Ah Grasshopper - Follow the $$$$$

At the Peoria Chronicle, in reference to the Glen Oak Park site, Gary Sandberg made the comment,

"Follow the money, Grasshopper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "

Rally Peoria's very own --

Gra$$hopper Dateline

Volume 1 - Issue 1

(We know a little technical, ho hum... via the FOIA trail!)

April 4 -- Legal Notice to be published..... "Pursuant to Article 17-1 of the School Cole (should be Code) of Illinois, a legal notice announcing the required Public Hearing was published in at least one newspaper of general circulation on April 4, 2006. That notice set the time and date for the public hearing as May 8, 2006. It is necessary that at least one such Public Hearing be held prior to the adoption of the Amended 2005-2006 budget. Given that the Budget Hearing has concluded, the Amended Budget may now be adopted. " (PPS-Action Item, May 22, 2006, Background Information, Signed by Guy M. Cahill, Approved by Ken Hinton)

April 24 -- INFORMATION ITEMS - DISCUSSION OF SENATOR SHADID'S REQUEST -- Mr. Hinton made the following statement.......

• "The Master Facility Plan, which was formally adopted by the Board of Education on November 21, 2005, set forth a commitment to build and revitalize our community with new state-of-the-art schools. The proposed school on the Glen Oak Park site would be an example of that commitment."
• "However, due to recent events and out of respect for the Glen Oak community and in a sign of good faith, I am instructing my administrative staff to suspend the acquisition of property for the Glen Oak Park site effective 9:00 a.m. Wednesday, April 26th and ask the Board to delay their formal approval for the construction of a new school in the Woodruff Attendance area until a forum can be held."
• "To those 6 property owners with whom we have already entered into contract, we will honor our obligations." (PPS-BOE Minutes, 04/24/06, pp. 264-265)

April 26 -- Suspended acquisition of property for the Glen Oak Park site effective 9:00 a.m. (PPS-BOE Minutes, 04/24/06, pp.264-265)

April 28 -- $140,000 - 2102 N. Prospect

April 28 -- $89,000 - 2144 N. Prospect

April 28 -- $125,000 - 2212 N. Prospect

May 2 -- $100 - 2102 N. Prospect

May 8 -- "7:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET - Ms. Butler called the public hearing on the amendments to the budget to order at 7:00 p.m. There were no speakers. Mrs. Butler declared the hearing closed at 7:03 p.m. The amended budget will be voted on at the May 22, 2006 meeting." (PPS-BOE Minutes, 05/08/06, p. 268)

Again from the Peoria Chronicle, Mahkno's comments on May 25th, 2006 hit the mark,

"The problems this town has does not rise high enough for them to interrupt their daily lives for something messy like politics."

"If 500 people showed up at a council meeting demanding change… you bet they would notice. If 1000 people showed up at a council meeting demanding change… the council would get restless. If 10,000 people showed up downtown for the council meeting, demanding change… we would have a revolution in local politics. But… that would interrupt their baseball or basketball game. It might interrupt American Idol. We know American Idol is more important anyways"

Please wake up "Rip Van Winkle" and to the ramparts!!!!!

May 9 -- $98,000 - 2126 N. Prospect

May 9 -- $120,000 - 2206 N. Prospect

May 10 -- $133,500 - 2208 N. Prospect

May 11 -- $90,000 - 2142 N. Prospect

May 12 -- $82,000 - 2138 N. Prospect

Peoria County Government - Property Tax Information (please click link, then search by address or Property ID)

May 22 -- Budget amendment transferred $1.6 MILLION from (20) Operations & Maintenance to (60) Site & Construction/Capital Improvement.

Asked (on 05/22/06) for the statute covering this transfer --- Mr. Cahill's response was that he would have to conduct research to find the statute reference.

(Please note, a follow-up email was sent and still no response has been received from Mr. Cahill to date - 05/26/06.)
(PPS-BOE Agenda, 05/22/06, Action Item No. 8; Amended 2005-2006 Budget, p. 3 dated 5/5/2006, approved by BOE)

(105 ILCS 5/10‑22.33) (from Ch. 122, par. 10‑22.33) Sec. 10‑22.33. Interfund loans. To authorize the treasurer to make interfund loans from (1) the operations and maintenance fund to the educational fund or fire prevention and safety fund, or (2) from the educational fund to the operations and maintenance fund or fire prevention and safety fund, or (3) from the operations and maintenance or educational fund to the transportation fund, or (4) from the transportation fund to the operations and maintenance, educational, or fire prevention and safety fund and to make the necessary transfers on his books, but such loans shall be repaid and retransferred to the proper fund within 3 years. In case such repayment is not made within 3 years the regional superintendent shall withhold further payments on claims authorized by Article 18 of this Act until repayment is made. (Source: P.A. 89‑3, eff. 2‑27‑95.)

105 ILCS 5 / School Code, ARTICLE 10. SCHOOL BOARDS

Any attorneys, any school attorneys out there???? Is this the correct statute? Is there another statute(s) to cover this type of transfer?

May 22 -- "Prior to the moratorium on real estate purchases for the Glen Oak Park School Site, Purchase Contracts for listed property purchases were executed."

(Please note, that it would appear --- from April 24, 2006 at the BOE Meeting (sometime after 6 p.m.) until Wednesday, April 26th effective 9:00 a.m., D150's property acquisition went from 6 to 8 properties.)

(Also, asked (on 05/22/06) who was the signatory on the D150 real estate purchase contracts? --- No identification was provided.
(PPS-BOE Agenda, 05/22/06, Action Item No. 9; PPS-Action Item, May 22, 2006, Background Information, Signed by Guy M. Cahill, Approved by Ken Hinton)

Taxpayers are looking for equal treatment --- they are hoping that the BOE will employ the same "raise the bar, increase the rigor and relevance" standard which Superintendent Ken Hinton announced for increasing Lincoln School Academic Performance for civic engagement and open government for the taxpayer.

Does it seem curious ....

to reference the School Code section for a legal notice ---- yet need to do research to identify the section allowing for the transfer of $1.6 MILLION ?

that D150 seemingly COULD ONLY purchase these properties once D150 made an offer, especially when no intergovernmental agreement has been signed between D150 and the Peoria Park District to develop this proposed site? What happened to the concept of a purchase option?

that D150 is able to expend funds prior to the Public Hearing AND prior to the BOE vote to make a budget amendment to transfer the funds, $1.6 MILLION from (20) Operations & Maintenance to (60) Site & Construction/Capital Improvement?

that any expenditure over $10,000 has to be put out for bid AND the accepted bid has to be approved in a regular (open) D150 meeting by D150 BOE Members PRIOR to the receipt of services .......

YET THE SAME PRINCIPLE DOES NOT APPLY TO THE ACQUISITION OF $877,500 WORTH OF REAL ESTATE PURCHASES?

and so on . . .

Peoria Park District Trustees Champion Public Invitation

Peoria Park District Trustees Jackie Petty and Jim Cummings are to be commended for their support that the public should be invited to the May 31st meeting where Rep. LaHood is to be the broker to work out the large creases in the proposed D150/PPD school in Glen Oak Park.

Trustee Petty shared that they (PPD) have nothing to hide, so let the public attend.

Trustee Cummings shared that from Day 1 there had been a sequence of follies, that public input is essential and to not invite the public is a big mistake.

A motion was made, seconded and passed to that effect --- that the PPD would encourage those who had organized the meeting to invite the public.

PPD Board Attorney, Jim Konsky, felt that the Trustees action was within their scope of office as the trustees were not taking a final action on anything, no expenditure of funds was occurring, and it was only a motion to encourage that the public be invited.

Thank you to Trustees Allen and Ryan for voting for this motion. (Trustees Johnson and Budzinski were not present and President Cassidy had to leave for another appointment.)

Actually this is such a great idea, that the meeting should probably be rescheduled so that more of the public can attend!

And saddly, the PJStar did not have a reporter at the meeting to cover this late-breaking news item.

Additionally, Karrie Alms presented signed petitions in opposition of park land at Glen Oak Park or any PPD land being used for schools or any park land being transferred to the school district ---- which were accepted as part of the public record by President Cassidy and given to Board Secretary Joyce McLemore.

There is a second petition which supports the current Glen Oak School site to be utilized for a new school.

If you are interested in helping to pass petitions, please contact us at:

pinkthinksmarttalk@yahoo.com or snail mail at RALLY Peoria, P.O. Box 44, Peoria, IL 61650-0044. Completed petitions, including the name and address of the petition gatherer should be returned to the same address and we will present completed petitions at each Park District Meeting.

Glen Oak Park's Identity Crisis

A Park, a School or a Zoo?

Which century and which day of the century just might be the questions to ask.

19th Century

• Glen Oak Park was dedicated on September 7, 1896, as the People's Park.
• Dedicated for the people of the City of Peoria and the people of Peoria County.
• A lovely and beautiful park designed by Oscar DeBuis (he also designed Lincoln Park and West Park in Chicago) and included many amenities.
• Glen Oak Park was designed as a classical, European late-Victorian Park.

20th Century

Fast forward about three score years and what do we find ..... the beginning of the end of the People's Park.

Glen Oak Park has experienced serious demantling and neglect, with the process starting around 1959, continuing to the present, one amenity after another fell into disrepair by neglect, lack of funding and/or as residents feel by design ---- no one seems to know the territory, the history or what a neighborhood, city and county park should actually contain.

Gone ----

The Sunken Gardens, the Palm House, the Rose Arbor & Gardens, the Old Settler's Cabin, the Lincoln Cabin, the Fountains, the Train, the Wading Pool, . . . .

and most recently the Parapet (definition: an earthen or stone embankment protecting soldiers from enemy fire) soon to be dismantled and the Cannon removed because the Peoria Park District lacks funding to renovate this park feature which has been enjoyed by thousands of children during the last hundred years.

Sadly, Glen Oak Park is not able to protect itself!

21st Century
March 29, 2006 - Plans announced by the Peoria Park District (to share approximately 5 acres) and District 150 Schools (to acquire approximately 5 acres) to build a new school at the corner of Prospect and Frye and acquiring approximately 21 well maintained parcels with many owner occupied properties in the group.

May 1, 2006 - District 150 is compelled by Senator Shadid to hold a public forum. PJ Star reports 250 people attend, 30 people speak (more than a 10% sampling) and not one, no not one person speaks in support of this project. You read that correctly, 30 people spoke in opposition to the project at the proposed site, with support for a new school at the current site.

May 10, 2006 - Glen Oak Parent's Forum --- several parents attended as well as many concerned neighbors and community members, you guessed it ---- support for a new school to be built at the current Glen Oak site.

May 16, 2006 --- PJ Star --- Legal Notice - Section 182

The Peoria Park District is applying for a SPECIAL USE permit to expand the zoo into Glen Oak Park, four parcel ids are indicated with Parcel 14-34-332-015 being of great interest..... that is the parcel which is adjacent to the parcels that D150 is acquiring to build the joint venture school.

Please note that Parcel 14-34-332-015 extends from along Prospect, on Republic and Frye too and is behind and adjacent to the 21 parcels that D150 is acquiring, that entire section of Glen Oak Park is to be rezoned for the zoo expanion. YIKES!

There would seem to go dear old Glen Oak Park as we know it ---- for a ZOO!

An expansion or a conversion?????????

Where will you have a pincic with your family, walk your dog, play baseball, fly your kite, ....

Hum ---- how can the Peoria Park District use the same land for a joint venture as a school site and at the same time for a zoo expansion?

The City of Peoria Zoning Commission Public Hearing regarding Case No. ZC 06-35B will be held in Room 400 of the City Hall Building beginning at 1:00 pm on Thursday, June 1, 2006.

Should prove to be an interesting public hearing!

D150 -- Site '"Cost' Analysis - Apples & Oranges

Apples & Oranges and perhaps other fruit come to mind when we toss the salad for D150's site cost analysis --- Pondering the Potential at PJStar's website.

http://www.pjstar.com/news/ssection/district150/glenoak.shtml

Sites - Please note only the current site is being compared to the 'recommended' size of 15 acres.

1 - District 150 Central Office (Von Steuben) - 12 acres
2 - Adjacent to Glen Oak Primary School - 17 acres (Current site is approx. 3 acres)
3 - Adjacent to Glen Oak Park - 10 acres plus access to the park
4 - Adjacent to Morton Square Park - 5 acres plus access to the park
5 - Adjacent to Constitution Gardens - 1.7 acres plus access to park land

Estimated cost of acquisition (calculated per acre) / demolition costs

1 - Zero / Unknown.

2 - $3.5 - $5.5 million / $590,000 and $935,000 - approximately 14 acres to be acquired [$250,000 to $392,857 per acre].

3 - $1.6 million / $232,000 --- however, no mention that taxpayers are only purchasing 5 acres [$320,000 per acre] and the other 5 acres is to be potentially 'shared' with the Peoria Park District from Glen Oak Park.

4 - $1.2 million / $132,000 - approximately 5 acres [$240,000 per acre].

5 - $400,000 / $40,000 - approximately 1.7 acres [$235,294 per acre].

(All figures are estimates and actual costs would be subject to change)

Positives & Negatives - Range of reasons ---

Student Concentration ---- THIS IS THE QUESTION TO BE ASKED and ANSWERED!

1 - Site is outside the attendance area for Glen Oak and White students.

2 - No comment.

3 - No comment.

4 - Site is removed from the heaviest student concentration.

5 - Site is removed from the heaviest student concentration.


And your vote is .... , Site 2 (Current Glen Oak School) or Site 3 (Proposed Glen Oak Park Site) for the heaviest student concentration?

Let's just use a T-chart and compare all the APPLES and ORANGES for each site and about the whole process --- and the analysis reveals:

Taxpayers do not ....

(1) like the process which has been utilized by D150 and the PPD to 'announce' this done deal;

(2) like the idea of the PPD entering into any type of agreement with D150 to use any part of Glen Oak Park as the new site for the Glen Oak School;

(3) like the idea that D150 will use Health Life Safety Bonds, or State School Construction Grant Money (if it ever gets approved) or Public Building Funds if Senate Bill 2477 (SB2477) becomes law or any other combination of funding sources to fund schools for which the taxpayer has no say in the site selection et al;

(4) want a Birth to 8 school; ........

******************************

Taxpayers do want ...

(1) open government for the planning and collaboration of a healthy and vibrant Peoria --- schools, neighborhoods, et al;

(2) D150 to utilize the current Glen Oak Site;

(3) to have a clear accepted model for the future with a well designed plan of implementation;
http://www.civic-strategies.com/library/change.pdf (A Good, Simple Theory for Change)

(4) to decide by referendum the funding of any new school construction; ......

Other additions to the T-chart?

Dr. Comer --- Plans For Inside the "NEW" School

Received an email from an interested, engaged, solution minded Peorian (aka taxpayer):

The Dr. Comer Method:

"The program is derived from the idea that when students feel supported and nurtured in school, their outlook, life skills and academic performance will improve. Since 1968 when the model was created by Dr. James Comer, a Yale University child psychiatrist, it has been utilized in more than 1150 schools nationwide. Approximately 300 schools are currently at different phases of implementing the model."

The local PBS program has a Chicago school for an example, more info here:http://www.pbs.org/makingschoolswork/sbs/csp/il.html

"Now attendance is at 95%, and approximately half the students are performing at or above grade level in reading and math, up from 12% in reading and 19% in math. The kids feel safe, and cared for, with much improved behavior and a warm climate at the school. Even parents have felt the impact. "Note: the kids were from poverty areas of Chicago.

The Comer method used as a solution involves concepts that unfortunately have not even been followed for the new school siting issue, so would D150 be interested in trying such an approach to really change the situation at any D150 school? Let's hope that the D150 Board would be willing to try such a method.

The Comer Process puts the responsibility for the schools on their principals, administrators, teachers and parents to come together to agree on an action plan for the school, with both social and academic components.

Teachers, principals and parents make decisions collaboratively, in the best interests of the students. The Comer Process guides schools to set up a network of teams to manage the school and to deal with various facets of the social and academic needs of the school.

A part of a series: "Making Schools Work"http://www.pbs.org/makingschoolswork/index.html

A collaborative, community, inclusive decision making process.

No money you say????? Perhaps the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, education section, would be able to be utilized for a grant... http://www.gatesfoundation.org/ForGrantSeekers/

Sounds like a viable solution to some of the challenges facing D150.

D150 - From There to Here - Community Engagement

So, what did happen from there (10/05) to here (05/06)?

The Master Facility Plan - Final Recommendations (MFP) were published (10/05) and then approved by the D150 Board (11/05).

Also in the MFP, Community Forums and Civic Gatherings ---
11. Exact locations of the new schools (as well as possible high school boundary changes) should be further discussed by the committee at this time, with an eye to providing the community with more details about these.

How/Where Addressed in Report

See Recommendation "1.0" generally, and "3.2" and "3.3", specifically ---

"1.0" --- By Fiscal 2009, dependent on subsequent Board adoption of a funding source (see Recommendations 4.0 -4.4), fully implement the "full" planing, including, .....

"3.2 and 3.3" --- respectively the Manual and Woodruff Attendance area plans.

The min/max plan is not clear, too many variables and an undefined funding source. Most stakeholders are unclear about what the end product will actually be and how it will be financed.

Next time the public hears about the site is at a Special and Joint (D150 & PPD) March 29th meeting, at 10 am, held at Valeska Hinton Early Childhood Education Center, located at 800 W. 5th Avenue, 61605.

So, a special joint meeting, at 10 am not in the East Bluff, not at the Park District's administration building, nor at D150 administrative offices -- but on the other side of town?

What happened to a convenient time for the public to attend as well as walkability?

Approximately four (4) months and then Voila, the perfect site.

Upon reviewing 10 Principles of Authentic Community Engagement - KnowledgeWorks Foundation
http://www.kwfdn.org/resource_library/_resources/10principles.pdf

* Involve all stakeholders
* Solicit community input
* Involve community early in the process
* Offer opportunities for people to gather at convenient times and comfortable locations at a variety of convenient times
*Consists of more than one meeting and allows time in the process to make informed judgements
*Is driven by aspirations that communities hold for their future
* Has a learning component that helps build community awareness and knowledge about the subject at hand
* Allows for sustained involvement by community stakeholders
* Utilizes community partnerships and expertise
* Employs clear, open and consistent communication

Please take a minute to grade your experience in this process.

(PJStar (03 May 2006)) "If the parents and staff don't care (what we do), then maybe we have to listen to the very concerned voices of neighbors," Matheson said.

Our community needs to listen to all the community stakeholders, as well as the parents and staff.

Because someone does not say anything verbally does not necessarily indicate that the parents don't care as well as the fact that listening to the neighbors (who also have ideas, creativity, and pay taxes et al) is an activity to be possibly considered as beneath one's station in life. Please remember the fear of public speaking ranks up there with the fear of death.

Which leaves us with some of the same questions which remained unanswered:

(1) The MFP states that the Woodruff Attendance will see implementation from fiscal year 2007-2009. Why and how can D150 begin implementation in fiscal year 2006?

(2) When did D150, in open session, vote as a Board to purchase properties for the proposed Glen Oak Site?

(3) What happens to the proposed site if PPD and D150 do not enter into an intergovenmental agreement?

(4) What happens to any properties that D150 would purchase prior to and if no intergovernmental agreement is signed between PPD and D150?

(5) The statement on the last page of the MFP, Exhibit 7 - ISBE / CDB Program Statement, .... D150 is proposing K-8 schools.

Why does the Letter of Intent (attached to the PPD minutes of March 29, 2006 meeting) state --- ' ... the School District shall have the right, for the term of 99 years, to construct and maintain a Birth through Eighth Grade Community School building, at the School District's expense, on a joint Park-School site?

(6) In what public meeting has there been discussion about the change from K-8 to B-8?
******************************************
So, does anyone have any answers?

D150 - New Information, Citizens & Civic Engagement

D150 Board Members and Administrators wanted new information and a lot of people to attend the public forum. Citizens delivered on both counts using best practices!

New Information --- Community Schools are located within the neighorhood to be served and civic engagement process information:

Schools as Centers of Communities - A Citizen's Guide For Planning - National Clearinghouse for Education Facilities (NCEF)

http://www.edfacilities.org/pubs/scc_Cover_page_Table_of_Contents.pdf

Historic Neighborhood Schools Deliver 21st Century Educations (NCEF)http://www.edfacilities.org/pubs/historic.pdf

Please take the time to click on the NCEF index link --- best practices in the 21st century for schools with the following categories ---Preplanning, Planning, Design, School Spaces, School Grounds, Case Studies, Safe Schools, Healthy Schools, High Performance Schools, Technology, Materials and Equipment, School Construction, Financing, Buliding & Operating Costs, Maintenance and Operations with several indepth articles in each category and subcategory.

http://www.edfacilities.org/rl/index.cfm

Historic Schools: Renovation vs. Replacement & The Role of a Feasbility Study - National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP)

http://www.nationaltrust.org/issues/schools/downloads/school_feasibility_study.pdf

Why Johnny Can't Walk to School (NTHP)

http://www.nationaltrust.org/issues/downloads/schools_why_johnny.pdf

10 Principles of Authentic Community Engagement - KnowledgeWorks Foundation

http://www.kwfdn.org/resource_library/_resources/10principles.pdf

http://www.kwfdn.org/schools_communities/schools_centers/community_engagement/

Communities are more likely to financially support improvements that involve them .... and so on .....

Standards of Excellence in Civic Engagement - The Harvard Institute

http://theharwoodinstitute.org/file_uploads/Standards_of_Excellence_1441.pdf

And 250 -275 citizens attended the public forum and presented all this information and alternatives to the proposed site in a respectful manner. Solution minded citizens who have Grand Canyon-sized hearts.

Today's PJ Star (o3 May 2006), Time to table school plan? has a couple of quotes ---

"No one's trying to force something on a neighborhood that doesn't want it. They'll say 'We do want it, but we want it with all our qualifiers and all our stipulations,' but the problem with that is that it may not fit in with the plan of our district," Morris said Tuesday, the day after about 30 people voiced opposition to a proposed school site at Glen Oak Park.

"It may not fit in with the plan of our district" --- whatever does that mean? Our district is actually 'owned' and financed by the property owners of the district (whether they live in the district and/or have children in D150 schools) and all stakeholders would like to involved in the process.

Remember the tea party in Boston Harbor?

'Our district' involves all stakeholders working together from the onset and throughout the entire process to opening day and beyond to develop a 'best practices' plan for 'our district' and thereby the City of Peoria and for this region and this the state of Illinois and for the U.S.A.

Board member Mary Spangler also mentioned this possibility, saying that it may be better to hold off on a school in the Woodruff area if the district can't find a solution that pleases the public and is financially and educationally sound.

"We're just talking about more time to get everyone on board and make it a win-win situation for everyone," Spangler said.

That's the spirit --- let's get everyone on board this train --- whether it is in the Woodruff area or elsewhere within the district, the citizens are asking to be involved, to be a part of the Peoria's destiny.

No matter the school site, the information presented at the public forum is applicable to both sites and civic engagement. Hats off for a job well done.

D150 Public Forum & Written Comments until 5/8/06

WOW! 'Democracy in action' was the name of the tune at D150's first public forum. Martha Ross had already noted that she would be out of town because of previous long-term plans (she informed the public on 24 April 2006 (D150 School Board Meeting)). Thumbs up for great communication!

D150 Board Members as well as Superintendent Ken Hinton and Treasurer/Comptroller Guy Cahill received a NO support vote of the proposed Glen Oak School site by each and every speaker (as well as various comments heard from other audience members.) Previously mentioned concerns were all noted, as well a few here and more to follow:

*A representative from the ACLU shared, that the ACLU is deeply interested in helping the community and is encouraged by the forum and strongly suggests that D150 and the public continuing talking until both sides feel that the issue has been resolved.

*At least two business owners requested that compensenation for the potential relocation be addressed.

* One mother shared that she had removed her daughter from D150 due to the lack of appropriate behavior of the other students at her daughter's school.

* The Master Facility Plan calls for implementation of the Woodruff Attendance Area to being in fiscal years 2007-2009. Fiscal year 2007 begins July 1, 2006. By what legal authority can D150 begin implementation before that date? (Can D150 legally enter into any land contract at this point? Has the D150 Board ever voted in a public meeting to enter into land contracts for this project?)

*Handouts to improve the community input process and renovation of older schools for 21st century educations were submitted for consideration (Stay tuned).

Members of the Peoria Park District (PPD) were also present, President Tim Cassidy, Jim Cummings and Jackie Petty. They received an earful or two or more regarding the unacceptable use of park land for any other purpose than being a park, including the discontent of the removal of tennis courts, ball diamonds et al for the zoo expansion. Question was asked: As there is no signed and executed intergovernmental between the D150 and PPD now, what happens if PPD does not 'share' the five acres of Glen Oak Park, what is the impact on the proposed location if D150 only has their five acres?

The citizens of the East Bluff et al and Councilman Bob Manning asked for the new school to utilize the current site in some reconfigured manner with some additional land acquisition to assist in the revitalization of the East Bluff.

All information received will be reviewed by the D150 Board Members and 'synthesized' by Superintendent Hinton and given to the board for their next decision.

Written comments can be sent and will be received through Monday, May 8th --- via email: facilities@psd150.org or via snail mail to Peoria School District 150, 3202 N. Wisconsin Avenue, Peoria, IL 61603.

D150 School Siting Decisions

Since March 29th's announcement of the proposed Glen Oak School site as a collaboration of Peoria School District 150 (D150) and Peoria Park District (PPD), our community has expressed concern, even outrage in some cases that a portion of Glen Oak Park would be 'shared' (if and an intergovernmental agreement is signed by D150 and PPD) for a new school site.

Many reasons have been communicated that this proposed site is not the correct site ----

* Lack of community/stakeholder input on the specific site selection --- Glen Oak Park or Von Stueben site on 11/21/05 D150 adoption with the recommendation in the Master Facilities Plan to the March 29th announcement by the D150 & PPD that the Glen Oak Park site was the final decision. How did we get to this point?

* Not a central location of the neighborhood, not a community school for East Bluff neighborhoods. How does the proposed site at the eastern edge of the East Bluff add to the 'community' value of a school that is not centrally located in the neighborhood that it is supposed to serve?

* Current Glen Oak site would work with the model as promoted by the National Trust for Historic Preservation(this report) --- review Public Planning and Community Participation.

* Lack of walkability for the students (K-8) from the western edge of the East Bluff to this proposed location.

* Lack of walkability for the families and seniors to be served at the proposed site.

* Potential additional costs for bus transportion of students. How will higher fuel bills cut down on D150's fuel bills with the announcement that gas prices should continue to rise for up to three years?

* Not a prudent or community accepted idea for the PPD to share any more land from Glen Oak Park (or any PPD park land) with D150, suggested violations of the Open Meetings Act (OMA).

* Traffic concerns at the Corner of Prospect and Frye of young (K-8) students having to negotiate a busy intersection to arrive or depart from the proposed campus.

* Concerns about a new school being located across the street from a convenience store selling alcohol

Additional concerns?