Opinion: Ridgefield School District created part of the capacity problem

Ridgefield resident Heidi Pozzo believes the Ridgefield School District Board of Directors made a series of decisions that impacted the capacity of the schools at a time when it was needed most

Heidi Pozzo
for Clark County Today

“How did we get here?” That was the question in a Ridgefield School District capital facility needs presentation at the School Board meeting on Nov. 28, 2023. The implication being that voters were to blame for not passing bond measures to increase needed capacity. Clearly when a bond doesn’t pass, that means funds aren’t available to build more schools. But is that the whole story?

As it turns out, the board made a series of decisions that impacted the capacity of the schools at a time when it was needed most.

By making the decision to take $15.5 million in estimated state funds to build the new middle/intermediate school, the district agreed that it would no longer use the old View Ridge Middle School for K-12 purposes. That means that capacity for 400+ students, between permanent and portable classrooms per the 2015 Capital Facility Plan, was eliminated.

At a time of known capacity shortage, a trade off analysis between taking $15.5 million in state funds and eliminating capacity or forgoing the funds and keeping the capacity in place would lead to one answer. Keep the capacity because it is more expensive to build a new school. But the Board chose not to. And while the District ultimately received $3.3 million more in state funds, the analysis would still result in the same answer.

During the same period, the district and the city of Ridgefield worked collaboratively to develop the Ridgefield Outdoor Recreation Center (RORC), including the placement of the facility. The District provided a roughly 30 acre parcel of land that the RORC sits on.

The RORC was placed on the prime portions of land, while the new middle/intermediate school were placed between two wetland areas. Through this exercise, a portion of the school and parking areas were placed on land owned by the city. As a result, the city and the district swapped parcels of land.

Because of the placement of the building between two wetlands and the construction of the RORC on the district owned land, the ability to procure and place portables to accommodate enrollment growth was precluded.

Further complicating the situation is the design of the 148,932 sq. ft. middle/intermediate school itself. The district designed the 43 teaching station school with dedicated spaces for activities such as the wrestling room and the performing arts black box theater. As a result, the use of those activity spaces as classrooms has garnered criticism.

The district’s plan for middle/intermediate growth at the time was to build another similar school for 1,000-plus students. So, with no flex capacity at the old school, dedicated spaces that are not easily converted to class space at the new school and no ability to add portable capacity at the new school, the District left as its only option building a new school for a capacity of 1,000-plus..

From a strategic perspective, it is unusual to have as the only option the need to double capacity through building a new school.

There was a plan in 2012 to build a new high school on the 50 acre parcel occupied by the RORC and View Ridge/Sunset Ridge and convert the high school into a middle school. That would have provided significantly more flexible capacity at a lower cost as well. That plan was scrapped for what we have today.

Yes, there is an impact from new bonds not being voted through. The District has also contributed to the problem by its decisions and not providing a stair step approach to addressing capacity issues.

Heidi Pozzo has been a Ridgefield resident for 16 years. She is a concerned citizen who would like students to get a good education and thinks we can do it in a more cost-effective way.