Suffolk board bristles at city's intrusion in school site search

The City Council overstepped its bounds by getting involved in the process of finding a spot for a new elementary school, according to the city's School Board.

In a letter sent last week to Mayor Linda Johnson, board Chairwoman Lorraine Skeeter questioned the legality of a City Council decision to become more involved in the site selection for an elementary school. The new building, slated to be built in the southern half of the city, would replace two of the cities older and smaller elementary schools, Southwestern and Robertson.

The Virginian-Pilot obtained the letter from the school division through the Freedom of Information Act.

On a 5-3 vote June 16, the council directed the city

manager to look for possible locations for the new school. Councilmen Robert Barclay, Joseph Barlow and Leroy Bennett cast the dissenting votes.

Several School Board members - including Skeeter and Vice Chairman William Whitley - said they were blindsided by the decision.

"I can't give away the authority of the School Board," Skeeter said Monday. "I could not go along with it as presented."

The letter begins with quotes from the state constitution, state law and a state Supreme Court decision which delineate a School Board's sole authority over such matters.

Jeffrey Gardy, the council member whose comments spurred the vote, has said that the council is trying to help, not take control of the process.

The City Council hasn't discussed Skeeter's letter, Johnson said Monday. Once that happens, she'll send a response to the School Board.

"The end result is we all want the same thing," Johnson said. "We all want to build a school."

Conversations about renovating or replacing Robertson and Southwestern elementary schools have gone on for 20 years. The board and the council have gone back and forth about whether to maintain two schools or construct one to replace them.

Last year, the council urged the board to plan for one large school because it would be the most cost effective. Board members complied and have been looking for the right spot for the past six months or so.

Earlier this year, the Planning Commission and the council rejected the only site the school division submitted. They argued that the location, on Copeland Road in the city's "rural agricultural conservation area," did not fit with the city's comprehensive plan.

In her letter, Skeeter asked the council to advise the board as to whether it still supported building one replacement school or another option.

"We can do our job and we are going to do our job," board member Thelma Hinton said Monday. "We just need clarification."

Hattie Brown Garrow, (757) 222-5562, hattie.brown@pilotonline.com