 when "open" classrooms were popular and now we look back and say, "what were we thinking?". The other schools are dated, crumbling relics.

4. It is always cheaper to build now rather than later.

5. It is cheaper and smarter in the long run to build new, rather than patch and repair. Remember, the story of the boy who plugged th leaking dike with his fingers? Eventually we'll run out of fingers.

6. Those who have the gold, do make the rules. Thus everyone in town who takes time to vote has the gold, or the vote to approve or turn down a bond issue.

7. Everyone can think of the "perfect" place to build a new neighborhood school or elementary campus. But if the owner of the land isn't selling or the cost is outrageous, it does not matter if it's the perfect location or not.

and finally,

8. No matter what is proposed, there will always be people who will feel they are not being heard. We could build a grand campus out in the country and consolidate and some groups would not be happy. We could build a school in any direction, North, South, East or west of town and the other three directions would swear the district was catering to a special segment of the population.

I don't know if this is the greatest plan for this town. I myself would like to see a large elementary campus developed in town and a new high school built outside in the country. Then if the surrounding schools wanted to consolidate in the future, we could build another building next to the newer country high school. Saline Co. Consolidated High School and Senior High School. Right now, each school building is land locked.

To sum up, I believe the powers that be really try to do what's best for the students and families they serve. ALL possible options can not be persued to completion. What can be done is select an option, research it and see if it will serve the needs of the district. The people will ultimately approve or turn down the proposal.

Remember, if we can't solve this, a represenative from the district and a represenative from the public might be called to Washington to settle the matter over a beer.

-- Posted by Greg House on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 8:38 AM

The blogger that wrote about wanting the "people" to have input into the issue made me chuckle. I have been to these quasi-town hall meetings. For the most part, those that showed up were those that had to be there and zealots. I think a President (Lyndon Johnson) was thinking of this when he used the term "Silent Majority".

Another thing that caught my eye was the blogger deriding the school superintendent. I didn't know our "Super" had that much power. I always thought the School Board decided things. Oh well. What do I know?

Come on folks. Kids come first. They are the future.

I notice we got a new jail for the grown-ups approved by the voters but we can't seem to take care of the kids. Strange community we got here.

-- Posted by red dog on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 7:22 AM

born-n-raised ... you're the one who is nuts if you think that the people out there don't want a school located near them. look how spread out that area, and homes are ... it's not like the school is gonna be right next to them, say like ... any of the four elementary schools in town that are concentrated. doesn't matter ... most of the wives out there don't work anyway, so they have plenty of time to drive kids to school. you wouldn't see a single child in those neighborhoods walking to school. they just want it located near them.

once upon a time i lived in a very nice area that would put stonehedge to shame, was a lot more concentrated in how small the lots were and how close the school was to home, how high the property values were, million dollar homes ... it was a very very high class neighborhood that parents craved to live in cuz of the school system and HOW CLOSE the school was to their home. those parents LOVED being able to walk their kids to school ... i've seen it happen many times, with my children in the same system at the time. so please don't think these people don't want a school located near them, especially cuz it will be blocks away. marshall needs to wake up and get in the real world.

seems to me this plan to put it on the south side of town will make just about every child in the marshall district eligible to ride a bus to school, considering their "over one mile" policy. i like the idea of keeping the neighborhood schools, but in this time of a president-in-training do we really want to spend 18.5 million plus overcosts that are sure to come just on a school that houses only grades 3-5?

i've been thinking that for days, that noah and russell are new to the area ... they just don't understand things here. to reply to one poster .. no we aren't stuck in our ways, this just doesn't make any sense at all. not at this time. especially with a huge lawsuit hanging over our heads.

once again, i'll be voting NOOOOOOOO.

when will they ever learn? the marshall school district hasn't exactly had any success lately with high school principals/superindentents role ... why would we trust anyone just coming in?

craig noah ... sit down, shut up, and learn. instead of trying to push something through from your buds looking for a new school next to them.

-- Posted by buffetandtrump on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 12:01 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong - but way back when they first started talking about a bond issue, like in '95 or so, wasn't the Banks land an option then as well? No "rich" folks out there then, was there? Maybe my memory is failing me, I could be wrong. But I can't believe the "rich" folks want a school in their backyard - or anyone for that matter. Also, I wonder how many "rich" kids parents already transport them to and from school. You certainly see them at the schools dropping off and picking up already. How many of them ride the bus now? I don't think having the school near them will change that. It's not a matter of rich or poor or middle class. It a matter of people in this town not wanting to support anything positive because then what would they have to gripe about. Geez.

-- Posted by outsidelookin'in on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 9:52 PM

Both Noah and Russell are new to this town. Maybe

they do not understand that they need to get public input when trying to pass a bond issure.

Especially in the turn of the economy. Many people in town had higher appraisals on their property in these hard times and now they would raise again if the bond issue passes. These two

are taking matters in their own hands. It took years to get a classified employee committee for

equal rights and they come in and disband it on

their own. However, we notice the CTA was not

disbanded. No input from anyone. We for sure will vote NO for the bond issue. The time is not right nor the location they chose on their own. What is wrong with the Board of Education?????????????????

-- Posted by Cat Lover on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 9:25 PM

I am amazed that the plans are already being made, land chosen to buy and NOT ONE survey from the tax payers or open discussion at a public forum?? Who do you think will pass this bond ....wouldnt it be practical to survey the masses and get residents opinions???? Sounds like it is a DONE deal! I will push as hard as I can for a big fat NO vote and do not think I will not make my voice heard!!!

I think maybe the Sonehedge crowd has TOOOOO MUCH pull with the district. Could it be that deals are being made on the golf course and not in the school board room with the public present or the press??? Tsk Tsk Dr. Noah and your cronies..............Also this does not look good for future school salary raises!!!

-- Posted by Tito on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 6:30 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
Just to clarify: School salaries and school buildings are paid for with different sources of money, so one doesn't really affect the other. Bond issues aren't used to pay salaries, so succeed or fail, raises won't be affected.

People, you are out of your minds if you think the "rich folks" want a school built near their homes. They are going to be hollering the loudest against this location. Do you really believe that the "rich folks" want all of the increased traffic and noise in their neighborhood? I don't live anywhere near there, but can categorically say I don't want the school built near my home either. Frankly, the further the school can be built from residential neighborhoods the better. This isn't about "us" and "them". Get over yourselves, people. This about the kids.

-- Posted by born-n-raised on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 6:22 PM

A further comment or two about this school bond thing. There are some genuine rich people around. Maybe more than a few. Perception is that big fine houses and expensive vehicles belong to rich people. I wonder about that perception.

I read somewhere that if you owe $10,000 you are a debtor. If you owe a million dollars, you are a partner. Is there any truth to this?

I miss the Sage of Coon Holler. I would enjoy reading his comments about this.

-- Posted by red dog on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 6:20 PM

Instead of buying property somewhere else why not try and purchase some of the plaza, not much left there anymore and its right by the high school, parking lot already there, yes the parking lot needs some work, then all the schools would be right there together. To me it makes more since to keep the schools all together. Or why not try and purchase the old Wal-Mart property and put the school there? Just a thought..

-- Posted by buttercupp on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 5:54 PM

1980's revisited. How many of you were around in 1980 to witness similar opposition to a school bond proposal? The big issue then by the opposition was preservation of neighborhood schools. There was a long range plan by the School Board to eventually have a campus. No one saw the long range plan as the future of the Marshall Public School Distict. So big money was spent to preserve what we have. Funny thing. We have "neighborhood school" buildings that are now 29 years older.

My concept of a "neighborhood school" is grades 1 through 6 with one teacher for each grade, teaching all the subjects. That is the way it was in the sixties and before.

Actually, if I remember correctly, kindergarten was introduced in Marshall sometime in the sixties. Pre-school? The idea "in the day" was to let kids be kids. 6 years old was about right to start school.

We still have school buildings in the neighborhoods. To bad they are no longer used as a neighborhood school. K through 6 in the neighborhood would be fantastic. Why don't we do it? I will tell you why. Money. Space. Practicality.

One bloggers comment stirred a memory from the '80's campaign. The State required so much acerage per one hundred students for the building site. I believe there is enough open acreage at the present high school site to do some more classroom building. The sad thing is so much of the open acreage is taken up by things like a football field, practice football field, baseball diamond, tennis facility and a soccer field plus the parking lots.

So, do we build on the high school property? We already own the acreage. We can go back to renting Gregg-Mitchell Field for football; baseball and tennis at the park, and, maybe, soccer at the MVC site. We will still have a football practice site and a soccer practice site at the middle school. We can bus the participants there.

MVC will charge for the use of their facilities. I don't know about the park. It won't be a big deal because we have saved so much by not buying other land.

I detect hardcore opposition to having a school campus anywhere near "rich folks". It dawns on me the title of our education system is the "Marshall School District". The district is much larger than the City of Marshall, though the majority of the patrons live there. Why don't we build in the country?. Anywhere in the district will be ok. After all, the most open acreage around is in the country. (Surprise!) To bad the needed utilities are in the town. A rural location will remove the advantage that would be gained by building close to the "rich folks". All the children would be taking a bus ride.

I am getting tired of writing so I am going to end it here. I have made enough spelling and grammatical errors to give the egotists a satisfactory dopamine rush when they criticize.

-- Posted by red dog on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 5:11 PM

I want to know why it would only be an upper elementry school? I grew up in a town about the size Marshall is now and think it would be much easier to have K-12 on one large property like I went to. Those of us with children in multiple grades (basically most ppl with more then one child) would have a lot less hassle with one school to pick up and drop off at, not to mention parent teacher confrences all in one place.

-- Posted by STLgirlMarshallMom on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 3:51 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
The architects have discouraged the board from considering a larger facility. In a nutshell, they say the grade 3-5 building is the biggest the district can get with the money it has available.

Haven't you folks heard - He has the gold makes the rules - of course, they want to locate the new school convenient to the rich folks. Also, right now if you live close to the school your child attends they must walk or YOU have to find a way to transport your child to that school. I bet if the new school is within one mile of the ritzy neighborhood THEIR children won't be walking, nor will Mom have to back the Beemer out of the garage each morning to drive little Muffy and Biff a few blocks to school!! I'm sure those with the gold will make sure that little situation is changed real quick. We wouldn't want Mom to be late for her morning tee off at Stonehedge because she had to drop off the children at school!

-- Posted by Typesetter on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 3:35 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
School policy requires students who live within one mile of school to walk of use private transportation.

What if the Church of the Nazarene doesn't want to sell? Then what?

-- Posted by luvthoseowls on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 3:29 PM

I have to vote no, also.

-- Posted by Green Eyes on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 3:23 PM

GEEZ... ALREADY HAD PLANS DRAWN UP, ALREADY IN NEGOTIATIONS ON THE PROPERTY THEY WANT, ALREADY CHOSING A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO BUILD. SOUNDS LIKE A DONE DEAL!! HOPE THEY DON'T THINK THEY NEED A RAISE NOW.... OOPS... PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE SAID ANYTHING. THAT WILL BE THE NEXT THING WE THE PEOPLE OF MARSHALL GET TO "VOTE" ON. TALK ABOUT "ABSENTEE" VOTING GOING ON HERE

-- Posted by 1OFTHEGALS on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 3:03 PM

What the f......

That's very special. And you were right on target. Everything within walking distance for the rich little darlings. Add another 'no' vote to the list.

-- Posted by BlackBird on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 2:08 PM

Why do we need a new of property? Why don't we explore the current space at the MHS campus? If you have to build,,,,, why not explore this option to at least see if it is possible? Until then, I'm going to vote NO and encourage others to do the same!

-- Posted by big3fan_62 on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 1:44 PM

I would like to see an estimate for doing necessary things to the existing structures. Will it come in under $18.5 million?

-- Posted by Scarpetta on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 1:10 PM

Ah yes, conveniently located right by the "country club". Isn't that special.

We don't need it folks. Vote no.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 1:01 PM


Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: