![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.nevadadailymail.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (4)
Share link
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Furl
Reddit
Google
 Justin Messner/Daily Mail-- This room has become so dilapidated it is now used as a storage room rather than as a classroom. |
Currently, NEVC is separated into two schools; the high school, a 79-year-old building, in Walker, and the elementary school located approximately 14 miles away, in Schell City.
On Jan. 3, more than 130 people attended a public meeting hosted by the NEVC school board and district superintendent Charles Naas, announcing the plan to build a new centralized facility.
During the meeting, faculty and staff at Walker provided tours of the building displaying a dilapidated structure with bowing floors, cracked walls, falling ceilings, separations between the floors and joists, exposed electrical wiring and a non-operational boiler. Several classrooms now act as storage since conditions have become so bad they cannot house students.
Naas used the meeting as a platform to announce the district's plans to increase the school districts tax levy by $1.10 from its current $3.45 to $4.55 and to terminate a voluntary tax rollback of 80 cents, bringing the total operating levy to $5.35.
To begin collecting the tax increase, the proposition must be passed by majority decision by district residents in the April 8 election.
If successful at the polls, this tax increase would be used to fund the proposed $4.5 million, single story school set to be located around Harwood. If unsuccessful, Naas said the district would still eliminate the 80-cent tax rollback and use these funds to attempt renovations of the current facilities.
"What we'll be looking at then is raising the taxes anyway because were already rolled back 80 cents voluntarily," he said. "So, we would raise somewhat to start renovation projects which is not what we want to do but it will be out of necessity just because were 80 years old now at the two buildings."
Naas described the general attitude of NEVC district residents as "very positive, extremely positive." In a letter Naas wrote, "I have been overwhelmed by the support of the community in reference to our proposed new school project. Even the few who have admitted that they will probably vote against the issue have expressed their understanding of our severe need and wish us well regardless of the election outcome."
A portion of these people against the tax increase have formed a small committee named the Citizens for Quality Education. Seventeen names appear on the committee's roster, including Kent Abele, who said he is not convinced the tax increase will be enough to fund a building of this size.
"They've proposed to build a $4.5 million building; which, as far as I know, nobody in the public has seen the blueprints, they have no cost estimates, no blueprints. They just think they can build it for $4.5 million or somebody in St. Louis told them that it could be built for $4.5 million. Assuming that it could be, my sources -- which are sources that are in the business of public finance -- tell me that they are going to be $32,000 to $35,000 short of being able to service that much debt with a tax increase and the assessed valuation that they have. So, it looks to me like even if they get it built we're not going to be able to pay for it."
Naas referenced Dr. Howard Neeley, former superintendent of Republic R-III School District, currently specializing in public financing as a key participant in NEVC's financial decision making process regarding the proposed new school. He said that he believes the numbers given to him are accurate and that the school could be built with funds from the tax increase.
Naas, also explained that the district has opted to refrain from printing any formal blueprints or building diagrams due to the cost and resources that would go into these projects. He said the board intends to wait for the public to vote yes or no before spending the additional money on blueprints. "Because these plans are quite costly and labor intensive, it would certainly not be financially responsible of the board to spend such money without first obtaining the community's commitment.
"Essentially, this will give the board the authority to raise our levy up to $5.35. If and when we secure the funding and lock in our contractor prices where we can build the school. It doesn't mean we definitely will build, it just gives them the authority to raise our levy so we can generate that money to build," he said. "We are hoping to offset with some loans and other things too, just to help out, but our hope is that this will fund our project."
Brent Gundy, another member of CQE, said he thinks the tax increase is just too high and that it will not fix the schools problems with accreditations.
"I just feel, that large of a tax increase puts a lot of pressure on just a few people, basically property owners. The school only having half of their accreditations is a big factor for me. Their wanting this tax increase for a new building and I think the accreditations should be brought into order before the new building is even considered," said Gundy.
Ron Wilken, area supervisor over NEVC for the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, said the new building would offer a better learning environment but would not directly effect accreditation. He said, "You're going to have better science labs and better facilities for the kids. That's really what you need to think about when you're talking about raising a tax levy is, the kids. Of the 14 standards, none of the standards are directly related to the building."
Abele later said that he agrees that the school facility is in poor condition but is still not sold on the idea of a new school.
"I really admire the people on the board and the effort that they put forth and Mr. Naas all those people have done the best they can with the conditions they've got but it just doesn't look like it's workable," he said. "There is absolutely no doubt that they need better facilities. The facilities that they have are bad there's no denying that. I'm just not sure that raising the patrons property taxes by 55 percent and hoping to be able to build a building that won't improve the accreditation of the school is the way to solve the problem."
NEVC district representatives agreed with CQE on one issue -- residents should cast their votes at the election.
"I think the biggest thing, one of our concerns, is that people understand the issues and do go vote," said Rob Barrett, a member of CQE. "A simple majority could pass or fail this thing and this impacts a lot of lives, not just tax payers but students. It's a very critical issue, and my personal tax assessment pales in comparison."
On Saturday, April 5, the NEVC board will host a special meeting on the property where the new school could be built. The meeting is slated to begin at 6 p.m., and will offer residents the opportunity to ask questions about the proposed tax increase and new school building and see floor plans for the building. In the event of rain the meeting will be held at the Schell City Elementary School.
Polls open for the April 8 election at 33 polling places in Vernon County at 6 a.m. and close at 7 p.m. Only voters living within the NEVC school district will be able to vote on the tax increase proposition.
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
Students and teachers should not have to tolerate being educated and educating in a facility in this kind of severe, deplorable condition!! Yes it does say in the article that the room shown in the photo is now being used as storage, however, there are rooms being used as classrooms that are heading toward this kind of condition. I am a former employee of the Northeast Vernon County R-1 School District. I have spent many days over the past few years in the Walker building and I would like to make some points concerning the tax levy increase proposal.
Point #1:I can tell you that you do not want to be on the lowest 2 levels of the building because it IS going to fall in someday soon due to the rotting condition of the building. I can, and my own child (who attends the school) can tell you that there are cracks in the walls that the kids can drop items through (from the top level) and kids on the lowest level can catch them!! The CQE group expects our children to live a good portion of their day, 5 days a week, 9 months a year in a building as rundown as the Walker building is, however, I think I can safely assume that NOT a single one of the members of that group would ever want to have to reside in a home of that quality.
Point #2: There is a group who calls themselves "Citizens for a Quality Education." What kind of quality do they mean? High quality? Low quality? Quality can mean either of these. It sounds like they want our children to be educated in a VERY LOW quality building but in a HIGH QUALITY manner to achieve HIGH QUALITY skills. Students learn better and teachers teach better in a modern, clean, bright, heated, air-conditioned facility. The Walker building does not have appropriate lab facilities for Science students to perform experiments. Studies about how children/adolescents learn show that most students are visual and tactile/kinesthetic learners. These types of learners need to perform experiments, have hands-on activities to do in order to learn to their full capacity. The new school will provide such. Oh, and guess what?! Standardized test scores rise, and accreditation is not a problem. So, to the CQE, this will take care of your concern about accreditation.
Point #3: Okay, the CQE is going to say that other schools have the proper facilities for students to learn much better than NEVC students do. While that may very well be true, for now, our children are accustomed to learning in a small class environment and desire to keep it that way. If our students are ever sent to other schools, they would have to become part of much larger classroom populations. I teach in a small school district and have 12 students in my class. I student taught in a classroom in another school that had 22 students. I feel that it is much easier to provide the individual attention to students who have special needs in a class of 12, as opposed to a classroom with 22 students. The great teachers who choose to continue their careers at NEVC often comment that they like the small population classrooms, for the reason I have mentioned above.
Point #4: My husband and I will inccur a substantial tax increase, however, it is our belief that the children in the Walker building are unsafe during their time there, due to the condition of the building and various systems within the building (heating and electrical, to name a couple). Which would you rather sit down and cry and whine about: the reasonable tax increase that is being proposed or 110 children dead and/or injured as the result of a building falling in on them? I am sure we all spend hundreds of dollars per year on junk that we shouldn't and don't need. Let's just cut back on the junk and there's the money for the extra tax.
Point #5: The CQE group is concerned about accreditation. Well, they SHOULD NOT be. I have seen the names on the list on the flyer that was in my mailbox (and might I add, they wasted 2 stamps). While I am not familiar with all of the names listed on the flyer, I do know some of them and also know that certain ones send their children to other schools anyway, so I don't see any reason for them to be concerned about accreditation issues for NEVC. They probably need to be concerned with the schools they send their children to.
In response to "healthy's" comments on the CQE group and the NEVC ballot proposition to raise taxes I can only say it's simple--close it and send the students else where. Eventually these kids are going to have to be part of "a much bigger class room" anyway. If the building is as dangerous as she describes they should all have been in other schools years ago.
Just because some patrons have the common sense to send their kids else where doesn't mean they don't care or don't pay just as much school tax as Ms.Sense, or don't have just as much right to vote, it just means they are smarter about education and it's costs.
As for the other school's accreditations, I see little need to worry about them. It's a much shorter fall from 7 (the areas NEVC is accredited in) to 5 (the areas required to keep accreditation) than it is from 12 (the areas of accreditation by the WORST surrounding district) to 5.
And don't kid yourself if she and her counter parts were better qualified or could get the job, they would be teaching in one of the neighboring districts that pay teachers much more.
In response to:
Point #1: No one expects children to be in these conditions. The issue is that the children can be better educated elsewhere.
Point #2: Maybe before the school board spent $80,000 on land to build a school they should have thought about books and a science lab. If test scores rise, what happened to NEVC?
Point #3: Things change and it is something that children have to learn. It sounds to me like people are afraid their child won't be at the top of their class or make the "team". I don't believe this is a good argument to keeping a school open. In life you don't always get what you want and this is something that your children are going to have to learn. If they are truly as good as you believe them to be, they will be at the top of the class, they will be on the team, and they will succeed.
Point #4: If the buildings are as unsafe as you claim they are, why would you send your child there? In point #1 you say the building "IS going to fall in someday soon". I would not send my child into a building that I truly believed was going to fall in anytime soon. I think this would fall under the category of child endangerment. For the people want to keep a school open in the district why not build a private school and charge tuition. This puts the burden on only those who want to keep their children in this district, and lets the rest sent their children elsewhere.
Point #5: There doesn't seem to be a reason to be concerned with other districts.
CQE agrees with many of the views of myvoteisforhealthy. Students shouldn't have to be under these circumstances. However, we do not agree the answer is to spend 4.5 million (which nobody is sure will build a new school) and CQE feels this is a very low figure. Therefore, the maximum levy would be six dollars and that is questionable also as being enough to service this kind of debt.
We the (CQE) have the desire that every student should get the best education available. This can be obtained better by the students attending schools with full or nearly full (13 out of 14) state accredidations and for less money.
The CQE committee does not wish to insinuate anything less of the students or faculty of NEVC, but the district has had at least 10 years to bring accredidations to standard. So, we question NEVC...How much longer it might take, even with a new school? What is the feasibility of this new school's cost when neighboring districts have the capacity, ability, and willingness to do the job and for a smaller levy?
This is a democratic process, it will be decided by a majority vote. Hopefully, everyone will participate.