Surveys inconclusive, board votes to wait and see in regard to future building plans

Of the more than 3,000 surveys sent out to school district patrons, only 181 were returned and the "None of the above" option received the greatest number of marks. When combined with those who completed the survey online, results were still inconclusive because it was unknown how those favoring options 1-3 would vote if the choice were simply to increase mills to build a new high school or not.
Of the more than 3,000 surveys sent out to school district patrons, only 181 were returned and the "None of the above" option received the greatest number of marks. When combined with those who completed the survey online, results were still inconclusive because it was unknown how those favoring options 1-3 would vote if the choice were simply to increase mills to build a new high school or not.

— After creating a second survey to learn the wishes of Gentry School District patrons in regard to future facility plans, making it available to patrons online and mailing out approximately 3,150 return-addressed and postage-paid survey forms, the only thing which seemed certain was apathy on the part of most school district patrons.

According to results shared with school board members on Monday, only 181 responses were received by the June 18 deadline from the thousands of postcard-sized surveys mailed out by the district in early June. Another 179 people responded by completing the online survey.

A compiled summary of the 360 responses shows 23.3 percent favored building a new intermediate school classroom building adjacent to the current main building of the intermediate school and demolishing the old wing buildings at a cost of $3-plus million and approximately 3 new mills. Building a new intermediate school behind the primary school campus at a cost of $10-plus million and approximately 6 new mills was favored by 18.6 percent. Building a new high school and moving the middle school into the current high school and the intermediate school into the existing middle school at a cost of approximately $20 million and 6 new mills was favored by 29.7 percent of respondents. The "none of the above" option was favored by 28.3 percent, or just five less votes than building a new high school.

Of those who mailed in responses, 39.8 percent favored none of the proposed options and were presumed to have wanted to do nothing which would raise taxes. Of those completing the online survey, only 16.8 percent favored doing none of the options and 36.3 percent favored building a new high school.

With approximately 6,000 eligible voters in the school district and only about 5 percent responding to the survey, no clear results were apparent and school officials and board members had cause to wonder if non-responding voters would favor doing nothing that would raise their taxes rather than choosing an option to build new facilities.

Randy Barrett, Gentry School District superintendent, told board members he didn't wish to do something which would be divisive in the community and suggested the board either do nothing until the need is more obvious or build at the current intermediate school location and keep the cost to a minimum. He also said that any millage increase now would likely prevent the board from coming back for another increase to build any new facilities for at least 10 years.

"I don't think we are ready to push for any kind of a millage increase in the September (school) election," Barrett said.

Board members expressed their frustration over the poor response to the survey and having not received any clear-cut direction in regard to the district's facilities.

"It's frustrating to send out that many surveys and receive so few responses," said Jim Barnes, school board president.

Barrett suggested the board wait and see what the Arkansas Division of Public School Academic Facilities and Transportation might do if the district were to tear down the old wing buildings at the intermediate school campus, explaining that he intended to pose that question to the division this summer. The board unanimously agreed.

"I am personally of the opinion, 'Let's wait and see what the facilities division will do if we tear down the wing buildings," Barrett said.

If the old buildings are removed and temporary classrooms are used, the division could possibly revise its evaluation of available classroom space in the district and reconsider assisting the district with costs to build a new high school or other classroom facility. The district had applied for state funding and expected it could receive as much as $6 million toward the cost of building a new high school but was denied because of space available in its existing facilities.