Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
School superintendent urges council to reconsider sidewalk requirement tied to bond projects
Summary
Jervis School District superintendent asked the council to reverse or limit a new full-sidewalk requirement in front of the high school, citing unexpected costs, code inconsistency, and pending grants; multiple residents urged the council to prioritize building repairs.
Dandy Stevens, superintendent of the Jervis School District, asked the council to reconsider a newly imposed requirement that the district construct a full sidewalk in front of Jervis High School, saying the requirement was introduced after the noticed appeal hearing and increases costs and schedule risk for bond-funded projects.
Stevens told the council that estimates from the district’s contractor and project manager put the cost of a narrow (2-foot) path at more than $253,000 and that a full sidewalk with curves and tree removal would be significantly higher. “Estimates from our general contractor and project manager totaled more than $253,000,” Stevens said, and he urged the council to rule on the noticed appeal or allow permit work to proceed while district and city staff continue to seek a joint solution.
Stevens raised four core points: the unexpected and high construction cost for public work, inconsistent application of city code across district projects, language in the city’s Safe Routes to School report that assigns some sidewalk responsibilities to the city, and strong community support for preserving mature trees and directing bond funds to building priorities.
Residents and parents who addressed the council echoed those concerns. Maria Contreras said the late addition of a sidewalk requirement could change the bond’s scope and cost as much as $500,000, diverting funds from essential building repairs: “To pay for it, we would have to cut or delay educational improvements for students,” she said. Other public commenters urged that sidewalks identified in the city’s Safe Routes report be pursued by the city using grant funding rather than by the school district.
The speakers asked the council to either rule on the noticed appeal based on the record or to find a way for permits and site-preparation work to continue while the city and district negotiate a solution. The council heard the comments during the public-comment period and did not take an immediate final vote on the school’s appeal during the meeting.
Next steps: The district asked the council to reconsider its September 4 action; staff and the district indicated they will continue to coordinate and seek grant funding and that the council may revisit the topic in a future meeting.
