The Original Akron Footprint

fleadog101

fleadog101

Active member
When the Voters of the Akron Public Schools voted on a School levy to fund construction of new schools, The State Facilities Commission offer was a 60/40 of with was very good offer. Upon recommendation and under the Agreement they were to have only 4 High Schools. Currently under they are over the cap and agreement of 4 High Schools. it was recommended by (TSFC) to keep the following Schools.
Firestone
Ellet
Garfield
North
Akron Public Schools are in the same situation that Massillon City Schools was a decade ago or so when they did not conform to there agreement with (TSFC) and they were forced to pay back the overages. When you take (TSFC) money they can up to 35 years tell you what to keep open and close, This will be an interesting one in how this Plays out with that governing body.
It also seems like the Akron Public Schools BOE likes to pick and choose schools as evident by who has a football field or not seems like no equal opportunity in the district
 
 
And Akron North remains the oldest high school, not to be replaced but surge in enrollment due to so many immigrants settling in North Hlll. Akron needed to just bite the bullet and have 4 geographic high schools. East, North, South and West....
Ellet and East= New East at Ellet ( has stadium)
Garfield and Kenmore = at new Garfield, New South( old Kenmore stadium upgraded)
Buchtel and Firestone = New West ( Buchtel has stadium)
North plus margins of East and Firestone ( need stadium improvement definitely but room.
Problem solved except never will happen now.
 
wildcat71 said:
And Akron North remains the oldest high school, not to be replaced but surge in enrollment due to so many immigrants settling in North Hlll. Akron needed to just bite the bullet and have 4 geographic high schools. East, North, South and West....
Ellet and East= New East at Ellet ( has stadium)
Garfield and Kenmore = at new Garfield, New South( old Kenmore stadium upgraded)
Buchtel and Firestone = New West ( Buchtel has stadium)
North plus margins of East and Firestone ( need stadium improvement definitely but room.
Problem solved except never will happen now.
Click to expand...
Did you know that per the agreement and contract that a new North was to be built
 
The problem is that school board members are often politicians, some who use it as a stepping stone to other positions. In general, many of them don't want to make difficult or controversial decisions but rather just seek to please the public.

There were discussions a while back to combine East and Ellet at the Ellet site. After both communities voiced opposition, the board essentially caved and built East a new school.
 
Akron East really didn't get a "new" school, rather improvements made and new addition for middle school students from former East ( Goodyear ).
 
fleadog101 said:
When the Voters of the Akron Public Schools voted on a School levy to fund construction of new schools, The State Facilities Commission offer was a 60/40 of with was very good offer. Upon recommendation and under the Agreement they were to have only 4 High Schools. Currently under they are over the cap and agreement of 4 High Schools. it was recommended by (TSFC) to keep the following Schools.
Firestone
Ellet
Garfield
North
Akron Public Schools are in the same situation that Massillon City Schools was a decade ago or so when they did not conform to there agreement with (TSFC) and they were forced to pay back the overages. When you take (TSFC) money they can up to 35 years tell you what to keep open and close, This will be an interesting one in how this Plays out with that governing body.
It also seems like the Akron Public Schools BOE likes to pick and choose schools as evident by who has a football field or not seems like no equal opportunity in the district
Click to expand...
Actually when the OSFC came one of their first recommendations was to close Ellet because it was geographically furthest away from the majority of the students that resided in Akron. Those that lived in Akron at the time know how politically untenable that proposal was from the get. The Board decided to close East instead, but after some protest from parents shuttered that idea. In retrospect they didn't close 4 High schools, but by combining Buchtel with Perkins (feeder middle school), East and Goodyear (feeder middle school) and closing Central-Hower, and Reidinger (middle school) , they did close 4 buildings at the High and Junior High school level.
 
wildcat71 said:
And Akron North remains the oldest high school, not to be replaced but surge in enrollment due to so many immigrants settling in North Hlll. Akron needed to just bite the bullet and have 4 geographic high schools. East, North, South and West....
Ellet and East= New East at Ellet ( has stadium)
Garfield and Kenmore = at new Garfield, New South( old Kenmore stadium upgraded)
Buchtel and Firestone = New West ( Buchtel has stadium)
North plus margins of East and Firestone ( need stadium improvement definitely but room.
Problem solved except never will happen now.
Click to expand...
If you ask my two cents, "immigrant" is the main reason North doesn't have a new building. Many of them are new to this area and do not have the political wherewithal or weight to make enough noise.
 
clarkgriswold said:
The problem is that school board members are often politicians, some who use it as a stepping stone to other positions. In general, many of them don't want to make difficult or controversial decisions but rather just seek to please the public.

There were discussions a while back to combine East and Ellet at the Ellet site. After both communities voiced opposition, the board essentially caved and built East a new school.
Click to expand...
Those conversations went on in several areas of the city, and you are right the politicians listened to the citizens and either delayed or decided against closing some of the schools. Not to be revisionist on my part, I was at some of these meetings and on this board arguing to keep as many of these schools open a possible.
 
hubman said:
If you ask my two cents, "immigrant" is the main reason North doesn't have a new building. Many of them are new to this area and do not have the political wherewithal or weight to make enough noise.
Click to expand...
Plus I've heard some local " politicians " say that the immigrant community is pleased with the building. I was there in the winter and impressed on how clean the overall building was. In addition the architecture of the older buildings is so much more appealing than the " cookie cutter" new buildings that basically all mirror each other.
 
hubman said:
Actually when the OSFC came one of their first recommendations was to close Ellet because it was geographically furthest away from the majority of the students that resided in Akron. Those that lived in Akron at the time know how politically untenable that proposal was from the get. The Board decided to close East instead, but after some protest from parents shuttered that idea. In retrospect they didn't close 4 High schools, but by combining Buchtel with Perkins (feeder middle school), East and Goodyear (feeder middle school) and closing Central-Hower, and Reidinger (middle school) , they did close 4 buildings at the High and Junior High school level.
Click to expand...
Central Hower was already out of the equation. Under the State agreement there was to only be 4 HighSchools
 
Consider this also under the just released numbers by the OHSAA of interest Akron Firestone would be at 728 with Buchtel added and Ellet would be at 712 with East added. just food for thought.
 
wildcat71 said:
And Akron Central Hower was the newest building at the time!
Click to expand...
But Central Hower is in no-man's land. It never had a population base around it. The City effectively cut off the last vestiges of a downtown population in the late 60's when they plowed under the neighborhoods surrounding the old Central and Hower high schools to put in the innerbelt. After that, what is the closest population base to Central Hower? North Hill? Joy Park? Firestone Park? Nothing close, really. It's amazing to me that Central Hower lasted as long as it did!
 
Irish60 said:
But Central Hower is in no-man's land. It never had a population base around it. The City effectively cut off the last vestiges of a downtown population in the late 60's when they plowed under the neighborhoods surrounding the old Central and Hower high schools to put in the innerbelt. After that, what is the closest population base to Central Hower? North Hill? Joy Park? Firestone Park? Nothing close, really. It's amazing to me that Central Hower lasted as long as it did!
Click to expand...
Correct.
 
The issues of racial/neighborhood balance is what has APS dragging their feet with merging more of the High Schools. East and Ellet have fairly different demographics as well as Firestone and Buchtel. Not to mention the way that life is lived in a every day sense(Ellet has always felt like it's own little city) and I understand the difficulty in trying to combine some of these Highschools. I live within Firestone's district and most of the kids in my neighborhood attend the catholic schools or CVCA, and this is with Firestone having all the amenities and programs that it has and being the healthiest traditional City High School academically. If it's combined with Buchtel, more families will continue to send their children elsewhere.

I also must say this, for years I've seen people make this arguement from a sports perspective and I must say that I don't agree. Taking bad/medicore Div. 2/3 schools and combining them will just make them a bad Div. 1 team. Unfortunately so much of the talent is at the parochial schools or in the burbs. In a perfect world you just go to 4 high schools and everyone is fine with it but there so many idiosyncrasies that exist in a city like Akron.
 
westa-k-ron1 said:
The issues of racial/neighborhood balance is what has APS dragging their feet with merging more of the High Schools. East and Ellet have fairly different demographics as well as Firestone and Buchtel. Not to mention the way that life is lived in a every day sense(Ellet has always felt like it's own little city) and I understand the difficulty in trying to combine some of these Highschools. I live within Firestone's district and most of the kids in my neighborhood attend the catholic schools or CVCA, and this is with Firestone having all the amenities and programs that it has and being the healthiest traditional City High School academically. If it's combined with Buchtel, more families will continue to send their children elsewhere.

I also must say this, for years I've seen people make this arguement from a sports perspective and I must say that I don't agree. Taking bad/medicore Div. 2/3 schools and combining them will just make them a bad Div. 1 team. Unfortunately so much of the talent is at the parochial schools or in the burbs. In a perfect world you just go to 4 high schools and everyone is fine with it but there so many idiosyncrasies that exist in a city like Akron.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Combining two piles of **** results in one larger pile.

Also, we all discuss this from an athletics perspective. Larger is not always better academically. Also, new schools do not improve the quality of the education.
 
clarkgriswold said:
Exactly. Combining two piles of **** results in one larger pile.

Also, we all discuss this from an athletics perspective. Larger is not always better academically. Also, new schools do not improve the quality of the education.
Click to expand...
not from akron area, but had to jump in on this comment.

bigger schools being better/worse academically is a very iffy subject. why? well here’s two different view points

1. larger schools are better academically, because they can offer more programs academically and offer more extra-curriculars. bigger schools have the opportunity to offer more CCP (college credit plus) classes and AP classes, which will greatly improve situations for the kids who do choose the college route. having more extracurricular activities is a benefit for kids who don’t have the chance to be apart of something they enjoy because the school doesn’t have the resources to support it.

2. larger schools are worse academically because students aren’t getting the personalized attention they need to succeed. some students need to be nurtured, as in building those personal relationships with teachers and admin in order to succeed. much harder to have that at a large school, when you’re more of a number.

growing up, my son experienced going to a large school, as well as a small private school. from a parents perspective, they’re very different, but i’m not saying one is better than the other. it’s all relative to the needs of each student/family.

in my area (Clark County) we had two high schools in the same district with shrinking enrollments. there was a levy to vote if the community wanted to build a single, combined high school, or keep the 2 schools separate. the community voted to keep the 2 schools separate.
 
fleadog101 said:
When the Voters of the Akron Public Schools voted on a School levy to fund construction of new schools, The State Facilities Commission offer was a 60/40 of with was very good offer. Upon recommendation and under the Agreement they were to have only 4 High Schools. Currently under they are over the cap and agreement of 4 High Schools. it was recommended by (TSFC) to keep the following Schools.
Firestone
Ellet
Garfield
North
Akron Public Schools are in the same situation that Massillon City Schools was a decade ago or so when they did not conform to there agreement with (TSFC) and they were forced to pay back the overages. When you take (TSFC) money they can up to 35 years tell you what to keep open and close, This will be an interesting one in how this Plays out with that governing body.
It also seems like the Akron Public Schools BOE likes to pick and choose schools as evident by who has a football field or not seems like no equal opportunity in the district
Click to expand...

The Voters of Akron never approved a levy for the construction of new schools. They actually voted it down. They didn’t want their property taxes raised for the project. (Most people don’t want their property taxes raised.) So King Don, aka Mayor Plusquellic, came up with the idea to raise the money with an additional income tax on everyone who worked within the city of Akron. Therefore a large percentage of the money generated for the school construction came from mostly people who do not live in Akron. (Sounds like taxation without representation.) The Akron voters handily passed that proposal. The new buildings would be owned by the city of Akron and called “Community Learning Centers”. Teachers were made aware that their classrooms could at any time out of school hours be used by residents of the city. Some buildings like Mason CLC were built with additional meeting rooms for a neighborhood community center. That’s how it is today. Now the Akron Schools are called CLC rather than schools. Unless of course a building got shafted when the money ran out like the 105 year old Firestone Park Elementary School. Originally slated to get a new building, they were moved to the “last phase” of the supposed five year plan. Also a contributing factor is the declining enrollment in the district. State wouldn’t justify the number of buildings for the lower enrollment. Mason had an enrollment over 450 students when their new building opened in 2005. Now it’s around 250.

Had APS had a strong BOE and Superintendent like Conrad Ott was twenty five years ago this current debacle would’t have occurred. So now the situation is as it is today.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top