March 6, 2008

Councilors say 'no' to Scalia site

I'll post reporter Jackie Majerus' story when it's done, but the City Council tonight voted down by a 4-3 margin the proposal to put a new K-8 school at the Scalia site on Barlow Street. I don't think there's any real consensus for a different site.

Update at 10:25 p.m. - Here is the promised story:
In a 4-3 vote Thursday, city councilors shot down a plan to build a 900-student, K-8 school on a former Scalia sand pit, sending the location problem back to the West End School Building Committee.
"The options are limited," said Mayor Art Ward, who cast the deciding vote against the Scalia site. "There's not a lot of alternatives."
"I honestly believe that this is the wrong site for the wrong reason at the wrong time," said Councilor Mike Rimcoski.
Ward, Rimcoski and Councilor Frank Nicastro, who also voted against the site, all said they were concerned about the price of the property if the Scalia family claimed they could still mine the land.
Rimcoski said he spoke with a member of the Scalia family who said she didn't want to see a school there and mentioned mining rights.
"As soon as she said that, the first thing I saw was dollar signs," Rimcoski said.
Nicastro said, "If their mining rights are still there, that cost could skyrocket."
The other councilor who voted against the Scalia site, Craig Minor, tried to push the council into making a clear decision Thursday, saying the residents of the Park and Divinity neighborhood have been in "purgatory" ever since the plan to put a school there – and take about 35 properties in the process – came to light.
"We need to make a decision tonight," said Minor. "This just can't go on forever."
Several residents spoke against putting a new school on the sand pit, but others came to tell the council that the Park and Divinity location was the wrong spot.
"We'd lose our home by eminent domain," said Debra Gagnon, a Divinity Street resident who said property owners can't sell their homes and are even afraid to invest in repairs while the question hangs over them.
Still others cheered the idea of the Scalia site.
Jeff Merrow said he grew up on Park Street and knows the contamination in the neighborhood from junkyards. It wouldn't be a good place for a school, according to Merrow.
Putting a school on the old Scalia sand pit site, said Merrow, is "a fantastic idea."
Minor said the council should try to steer the West End committee to the Park and Divinity street location and after the Scalia site was voted down, he made a motion to that effect, but no one seconded it and it died.
Nicastro said he doesn't like the Scalia site, but isn't in favor of the Park and Divinity location, either.
"I never felt that either place was the right place," said Nicastro.
Ward said a problem with rejecting the Scalia site was that the Park and Divinity site – which Ward called the "worst idea" – could be next in line.
The best site was the former Roberts property, said Ward, "and that's been eliminated."
Superintendent Phil Streifer said he wasn't surprised by the council's vote.
"This really is a difficult decision," said Streifer, who said there's "no clear winning solution."
Streifer said the building committee will now meet again and consider alternatives. While the committee could recommend the Scalia site a third time, Streifer said he would encourage them to select a different location.
Councilors Cliff Block, Ken Cockayne and Kevin McCauley all voted in favor of approving the Scalia site.
"The days of neighborhood schools are no longer," said Block.
McCauley said the Scalia family should sell the land without the city having to use the power of eminent domain.
The Scalia family's mining company, McCauley said, has "abused their position in excavating that land." He said neighbors have "been abused for years" by the "overindulgence" of the use of that land.
But McCauley still said the Scalia site is the best option.
"Safety is number one," said McCauley. "I believe Scalia is the safest bet for our students."
Cockayne, who is on the West End School Building Committee, said two different groups of people on the committee chose the Scalia property as the best site.
"I'd hate to see it taken off the table," said Cockayne.
But Nicastro said the streets aren't safe for heavy school traffic and that major road work would be required to make it work.
Nicastro also said the district made a "costly mistake" in dumping the old K-8 system for a middle school format.
"It seems like we follow trends 15-20 years later," Nicastro said.
In his remarks, Rimcoski called on several city officials, including the fire chief and city planner, to answer questions.
Fire Chief Jon Pose said the trucks could make it through a tunnel to the school site, but that if they had to go around via Clark Avenue there could be "significant" delays in the response time.
City Planner Alan Weiner said the potential sites are limited in part because of the size of the school.
"There is no clear cut best site," said Weiner.
Despite sending the committee back to the drawing board, councilors were careful to pat them on the back.
"You're doing a thankless job," said Rimcoski.
Nicastro, too, said the committee members were working as unpaid volunteers and that he didn't want to belittle their efforts.

*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

49 comments:

Anonymous said...

What happens if there is no consensus on the site? It doesn't sound like the council agrees on any of the other possible sites either.

Is it back to the drawing board entirely? Will they consider renovating or expanding older schools like Stafford again?

Anonymous said...

There is an adage that goes " Not to go forward is to go backward".
To me, that is what this council seems to be doing.
They will find some way to drag this out and eventually it will die, just like the effort of 6-8 years ago that sorta just dissapeared.
Meanwhile Bristol fails to keep up with the needs of Education, and therefore fails the students AND the community.

Anonymous said...

7:47 - do your homework before giving the wrong answers and flunking the test.

Anonymous said...

This proves that McCauley, Cockayne and Block have no idea what they are talking about. All three of them are a risk to this community.

"The days of neighborhood schools are no longer," said Block.

This is the worst thing Block could have ever said. Neighborhood schools are in high demand with potential home buyers and more and more people who can afford to move to another town are doing so because the schools are smaller and better.

Anonymous said...

Does minor realize that claiming the Park/Divinity Street area as the new school site will delay ground breaking for at least 5 - 7 years because of eminent domain issues? Of the 35 or so properties that would need to be purchased, there are at least 7 (that I personally know of) that are dead set against selling their homes for this and already have a lawyer waiting in the wings to start the fight.

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that if you drive down Divinity / Park and take a real look around, it is obvious that this is the wrong end of Park/Divinity to take. This is the decent end with many single family homes.

Take the crap at the other end of Park/Divinity and you will end a HUGE drug presence in the West End.

Anonymous said...

8:22

And what are the "right" answers?

Anonymous said...

It is clear to me that some members of this council DO NOT want to do anything regarding this issue.
Two of them (Nicastro, Ward)killed the issue years ago, Rimcoski says no to everything.

Bristis not moving FORWARD.

Anonymous said...

Block is a Block head!! We already have neighborhood schools!!

Anonymous said...

8:22

And what are the "right" answers?


The appropriate thing would be that Bristol wants to maintain the neighborhood school environment instead of abolishing it.

We will continue to attract lower income families and at risk children that have proven to cost the taxpayers millions of dollars if we try to get rid of our neighborhood schools for the sake of monster schools.

Neighborhood schools attract single family home buyers who are tax payers versus state aided families that cost the tax payers millions and drive the working families away to other towns.

Anonymous said...

I hear that the Council got scolded by Kenny Johnson.

Did they ever get our $10,000.00 back?

Anonymous said...

Minor sounds like a dictator. Basically telling the committee to go back and bring him Park St. Who does he think he is!!

Anonymous said...

Ward....Moving Bristol Back-Ward!

Anonymous said...

Neighborhood schools are dying. 60% of the students in this town are bussed, which means at least 60% of the student population live more than 1 mile form their school. I would not characterize more than a mile away as being in my neighborhood. Actually, it's in someone else’s neighborhood.

I can think of one school that is surrounded my neighbors, CTO on Park Street. Let me know when you want to move into that neighborhood and attend that neighborhood school.

Bristol is burning and Ward fiddles.

Anonymous said...

11:13

Thanks for responding.

I appreciate your analysis.

My reading is that is that a good education system attracts the more desireable homeowners and raises the value of all property.

Modern schools attract better teachers, even though Bristol does generally have good teachers.

It is dificult to be progressive whne the physical plant is outdated, especially in todays age.

And, when one really stops to think about it, do we really have neighborhoods any more?

Anonymous said...

"Mining rights?"

That land was played out long ago. There is no active permit to remove any more material there. The permits expired. The lot is already at road grade for the most part.

I am not a fan of this site for other reasons, roads, sidewalks, water, sewer, emergency access, etc.

But lets not be silly and say "mining rights" are involved.

Any property owner could make that claim, not just the Scalias.

Anonymous said...

I believe we do have neighborhoods and neighborhood schools are classified as smaller, age focused groups. You can have modern, technologically updated schools without making them huge and K-8 "one stop" education machines.

People aren't looking to move into areas that have large schools. The smaller neighborhood school districts that are kept up are where parents are enticed to move to. Look at our smaller surrounding towns. Their family census is dramatically rising. The education systems are still maintaining a small atmosphere.

I have asked this question a bunch of times and no one has answered me. Where else in CT do we have public K-8 school systems?

Anonymous said...

Why do Craig Minor and other politicians, feel that they have to and can social engineer by using eduaction as a crutch?

This is an Education issue: lets decide it on that basis!

Anonymous said...

Re: 1:37 Poster

You could be correct in your analysis. However, the charge of the West Bristol School Building Committee has nothing to do with any educational model.

Their responsibility is to find the most suitable site for a school that an elected Board of Education said will be a K-8 model.

The Committee chose Scalia because it has the most acreage, little if any movement of existing homeowners, and most importantly, it's the safest site available for children.

It will need sidewalks, sewers, street widening, site work, landscaping and many more items that will cost a good deal of money. I would prefer to build this with 2008 dollars rather than 2012.

The Council members asked questions last evening of school officals that were not asked of the Green Hills School Building Committee and the Council voted approval of that school site. This is a political football and power play on the Council's part.

I suspect the Building Committee will again submit the Scalia site for a 3rd time. Possibly three times is a charm.

If it's defeated again, there will be resignations from some committee members. Then the Mayor can appoint people that agree with whatever he is thinking.

Welcome to Bristol.

Anonymous said...

11:13

The reason we attract poor kids has nothing to do with our schools. The reason is cheap housing. We have a large supply of old multifamily units which have comparatively low rents.

Anonymous said...

Maybe the reason that we have cheap housing is because the owners cannot get those that might pay more (and do elsewhere).
It is supply and demend, and the demand id not high, partially because of the reputation of our education system.

And, this fiasco with not going ahead with scholl improvement is just a part of it!!!

Anonymous said...

However, the charge of the West Bristol School Building Committee has nothing to do with any educational model. Their responsibility is to find the most suitable site for a school that an elected Board of Education said will be a K-8 model.


This is the foundation to the problem. No one on our elected BOE is experienced or educated enough to make such a dramatic and risky decision on their own, however our City Council has allowed them to by approving their plan.

There are no studies that prove that this will be beneficial to the majority of students in the system. It just says that it will be better for the children that come from poor families (OBrien uses the free lunch percentage to title this group of people).

But no one has received an answer from the BOE or any elected official making the decision to change our education system to the one question that would validate their reasons for building these schools:

WHERE ARE OTHER PUBLIC K-8 SCHOOLS IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT AND WHAT IS THEIR STUDENT SUCCESS RATING?

Anonymous said...

Re: 5:49 Blog

I would remind you that Tom O'Brien won re-election and he had the most votes of any candidate in the city.

His positions on the K-8 model were well known before the election and he won. To the victors go the spoils.

If you attended any BOE meetings over the past 5 years, you would have heard the rationale many times over. This discussion did not come out of the blue and I am sure if you contact any current board member, they will be happy to share the data and studies.

I have no idea if this is the proper model for Bristol as I am not on the BOE, but these people were elected to the BOE to do our handy work. If we have/had no faith in them, then the majority of voters should not have elected them, but we did.

Anonymous said...

Lets see where they look at next, and who knows who.

Seems like there might be some hidden agendas here.

Anonymous said...

If some of the Rocket Scientists on here would do a little thinking instead of bashing(which is pretty easy ) when you're gutless wonders with all the answers and no one knows who you are, Bristol would be a lot better off. I would hope our leaders ,Republican or Democrats do not listen to a nameless person on here to do the business at hand, which is to make Bristol a better place to live. We will really go dowmn the drain and fast. I fail to see any good coming from name calling ~!!

Anonymous said...

Well lets hear some ideas. All oppositions aren't very constructive with out alternatives.

Anonymous said...

900+ kids in one primary school is ridiculous!

Keep the schools small- better for kids, better for learning, better for positive behaviors.

Why invest all that money in warehouse schools?
Show us the cadre educational researchers who are advocating for large sized primary schools?
On the other hand, there are many advocacy groups for small sized schools.
This fiasco in the making is all about making it easier for the school janitors and top administrators to clean the floors, and manage the paperwork rather than generating a positive academic outcomes.

A previous poster was correct no one will buy a house in Bristol so his child can go to a huge primary school.
Only low income communities make the choice of large sized primary schools.

Pity that the teachers of this town don't speak up ..... they deserve to deal with what they will endure.
Chicken hearts!

Anonymous said...

You ? The unknown critic are calling someone chicke hearted? Now your a comedian !

Anonymous said...

Heard Ken Johnson is opposed to the Scalia site.

Did Ward, Nicastro and Minor promise Johnson the relocation contract for Park Street, sorta like he got with the Bugryn deal?

Anonymous said...

A previous poster was correct no one will buy a house in Bristol so his child can go to a huge primary school.
Only low income communities make the choice of large sized primary schools.
``````````````````
Me thinks this dimwit beleives Bristol is West Hartford or Avon .

Anonymous said...

Mayor Ward, Councilors Mike Rimcoski and Frank Nicastro:

THANK YOU


March 7, 2008 12:09 PM:

It's the citizens. not the schools. Case in point: Hartford

Anonymous said...

Re: 3:05 Blog

You forgot Minor. It was 4-3, no.

Anonymous said...

You poor Democrats always picking on Ken Johnson. It's too bad that your party got us into the Bugryn mess with Ward and Nicastro voting to steal thier land. It took Ken Johnson coming in to say the day and gt them off the land. The Democrats couldn't do it.

Most of the people who post on this site must have gone to Bristol schools because your stupid when it comes to fiscal affairs.

It too bad I have to talk like that but the truth must hurt.

Anonymous said...

9:21 - have that much faith in Johnson?
ask him when he is going to deliver on his promise for relief from C L & P that he promised us years ago - he must have spent the $10,000 dollar retainer by now - by the way, contrary to what he said during the election, he never gave up his position with this company, he retained and is still the CEO - OOPS, must've forgot, huh?

Anonymous said...

Johnson DID NOT get them off the land, the Courts did. He was paid handsomely for trying to find aplace for them, but failed to do so, but still got paid his $20,000 on a no -bid contract gotten through his friends.

Just because Nicastro screwed up doesn't mean that two wrongs make a right!

After a year or so I have not heard any progress on his Energy contract.
He wanted the city to do the work, lied about Walt Veslka and Public Works, conned the city about giving up control of his company.

Although he is a republican, he is one of the good old boys and continues to manipulate the system for his benefit and at our expense.


I would like to know just how he will be involved if the city chooses the West End for the School. That should be a Real Estate Agents dream.

Will he again get a "no bid" contract?

Anonymous said...

Tom Colapietro, Tom Colapietro, Tom Colapietro !!!!!

Anonymous said...

Ken Johnson's history of past performance provides no basis for believing that he would honor any contract or comittment with the city or anyone else for that matter.
If this city even lets Ken Johnson speak on another contract, they should be run out of town on the next freight car going south, just Ken Johnson has done to us.
A complete unscrupulous,phoney, untrustworthy blow-hard.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget that Kenny is buddy-buddy with McCauley, Minor and Nicastro, and Rimcoski has to support Republicans otherwise he will be on the outside looking in.

Anonymous said...

1;48

I o believe that the Republican plan is to have Ken Johnson run for Mayor in 2009.

Hope others see things as you do.

Anonymous said...

A few months ago, Deputy Mayor Nicastro was moaning and groaning about the environmental report on the Crowley property.
Now that he is the Mayors' right hand man, he should have read it.

Frank, are ther any problems we should be aware of?

Are you still going ahead with that property?

Were you just grandstanding as usual???

Anonymous said...

Each years delay will cost taxpayers about 4 million dollars, each school, with almost 1.5 million, each school, being part of the local budget (bonded).

And the politicians are claiming they are are on our side?

Gimme a break!!!

Anonymous said...

I have not sen or heard ONE WORD from any of the City Council that emanated from any specific knowledge on their part, i.e engineering knowledge that shows that the "sandpit" is unbuildable etc., AND more important, I am still waiting for cogent comments regarding the inapproriateness relative to Education.

They all seem to have their OWN agenda!!

Sad, Sad for Bristol.

Anonymous said...

Maybe it will be cheaper to build the school in the future because the recession will lessen demand for building materials and make labor costs more competitive.

Anonymous said...

Don't bet on it, especially with my/our money.

Anonymous said...

Still haven't seen any answers regarding what other CT towns have public K-8 schools and what their success rates are.

I guess Bristol is the first and will be the first to fail.

The State considers us a "trial and error City". Why should this be any different.

Anonymous said...

Looks like tommy boy isn't going to get his new school on the scalia site.

Oh boo hoo...the Thomas P. O'Brien Elementary school won't come to fruition.

hey, Its Better than the B.Y. Doyle Elementary School.

Anonymous said...

Mr. O'Brien wanted Park Street, not Scalia.
He wants to tear down renral property as part of te overall project.

Anonymous said...

< I guess Bristol is the first and will be the first to fail. >

School size will not affect success or failure . With the teachers union running things , it can NOT possibly succeed , no matter what else is done .

Anonymous said...

If Scalia wants more than it is appraised for, why not tax him on what he thinks it is worth?