Champaign school board's decision upsets crowd

Champaign school board's decision upsets crowd

CHAMPAIGN – In a stunning about-face Friday that infuriated an already angry black community, Champaign school officials advised board members to stick with the Boulder Ridge site they picked Monday for a new northwest Champaign school.

Backlash was immediate. Activist Imani Bazzell said the black community will almost certainly turn to its attorneys and a court monitor to ask for legal sanctions, including an extension of the costly consent decree that's due to expire in the 2008-09 school year.

"The community feels betrayed," Bazzell said. "Apparently the board is more comfortable betraying the black community than the other people in the district who are going to get two new state-of-the-art schools in their neighborhoods."

After a 90-minute closed session, Superintendent Arthur Culver said he had a mandate and a responsibility to look at the community's long-range growth as well as the welfare of all children in the district now and for years to come.

"There's been a lot of information shared, a lot of passion, feelings and hurt," Culver said. "I care about our kids. I'm a poor boy from a ghetto. I know how it is. I've been there. As superintendent, I think Monday's recommendation is a good decision for everyone. To change now will cost us trust, will destroy trust from parents all over the district. Our needs are so great, to make any other decision would be irresponsible. "

Wednesday, at a heated meeting of the Planning and Implementation Committee, Culver said he would be willing to take another look at the proposal to mollify a black community offended by the Boulder Ridge site. Opponents of that site said it satisfied the letter of the district's consent decree but violated the spirit of that agreement.

He said one option would be to build at two schools in the heart of the black community, Washington and Garden Hills, constructing a new larger school at Washington and adding space at Garden Hills, a proposal that pleased black community members. The unusual Friday night board meeting was scheduled immediately after the committee adjourned to consider those options.

The plans go to voters Tuesday. If they approve the district's $66 million building bond proposal, work on the agenda would include construction of the new Boulder Ridge school and a second school at Savoy, replacing Dr. Howard, major renovations at the eight older elementary schools and the purchase of land for a new high school to be built later.

Board member Nathaniel Banks, who opposed the Boulder Ridge site from the beginning, made a motion to rescind Monday's vote, a motion seconded by Minosca Alcantara. The two voted against the site on Monday.

Banks said he'd rather take a long-range look at the district's growth, but he believes the district still has to address immediate inequities.

"This is not a flip-flop," Banks said. "These are statements about where to locate one school, not statements against the referendum. I'm not representing myself. The consent decree is a vehicle through which the African American community got attention. The intent was to have a school in an area where the people affected live."

Banks' motion was defeated in a 5-to-2 vote.

About 90 people attended the meeting, and they spoke for two hours preceding the executive session, most supporting the idea of a Garden Hills addition and Washington replacement.

"All the children need to have a safe environment," said Stratton parent Michael Miller. "I don't care how this is resolved; I care that it is resolved."

Sawgrass resident Regina Ray said she's sorry to see the issue becoming polarized.

"Whatever you do, make sure it's best for all children," Ray said. "This is not a white versus black issue, but it's becoming one."

"I'm voting no," Lynn Stucki said. "This process is very haphazard.

Julia Johnson Connor, a Savoy resident who picked Washington School for her son even though it's far from her home, said she supports any proposal that "puts district energy and investment in children who live north of University Avenue."

"We're looking at economics, not what's going on with the people we're supposed to serve," Melodye Rosales said. "I have a problem with both Boulder Ridge and Savoy."

Rosales and Connor both objected to the busing that would occur to balance racial makeup at both the Boulder Ridge and Savoy schools. Connor said an estimated 4 percent of Savoy's residents are black and the school population will have to be at least 22 percent black, so all the rest of those students will have to come from Champaign neighborhoods.

"I think about what we learned from Katrina," said Sam Smith, a teacher and counselor. "We learned that a strong wind can blow away the veil. We need you to make a real investment in poor children, in the lives of black children."

Urban League president and CEO Tracy Parsons said the Boulder Ridge site will never be acceptable in the eyes of the black community.

"We're not talking about busing," Parsons said. "All kids are on buses. Busing for integration is a different issue. Until this city builds more mixed income housing, it's on the back of the schools to integrate. You have opportunities here even if you can't come up with a final site before the referendum."

Sections (2):News, Local
Topics (1):Education
Categories (2):News, Education

Comments embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

Lotte wrote on March 18, 2006 at 11:03 am

There already IS a new state of the art school in the heart of a black community...Stratton. Why is Imani Bazzell saying that other children will be getting two such schools while the black community essentially goes without? Stratton is like a Barkstall north of University Avenue. MOST children in this district don't have a Stratton in their neighborhood! Go ahead and take more legal action, despite the fact that the Boulder Ridge site satisfies the consent decree AND considers the financial logistics of a district that is under dire financial constraints from trying to satisfy the consent decree. Spending is not unlimited just because there is a consent decree in place. It has reached the point of having to go to tax payers for more money. Launching more legal action against Unit4 will serve ALL children of this district most well, won't it. Continue to drain this community financially and watch people leave with the very tax dollars you're after. It's already happening.

MrHappy23 wrote on March 18, 2006 at 3:03 pm

I think that it is interesting that there is now opposition from both the extreme right, opposed to any taxation to 'invest in the community' AND the group which feels slighted by the location of Boulder Ridge, practically in Mahomet.

If the referendum does not pass, it will be a VERY bleak day for the school district which should be one of the pillars of our community. As extremists on both ends of the political spectrum up in arms over the issue of the size of the budget, the electorate will not have an opportunity to vote on what is MOST needed out of the referendum-- critical maintenance that needs to be done on the schools that the community already has. I do not feel that the Boulder Ridge location was very well considered and the lack of dialogue on such a sensitive subject is very alarming. At the same time, it is a VERY logical location given the fact that land in C-U is available in every direction, outside of town.

ALL of the schools should be looked upon as an asset of the whole community and it is our responsibility to maintain them together. If we the electorate fail to act responsibly and support maintaining those community assets we already have, the 'cost' in the long run will be far higher and we will all share the costs of abandoning this responsibility as the schools go down the tubes which will likely have negative, long-term consequences for property values all over town.

teacher wrote on March 18, 2006 at 9:03 pm

I wish he media would quit refering to Imani Bazzell and her compatriots as community activists (although this story actually just said "activist"). She is not speaking for the community, she is speaking for a special interest group. The members of the school board are the true community activists--they ran for and were elected to their positions. They look at issues from all sides before making a decision tht is good for the WHOLE community. Ms. Bazzell's push to extend the referendum is further evidence of her lac of concern for the entire Unit 4 community. As a Unit 4 parent, she should be as sickened as the rest of us to think tht $2,000,000/yr is being spent on legal fees instead of our children. Asking for an extension is irresponsible and reprehnsible. When Ms. Bazzell becomes a member of the board, then she will have the right to be considered a "community activist". Let's hope she learns the meaning of the word community first.

Seykick wrote on March 20, 2006 at 11:03 am

People in Champaign need not look beyond our state borders to see the problems that can arise from mismanaged planning and community relations in the school district. Perhaps the News-Gazette can remind us all of what happened in Rockford and what the outcome has been. It might be sobering and broaden the perspective. Aren't factors such as the quality of education, student:teacher ration, collegiate placing, and extracurricular activies more important than physical location? Champaign is still small enough (unlike Rockford) that even the longest trek across town only takes a few minutes. Let's not forget how close we are here and that we are all connected in this community. Let's keep the focus on the most important issues.

NoSchool4U wrote on March 22, 2006 at 8:03 am

Isn't it ironic that Savoy would like to keep the buses of MTD out (for reasons that are probably a little more sinister than what is claimed) yet more than welcomes the tax dollars of the neighboring community to build a new school there ?