On Feb. 24, 2009, a majority of the Loudoun County School Board authorized a contract to purchase 170 acres of land from two property owners at a total cost $11.3 million, and did so after a majority of the members of Loudoun County Board of Supervisors signaled their support for the three school project.
Adjacent property owners have launched a small but formidable and seemingly effective opposition to the project—notably arguing against the costs, the size of the three-school campus and the location. Nothing has changed since the Feb. 17 meeting that LCPS staff held with Loudoun supervisors–but supervisor support for the project has certainly changed.
The only change in the LCPS contract for the Wheatland property has been a reduction in the cost to the county. Sam Cangiano, owner of the larger of the two “Wheatland” parcels—160 of the 170 acres–agreed to lower the contract price by $2.3 million, from $9.9 million to $7.6 million–or from $62,031 per acre to $47,500 per acre. According to LCPS, the Cangiano property had originally been offered to the LCPS for $15 million.
The Wheatlands Alliance, formed by area farmers and citizens against the three-school Wheatland site remain opposed, despite the drop in price for the property. As in a replay of last year’s Lenah Run school site process–which also included a contract price reduction when the project ran into opposition–LCPS has again been faulted for not securing the lower contract price at the onset of negotiations.
So, while the locations have changed, the private property owners–the sellers–have changed, and once again adjacent and nearby (NIMBY) property owners again oppose this most recent LCPS school(s) project, the players on the government side remain the same–nine school board members and nine Loudoun County supervisors.
Supervisor Lori Waters (R-Broad Run) expressed her concerns regarding the contract for the Wheatlands when LCPS staff briefed supervisors in February on the school site. Waters said she was not one, but acknowledged there was a “majority” of supervisors who expressed their support for the Wheatlands school site and indicated the school board should proceed to contract.
Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio, (R-Sterling) confirmed he was one among a majority of supervisors at the February Wheatlands briefing who supported the LCPS contract for the three school site in western Loudoun. At least one supervisor who advised support for Wheatlands in February has reportedly changed their mind and now oppose the project.
The Project
LCPS seeks to build three schools on “Wheatlands,” the western Loudoun site: ES-25, an 875-student elementary school scheduled to open in 2016; MS-10, a 1,350-student middle school scheduled to open in 2017, and HS-10, a 1,800-student high school, not included in the current School Board Capital Improvement Program. The Wheatlands project would co-locate the three schools on land along Route 287 north of Route 9.
What Happened
A Joint Committee comprised of supervisors and School Board members has been meeting for more than a year in an effort to foster better communication between the two governing bodies, and a better understanding of each board’s duties and obligations. Progress has certainly been made, but evidently not in one of the major areas of concern, complaints and commingling of authority: land, and particularly school site acquisition.
The School Board began its review of a western Loudoun site for schools and provided direction to LCPS staff beginning with an Oct. 28, 2008 meeting, and in meetings on Nov. 11, 2008, Jan. 13, 2009 and Feb. 24, 2009, according to LCPS documents. Meetings with the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors regarding “review and direction” of site selection of the western Loudoun schools began with a Nov. 18, 2008 meeting, followed by a Jan. 21, 2009 meeting and a final Feb. 17, 2009 meeting.
At their last meeting with supervisors on Feb. 17, a majority of the supervisors signaled support for the project, and on Feb. 24, a majority of the School Board authorized the contract for Wheatland schools site.
The LCPS review of the western Loudoun school sites began before members of the Joint Committee agreed to more communication and briefings for supervisors on land acquisitions and contract, but in this case, the School Board did not act without seeking and receiving direction from supervisors.
What Next?
While everyone awaits the School Board’s reaction to this latest hurdle–and what some School Board members surely must see as another obstacle in their efforts to provide schools–everyone is also waiting for a better method or new arrangement to accomplish just that.
Supervisors, not School Board members, continue to hold the purse strings, whether it is for new school construction, school site acquisition, or school operating budget. It now seems more likely supervisors will take control of the school site acquisition process, including negotiations and more.
However, merely a change in the players does not guarantee success; substituting supervisors for School Board members does not guarantee that county residents will get the best-negotiated price for the best site in the best location–and without opposition.
The recent example is the acquisition of the Fields Farm property in Purcellville for the Woodgrove High School, which was purchased by the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors – not the School Board. Gaining approval from the Town of Purcellville to construct a much-needed high school to relieve the overcrowding at Loudoun Valley High School was difficult and costly for the county. Woodgrove is slated to open in 2010 – after much litigation, and more than eight years after the process began.
The Loudoun County School Board’s regular fourth Tuesday meeting is scheduled for May 26, and the Wheatlands project is expected to be a subject of discussion. School Board member Bob Ohneiser (Broad Run) cast the lone vote in opposition to the Wheatland contract. Ohneiser continues to call for money to be spent for purchase of sites and construction of schools in the Ashburn area, as opposed to using monies to purchase land for schools not yet needed.
Yet, School Board member Jennifer Bergel (Catoctin) argued for the Wheatlands contract and the fiscal responsibility in securing land now for future schools. Bergel spoke at length at the last school board meeting regarding her support for Wheatlands at the original contract price.
“Though the price is a concern addressed by many, I saw it as justified because it allows land banking for future schools needed by a geographic region,” said Bergel. “Furthermore, it is on the major transportation artery for the region. Purchasing now as opposed to later should save money – land is of limited availability. The voters have approved the acquisition of land for these future schools.”
Bergel also stated, “I have asked for the contract to be amended if possible. I am hopeful that water tests can go through the summer and the home can be moved.” Bergel referenced the fate of an older structure on the property and opponents calls for more time for water and well testing, as well as a possible reduction in the contract price.
Meanwhile, work continues on sites for both schools and county services. In April, the Joint Committee agreed to establish a subcommittee to “comprehensively examine any further 10-year capital facilities school construction needs in the three central sub areas of the county.” A subcommittee chaired by Supervisor Stevens Miller (D- Dulles) met last week and received an initial inventory of vacant land – a list of possible properties –although no environmental or other advanced testing was conducted.
The subcommittee is charged with issuing a report and recommendations on its findings by October, as part of the Loudoun’s 10-year Capital Needs Assessment process. Supervisor Miller has also indicated he expects to offer a proposal for modifying the school site acquisition process, in order to address concerns evidenced in both the Lenah and Wheatlands efforts.
%7Cutmcsr%3D(direct)%7Cutmcmd%3D(none)%3B%2B__utmv%3D57507529.-%3B)
Gee...how could we get public support for school sites....what COULD we do? What party needs to be at the table at the beginning of the process? I can't for the LIFE of me figure this one out...