Political tug-of-war: the new school series
Story #1 (co-written with Beryl Kessio)
You would have to be living under a rock to have missed the controversy over the proposed Monrovia High School.
Here is the low down:
After receiving $56 million in BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure) money for school improvements and renovations, the district moved ahead with plans to build a new high school, slated to be built across from Legacy Elementary, by purchasing land this August.
However, Supt. Matt Massey has spoken out against the high school since his first days as a campaigner and has instead proposed to focus $23 million on Sparkman renovations— which include a performing arts center— and other school improvements around the county. In a January address, Massey cited the financial burden a new school would have on the county.
“This is an opportunity to put our schools on par with the best in the state. With a new school, we will lose academic programs,” Massey said. “With a new school, we will have increased operational costs.”
School board president Jeff Anderson affirmed his belief in a new high school, stating that it would bring about more opportunities for students. Jeff then said Massey’s plans would drive parents out of the school.
“I don’t have a crystal ball. But I can guarantee that this will drive families out of this school,” Jeff said. “All I can say is, buy stock in Madison Academy and Westminster Christian [Academy].”
Board member David Vess cited safety concerns as a primary reason to build a new high school. With rumors of overcrowding and violent activity hitting newsstands over the past month, community members are unsure of what to accurately expect from the school.
“I don’t see where we can put in an arts center before we see about the safety of our kids,” Vess said. “We have to think of safety first.”
The commissioners were obviously less than pleased, according to al.com’s article regarding the Jan. 28 address.
“You’re swimming upstream,” Phil Riddick of District 5 said. “You’ve got to know when to hold ’em and know when to fold ’em.”
The commissioners countered nearly every point of Massey’s plan and Monrovia parents later expressed their concerns on a Facebook page entitled “Monrovia High School Now.”
The public group, with 389 members as of Feb. 3, is mostly a feed of shared news articles and debates regarding what they think is best for the community. The majority of the posts are from concerned parents who are pushing to get the new school built as quickly as possible.
“The purpose of this site is to share information and opinions about the proposed Monrovia High School in Madison County, Alabama. Discussions and debates are encouraged,” the group’s description reads.
Overcrowding is often cited as a reason to build a new high school, and is one of the most popular topics in the group.
“Some people may say, well our school sizes are nothing compared to Texas or other states around the US. However, let us look at our academic performance as a state, particularly our county on test scores and then try to hold a solid stance in support of large schools in other states,” a Jan. 29 post reads. “Smaller class sizes would absolutely benefit our students and friends within our community.”
Massey believes the overcrowding concerns are a myth, as the school is actually seeing decreased enrollment each year. He added, in an address to the County Commission, that “Monrovia Middle School has its smallest enrollment in 10 years and Sparkman Middle has its lowest enrollment in nine years.”
Proponents of the new school also see it as an opportunity to increase property values and attract new businesses. Some are concerned that the current school will not accommodate for the community’s growth. And with companies such as Remington Outdoor Co. and Polaris Off-Road Vehicle Co. making an entrance to Huntsville, new employees are expected to flock to Madison County.
“The number of students attending Sparkman will certainly increase and Matt Massey has no plan for this inevitable growth,” parent Gabrielle Pace commented on the counter petition on change.org, titled “Continue with the existing Capital Plan and build a new high school in the Sparkman High School District. “Our children will not go to an overcrowded Sparkman, just because it has a new performing arts center. Performing art centers clearly do not fix overcrowding problems in schools.”
Parent David Weis takes a different stance, stating that if the new high school is built, the dozens of programs offered at Sparkman will inevitably take a turn for the worse. As the Monrovia Middle School and Sparkman Middle School kids split in half, the diversity and communal unity will take a downhill turn to mediocrity.
“I don’t believe that both schools will be able to sustain the level of award-winning programs we have today,” Weis said. “People say that a smaller high school offers greater opportunity but if you look at the band as only one example, you see that is not going to the be the case.”
With a 245 member band, the students have brought home countless awards and titles over the past decade. Splitting the band in half will drastically reduce the amount of musicians going to competitions and consequently, reduce the amount of recognition given to a group who thrives on strength in numbers.
Senior class president Kyle Anderson believes the new high school would divert much needed resources from the current school. Kyle stands by the idea that a new high school will not help the community.
“If we invest in Sparkman instead of a new building, we have the potential of having the best high school in the state rather than two mediocre ones and an even more underfunded county system,” Kyle said.
Kyle has kept a vested interest in the development of the new school as the conversation has evolved. Once Massey was elected into office, Kyle contacted him about speaking on behalf of the new school protesters. After addressing the Board at the Jan. 15 MCBOE Board meeting, Kyle began to generate a deeper reflection on his school.
“I feel that many of Sparkman’s opponents have a misguided view of Sparkman itself. The [Jan. 28] fight was a prime example of that,” Kyle said. “The media blasted Sparkman, and those on the outside don’t realize what actually happened because they don’t attend Sparkman.”
The Wednesday morning fight did attract media attention. News vans came and went all morning and the online stories that followed only hours after the fight ensued angered students, teachers and parents alike. This event is only one stepping stone that fueled the growing fire.
“I think that if many of Sparkman’s opponents spent any considerable amount of time in Sparkman that they would reconsider their views,” Kyle said.
Weis affirms his beliefs about Sparkman, stating that the school is “no different from any other school in the US and is “a terrific school.”
“I am proud of the students at Sparkman, and I am saddened that the good name of Sparkman has been tarnished in this entire matter,” Weis said. “Sparkman has, and will always stand for excellence, and I would encourage the students to keep their heads held high, and rise above the fray that is ongoing.”
Alumnus Patrick Fitzgerald created an organizational battle cry three years ago titled “Stand for Sparkman.” And now as the new school debate heats up, Kyle and Buckhorn High School senior Grayson Everett have awakened the cause.
“Our hope is to give supporters of Sparkman a microphone to share their opinions,” Kyle said. “Ultimately, we hope that by rallying enough support the Board members will decide against building the new high school. If nothing else, we hope to unite Sparkman and show the world that it is a great school to attend and a great area to live in.”
Everett stands on the same side as Kyle, generally seeing that an entire new high school will be detrimental to Sparkman and surrounding communities.
“In essence, the decision makers who affirm the potential new school’s argumentative validity are saying ‘because we’ve had this not-so-good idea in the works for a while, we should progress it simply because it’s already happening,’” Everett said. “A bad idea, manifested over time, does not turn it into a serviceable one, and especially not a good one. Other than flimsy anecdotal and emotional appeals, I have heard no justifiable claims for the new school − even from the highest reaches of our county governance.”
The community has taken to social media with the hashtag #StandForSparkman to voice their opposition to a new school. A petition was created by a student in order to bring light to the strengths of a more united school. “The voices of the community have been ignored as the plans to build the new high school have been pushed forward,” the petition reads. Everett has diligently retweeted, shared and posted the movement, leaking #StandforSparkman to the Buckhorn High and Hazel Green High communities. Signal-boosting has fanned the flames of the growing Stand for Sparkman movement, and it has received considerable feedback and support.
“Personally, as well as organizationally, I’m going to continue to amplify the voices across the county that want a strong Sparkman, and a strong Madison County,” Everett said. “It’s been incredibly heartening over the course of our work so far to be able to hear from students, parents, and teachers in every single area that stand for Sparkman; they’re the majority of residents who want their leaders accountable, their schools thriving, and Sparkman unified.”
Story #2
There is still cacophonous silence in the board room whenever the new Monrovia High School is brought up.
As a long-time debate, the Capital Plan has been in executive limbo since it was announced in 2013. Supt. Matt Massey has combated the plan with his own developmental agenda, which primarily includes renovations to almost every school in Madison County. In addition to his prior plans, Massey pitched a Capital Security Plan in April 2015 that would set aside about $330,000 for security improvements and renovations in 27 of 29 Madison County schools.
However Massey’s plans seem to keep getting shot down, for through all of the five-minute speeches at every board meeting, no consensus has been reached in regards to how we should spend the BRAC money.
To give a little background—the proposed Monrovia High School was designed and promoted by former Supt. David Copeland. According to Massey, the funds the Madison County Board of Education would receive from the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) — $55,766,840 — would cover the funding for MHS brick and mortar, but not much else.
“[Monrovia High School] is probably not going to have a football stadium with bleachers and things like that. We are basically going to stretch the dollar amount as far as it goes and when we run out, that’s it,” Massey said. “All of it is a lot of question marks and that is a huge concern for me. I really want everyone to understand that when we build this new school with the money that is in there, it is not going to be a complete school.”
Although according to the Sept. 4, 2014 proposed budget for the 2015 fiscal year, the Commission would provide $5,000,000 in order to pay off the BRAC debt. This transaction was made in June, 2013 — roughly two months after the capital plan was revised. During an emergency meeting held on Saturday, April 13, 2013, the Board met to discuss revising the capital plan in order to be cohesive with the Commission’s financial aid.
“[District four representative Jeff Anderson] wanted the Board to align the current capital plan with the list that the commission requested and that is the reason the Board is meeting today,” according to the minutes from the Saturday meeting.
During the meeting, board members discussed what the Capital Plan currently entails and what officials are doing to progress the process.
“[Board President Mary Louise Stowe] stated that several weeks ago the Commission contacted Dan Nash and asked him if he could provide them with information to help them brainstorm some possible solutions to problems in regard to the BRAC money…” the minutes read. “Dr. Copeland encouraged him to pursue it.”
Anderson later said that he — along with the current district four representative David Vess and chief financial officer Karen O’Bannon — is uncomfortable with the financial instability that would accompany the capital plan.
“Mr. Anderson said he isn’t comfortable with the $46 million on the capital plan when the person that has built the last two high schools in the area says it will cost $52 million…Mr. Vess said his concern is whether the district can afford to pay the costs associated with operating them once built,” the minutes read. “Mrs. O’Bannon said she is concerned about the cost of operating the high school.”
However this project, taxless and time sensitive, has been put on hold for nearly a year and a half — before the funding agreement was ever signed, and now even longer since Massey stepped into office on Jan. 1, 2015.
“When tax free bonds are issued, there is a 36 month timeline put on the spending. Time is very important in this case,” Vess said.
There are circulating questions across the county that have raised alarm in regards to the new school agreement, such as why this special session was essentially kept under the table and what reasons allowed the Commission to become so financially invested in the case. One person who has been the most vocal about these issues is Madison County resident Allen Paseur.
“At the Jan. Commission meeting with Mr. Massey, Mr. Vandiver here made a very revealing statement. He was quoted in a News Channel 19 blog on page five, and I’ll try to paraphrase: ‘It’s not about what’s good for Madison County Schools; it’s about what’s good for Madison County Commission,’” Paseur said in his speech from the April 16, 2015 board meeting. “I couldn’t have said it better.”
The school board has been seemingly apprehensive towards the new high school proposal, with the exception of Massey and Anderson, who have been known to get lost in debate while on the panel.
“So you are hoping that the community will beg us not to build a school after they see the zone lines,” Anderson said to Massey during the April meeting.
To which Massey replied, “I want to be transparent through the process. The process of who is going to go where is going to be up-front, and I don’t think that’s an unfair thing to do. We are building this with taxpayer dollars and they deserve to know what we are planning to do.”
When Massey was elected, he proposed a new alternative plan that would issue roughly $23 million to our school for a performing arts center, then spread the rest of the BRAC money across the county, renovating and improving facilities and security in almost every Madison County school.
“I was very disappointed that [the proposed capital security plan] did not pass. [The Board members] spend $2.3 million buying another piece of land but $0.3 million would go to the safety of all our schools,” Massey said. “I wish that had passed.”
Massey says that not only is his plan more fiscally responsible, but it will reach out to more than one sector of the county. His primary concern with the push to build the new school is that the community will not be properly divided, racially or socioeconomically.
“The goal is that if we’re going to move forward with this then both high schools are going to have similar demographics. We can’t have a new school that looks different and feels different than what Sparkman is,” Massey said.
To alleviate this issue, Massey has proposed rezoning all the school’s zone lines in order to appropriately accommodate two equally diverse high schools.
“We can’t separate based on what the middle school zone lines are. The Department of Justice won’t let us do that and I don’t want to have two high schools that have such different demographics,” Massey said. “Not everyone zoned for Monrovia Middle will go to the new high school. I want to see a nice balance. Whatever we go through and decide though, we are going to be transparent through that and talk to the communities.”
And as far as the community goes, there is still a great divide between those who choose to stand for Sparkman and those who advocate for a new school. Madison County Schools Parent Organization president Aleta Stender says splitting our school will cause both schools to crumble financially and academically, while also putting a large dent in extracurricular success.
“The number and types of AP and elective classes at Sparkman will be reduced. Also, programs such as athletics, band, choir and drama will not be competing at the level that they currently enjoy. Those programs will be in a rebuilding period that could last many years,” Stender said. “Of course, raising the needed funds will fall squarely on the parents because there is no money in the school or system budget to fund the needs.”
According to Stender, Massey’s alternative plan benefitted nearly every student in Madison County, thus balancing the use of the BRAC money. However putting half of it towards our school is necessary for appropriate growth.
“Mr. Massey had an amazing plan for turning Sparkman into a premier high school in not only our area, but our state,” Stender said. “Sparkman has such a diverse student population, with so many varied activities and interests, and the addition of an Arts building and upgrades to our athletic and building facilities would have infused new and exciting energy, leading to bigger and better achievements for our students.”
As of now, we can only hear crickets in the board room. However with the 36-month window dwindling each day, a decision is projected to be made within the next few months. Massey says that the process is going to be inevitably painful, but the strength and support he has seen rising from the school community is mighty enough to save a school.
Story #3
The days of tense board meetings and political back-and-forth are far from over.
The Madison County Board of Education is still at a pause with making any decisions on whether or not a new high school will be built. Superintendent Matt Massey has worked tirelessly over the past year on the matter, and this month has been a nonstop new school debate.
“We were getting pretty close to making a joint submission to the judge with the plan we had submitted in July. The Board directed for that plan to be submitted to the Justice Department back in July with an 11-12 option. So, the [Feb. 18] meeting was the Board saying they don’t approve of that plan,” Massey said. “That was a non-binding vote, so there’s really no action to be taken; it was just an opinion. If anything, it’s kind of a pause and a reassessment of where we are in the whole situation.”
Since last summer, the community was left with a quarreling Board, $43 million in untouched reserved funds and no ground broken on a new high school. With tensions rising and arguments moving anywhere but forward, the Department of Justice needed to get more involved.
“Before you do any kind of zone changes, it has to be court-approved. In our case, we are the defendants and there are two plaintiffs: the Legal Defense Fund, which represents the NAACP, and the DOJ,” Massey said. “Before there’s any changes, we have to come to an agreement with the plaintiffs before we make any kind of joint motion to a judge.”
Future District Four Board member Dave Weis was a member of a Board-picked zoning committee, which met on June 4, 2015 and worked over the summer to brainstorm zone line proposals that would please the Board, community and DOJ. Weis says that it was no easy process, and their efforts to find a good map became a heartbreaking process.
“The DOJ gave us no guidance; the DOJ was not a part of this process at all. We asked if they were going to send a representative, and the answer we got was no. So it was put upon us to try to figure this out,” Weis said.
The committee, which was responsible for advising zone lines rather than creating them, proposed four maps that fell into the DOJ’s guidelines as closely as possible. The goal was to keep both schools with around a 26.9 percent black population and a 37.4 percent population of students who use free or reduced lunch (FRL). However, from the committee’s work, it became evident that drawing new zone lines was no longer about race, but socioeconomic status.
“Map ‘I’ was the best choice; it meets the criteria it is given. But, we also feel that the community does not want a new school, based on [the fact that] we are going to lose programs at our current school,” community member Larry Severe said. Severe served on the zoning committee and addressed the Board at the March 10 meeting with two of his fellow committee members on what they encountered during their time together.
The nine committee members present during the final meeting voted 7 to 2 in favor of Map ‘I.’ This map splits the Monrovia and Harvest communities almost in half. And while the racial values stay close to the DOJ’s goal (with Sparkman at 27.8 percent and the new high school at 26.1 percent), the FRL rate drastically soars to 52.9 percent at Sparkman and the new high school stays greatly under the goal at 23.9 percent. To the knowledge of the committee, the FRL numbers were never run on this map.
“[Map ‘I’ has] a huge socioeconomic separation. That is the biggest obstacle to manage, as far as success of students. That is the biggest obstacle to overcome,” Massey said. “In fact, in one of the descending votes that was mentioned, the ones who did not vote for [Map ‘I’] were not in the [new school] zone.”
This revelation brought about many questions, including where the committee saw a balance in this plan, how capacity and geographical issues will be fixed and what the true purpose of having a new school meant at this point.
“As we sat down and went through several hours of tweaking numbers here, pulling things, and trying to find out what was the best option for the schools, it was heart wrenching. How could you tell someone they can’t go because they live across the street?” Severe said. “As we discussed it as a committee, there were some people for the 9-12 school and some people who didn’t want to build a school at all. They felt like we should put the money into the buildings we have already.”
Severe says he talked with plenty of his friends and neighbors about what they would like to see happen in the school system. While opinions have fluctuated as time passed and arguments deepened, nobody can say for sure what the best option is.
“As we came to the committee, we started looking at the rezoning and we started talking about how the zones were changing and how it could potentially leave some people out and separate the community. Then they didn’t want it anymore. They didn’t like the idea of separating the community,” Severe said. “The community feels like they don’t know the whole story. And without knowing the full story, they are hesitant to say ‘new school’ or ‘no new school.’”
Committee member Lisa Novak said they never truly acted as an official committee, and they were not allowed to have direct access to the data behind the DOJ’s guidelines.
“How could we make sure that every rezoning option had been worked and looked at unless we were able to look at the data for ourselves?” Novak said. “In a way, when we were reviewing the maps, it felt like we were playing darts blindfolded, trying to see if a better option was out there.”
Despite the troubles of finding a viable map, the committee members concurred that they did the job they were mandated to do. The trouble of finding a decent map brought Massey to a newly publicized plan that he had been keeping in his pocket since July 2015: a one-campus split.
“At the [Feb. 18] meeting, the Board signed a resolution that they did not support a 11-12 plan, but two of the Board members who voted no said that they were willing to listen to their community members and that if they wanted an 11-12 school, that’s something they would consider supporting,” Massey said.
While there are issues that would accompany a split-campus system, Massey believes the cons of building a new high school vastly outweigh the cons of an 11-12 plan.
“We will have solutions documented and submitted out. The one time students will be moving will be during fourth period. We would bus them up, and then the buses would run an elementary bus route. But that wouldn’t add any cost to the system because we get reimbursements from the state. And there may be teachers who have to rotate down during their planning time, such as robotics. They might be [at SHS] for first period, then go to the new high school for third and fourth block,” Massey said. “But two 9-12 schools would be much more complicated because you would be losing programs. And I believe that if someone feels left out, then you’ve done it wrong.”
This unearthed the argument that the majority of community members have fought for since day one: are two 9-12 schools viable? Massey began his answer to this question briefly and simply: no.
“There is not a scenario in which the Monrovia community will not be split up; the Harvest community will also be separated. We can’t offer an elective at one school and not at another. So what happens is, when we have a photography program that is able to be supported at one school, there will not be the unit to have two photography teachers at two different schools. We will not have the units to have two medical academies, or two journalism programs,” Massey said. The list of lost extracurriculars kept going.
Despite the deliberation, Massey still stood firmly by the statement that two 9-12 schools would function, but them both being high quality schools is not possible.
“With our mission and with what we want to offer to our schools, it is going to be really hard to support high quality public schools that maximize student achievement and expand opportunities for students when we don’t have the local support and local funding to do so,” Massey said. “In the end, it is going to be impossible to get something that everyone unanimously says ‘let’s do it.’”
Eliminating any community split is the ideal plan, according to Massey, but he needs more support from the public and the Board to follow through with an 11-12 campus. Massey says this option is a refreshing take on the entire argument, because for years it has been the same question: why are we building a new school?
“It’s interesting that in the last Board meeting, Board member Anderson actually mentioned that this is not about overcrowding; it was about improving and providing more opportunities for students,” Massey said. “Some of these electives that we offer at Sparkman are not able to be offered at two schools. We are not going to be able to expand opportunities. So if it is not about overcrowding, what is it really about? And I think this is a discussion that should have been had three years ago.”
Story #4
The developments for an anticipated new high school have stalled, shifted and shaken for over a year now and a definitive answer is still nonexistent. It is no secret that the community is beyond frustrated, but Superintendent Matt Massey continues to hold his ground due to the fact that, as one parent says, “He really believes that he is acting in the best interest of the kids.”
One of the biggest concerns about this issue is the emotional tension it has put on all concerned; informative meetings bring more heated arguments than discussion nowadays. With Massey being the victim of a community tug-of-war, friends and neighbors have built resentments from these disagreements that echo to their children, schools and neighborhoods — and he notices.
“It is a very emotional issue for folks. At this point, you’ve had expectations and people are irritated about the issue, so I think it is important to have a civil, open conversation,” Massey said. “With the Facebook pages, I keep an eye on those. And for the most part, except for when they’re talking about me, the conversations are pretty civil.”
Massey has become Harvest’s “He Who Must Not Be Named” and is doing everything to remedy this. He says it is impossible to make everyone happy, but he is doing his best to figure out the most viable solution.
“With our mission and what we want to offer to our schools, it is going to be really hard to support high quality public schools that maximize student achievement and expand opportunities for students when we don’t have the local support and local funding to do so,” Massey said in a March board meeting. “In the end, it is going to be impossible to get something [where] everyone unanimously says ‘Let’s do it.’”
One concerned parent, who anonymously signs himself as “Mike,” has strong beliefs about what a new high school will do to his family.
“I see [a new high school] being a school full of over-indulged rich kids who drive nicer cars than I do, dominate the sports teams because their parents are willing to pay $1,500 for them to play school sports and who get away with pretty much anything because their parents grew up with the [same] principle,” Mike said. “I definitely don’t want my kids growing up to think that’s the norm. I’d rather have them be exposed to a healthy dose of the real world outside the confines of Kelly Plantation.”
While Mike is concerned with this new high school being a pawn in the Monrovia community’s game, Kerri Dyer, parent of eight, defends the integrity of the people who support a new high school along with her.
“Those are good people. They are not bad people and they’re not … you can’t stereotype them,” Dyer said. “If they’re guilty of something, they’re guilty of wanting the best for their kids. Don’t we all?”
Dyer is part of a vocal few who are in support for the new 9-12 school. At the community meeting, held in the gym on May 2, supporters of the new school held signs stating “Two 9-12 High Schools.” As emotions continue to stir on the internet, Dyer says people can feel like they might have no choice but to stay quiet, especially when people have the opportunity to hide behind a computer screen and say whatever they wish.
“I think [rude social media comments] scared a lot of people off who would’ve wanted to speak out and say what they were thinking,” Dyer said. “But if you know someone is just going to squash your answers — not even with logic or reason, but just hatred — then there’s not any point in speaking up.”
President of the Madison County Schools Parent Organization Aleta Stender has been an active parent in the school system since 1998, from attending almost every board meeting to having daily conversations with board members, parents, students, teachers and administrators. She says one of the biggest issues in this argument is how few people go out and actively find accurate, updated information to use in the many debates.
“It’s a little bit frustrating for people who think they know all they need to know about a specific situation or issue to make generalizations and cast aspersions on the character of other people, when they really don’t know all there is to know,” Stender said. “I would say that people need to get fully knowledgeable before they start passing judgement on other people or other decisions.”
This misinformation, Stender says, puts a large burden on those who truly just want to learn the facts. And with the back-and-forth arguing about speculations that are not always entirely true, it has largely taken away from what the new school debate is truly about.
“This entire issue has gone way beyond what is best for our children. It’s not about politics or profit margins; it’s about providing the best educational opportunities for our students,” Stender said. “Unfortunately, that has been lost in all of the arguing and name-calling and contentiousness and that’s really disappointing.”
Mike says that a new high school would “undermine his desire for his kids to have a stable 4-year high school experience,” no matter which school they ended up attending. According to Mike, his kids love this school and he likes them just where they are, with everyone else.
“My kids have never reported any serious trouble at the school. They seem to feel comfortable and safe there and they have by now established the friendships they’re going to have for their remaining high school years,” Mike said. “I’m not in favor of disrupting that.”
One word that gets tossed around often is “opportunity.” Dyer says that it would be better to have two schools in order to have two opportunities for achievement in different areas. She also says relationships will be strengthened through individual involvement.
“Think of how many more opportunities you would have to know the other people in your class and to be able to help them with scholarships and know their name. It’s all about relationships and you just don’t have those kinds of relationships in a school this big,” Dyer said. “I’m not saying it’s a bad school. Five [of my] kids have graduated from it, they’ve gone to college [and] they’re successful kids. Some of those people will rise to the top no matter where they [are].”
Longtime parent Dave Weis has a different opinion on opportunities here, due to the fact that he has been an active band booster club official. Specifically, Weis describes his experience with this year’s indoor drumline, which won first place at their world championship competition in April. He says with two band directors between S9GS and SHS, three concert bands, an indoor drumline, a color guard and more, there is no excuse when it comes to opportunity.
“Mr. Raney is the band director for [SHS] and Mr. Albert is the band director for [S9GS]. They combine their efforts together and that’s why we have this amazing band,” Weis said. “Mr. Albert went out of his way to create positions for all the kids that wanted to be in indoor [drumline] this year; he didn’t turn away a single kid. So for someone to say there’s no opportunity — garbage. Go talk to Mr. Albert because he created the opportunity for a child to be in that organization.”
Weis believes in doing things that are in accordance with a “defined requirement” and he says he does not see that in this community.
“I’ve always been of the belief that if you need a new high school, or if you need any school, you have to have a justifiable reason for doing it and you have to have a defined requirement [as well as] a need to build any school,” Weis said. “Ten years ago, there was probably a defined requirement to do what we are planning to do right now. Today, there is no need for a new school here.”
As the District 4 Republican board member elect, who is running unopposed in this year’s election, Weis is stepping into a hotseat. However, he has been watching this debate closely for years, similar to Stender and believes that a new high school is the wrong decision for the community.
“I believe that the money would be better spent at Sparkman High School, making Sparkman an even better school than it is already, making the athletic facilities worthy of a 7A School and using the money that’s left over and helping the other communities and other regions of the district to make sure that they have even better facilities than they already have,” Weis said.
Weis is also a member of the zoning committee, put together by Massey and the five board of education members. The committee was tasked with finding the most viable split in the community that would be in accordance with the Department of Justice’s desegregation regulations.
“[Massey] also wanted to change [the task] by saying, ‘I want to make sure that we look at the free and reduced lunch program,’” Weis said. The committee had to make sure both communities kept a 26.9 percent black population and a 37.4 percent population of students with free and reduced lunch (FRL). “That was a bigger challenge than the black and white because there is a large disparity between the two middle schools. Therefore, whatever we found out was going to still [have] a larger disparity.”
The FRL numbers signify that students who are incapable of paying for lunches may also be incapable of paying club fees, sports fees, fundraisers and other school expenses. Massey believes that it is important to keep this close in mind, because if there is to be a new high school, he does not want two schools with such extreme socioeconomic differences.
“[Socioeconomic separation] is the biggest obstacle to manage, as far as the success of students,” Massey said. “We can’t have one school with over half the population on free and reduced lunch and another school without practice fields.”
People say that money talks, but in this case, it seems quite silent. According to a comparative study of the Huntsville City and Madison County course catalogs, Grissom High School has 78 more AP classes, extracurriculars and STEM electives than Sparkman. This is largely because Huntsville city schools receive extra funds from higher property and sales taxes available in the city and therefore can afford to fund more teaching units, supplies and resources.
Their test scores are higher in most areas and critics have said this is due to more cultured, focused teaching, but SHS excels in other areas such as band, JROTC, journalism, medical academy and others, which are almost solely student and parent-funded. According to this, having smaller schools is not the issue in our community; it is about what is offered at one school. As Massey has stated, a new high school brings the loss of dozens of programs and classes, thus widening the gap between our school and others in north Alabama.
“My philosophy is that if you’re going to do something, do it right. We are building a new school that will be substandard compared to Madison City or Huntsville City,” Massey said. “If you build a new school, then you need to balance that out by improving the existing schools. We won’t be able to do that with this. We’re not even going to be able to put a coat of paint on the walls at Sparkman or at any of the other schools.”
However, as community meetings are held and the cold, hard facts are being presented, it seems as if some people are having changes of heart. The arguments continue to shift, but more so in Massey’s favor.
“No longer is the argument, ‘It’s overcrowded and there’s no opportunities for people.’ Now, the argument for a new school is a little bit different. Now it’s ‘Well maybe there’s too many people here; maybe it will help the community grow,’” Massey said. “I think my plan helps improve economic growth by improving what Sparkman has and improving what our other schools have. In fact, I think that we would have a bigger economic impact.”
No matter the outcome, the integrity of the community will follow us forever. Stender believes that no matter what happens, the most important thing is keeping a level head and remembering that respect defies all the argument.
“I am all about people standing up for what they think is right and there’s a productive way to do that,” Stender said. “It’s sitting down and discussing all the options available and determining what is going to be the most cost-efficient [and] productive means to provide a successful education for our students. We have not done that in a while.”