— by Bea vonTobel —
Updated Sept. 20:
I would like to offer a couple revisions to my original letter. (Editor’s note: revisions are in italics)
Sometime when you look a gift horse in the mouth you may need to say, “Thanks but no thanks.”
The extreme generosity of a large donation to the greater community of Orcas Island has placed the Orcas Island School district (OISD) board in a peculiar position. It now seems as though the gift of a million dollars has become a major driving force behind the upcoming bond proposal—no matter which of the three bond amounts are currently on the spreadsheet, the construction of a track facility is among them.
More than two decades ago, head of maintenance Ron Savell and physical educator Cindy Elliott established a one-mile fitness trail, which circled behind the current baseball field, skate park, tennis courts, softball and football fields and back to the school.
A grant provided funding for the construction of ten exercise stations and signage along the one-mile course. After its dedication, no funding was made available for its upkeep, and portions fell into disrepair. Over time the exercise stations were removed, being deemed unsafe. Portions became overgrown. Throughout its existence, however, the original path itself has been in continuous use by middle and high school physical education classes as part of its regular curriculum.
Community time, talent and treasure were used to construct the Scott Stamnes Skate Park in 2002 on a triangle of land within Buck Park owned by the school. Some of the original funds were left with OICF for use on repairs at an amount not to exceed 10% of the principal per year.
The transfer of the Buck Park facility to Orcas Island Park and Recreation, a junior taxing district, has forced parks and rec to budget monies for deferred and ongoing maintenance of the facilities left fallow under the prior ownership.
Enter the donation. Described by Janet Brownell, the money would cover approximately half the cost of the proposed construction of a track facility. The site of the proposed facility removes space which is currently used by soccer (both middle and HS), softball, baseball, Kings football and golf, for school-based instruction and interscholastic practice.
But it also illuminates a conundrum: a consideration by the district of supporting additional programs which require participants in order to function. The numbers of participants needed to field fall seasonal teams in football, volleyball and cross country are currently undersubscribed. Spring teams for baseball and softball are currently holding their own for numbers, but golf is undersubscribed. Crew and sailing also draw students from the general population. And, if a track facility is constructed, at some point someone will ask whether we shouldn’t field a track team. Current county demographics do not support increased numbers of school-age youth.
Looming larger is a question about funding the maintenance of such a facility, which has not been contemplated or calculated.
Schools are called on to be all things for all people. In this case, the board’s gun-shy position and its desire to ‘do it right’ make the decision on how large a proposed bond might be and what should be included in it provide lie-awake-at-night kinds of contemplations.
Thank you Bea for your letter. So great when people engage. I hope everyone will consider the importance of this possible new school bond. On Sept 21st the OISD is hosting another meeting in which your voice, and others, can be heard.
I would, however, like to correct your attribution to me. While it may have been quoted somewhere (you mention “current documents”?) that I said, the generous donation of 50% of the cost of a new track is “a motivating project for the Phase III bond proposal”– that is absolutely inaccurate. What I have said, and continue to say, is that the OISD has unaddressed needs for which the OISD needs a new bond. Paramount are health/safety concerns for our schools, students, and staff.
Secondarily, there are needs (for example a track, a new weight room, and a music room) that were considered in the earlier bonds, but were cut in creating a version of the 2010 bond that supported school programming and met community desire. It was proposed by those helping us move the 2010 bond forward that these issues would be phased in during a later bond. It was never the intention of the school board to ignore those needs, it was a matter of when and how we would return to them.
I hope as a School Board, and a community, we look forward to what is possible for our children and for all of those who might benefit from a new track, for example. We as a board are realistic, and always weigh the pros and cons. When looking at a possible new track, for example, you look at the impact on after school sports — we look at that as well as how PE classes might be enhanced, or the use of a community track for those who may not be able walk the one-mile fitness course because it is not as stable as a track surface. We look at any aspect of a bond with relation to its cost now, and the future (ie. for maintenance).
NOTHING, however, has been decided by the school board as to what will, or will not be in a new bond.
I agree, “Schools are called on to be all things for all people.” All people. That is why we hope you, and others can be there on the 21st to lend your consideration as to how we can ALL move forward.
I, too, have questioned the viability of a school track program and the investment to create an appropriate facility. The current athletic director does not endorse another athletic program in our small high school with only thirty some students per class year. Too, the reality of such a program is that there are continuing annual budget costs to include maintenance, uniforms, coaches, transportation and so forth. The District should decide instead which of the existing programs can be maintained within budget and show interest in participation from the students.
To be clear, it is NOT the responsibility of the School District nor the Board to provide facilities of any kind for the general community. Rather, the emphasis is ONLY for the benefit of the students.
I met recently with Eric Webb, the District Superintendent and made it clear that I would not support a bond request that included a track facility. I have also made that position clear to a certain school board member who shares my name.
Thank you Bea, Ed and Janet. This issue needs broad public input. Everyone involved is trying to do the “right” thing. A historical note: before Orcas Park and Rec was formed the school board took on responsibility for (donated) Buck Park largely because they were the only ones able to do so at the time. When school funding, enrollment and the economy went south, deferred maintenance at the park began–and went on. Now,years later, a large portion of recently funded Park and Rec budget (tax dollars) will be spent addressing the results of that deferred maintenance. In defense of the decisions to defer, school funding is crazy variable. When dollars disappeared, the school board rightly focused on their core business which was after all, education, not park maintenance.
The proposed track has an appeal for both school and community use, very like what was originally proposed for Buck Park. The Henigson family’s extraordinary offer (and decades of support for Orcas education) adds a desire to honor their vision for a track much like we honored the Buck family for their vision for what became Buck Park. Still the voters must decide. What’s the best we can do now? What is a bit of a reach, but not too far? Is your choice useful and sustainable for the school and thus worthy of asking your fellow citizens to vote for the bond? The current round of meetings before the school board are attempts to determine what is absolutely essential (HVAC) and what is worthy in addition (like a track and/or music room) and to put price tags on all of it. Can we afford everything? Or?Activists and advocates hold disproportionate sway in public meetings. I urge those who don’t like to attend public meetings to “talk it up”anyway, weigh in perhaps in Orcas Issues or with a school board member. Input is needed.
First I would ask the legality of the one million dollar gift that stipulates it be for a track. I understand that is what the donor requested, but does the school district have to be held to that or lose the money? As a senior citizen I would love the opportunity to walk on a track, however, I also feel it is not the school’s responsibility to provide for public use. Bond money should be used specifically for school use, whether music room, track, etc. I only hope the best long term solution is reached.
Ginny raises an important question–what legal restrictions attach to the gift? While many bequests perfectly legally state the use to which the gift should be put (such as “this money is for a track”), with a reversion of the fund to the estate of the donor if that use will not be made of the fund.
I have not seen any information about the exact terms of this bequest, and whether it includes any options for alternative use.
How much is the total bequest, and how much was provided for maintenance costs?
Yes, this issue needs as much input as possible. Every taxpayer should try to be at the meeting.
I will not support a bond that includes building and maintaining a huge track. One, because I believe many of the other sports are diluted already(lack of students) because of choices the school already offers and two, because I don’t want to have to pay to maintain it forever. And it WILL have to be maintained-even if it isn’t used for a track team from school because of possible legal ramifications if it isn’t and someone were to get hurt.
I would be willing to bet that the Henigson’s, in their very generous offer, had no idea what an unnecessary burden this could possibly be in the future for the school as well as already struggling taxpayers.
Perhaps someone could sit down with the good folks in charge of the Henigson’s estate and have a practical, human, heart-to-hear dialogue with them about these issues. Perhaps they would consider putting their generous gift in a perpetual fund for maintenance of all sports and other extra-curricular activities so that ALL children in our school will benefit, not just a few who may like to run.
I am unable to attend the public input meeting but am hoping someone could pass on my comments. I fully support broadening the sports program at the school, as sports are one of the few positive activities available to high school age kids on the island. That said, I have real concerns with the condition of what is already existing and how well it is or is not being maintained. The conditions of the already existing playing fields are poor. Who will be responsible for paying and providing the ongoing maintenance of a track system. Additionally, driving to the high school and through the high school parking lot is like putting your life in danger with the grand-canyon of potholes! I am afraid a small child will fall in, never to be seen again.
If care is not being taken with what already exists, how can it be expected that care will be taken with additional facilities?
Perhaps a naive question here:
Is the skate park a vital part of the island recreation program? How much is it used, and by whom? does the school use it in their rec. program? does anyone over the age of 30-something use it? I haven’t been motivated to oil up my skate boards, practice my shimmy whammies and head out to the park, though I have enjoyed seeing a helmeted head appear above the concrete as I pass by. I know Orcas has trouble providing other surfaces for any sport like that, but…
How about razing the skate park, filling in with proper soil, creating a perhaps not official size track (unless there’s room), and using the middle grassy or concrete/rubbery surface for some other exercise space. The track could be utilized at specific times for in-line skaters, as well as runners/walkers and the new school track team. Andrew and his crew could lease times for physical therapy walking & exercising;
The track would then be close to parking rather than across an uneven field, and therefore possibly utilized by more of the likes of us (I lied, I don’t own a skate board).
The only other alternative is to create a track around one of the fields adjacent to the school…then there’s a parking issue.
I too was unable to attend tonight’s meeting. I voted for the last bond election primarily to support the creation of an appropriate music room. There is high student & citizen demand for this, & I consider it an urgent need, as a cornerstone for quality public education on Orcas. If the School Board guarantees its construction this time, I & many others will vote to pass the bond.
Update: The loss of small children is less likely at this time, due to some gravel filling the potholes! Yea!!! (And thank you). Hoping for pavement in the next phase!
That said, I would still like to see an overhaul of the current budget, organizational structure, and plan for taking care of current facilities before voting to add more to the plate.
I agree completely with Bea.
I am also, though, an advocate of infrastructure… especially infrastructure that poses not only pleasurable enjoyment by the general residental population, but also infrastructure that is a tourist and visitor attraction. An off road walking and bike path that meanders its way between Orcas Landing and Eastsound Village would be a County wide visitor draw and result in visitors not only using the path but also many staying the night, sleeping, eating and shopping at: our charming and friendly BnBs, our tasty restaurants, our delightful shops.