GUHSD’s broken promises anger Alpine residents

By Lori Bledsoe
The Alpine Sun

     EL CAJON — A full house of Alpine residents showed up at the Feb. 3 Grossmont Union High School District’s Strategic Planning Meeting that was held at Foothills Adult School. Noted attendees such as Mark Price, Steve Hunyar, newly appointed AUSD school board members Gina Henke, and Eric Wray, as well as Alpine High School Citizen’s Committee members George Barnett, and Bill Weaver, among several others, were present.
     GUHSD started this meeting at 8 a.m. Saturday morning, but got around to discussing the Proposition H Bond Funds and how they would be used at 11:30 a.m. The board opened the floor up to speakers who addressed the group, some with controlled irritation, and others with irate indignation. Still others approached the board with bitter disgust for the board’s insinuated future intentions. There was a varied response from citizens all over East County who took their time to say their piece.
     Mark Price, AUSD board member, and APG board member stood up to eloquently remind the GUHSD board of their promises they made to the Alpine community before the November elections.
     Stephanie Wells, the well known coordinator of the local Alpine Art Festival, took her three minutes to let the board know that Alpine needed this high school, and by not building one, GUHSD was breaking faith with the community. Wells laid out the everyday scenario of what every Alpine parent goes through when they must transport their high school-aged students down the hill to the overcrowded Granite Hills and Steele Canyon high schools for class and extra-curricular activities. Wells added that in light of promises made to Alpine, and the current price of gas, Alpine students deserve to have a high school in a closer proximity.
     Debbie Sakarias reminded the board that the high school was a part of the Proposition H Bond language and this measure of the bond needs to be met.
     On the other side of the fence however, Luis Giorgi a Lemon Grove/La Mesa community member stood up and said that the voters in his area are very concerned. These voters want a vote of confidence that if the GUHSD allows a high school to be built in Alpine, that GUHSD will keep this high school, and it will not be allowed to go charter, as they too have been paying these school taxes for the last 20 years.
     Giorgi also pointed out that the current schools need serious attention as many of the older schools are in disrepair, and asked how the district intends to pay for the upkeep of yet another high school, when they couldn’t seem to afford to upkeep what they already have.
     Also, two students from Grossmont High School clearly said that in their own, young opinions they don’t think Alpine needs a high school. They believed that Prop H funds were meant for upgrading and fixing the current crumbling schools.
     After several people had their say, Terry Ryan responded to these statements, and pleas, by saying that GUHSD’s top priority as a board, has been to have a thorough review of the facilities.
     “This board wants to make decisions based on the very best information,” said Ryan.
     At a meeting held last year however, Ryan said, “We are looking to acquire land for a future site in Alpine… that’s what we promised to do and that’s what we’re doing,” Ryan said.
     George Barnett of the Alpine High School Citizen’s Committee, made a presentation to the board. Barnett reminded the board once again of the promises they made before the elections. He thanked the board for speaking about what’s best for Alpine children. Barnett went on to explain that there should be enough money in the bond for the needed and necessary repairs and upgrades to the existing schools, as well as building a high school in Alpine.
     Barnett said that the board needs to remember that the quality of life in a learning environment needs to be pleasant. Currently at Granite Hills, where most of Alpine’s high school-aged students attend, enrollment is approximately 3,000. Barnett said the overcrowding does not allow for a pleasant high school experience.
     Barnett pointed out that GUHSD would attract not only Alpine community members to their new school, but many students from the Back Country looking for another option in education from the Mountain Empire district. Also, Barnett brought up the growing need for adult education in our community, and in the Back Country.
     “We want to work with you folks. We want a high school in Alpine. We want to work with you on a high school in Alpine,” concluded Barnett.
     Scott Patterson, deputy GUHSD superintendent then began a lengthy presentation, that included a packet of information, and more than 60 slides that showed an overview of Proposition H, delineating the Prop language.
     Also this presentation made an attempt, albeit unclear, to relate the current status of the district actions regarding the bond monies, future enrollment needs of the county, financial information, what trade offs could be made, and all options that GUHSD had available for the remaining Prop H funds.
     Patterson seemed to try very hard to seriously look at all options, but leaned heavily on not taking the option to build a 12th high school. He included in his discussion that the current buildings need renovation, mentioning that all the doors need to be replaced to ensure safety against intruders on the high school campuses.
     He also said that building new science labs would be more cost effective, then just renovation of the old labs. In stating this, he said that this brought up a new mindset; he said that in building new science labs, GUHSD would have “state-of-the-art” science labs.
     Patterson said that the rising cost of construction was overshadowing everything that the bond monies were intended to cover.
     There was a murmur that began in the audience at this and Ryan said, trying to appease the crowd, “We’re going to run out of money, not because of mismanagement, but because of increase in construction costs.”
     Bob Kiesling, who joined GUHSD’s team as the Executive Director in Facilities Management in August 2006, agreed that the costs of construction always tend to be higher than what is estimated. Kiesling also added that the bond measure that was drafted was not identical to the Long Range Facilities Master Plan.
     Kiesling went on to explain that in order to get classrooms air conditioned, electrical upgrades are needed. Cement slabs need to be cut into or replaced with new facilities. All of this is costly construction work.
     The discussion moved away from renovation and to what Alpine needs in regards to a high school, if GUHSD proceeds in building one.
     Ryan acknowledged that Alpine residents want a comprehensive high school, with a full range of course options as well as athletic and extra-curricular activities. Because of this desire, GUHSD itemized the pros and cons of building a new high school.

The pros included:
Satisfies ballot language,
May attract new students,
Reduces some students commute times and distances,
And adds to the value of the community.

However, the listed cons outweighed the pros:
The high school was not justified at this time,
It will take students away from existing school,
It will reduce the ability to complete the rest of the Prop H. program,
The new school would have to be “bare bones”,
It will increase the commute time and distance for some students,
The operational costs will come from existing school budgets,
The district will receive less state matching funding
The old portable classrooms that are on current sites will have to be retained.

     Patterson showed the downward trend of enrollment as well as future projections of lower enrollment numbers to support the cons that are listed above.
     Larry Urdahl spoke to this, referring to current demographics in the Alpine area.
     “One conversation that I don’t like to hear is. ‘We can’t do this because we don’t have enough money,’” said Urdahl.
He prompted the board to look at what was really needed. He said that the growth rate in East County is projected at 23 percent, and to say that the student enrollment did not support making a 12th high school may not be accurate.
     “Let’s make sure our demographic reports are true and real demographic reports,” Urdahl said.
     Several more options were presented, such as building a smaller high school or even an annex high school to Granite Hills, but every option that was presented at this meeting, in regards to the future of how GUHSD was going spend the Prop H funds seemed to not favor building a 12th high school.
     The original statements regarding Prop H, which can be found on the GUHSD web site are, “Proposition H is a local school bond measure... to authorize $274,000,000 for critically needed repairs and upgrades to our local high schools. If approved by voters, Prop H will allow the District to repair aging roofs, upgrade deteriorated plumbing, restrooms, electrical, technology, heating and cooling systems; improve fire safety and security systems; renovate outdated classrooms, science labs and school facilities; improve buildings and grounds for safety; and construct a new high school.”
     Ryan, Patterson, and Kiesling all seemed to agree on continuing renovation at the existing sites and waiting for an additional bond measure to try and build the new high school.
     In closing, many attendees asked how the district could legally delete the building of a 12th high school from the bond agenda. It is clearly stated in the ballot initiative and bond language of Prop H, this funding was meant for renovation and repair of existing campuses and classrooms, the building of additional classrooms to relieve overcrowding, as well as building a 12th high school.

 E-mail the Editor