BOLD costs school money with failed lawsuit

Within the next few years, three schools will be closing their doors for the last time. The lawsuit against the school board which would have stopped BOLD, the district’s new financial plan, has failed, as the school district had not violated their rights in any way.

After the levy passed in 2015, stating that improvements would be made to “existing schools,” the community has seen an outcry from concerned parents and citizens, angry that schools would be closing. These concerned private citizens, a lot of them seemingly appearing out of nowhere, have decided to sue the school district for closing these schools, costing the district some of the money they were trying to save with BOLD in the first place. This takes money away from funding other programs which would benefit the students.

The school district has had trouble passing levies in the past. Community members have not wanted their taxes to increase, and for a while, cuts in elementary school arts departments has seemed imminent. The mob which has emerged now was nowhere to be found when the music, drama, and arts were being threatened.

Those directly affected by the school closing are legitimately worried about the logistics of the changes that BOLD will bring. Most kids would get moved to Rutherford or Stonebridge, which could add up to an hour onto everyday commutes.

“Withrow people go to Rutherford, and Stonebridge, and then they’d be riding the bus for a way longer time,” sophomore Brooke Aschenbrener  said. “Like, I rode the bus for five minutes. And these kids are probably gonna have to ride the bus for like, an hour, because they have to pick up more kids.”

As well, friends could be split apart. This would happen for some kids in the middle of elementary school, and could create problems for shy or uncomfortable in social situations.

“[The kids] are gonna feel displaced,” junior Emma Ecker explained, “Since they aren’t going to finish at the same school, with their friends.”

Marissa Douglas, the petitioner, was against the closings as well (both her children attend Oak Park). She filed in March. Her suit, stated simply, said that the school district, in the language on the levy, had led people to believe that all schools would be staying open.

The case itself was not thought of in terms of whether or not the district was able to close the school, as the court has no jurisdiction over that. The court ruled that the case was about whether or nod the money gained from the levy could be used to fund BOLD.

Judge John McBride denied and dismissed with prejudice the case brought forth by Douglas, due to the ambiguity on the ballot, which stated that “existing schools” would improve.

As they were well within their rights to close however many schools they deem necessary, the school won. The statutes given as her case were inapplicable to the situation, as well as the fact that the District went through all the correct channels to approve the change in plan for the bond money. However, they still have two more lawsuits on the table, both filed by 834VOICE.

The real problem to many voters after BOLD is that they don’t feel they can trust the district anymore. School board members have already been accused of violating the law requiring their meetings to be open to the public, so this was the final straw for many community members. Voters should not let this cloud their judgement on future levies, as the students will be the ones who suffer for the district’s poor judgement on the plan.