Parents, residents press board to delay school closures as long-range plan is reworked

Public commenters at the St. Joseph School District Board of Education meeting urged trustees not to close Benton High School until replacement space is ready and criticized the district for what they described as poor communication about the failed bond proposition.

“I am here today to ask you to consider how we get to a 2 high school city,” Claribel Turner, a fourth‑generation Benton parent, told the board during audience participation. “We are asking that no buildings are closed until a new one is built.”

Turner and other residents told the board that uncertainty about building closures has already hurt morale, driven families away and contributed to staffing worries. Doctor W.A. Hedge and Laurie Brown also addressed the board during the public comment period with concerns about the vacancy‑filling process and the board’s decision‑making and communication.

The board and administration said they would pursue two tracks before the next public steps: a short, district‑run survey asking why Proposition 2 did not pass and a facilities review by architects to test “Plan B” alternatives that do not rely on building two new high schools. The administration said the survey will be distributed to the community tomorrow and results will be available by the board’s May 12 work session.

Gabe (administration) said the architects — identified to the board as DLR — will walk district facilities and return with feasibility recommendations and a timeline; administration asked that the architects provide a draft timeline by June. The district also flagged that any recommendation will need to account for long‑term operating costs and staffing constraints.

Board members and administrators repeatedly returned to the same set of constraints: community sentiment after the failed bond, the district’s operating budget, and an ongoing teacher‑recruitment challenge. Several trustees urged the administration to present operating projections that show the cost of continuing the current configuration so the community can evaluate tradeoffs.

Administrators said they do not yet have a preferred alternative to the bond plan and emphasized that the purpose of the survey is diagnostic — to learn why voters rejected the bond and to identify whether messaging, cost, timing or other factors drove the result.

The board set a follow‑up schedule: the survey results and a project timeline will be discussed at the May 12 work session; architects are expected to deliver feasibility analysis in June. Board members said any final plan will be brought back to the public for additional input.