Survey says ...

I used to teach at Naperville Central High School in 2002-2004, and even then the building was in horrible shape. It's too small and too old, and those kids deserve a better place to learn, and the people of Naperville should give it to them.

fix it,don't raze it!!

I believe the facilities task force chose the remodel over the rebuild not because they thought it was the "best" solution but because they felt it could be "sold" - that the public would be ok paying $70 million but not $120. People that have bothered to tour Central have overwhelmingly chosen to tear it down.

The things that bother me about a remodel are:

1) impact of students going to school under construction for 3-4 years - just the distraction and spending all that time in rented mobile classrooms
2) Health and safety issues - We know there is abestos and mold - what else is there? What is the cost of a student (or staff) being hurt or getting sick because of contruction?
3) unseen problems - what happens if a part of the building thought to be sound is found not to be when the walls get opened up? How many remodeling projects go 100% according to plan?
4) ongoing costs - how much less energy efficient will a remodel be that a new building? How much more will maintenance be? What is the breakeven point? Are the costs of heating and air conditioning all of those mobiles for 3 years calculated at $100/bbl oil energy prices? With Global warming AC costs?
5) Missing out - what facilities will our students be doing without because of a remodel instead of a new building? Smaller Science labs? Less computer space? Worse Air Quality? Less natural light? Smaller PE facilities? Will the current inadequacies ALL be addressed? Can they all be?

I suggest naysayers all go and take a tour and tell what is worth saving in the old building, and why we should risk safety and likely cost overruns and drag the project out longer ( 4 years instead of 2 ) to have a remodel instead of a rebuild.

People need to ask the long-term questions and not be penny-wise and pound-foolish.

AMEN GERI! NCHS is in horrible shape. My husband and I took a real estate class there through the College of DuPage and were appalled at the condition of the building, classrooms and restrooms. And we didn't see even 1/3 of the school! If the rest of it looks like what we saw, then it needs to be torn down and rebuilt. If the school board held an "open house" to give the residents who have a TRUE INTEREST in NCHS (i.e. their children or future children would be attending there), people would be singing a different tune. When we moved to this area, we specifically bought a home in 203 because of the fantastic reputation that Naperville schools have. We understood that our property taxes reflected that reputation, and assumed that our tax dollars were being used to maintain those buildings at the level that this community demands. They aren't. Where did all of the maintenance dollars go? Who allowed NCHS to get into the condition that it has, without correcting the mold and asbestos problems before they got out of hand? Where was the money spent - because it certainly wasn't spent on yearly upkeep that a building of that size with that many students requires. If NCHS isn't torn down and rebuilt - and it is still in the same shoddy condition that it is today - my daughter will be going to Benet. I'll pay the extra money for her to be in a school that actually cares about the environment in which they are trying to educate our children in.

There is no correlation between facilities and academic achievement, and there never will be. District 203 should have done a better job maintaining its facilities rather than give the teachers'union 7.2% salary increases for the last decade. Oh and by the way, there is absolutely no correlation between teacher salaries and academic performance either. Stop ripping off the taxpayers under the guise that "it's for the kids." It's not, and never has been. It's been "for the union." District 203 spending has almost doubled in the last 12 years while student enrollment was virtually flat. What does the district have to show for it? Central is not Neuqua. So what!

Mike, the balance between academic achievement and teacher salary is not the issue. Please don’t twist the argument because voters removed you from the school board.

While I have many passionate feelings about this issue, as a Naperville Central graduate and educator, long time Naperville resident and current Naperville taxpayer, I think one of my senior students said it best. Her words, submitted here with her permission, are below:

Talk to the superintendent of Naperville School District 203, and he'll tell you that Naperville Central High School is an elite institution of over 3,000 students where the average junior scores a 25.0 on the ACT and 97% of graduating seniors enroll in some form of secondary education. However, if you take a moment to speak with the students—the people who live, work, feel, and breathe the school on a daily basis, they'll tell quite a different story. They may mention the high expectations set for them when they step through the front doors each day or the extreme amount of effort they need to put in if they ever want to earn top grades in their classes, but these topics will not dominate the conversation. Instead, they'll speak at length about overcrowding, mold, poor ventilation, leaky roofs, overloaded power circuits, and asbestos. Their words will paint a vivid picture of a school building that has simply grown too old and too dangerous to sufficiently care for its students any longer.

As a senior, I shouldn't care about the dilapidated facilities. With graduation approaching in a few short months, it shouldn't matter to me that I can never find an open seat in the computer lab or that I have to fight for changing space in the claustrophobia-inducing girls' locker room. I should be focusing on more important things (such as applying for college). However, as the seventh member of my family in three generations to attend Naperville Central, I do care. I can't help but care. I've cheered my lungs out at too many football games and devoted too much of my time over the course of my high school career to simply stand back and watch as the 60-year-old school falls apart piece by piece. My peers and I deserve a school building that accurately reflects our efforts to enhance Central as a learning community, and the time has come for the district to build one for us.

However, despite nearly unanimous support for a new school among students, staff, and school board members, the majority of taxpayers remain unconvinced that the building requires any repairs at all. Those people fail to realize that the purpose of wanting to build a new Naperville Central is not to keep up with the neighboring schools in terms of pretty campuses—it's about making sure all floors have emergency sprinklers installed. It's about consolidating the school's 47 separate entrances, which may or may not be unlocked at various times between 7:45 A.M. and 3:10 P.M. It's about getting rid of the asbestos that has been lingering dormant under the third-floor since 1948. Fifteen years from now, I would much rather get lost in the halls in an unfamiliar, but safe Naperville Central than have to come back and see the damage another fifteen years of wear and tear have caused to my beloved campus.

While I am vehemently oppodes to seeing a third District 204 high school being built, I concur that it is time for a new Naperville Central. I have been to this school and it is dilapidated and disgraceful. The children who attend there deserve better.

In an attempt to reduce the rhetoric allow me to suggest that:

1. The students apparently like and are proud of their “dump”, remember the one they celebrate with t-shirts.

2. It may be Naperville’s oldest high school but as is prudent, the school has been updated over the years to accommodate the changes of time and need. The entire school is NOT as old as some portray. Let us all hope there is no consideration of one-upsmanship with the “rivals of the west’ for Naperville’s newest school.

3. If funds have been misspent and the school has not been properly maintained then we have a totally different problem with which to deal.

4. This physically “dilapidated” and “disgraceful” facility has experienced absolutely no discernable or measurable negative impact on high student achievement.

5. This building only incurs educational use 176 days per year, which should allow for many educational years left in its life.

6. Not one student or administrator has died due to a wall collapsing, drowning in a broken commode, or because a fire has ravaged the halls. Some schools in Lisle don’t even have access to reasonable water pressure and the Fire Department has no concerns: the students employ fire drills to prevent injury.

7. This is a school building and not your home. The student occupies this building only six hours per day, five days per week for 176 days per year: NO ONE lives there!

8. If the choice is to either tear the current building down and build a brand new school in a SD of declining enrollment or maintain a demonstrably serviceable minimally utilized building, the choice appears obvious.

Given that, the answer to the question is: This SB, as is so true of others, will do what it wants irrespective of polls or SD resident input. They will advance their case presenting THEIR facts and THEIR figures supporting more than likely a NEW building because that’s what School Boards do. The voter will then decide on the credibility of the SB and what they present, and whether they can afford to support their proposed referendum. Personally, I’m hoping for a new t-shirt touting, “I’m a SD 203 fiscally responsible voter – You’re Welcome!”

Listen, "Mayor". Clearly you don't have children in the school system to make comments like "no one has died". So a child or a teacher has to die or be injured before it is prudent to build a new facility? I don't believe that this is a competition between 203 and 204 for the best high school. It's about providing a safe environment to educate our children in. School is their "home away from home" - where else does a child spend the majority or their time during those 4 years? Would you want to live in a home that has mold and asbestos problems, hasn't been "updated" with the things that are expected to be "standards" now, and clearly hasn't been taken care of the way it should have been? I wouldn't, and I think the majority of people with children who attend or will be attending NCHS wouldn't either.

Is this not a serious violation of state health regulations? "Would you want to live in a home that has mold and asbestos problems, hasn't been "updated" with the things that are expected to be "standards" now, and clearly hasn't been taken care of the way it should have been? I wouldn't, and I think the majority of people with children who attend or will be attending NCHS wouldn't either."

Of course not! Regardless of which side (build vs. renovate) one may be on, this begs the question: If mold and asbestos have been found in the school, why have no steps been taken to remove them?

Ms. Evers, I have “listened”:

My point regarding no one dying in that school would be to comment on the relative SAFETY of that environment, not its danger. I hope you have no teenage drivers because if you do and you allow them to drive, that would indeed now be allowing them access to what is a truly dangerous environment. The domain currently provided by this school has been documented, year after year after year, to be one that is both safe and conducive to a very successful educational process. Perhaps for some NCHS students it is their “home away from home” but certainly not for all. That reference would be situational, not time spent determined. I don’t believe that most would consider their work place their “home away from home” would you? And whether or not I have children currently enrolled does not trump my status or concern as a taxpayer.

If that building was known to be unsafe all these years and nothing was done I would think the current SD administrators and SB should be dismissed immediately for non-performce. Actually, if the building is a “death trap” as you intimate, I would be angry with both the City and the State for being at a minimum inept if not criminally negligent.

I don’t disagree that routine maintenance and updates have been and must continue to be performed but have difficulty understanding why it has now become an emergency. If we are just discovering that this building has been permitted to deteriorate to the point of requiring replacement the voter must seek culpability and surely demand an explanation from the 203 administration.

Regarding the “rivals to the west”: I think it naïve of you to not believe that the thought of more positive recognition does not enter the minds of school district administrations, this is Naperville you know. By the way, just how are the administrators’ salaries determined again?

I am an SD203 tax payer, and my kids will attend Naperville Central in the near future. I had a chance to check out NCHS on a rainy afternoon not too long ago, and the thing that stood out to me most was the number of garbage cans positioned around the building collecting rain water falling through the ceiling and the duct tape holding the carpet down on the 3rd floor. I agree that the students of Naperville Central deserve a new school.

Also, Mayor, I wonder, if there really was a shirt that claimed, “I’m a SD 203 fiscally responsible voter – You’re Welcome!” would you be able to wear it? I've noticed you are also an outspoken opponent of the 204 new high school plan. Which district do you pay taxes in?

I'd suggest everyone put themselves in the position of the high school senior in the earlier post- weren't we all once high school kids who wanted to be proud of their school?

John:

In addition to being a homeowner I own a small business with a healthy portion of my rent going specifically to real estate tax. I trust that clears the issue for you.

With respect to the garbage cans and carpeting:

1. Leaks should I would think be part of routine maintenance. If your home has a roof leak you don’t buy a new home, you repair the roof correct?

2. Carpet – most schools employ floor tiles vice carpeting anyway don’t they?

I don’t mean to minimize those issues, just point out that even a new school would require maintenance don’t you think? I have paid taxes for many years and am tired of school districts pretty much getting whatever THEY deem necessary. I don’t think taxpayers are willing to pay for “smoothie bars” or marble entrances any longer.

I do take to heart your comment about students wanting to be proud of their school. I would think that given both their athletic and academic success that they are proud. These students have proven that maintenance blemishes are inconsequential when compared to the important things don’t you think.

Do you know if any parents with students currently attending NCHS have ever approached the administration or the SB and asked why repairs have not been made? If the question has been asked, what was the answer? They don’t perhaps have a “new school” agenda do they? Just asking.

Mayor, just keep in mind, everyone has an agenda when expressing an opinion on something like a new school. I'd like to see the new school built, so I present my arguments with my own agenda in mind. You think it would be a waste of taxpayer dollars, so you present your argument according to your own agenda. Isn't that what makes this country so great?!?

I hope they build the new school- that's all I have to say.

John:

Well said and I agree completely. I understand and support your motivation even though I disagree with your vision. What I resent is when there is often a selective presentation of fact or it is slanted to accomplish a result beneficial only to a special few. Although I sometimes doubt the sincerity or lack the understanding of some posts I absolutely harbor no animosity.

I have long passed my peak earning years and now find myself more than ever needing to closely monitor my income. I don’t mind contributing to the educational process but I do resent being made to pay for nice to have items vice need to have. When I grew up NO school had a swimming pool because it was expensive and it was not recognized as necessary for education. We were even made to suffer through the heat of the day without air conditioning! The buildings were simply constructed without any “fancy accoutrements”. Do I hope to gain support for my view on issues, of course, but more importantly I try to get people to think and examine the issue pragmatically. The 2005 SB election elicited a whooping 15% voter turnout – 15%! In 2007 it jumped all the way to 25% which was better but still deserved no prize. I haven’t missed an opportunity to exercise my franchise since 1968 and that includes the years spent in the US Navy. I get angry when I see the wide spread citizen apathy that consumes our voters. Anyway, I appreciate your interest and hope that it not only continues but that you take it upon yourself to incite others to get motivated and get involved.

I apologize I didn’t mean to preach. Have a good evening Sir.

It's hardly surprising that the Touch the Future survey and phone survey would give different results. It would be safe to assume that the people most likely to attend the TF presentations are families with children that will be attending NCHS yet that key demographic was not listed as one of the choices on the feedback survey. Either that was a huge oversight or purposely left vague so that the responses could be characterized as SD 203 residents as the SB seems to be doing.

Even if rebuilding is the "right" option, there are at least a couple things the SB should consider. Given its past history, there exists the possibility that no matter how strong and well-justified of a case the SB makes, voters may just say no. Also, if Plainfield and Oswego can build high schools for $52M and $65M respectively, (although slightly smaller at around 2400 students), a new NCHS should be able to be built for considerably less than $130-140M. That would make it much more attractive compared with the major renovations options. But, oh, that would make it less than the $125M SD 204 is spending. Never mind!