Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Site Selection topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Neighbors urge Springfield R‑XII to reconsider Pershing Middle School placement

Springfield R‑XII Board of Education · October 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Two neighbors told the Springfield R‑XII Board of Education they were not consulted about a proposed $60 million rebuild of Pershing Middle School and raised safety, traffic and property-value concerns, asking the district to present alternative site and phasing plans.

Sharon Benton and Patrick Mueller, homeowners adjacent to Pershing Middle School, told the Springfield R‑XII Board of Education they oppose the district’s proposed placement of the new Pershing Middle School and urged the board to reconsider the site selection.

Benton, whose property borders Pershing on the east side, said neighbors were not contacted and described the proposed design as creating “an alley … a no man’s land” between back fences and the school. “That doesn’t sound very safe to me,” she said, and asked the board to provide cost details and justify use of the bond funds. Benton cited the bond’s roughly $60,000,000 price tag and said residents want a second look at the location plans.

Patrick Mueller, who lives on Alameda Street next to Pershing’s northeast corner, said the district has existing green space that could house a new track and parking and urged a phased approach that would keep the school in its current location. “I urge you to take a beat and ask more than one rebuild plan for this $60,000,000 project,” Mueller said, arguing that moving the building closer to private homes will cause permanent quality‑of‑life impacts even if student disruption during construction is minimized.

Board members did not take action on the comments; the public comment period is advisory and the board said items related to site selection would be considered as part of upcoming project briefings and bond‑related agenda items. The district has scheduled related votes and presentations for its Oct. 28 regular meeting, according to staff statements during the meeting.