Thank you Leslie. I received that same e-mail from Councilman Walker and was equally frustrated. When we moved to Maryland from the deep South, we never dreamed that in a place with such a stellar academic reputation we would be fighting every year for our kids to receive even just the minimum standard of safe and appropriate facilities.

Leslie,
I too received the same email from Councilman Walker. The same night I received an email from Superintendent Maxwell in response to an email I sent to the BOE and the County Council regarding SPHS. Maxwell repeated the results of the Strategic Facilities Utilization Master Plan that was issued in 2006. Bottom line - the BOE and the County Council have 2 different agendas. At this point in time I believe that the only way Severna Park High School will receive the funding it needs is when it loses its accreditation. I also support an increase in taxes to fund all of these essential projects.

Before everyone starts screaming about needing more money by raising taxes, must I remind you that the school's budget has increased substantially over the years? I'll get the figures for you. Just as you pointed out Leslie, we all must manage our household budgets and by promoting the tax increase you are esentially telling the schools (AND the state of Maryland AND the Federal government) that its okay for them to not be forced to manage theirs. True the BOE and the County Council (and the Executive) have always been at odds, but raising taxes will NOT fix that problem. Just because there would be more money in the pot, don't think they will spend it the way you would have them.

Amy, what is your solution? Yes, the school budget has increased, but so has the student population and the federal requirements on the school system.

The School Board members are not elected officials, that is a huge problem. The BOE, the County Council and the County Executive are busy pointing fingers and our Severna Park HS students are paying the price.

I would love the State of Maryland to manage its budget properly, but sadly, what I think is proper and what our current government thinks is proper are too different things. The money we spend per pupil in Anne Arundel County is considerably less than in our surrounding counties as are our taxes. The property tax cap is not allowing our county budget income to grow at the same pace as the growth of our county.

Leslie, you have summarized exactly what I feel. Im outraged by this whole process! I say we have some sort of HUGE town hall meeting in Severna park and say enough is enough!

What about merely allowing feeder systems to become their own school systems--or at the very least allowing them to make (and fund) decisions based on local needs? That's how schools are run in most of the country (one community/feeder system=one school district). At the very least, Severna Park should be able to determine how it raises and uses its own funds. When we lived in Burlington, VT (and in the Chicago suburbs, come to think of it), local voters decided if some specific local school should get a new roof, or whatever. Obviously this whole giant county (which is the size of the entire STATE of Vermont) doesn't care about one of our little Severna Park schools, especially when weighed against their own grave concerns, and we here in Maryland aren't allowed to make these decisions for ourselves on a local level. But if we as a feeder system could control our own spending, we could not only have a high school that meets modern health, safety, and educational standards but also pay for school hours that are compatible with health, safety, and learningm even if the county as a whole isn't willing to do that for all the feeder systems. . . . I'm aware that this would probably involve changing the Maryland constitution. But we will never solve these, or any other issues, unless we address the root of the problem. And it's one tough root.

Amen, Terra! Legally, how do we get this going?

If we could 'opt out' of paying the portion of our taxes that support the school board (about 51%) I'd suggest making Severna Park a Special Community Benefit District. That way we could raise our own money for the schools in Severna Park. Ha Ha.

The Citizens of Anne Arundel County should demand from our State and County representatives the establishment of an elected school board. AACPS is one of a few of the 24 districts in Maryland that does not have an elected school board. If you are interested in your school system, and you should be regardless if you have children in school or not. Join the Citizen Advisory Committee. For more info go to:
http://www.aacps.org/aacps/boe/commu/cac/cac.asp
Raising taxes is not a solution, they should use what they have wisely. An elected school board would serve the citizens of this county and properly manage the funds we all pay in. Where I work we do building condition reports to prioritize projects for renovation and repair, and we do not "ignore" the obvious. The MGT of America issued a Strategic Facilities Utilization Master Plan in 2006 and it is now 2011 pushing 2012 and SPHS is still falling down. An elected school board would serve the Citizens of this county and be held accountable and when they jump off track.

As former student at SPHS, I would like to comment on its condition. Structurally, I think it is fine, its not literally "falling down." But there are other major problems that need to be addressed with it. First, it has the worst air conditioning system ever conceived by mankind. The parts that do work are in efficient, but the majority of cooling units are broken. I've literally sweated through my shirt in class. The worst part is though that there seems to be certain parts of the school (ie. the adminstrative office) that are (and I'm not exaggerating) a solid 10 degrees colder then the rest of the building. Second, the floor plan cannot accommodate the student population. At the change of classes, students can literally get stuck in a human traffic jam in the main hall because almost every other class, stairwell, and hallway empties into it.
The point of this is, I don't know if we need a whole brand new school (especially since such a large amount was just spent a large amount on the athletic complex, and it seems a little silly to just get rid of it after 5 or so years) but something needs to be done, whether it is a revamping of the schools maintenance equipment (which I think was honestly the most miserable thing) or some sort of renovation or addition.

Like Ben, I am a recent graduate of SPHS, and I can say that the condition of the building has close to zero effect on the students' performance. Those who want to work hard will not be stopped by a construction style last found attractive in 1959. The lack of air conditioning can be fixed easily and cheaply, and congestion in the hallways is only a minor nuisance at worst. The lack of money in the county is a result of people making decisions based on the idea that if it sounds nice, it should happen. Well, it certainly sounds nice to have a new school in Severna Park. It's exciting; it's refreshing; it's justice served for the hardworking students... but it's also unnecessary. Sadly, we have reached the point where government spending can only be towards necessities.

It is wonderful to hear from students who have actually spent 4 years succeeding in the building; however what they do not understand is patches and minor improvements have held the school together the last 5 years. If we put all of our best efforts into pushing for a new school, the earliest, best case scenario would be a finished school in 2016 - that is now being pushed back a minimum of 2 years, so 2018 for a new school. Overall costs of maintaining a school have to be taken into consideration. Heating and cooling, energy use general maintenance are all more costly in a failing building. If you buy an older home chances are your first improvements are new windows and a new roof and next would be heating/cooling system and plumbing.

We need to weigh the considerable cost of doing those repairs to a school that has many other issues versus the cost of a new efficient building. Also, if a new building is even a consideration in the next 10 years money will not be spent "fix" the issues these students talk about.

We were able to do a "revitalization" at the SPMS because of its existing layout. Having lived through that process and been very involved with the administration and teaching staff I can say that it is not an easy process. Teachers moved classrooms a minimum of 3 times. At the HS current layout does not work, a lot of money would be spent for a not great result. IF we are going to spend the money, let's do it right.

I'd like to comment on Alex's comment. As far as the air conditioning goes, I'm not sure if it would be cheap. It is a really large amount of hardware, but obviously know where near the price of a new school. So I agree with you in that respect that we do not need a new building, but students shouldn't have to be uncomfortable during the warm months. Up to this point, as far as I know, nothing has been done about the air condition. But overall, I agree that it does not effect overall ability to succeed. As to Mrs. Brown's comment, I contest that structurally the school is sound and functioning with the exception of the heat and sometimes over crowded hall. Other then that, I haven't been made aware of anyother significant issues that in my opinion would warrant the construction of a new building.

And since we (I am assuming) are not architects or structural engineers, we hire independent companies to determine the structural integrity of the schools. Via the private MGT study cited above, even the Board of Ed has agreed that SPHS is rated as one of the worst in physical structure.

I again stress if we do not continue a fight for a new HS now, it will be 20 years down the line rather than 7 years.

I truly believe that we should encourage our children to stare blindly at teachers, only fill in the letter "A" on the scantron or leave the answer blank and LOWER OUR SCORES! If all children handed in a blank exam on the MSA testing, our scores would drop significantly, and would turn some heads in our direction. A good many decisions are based on the scores that the schools bring in. Let them see us as a need and not a benefit to their system.

The only 2 things that are going to have an impact on the progression of our school is a low ranking in the MSA world and/or people getting sick or injured from the dilapidated building. I, personally, would hate to see the latter.

But then we would lose what funding we have. Either way, it is a difficult situation to change financially.

Mrs Brown,
I believe that the difference in maintenance and heating/cooling costs of SPHS over the next twenty years would not be over $100 million different than in a new building. That's what it would take for the purchase of a new building to make sense financially.

Regarding air conditioning: At SPMS we had window air conditioning units. These were mostly affordable and fairly easy to install, and certainly make sense for the short term while waiting for a new school, and even for the long term if a new school turns out to be not right around the corner. Ben, you and I both know that some classrooms do not have windows (Mr. Dunbar), but putting a hole in the wall to put in a unit is still possible.

The STAR theme for this year was resiliency. Students at SPHS essentially learned how to take life's difficulties without making excuses. That was the intention anyways. The continued grumbling about the poor condition of the school and it's harmful effect on learning can turn fiction into fact; the more students that are told that their performance is inhibited, the greater chance we have of watching their scores drop. Let the lesson instead be this: if you want to learn, you can do it -- anywhere, in any environment.

Alex,

Am I understanding that you believe that with just the addition of some window air conditioning units the school could continue to operate safely and soundly for another 20 years? Keep in mind that the process from preliminary design to a completed building is approximately 7 years.

Having toured the building before having a student there and having been a part of the process for improvements in the high school for the past 5 years, I can tell you that by professional standards there is more wrong with the building than the heating and cooling system. It has been a long road to have the funding put in the budget . If the school receives a couple of band aids and is taken out of the funding process, we start all over. The

The current design process which has been funded will take approximately 2 years - that is just the design process. And is there ever going to be a time when the expense of building a new high school is ideal? It will always be a huge line item.

This discussion started with the title of "Being punished for doing well" and that is just it, our students succeed no matter what their environment. They are hard working and have great educational and parental support. That is why school construction is supposed to be determined by independent building consultants - not by test scores.

I would just like a clarification on this subject. It has been mentioned numerous times that there are other things wrong with the school then what has been brought up thus far in the debate (mostly the heating/cooling units). Can anyone elaborate in more detail on what these other issues are?

Here is a link to the final MGT study which states the criteria used to determine building needs. http://www.aacps.org/html/press/finalreport.pdf

Issues with the building that have been discussed consistently in meeting over the past 5 years are plumbing, safety, hall way size - especially in the case of a wheel chair, electrical issues and the building not meeting current code in certain areas, also mold, are the ones I specifically remember.

One of the options was modernization with an addition - but that is still a lot of money and it wouldn't be ideal. You can't really expand the hallways in the current building. I have to go back through the history and find the breakdown on the options and the final decision to move forward with a new building. The MGT study really makes sense (at least to me) with the way they look at a school system and individual buildings.

Hope that helps. And again I truly appreciate the involvement and opinions of actual students. I can easily look at the current state of the building and see my home loosing value or consider the cost of private school, but I am not in the building every day. I am an outsider trying to improve our school system and our community. My children (at the rate we are going) with Will starting 8th grade will not see the benefit of a new school - unless things move forward quickly and I become in his eyes responsible for ruining his HS experience due to construction.

It's funny how all those foreign students in third world schools are out scoring our children in math, engineering, and science.Get off your raise taxes kick for a new SPHS, it isn't necessary... and certainly not worth 99 million.

Who said any of us are for raising taxes?! Where's 99 million coming from? And what "Third World" countries are you referring to? Africa, South America? Pretty sure some of the top scorers such as those in Europe, Australia, Japan or China are not considered "Third World". Just a little perplexed by that commentary....