On Thursday night, the Davis School Board established that the modernization of Emerson Junior High now ranks as the district’s highest facilities priority. The most immediate priorities are updating the science classrooms, expanding the art and wood shop classrooms, and a new shade structure for the lunch area outside.
The complete modernization of the Emerson campus would cost between 17 million and 19 million dollars, according to architect Steve Newsom who spoke on Thursday. Unfortunately, the district lacks the money even for the highest of priorities.
The district decided that logistically they could not close Emerson because the other two junior highs were on the other side of time.
Despite this rumors that the school district intends to close Emerson Junior HIgh have persisted for the past two years.
A few weeks ago, at a school board meeting where the $5.6 million deficit was discussed, I asked the district point blank if they intended to close a close as a means to close the budget deficit.
Board President Tim Taylor responding to a question from myself said:
“No, we have not had any dialogue or any official consideration of school closures. It is certainly something that we as a community have lived through painfully, however, we are going through and have ahead of us a whole lot of pain still.”
Bruce Colby explained that while the district could save up to $300,000 to $400,000 from closing an elementary and $500,000 to $600,000 closing a junior high, however, the first thing the district needs is the capacity for the other elementary schools to absorb the additional students. When Valley Oak was closed that pushed the elementary schools to 90 plus percent capacity, so at this time the elementary schools are running at 90% capacity and therefore there is not really excessive capacity at the sites to absorb a school closure.
He also said when the district discussed we would have to spend a million dollars on portables to add capacity, and we don’t have the ability to add capacity to a site because we have no facility money either.
James Hammond suggested also that we think about the long term ramifications.
“There could be immediate savings that’s on an ongoing basis for what we perceive to be a three to five year problem. Culturally we could have decades of issues related to something so traumatic.”
He expressed concern that school closure discussions would once again pit one part of town against another. He did not see that as a helpful discussion at this time.
He told me privately, “the Superintendent is adamantly and unequivocally against closing a school.” The school board did not seem inclined to want to get into it either.
Other board members also told me privately they had no intention of closing a school in the foreseeable future.
As many who read this site regularly know, the district made the determination in late 2008 that the highest priority project was the high school track and stadium. This generated a large outcry from some in the community who believed that classrooms ought to be prioritized over a sports facility.
All things being equal I might be inclined to agree. However, the facts in this case bear strongly that the district needed to repair the track and football stadium as a huge safety issue first. Emerson it had become clear did not and does not represent a safety issue to students or district employees.
Unfortunately however, despite the district moving Emerson to the top of their list they do not have the funding at this time to do even the first phase of upgrades. Superintendent James Hammond acknowledged this on Thursday and said that it was not clear when funding might become available.
Moreover, at this point, Emerson’s upgrade is not the district’s top priority in terms of funding. Facilities come from a separate fund from the general fund that funds teachers and spending in the classroom, however, if the district were to put a funding measure on the ballot it would be a parcel tax not a facilities bond.
The district is trying to figure out whether to put a parcel tax measure on the ballot for November and what size to make it. Barring new funding and changes in the state budget outlook, the district is looking at over 100 layoff notices minimum for May 15 when such notices must be finalized. If anything the budget picture may well worsen in May when the Governor comes out with the May revise to the budget.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
DPD: “That’s the good news for parents in West Davis who have been concerned about the future of Emerson since 2008 when there were talks of closing it. At that time, the district cited concerns about buildings themselves and repair costs. It was later learned that the structural problems did not impact the integrity of the building and that the modernization of codes was not required until work actually began.
The district decided that logistically they could not close Emerson because the other two junior highs were on the other side of time.
Despite this rumors that the school district intends to close Emerson Junior HIgh have persisted for the past two years.”
At the time there was talk of closing Emerson by the School Board, the reason given was structural problems – even though everyone knew it was a cost cutting measure, just as the closing of Valley Oak Elementary had been a cost cutting measure. When a huge uproar ensued over the possible closing of Emerson, the School Board then decided there were no structural problems. I think parents have every right to be nervous about the possibility of Emerson being closed for budgetary reasons. I’m glad Hammond is opposed to such a cost cutting measure, but parents must remain ever vigilant.
When a huge uproar ensued over the possible closing of Emerson, the School Board then decided there were no structural problems. I think parents have every right to be nervous about the possibility of Emerson being closed for budgetary reasons. I’m glad Hammond is opposed to such a cost cutting measure, but parents must remain ever vigilant.
Two pieces of context here:
1) Two years ago when all this was going on, a recent facilities review and master plan was not available. The purpose of such a report is to comment on the conditions of the physical structures in the district and when/if they should be fixed. With the lack of such a current report, everyone was ignorant as to what the true condition of Emerson was. Cosmetically it didn’t look great in many places, but outward appearances don’t exactly indicate structural soundness.
2) Hammond and a few other administrative associates had just arrived and had just barely become familiar with the district. That, combined with point #1 above, meant that district staff was on less sure footing to offer recommendations to the school board.
At this point there is a current facilities review and master plan, and Hammond et al. are able to make better informed recommendations to the school board.
In recent years it seems the district has had multiple opportunities to be fiscally prudent and has squandered the opportunities.
When the Mace Ranch neighborhood demanded a neighborhood elementary school that enrollment numbers could not justify, the board rolled over and agreed to build the school. Much of the justification by those clamoring for the school was that when they bought their new home, they were promised a neighborhood school. They (the board) apparently just couldn’t bring themselves to point out that they were promised this school by the real estate agent who sold them the house, not by the DJUSD.
When they had the opportunity to sell Nugget fields and perhaps use the funds for facilities upgrades, they just couldn’t say no to the opportunity to get involved in the parks and recreation business and caved in to the Davis youth soccer association’s demands that the field remain a soccer field. Another lost opportunity to raise significant revenue for facilities upgrades.
They had the opportunity to sell the Grande property and could not resist the opportunity to get involved in the residential real estate business. The Grande property is now bogged down and there will be no financial gain to be captured by the district in the foreseeable future. Another lost opportunity to capture significant revenue which could be used for facilities upgrades.
The mind set of past and present board members seems to be that to say no any special interest group’s demands will be the immediate end to any present and future political aspirations. In politics it is always easier to just say yes! Because Davisites have historically always overwhelmingly supported additional taxes to support the schools, it is easy to assume they will do the same again.
I can easily see a $600-1000 special assessment on the November ballot complete with promises that it is “only temporary”, or “just a loan” until things get better
When the Mace Ranch neighborhood demanded a neighborhood elementary school that enrollment numbers could not justify, the board rolled over and agreed to build the school. Much of the justification by those clamoring for the school was that when they bought their new home, they were promised a neighborhood school.
Money for this school came from a bond measure passed in May 2000. Measure J was passed in March of 2000. If voters had voted down the bond, then it’s not likely the school would have been built. Don’t forget to blame the Davis voters.