You might call it a comedy of errors. But, representing the community in an elected position is no laughing matter. The Chesterfield County School Board decided to close Chester Middle School to, as they say, relieve overcrowding at Thomas Dale High School. From a numbers angle, their decision was probably the right one, but the course they took to inform or include the public in their decision was flawed at best and arrogant and conniving at worst.

The way the board handled its decision and revealed it to the public was ham-handed and caused considerable angst for teachers and parents.

The decision to close Chester Middle School, converting it to a ninth-grade academy, was obviously made months before it leaked out. It wasn’t announced officially until many already knew it was coming. Then the timetable for public comment was only a matter of weeks, during which parents were seen almost nightly on television news crying foul.
Information on how the decision was made was unavailable, and when FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests were made for the cost analysis of the move (and other important issues), school administrators said the documents didn’t exist. The board voted on the closure as part of its Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget and input was limited.

Last month, the county’s Planning Department, in order to make sure it was doing its due diligence from a legal standpoint, asked that the School Board request substantial accord (SA). SA is a process that confirms that the action being taken conforms to the county’s comprehensive plan. Someone familiar with the public facilities part of the comp plan would have realized that the School Board action would probably be in SA with the comp plan. But the School Board decided not to apply – a sort of thumb on the nose wave at the Planning Department and Planning Commission.

Trying to do what was right, Planning Director Kirk Turner made the application for the School Board. His expertise in planning and with previous SA applications indicated to him that an SA process had to take place.

In another arrogant move, the School Board played hardball, resisting the SA process, and, according to Planning Commissioner Russell Gulley, discussed filing a lawsuit if the Planning Commission denied the SA application. Gulley said the lawsuit would have cost the School Board and the county administration a lot of money during tough economic times. Do you think that weighed on the commissioner’s decision?

Last Tuesday, the commission voted 3-2 to issue a finding of SA, although every commissioner made a statement condemning the School Board’s action or questioning its tactics. It was noted that there was no School Board representative in the room, either speaking to the SA or even watching from the sidelines.

Planning Commission Chairman William Brown chastised the School Board and reminded those in the room and watching on television that there is an election next year and that every School Board member should be voted out of office.

As this publication hits the streets, the Board of Supervisors will take up the issue. Is changing Chester Middle School from a school teaching sixth, seventh and eighth grade to one teaching ninth grade consistent with what the community wants, that is, in substantial accord with the comprehensive plan? By the letter of the law, yes, but by the spirit of community intentions, no. Like a judge in a courtroom, the Board of Supervisors will probably adhere to what they think is right by the comprehensive plan, which says the School Board can do as they please with regards to how the school is run.

And they are probably right, and by the letter of the county law, the decision to change Chester Middle into a ninth grade academy will be made without legal challenge. But in the end, that is not what is at issue here. It will be interesting to see if the School Board has the decency to show up at the Board of Supervisors meeting to at least show that they empathize with the community, because the community is not just the few people who are screaming, but the rest who watch in silent kinship.

What’s at issue here is respect. Respect for the Planning Commission, for the process and for the citizens of Chesterfield. Whether they agreed that they had to get SA or not, the School Board should have at least shown up and stated its case; after all, they were bound to get approval anyway. But now they have embarrassed themselves and, once again, Chesterfield plays the part of the backward community.

The School Board played this issue wrong from the start and, in the end, disrespected the very people who put them in office. I think that their constituents are owed an apology.