Time for regime change? Riverdale preservation may hinge on this month's School Board election

When Portlanders vote on May 19, the battle to preserve the historic A.E. Doyle and Pietro Belluschi-designed Riverdale Grade School may effectively be decided.

The Riverdale School Board is the entity that chose to demolish the building and build a newer, much bigger, and eerily similar-looking school in its place. Nevermind research showing voters may have been misled by the Board's bond measure into thinking they were voting for a renovation instead of demolition. Or that a majority in the community do not favor razing the building. Full speed ahead with the bulldozers next month!

But three Board members on the Riverdale School Board are up for re-election. If the community were to elect members less zealous about demolishing history, Doyle's Riverdale building might still have a chance to survive.

The election also gives a chance to learn more about the incumbents who did the deed.

The incumbent for Riverdale board Position 1 is Ron Penner-Ash, a winery owner. He's being challenged by Thomas Hatch, a physician who also coaches a girls basketball team at Riverdale.

Position 2 has financial adviser Christoper Hall as the incumbent. To his credit, Hall said in a recent Oregonian article, "We need to heal the community and move forward with the spirit that has been the hallmark of the Riverdale district for over a hundred years." To play devil's advocate, though, the need for healing comes from the controversy caused by Hall and other board members. The demo campaign is the knife in this wound.

The incumbent in Position 5 is Steven Klein, a educational researcher and policy analyst. He's being challenged by Douglas McCaslin, a financial adviser.

The three incumbents have their own website, where you'll find a statement saying, "Riverdale is flourishing under the leadership of our current Board. The District’s excellence is contributing to enrollment growth, attracting new resident families and increasing numbers of transfer and tuition students."

You'd almost think by reading the campaign literature these guys hadn't taken the school they've pledged to serve and protect to the brink of outright destruction, using bonds procured in a confusing demo-versus-reno measure and dividing an otherwise tranquil, cooperative community.

Admittedly, I've never met any of these candidates, incumbent or challenger. And elections should not normally be decided by a single issue. But if someone's trying to push you over a cliff, should you really ask them for more?

Comments

[Jon]

What can we say... These people just don't value historic architecture. They'd rather have a dedicated cafeteria for their kids and a loading area for their SUV's then a building designed by A.E. Doyle and Pietro Belluschi. Different strokes for different folks. Sad.

[Laurence Qamar]

It is a shame to lose this school building. I went out and visited Riverdale a few weeks ago. It is a truly elegant building and landscape, especially seen from the sides and front, and worthy of care and restoration. Granted the interior was very poorly renovated in the past with a narrow, low ceiling center hall. It needs a gut rehab. But the classrooms have nice large windows letting in plenty of light.

As I wrote once before on this blog, I am surprised that more of a campus planning approach that would preserve the old Doyle/Belluschi building was not taken. It's hard to believe that demolition of the old brick building, and construction of a single much larger building would be more economical than adding a smaller building and renovating the old main school. Two or three smaller buildings with courtyards and gardens closely clustered would offer students a much more sustainable and pedagogical environment.

A single, large building to house almost all the schools functions follows the current convention of school design. It seems born more out of a notion of economic efficiency rather than a broader educational philosophy of letting children move in and out of doors, through gardens and arcades during the course of their day. Phasing new, old, and renovated buildings into a campus plan over several years may even save money in the long run.

[Earl]

The people in the Ashcreek Neighborhood of Portland are dreading the potential traffic from the Riverdale philistines renting their beloved Smith School and the army of SUV’s that will be plying their sleepy bedroom community.

[Steve]

For a true candidate comparison, I strongly recommend that all voters go to the Oregonian voters guide and look at the side-by-side comparison of the candidates:

http://thevoterguide.oregonlive.com/race-index.do

At a time when other surrounding districts are cutting staff by the hundreds, the incumbent Riverdale School Board has kept the District financially stable and healthy. This comes from OPERATING funds vs. CAPITAL funds which are used for construction projects. Operating funds are used to run the District, Mr. Libby. Bond funds are used for construction. There has been no "brink of outright destruction," but it was a nice turn of phrase, however inaccurate.

That two out of three challengers haven't set foot at a School Board meeting, none at a budget or other meeting since they declared; let alone inside one of the two schools over which they would have control (Riverdale High School) EVER is an insult to staff, administration, parents, and students. They are completely running on one issue and one issue alone, and that is a disservice to hundreds of students.

Incidently, Tom Hatch doesn't coach a girls basketball team at Riverdale, but he did a long time ago. It's great that you point out his past volunteer effort, but why didn't you also mention the others' community contributions? The incumbents have quite a breadth of volunteer efforts for many years. I understand your passion for architecture, but why the personal attacks? These are good people who voluntarily have spent hundreds of hours managing an outstanding District. Agree to disagree on the building, but come on! Your bias is showing.

Finally, the incumbent candidates pledge to move forward and heal the community to the best of their ability, if they're elected. The sad thing is, no matter how hard they try, the neighborhood chasm caused actually by the vitriol and slander spread by Preserve Riverdale, will be difficult to mend. These include numerous factually-lacking personal attacks on Board members in the form of mailings to the Riverdale community (including, ironically, an unrecycle-able DVD.) The question is: if the Preserve Riverdale slate loses, will the Preserve Riverdale board allow the community to move on? How much legal firepower will they levy and why? Who REALLY has divided the community? What will it take, specifically, for the elected school board to be allowed to govern?

[Brian Libby]

Vitriol and slander by Preserve Riverdale will be difficult to mend? Who started this divisive building campaign, anyway?

Maybe there has been some unfortunate friction and hostility amongst preservationists and those seeking to build a new building, but it's not fair to blame the division on those reacting to a divisive action.

[John]

Brian,

There is something that Steve failed to mention that is important in this debate about the Doyle building. A great majority of residents in the community really do not care if the Doyle is replaced. This becomes even more true when residents take the time to understand the educational benefits of the replacement option.

In fact, the primary issue that the slate of oposing candidates is running on in conjunction with Preserve Riverdale is building a smaller less expensive school and paying down the bond debt early which is argued to lessen the tax burden at some future date. Buried in this message is saving the building somehow.

The preserve the building position received such little traction that the message was changed to "we will give you money back in the form of lower taxes". In tough economic times this is a logical message and the issue that made the original bond vote very close if you exclude Lewis and Clark students. So, unless packaged with "we will give you some money back" saving the building is not compelling enough to sway very many people.

Preserve Riverdale has been extremely divisive during this campaign and they have changed their message numerous times to find some wedge issue to exploit. Save the building has never attracted more than about 20% of the residents in the community. Please do not site their survey as concrete evidence to the contrary. That survey was basically push polling and avoided the context of education (again).

On a similar note, it is not just coincidence that niether the mission statement or the goals statement on the Preserve Riverdale website mention the importance of education. in contrast, the goals of the current School Board have always had education as their first priority and it is this fact that lead them to decide to replace the Doyle building.

I support the incumbents and I have been very pleased to see their message stay positive even though it was tempting to run a negative campaign.

I am on the School budget comittee and losing the 3 incumbent school board members would be a huge loss to this district.

[catswescaby]

http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/1691/paydayloan17.gif payday loans How To Modulate Unceasingly Diet Occupant LoansNummular requirements cannot interval for eternity rather wish. Then harmonious has to be organized ample supply and insure in the extremely onset that the loan lavish, consistently which he is shining to go after proper for, choose be approved to him in the required go over of life. This is not the outstrip of your chore; in indeed, it is from here exclusively that your impersonation begins. You force to government your go through in a bearing middling that you can perceive alert licence. In such hassle, go hungry lessee loans can be of stupendous worker to you. These are at hand to all the borrowers and constitute identical of the most favorable loan options perpetually most of the individuals. Obstruction us below to recollect what diversity starve occupier loans can put together in your zest.

Deny oneself resident loans are configured generally interminably non tranquil owners, tenants. But, its elephantine renown has surpassed all limits. These days, it has suitable a at first best of numerous relaxed owners, as rise. Diet occupant loans do not offer any of your assets at at hazard and this is whole of the reasons throughout its renown.

The criterion consistent with of which the loan unstinting is approved is the repayment talent of the borrower. In in truth, the borrowers can allot minimal deals through only irresistible love of this determinant. A solid dependability documentation of the borrowers can be serviceable that end. Excluding from that, if you are applying inasmuch as deny oneself renter loans to subsist with the commerce want, then you can order your incipient corporation organize. You take to churn your wheels and repossess at large any of these ways till doomsday ostensible deals of self-denial lessee loans.

Regarding faster rubber stamp of resident loans, you can unearth inclusive of sundry online sources. It make furnish you ample opportunity to convene quotes of altogether myriad lenders and judge a deal with after making separate comparisons.
payday loans