Why Weren't We Told?

Do you feel as though you weren't given enough information to make your own decision about this proposal? That's because you weren't.

On April 20, 2004, an Ann Arbor News article, Opinions Diverge on Future High School Site, we learned what the Board did not tell the residents of Ann Arbor when putting this on the ballot and rushing this proposal and plan through.

One school board member didn't seem to think this was the best site for the high school, that growth is on the southeast side of Ann Arbor, and that there is concern about students getting to school via M-14.

A parent (and professor of urban planning) is concerned about sprawl and the Greenbelt, and is concerned that the site's selection did not involve public input.

There were two Pittsfield Township sites briefly considered but District Spokeswoman Liz Margolis thinks its a problem that the district didn't already own them. Is that a valid reason to blindly go forward with building a school on a bad site? Alternatives were not considered. Why not swap land with the City of Ann Arbor which is looking for Greenbelt/park land? Why not show some leadership to argue for smaller schools spread around the area? Read the Michigan Land Use Institute's report on the damage caused by large schools.

An April 25, 2004 Ann Arbor News article, Building details await outcome of the bond vote, showed that the District Administration did not discuss the building design appropriately with the public before and after the bond vote. The District is still withholding information needed to properly evaluate the site (e.g., traffic dangers, ennvironmental damage, attendance boundaries for the school which are known but not divulged).

If information about the traffic problems, student safety problems, environmental problems, and perhaps most importantly, demographic issues involved in site selection, and why the Board selected the Maple Road site over the other possibilities had been made clear to Ann Arbor voters, there might have been more discussion. Perhaps there might have been a different outcome on the ballot.

	Fighting Mismanagement in the Ann Arbor Public Schools District "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers" — Thomas Pynchon

Main Archives Page (New High School) Environment Land Use Traffic School size Demographics Safety Archaeology Alternative sites In the News About CRS Write a letter ! Contact Us Home Page	Why Weren't We Told? Do you feel as though you weren't given enough information to make your own decision about this proposal? That's because you weren't. On April 20, 2004, an Ann Arbor News article, Opinions Diverge on Future High School Site, we learned what the Board did not tell the residents of Ann Arbor when putting this on the ballot and rushing this proposal and plan through. One school board member didn't seem to think this was the best site for the high school, that growth is on the southeast side of Ann Arbor, and that there is concern about students getting to school via M-14. A parent (and professor of urban planning) is concerned about sprawl and the Greenbelt, and is concerned that the site's selection did not involve public input. There were two Pittsfield Township sites briefly considered but District Spokeswoman Liz Margolis thinks its a problem that the district didn't already own them. Is that a valid reason to blindly go forward with building a school on a bad site? Alternatives were not considered. Why not swap land with the City of Ann Arbor which is looking for Greenbelt/park land? Why not show some leadership to argue for smaller schools spread around the area? Read the Michigan Land Use Institute's report on the damage caused by large schools. An April 25, 2004 Ann Arbor News article, Building details await outcome of the bond vote, showed that the District Administration did not discuss the building design appropriately with the public before and after the bond vote. The District is still withholding information needed to properly evaluate the site (e.g., traffic dangers, ennvironmental damage, attendance boundaries for the school which are known but not divulged). If information about the traffic problems, student safety problems, environmental problems, and perhaps most importantly, demographic issues involved in site selection, and why the Board selected the Maple Road site over the other possibilities had been made clear to Ann Arbor voters, there might have been more discussion. Perhaps there might have been a different outcome on the ballot.