Some city council, school board members disagree on Central site

Some city council, school board members disagree on Central site

CHAMPAIGN — City and school officials reiterated their differences of opinion this week as the countdown to a November referendum on a tax hike for the new Central High School continues.

Some city council members and school officials disagree — respectfully — on where that school should go and what the long-term costs will be to the community as a whole.

City council member Marci Dodds repeatedly has taken stands against policies she believes promote urban sprawl, and she did again on Tuesday night. But this time, the contentious relocation of Central to the north edge of the city served as the backdrop for her complaint, and school board president Laurie Bonnett responded on Wednesday.

Dodds' vote became a symbolic one more than anything — council members voted Tuesday on a fairly perfunctory step: allowing the owner of land on Interstate Drive at North Neil Street to designate for city records which portion of the land was to be sold. The buyer in this case is the Champaign school district, which has publicized its plans to build a new high school at the location.

Though Dodds said she understands the district's need to revamp the school, she thinks moving it to the edge of town costs taxpayers twice. That's once to build it — including the extension of streets and sewer lines, among other items — and again to expand and maintain city services like police, fire, road repair and plowing.

"The list goes on, and so does the paying," Dodds said. "Taxpayers will be paying for a school on the edge of town in perpetuity."

In 2011, Dodds also voted against Judah Christian School's move to the western edge of the city, but by the end of that debate, she was alone in her opposition. She was the lone dissenter again in Tuesday's 8-1 vote that allowed a revision of the official plan for the land on record with the city.

"It also costs taxpayers in the decreased quality of life," Dodds said. "We lose farmland; we lose transportation choices; we lose a view; we increase pollution; we increase auto costs."

Bonnett responded on Wednesday by pointing to the city's own comprehensive plan, which lays out strategies for future growth and land use. The plan puts that Interstate Drive property into one of the city's key growth areas and one of the areas which have their "infrastructure and service needs satisfied and are ready for development."

According to the plan, "as new neighborhood areas develop, elements like schools and parks should also be included to build a complete neighborhood."

And those are the guidelines that city officials and developers should follow, Bonnett said.

"If you look at the comprehensive plan and the way building is happening in our community, a school is the perfect place for Interstate Drive," she said.

And while Bonnett applauded Dodds for being consistent in her votes and comments against urban sprawl, she reiterated that the city's own documents say the Interstate Drive area is ready for growth.

"This is the plan," Bonnett said. "If they don't want people to build out there, don't make a plan inviting people to build out there."

The council action Tuesday was mostly a formality. Planning and Development Director Bruce Knight said that, had the council denied the revision, it probably would have complicated and delayed the sale of the land, but he does not believe it would have prevented it.

The real decision will be in the hands of voters in November.

"It goes to referendum," Bonnett said. "That's really when people should be voicing their opinions: at the polls."

The 8-1 council vote, though, doesn't mean other members don't still have concerns about the school district's plans.

"I would like to go on record as adopting Marci Dodds' remarks about the impact on a community — maybe outside of the narrow focus of a school board — the impact on the rest of a community of a school board's decision" to build a school on the city's fringe, Tom Bruno said.

His "yes" vote, he said, was only because he felt Tuesday night's poll was not the place for dissension.

"I don't think it would be fair or appropriate in this case for me to vote 'no' on this area general plan," Bruno said. "But that doesn't mean I don't hold the same sentiments expressed by councilwoman Dodds."

Council member Karen Foster took the opposite position.

"I'll respectfully disagree because I remember when Centennial (High School) was formed, it was toward the edge of town, and there were cornfields to the south," she said. "When Robeson school was built, there were cornfields that the children had to walk through."

But now they are in developed areas, she said. Who knows what that area around Interstate Drive and Neil Street will look like decades from now? Bonnett said Foster's comments were on point.

"We need to keep an open mind that it's not into perpetuity that it will be the edge of town forever," Foster said.

Champaign resident David Cobbs told council members that he just wants to get past the debate. The students are crammed into the current school and the facility is inadequate, he said.

"We just need to get over it and get this thing done," Cobbs said. "It's for the kids."

Council member Michael La Due said that, "though the statement of values articulated by council person Dodds accords very closely with my own," he felt that the looming tax referendum in November, for which voters will have to agree to a tax increase to pay for the school, will be the right place to take a stand.

"We'll all have that opportunity," La Due said.

Sections (2):News, Local

Comments

News-Gazette.com 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

Eric Bussollini wrote on July 17, 2014 at 8:07 am

I was wondering if the Dodds family could get together and tell the community where they will graciously allow a new high school to actually be built. 

Or is it that don't want a new high school because it will serve minority kids and those poor white kids not lucky enough to share a last name with someone who lives on Greencroft?

ROB McCOLLEY wrote on July 17, 2014 at 9:07 am
Profile Picture

You have a humorous username. I get it.

 

I agree with Marci. Let's keep Champaign Central somewhat close to Champaign.

99characters wrote on July 17, 2014 at 2:07 pm

If you open Google Map, what's the only glaring green patch of land in the middle of Champaign? The 92-acres of Champaign Country Club. To prevent urban sprawl and let CHS located near the center of Champaign, why don't we use Eminent Domain and expropiate CCC? The size is about right, cost less to contruct in a well maintain landscape. Do we really need that many golf courses in CU? No, too radical? Well, it will definitely bring down the property value of Greencoft.

Bump Dunlop wrote on July 24, 2014 at 3:07 pm

If you think the Dodds-Sokolski family are racist in any form you do not know them at all. It is discusting for you to suggest that. They are very generous with ther wealth and they do many things to benefit less fortunate people.

justthefacts wrote on July 17, 2014 at 10:07 am

The comment regarding the Dodds family makes no sense. They are not decision makers in this process. The comment regarding Greencoft makes no sense either. The Interstate Drive site would be less convenient to middle/upper class neighborhoods than the Dodds Park site.

It also makes no sense to destroy a valuable community asset, Dodds Park, which took decades and millions of dollars to develop when a viable alternative exists.  That alternative, Interstate Drive, also appears to be less costly.

The Interstate Drive site will be developed. The land surrounding it has already been developed. Building a school there would simply be filling in and complementing the existing neighborhood.  Anyone who honestly believes the Interstate Drive site will be farmland 20 years from now is delusional.

Cuthbert J. Twillie wrote on July 17, 2014 at 4:07 pm


Since CM Dodds has been on Council, the City has expanded it boundaries past 57 and Windsor.  She never once complained  ( other than Judah) about subdivisions that have been created... Turnberry, Copper Ridge, Jacobs Landing etc.  But now it is  a huge problem for her.   As a previous poster has stated... lets buy the Country Club and build there.  It is Central to the City.  It has lots of space and has great roads leading to it.

As for CM LaDue.  Please be quiet.  Worry about the library and drinking on campus.  Leave the rest of the City to the adults.