Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident says board sidelined public on plan to demolish historic high school

Banks SD 13 Board of Directors · February 19, 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

During public comment, a resident accused the board of predetermining demolition of the district's historic high school and said a revised cost-neutral renovation proved preservation was feasible but was ignored; the board responded with assurances about student-first decisions and listening.

During the public-comment period at the Feb. 18 Banks SD 13 meeting, a resident identified in the transcript as Corey (speaker 5, introduced by the board) sharply criticized the district’s handling of the proposed demolition of the community’s historic high school. Corey alleged the decision to demolish had been framed as the only viable option and said a revised “cost-neutral renovation plan concept 2” demonstrated preservation was financially possible.

"The district's own feasibility study proves this wrong. The structure is sound. It needs help," Corey said, arguing the board had not given the community a full opportunity to weigh renovation options. She said the revision showed modernization could be achieved while preserving the historic building, and accused those advocating demolition of promoting a false narrative that dismissed preservation advocates and prioritized a small number of parking spaces over the town’s history.

Board members and other speakers responded during the meeting. One board member (speaker 9), who identified themself as a special-education teacher, acknowledged concerns and said the board is "committed to creating a safe, welcoming, nurturing environment for all of our students" and that the board had considered multiple viewpoints. Other board comments thanked commenters for speaking and invited further discussion with individual board members.

The public comment did not produce a formal reversal or vote on the facility plan during this meeting; speakers and staff said process and next steps would continue between the board and community. The board later discussed related facility procurement and funding in the action-item portion of the agenda but did not, in this meeting, adopt a new preservation plan.