Of course much of the space on this blog has been dedicated to addressing student and staff needs, and informing both through updates and announcements. Students, faculty and staff were in the direct line of fire when the whole thing went off.
Less talked about, but surely on a lot of people's minds are the secondary effects of SJ's closure. Recently, these issues have received increased attention as the community of Sitka begins to more fully appreciate the impact of losing the college. The recent decision by the Board to close Hames and the Childcare Center are two examples. Here's another:
During the most recent Sitka School Board Meeting the issue of enrollment was discussed. The district lost 52 kids this year. The cost - $386,000. 38 of 52 kids had parents either enrolled or employed at SJ who have since moved on.
The good news: the loss of kids should make the closing of the childcare center easier to bare. In all seriousness, it's a significant loss, and another tragic outcome related to the closure of SJC.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
This is so true. It leaves me with questions.
Has the Sitka School Board members wrote letters to the SJ board members?
Has the mayor of Sitka wrote a letter to the president of SJ?
Has residents of Sitka become outraged at the state of affairs at the college?
Has the head of local organizations wrote letters to the SJ board?
As an alumni I hope the answer is yes!
More people should stand up and fight to reopen the collge if that means getting ride of everyone who was at the college then so be it.
I mean everyone! (yes there are good ones)
Were they working towards a shared goal. I tend to think not.
My heart sank and continues to sink every time I hear or read a story about SJ.
It will be interesting to see (assuming the calculations could/will be done) if the city ends up losing more revenue due to the effects of the closing of SJ than they would have if they had just made the loan and then had SJ default on it down the line.
Still, 38 kids sounds pretty high to me. Where did they get that number? I can only think of one faculty member who has left town that had a school age child (Mike Kaplan). I know some students and other staff had school age children, but it's hard for me to come up with more than a dozen or so. Others either graduated or are still in town (for at least this year).
On another note, at the risk of sending these comments off in another direction, I wanted to comment on some of the things people have said in prior comments. In particular, the impression I get of the administration and board with respect to Sheldon Jackson and its closing does not match my experience.
It seems clear to me that some people had significant frustrations with the way President Dobler communicated to them (and/or received communication from them, in some cases). I won't dispute that the closing of the school could have been more graceful, though I'm not sure it could have been any easier.
However, do people remember November/December 2005? That's when, then Chairman of the Board, David Dobler came to campus. Payroll had been late at least one month, and maybe two. It was not at all clear that there would be money to make payroll the next month (it was either December or January.) There was a very real chance that the school was going to close over Christmas break. As little warning as students/staff/faculty got for the closure in June, it would have been even less at that time. Without the actions of Dobler, Shirley Holloway, and the rest of the board, the school would have shut down at that time.
I do not know what students were told, but from the time he came, up through and including this past spring, President Dobler said to faculty that it was not guaranteed that the school would remain open. He used terms like 'guardedly optimistic' when talking about efforts to secure funding and get the school turned around financially. At one of the last faculty meetings he mentioned the date with the City Assembly to request a $1 million loan. Shee Atika was providing generous terms for matching money to get this loan, and the loan was to be a demonstration of local support that would encourage others to contribute as well. At the end of the school year, the Assembly had conditionally approved that loan. With that loan and the additional money expect to follow it, there would have been the operating capital to continue the effort to gain solid financial footing for the college. (This is not to say that I blame the city for SJ's closure. It was not the city's fault that SJ was in the situation it was in, and I am assuming the assembly members felt they were deciding with the best intrests of the community in mind. Whether it turns out that way or not, who can know?)
I am a little puzzled at the comments about lying and secrecy. In my time at SJ (Fall 2002-closure), President Dobler's administration was the most open (and blunt) of any of them. When President Haaland was here, faculty were told very little. At least one faculty member was specifically told not to talk to anyone on the Board of Trustees. While I never felt like President Cleveland lied to me, he certainly talked up the most optimistic vision that he could, a vision which, in hinsight was pretty far from financial reality. Having sat through a signifincant proportion of the Board Meetings the last couple of years, my impression of the trustees is that they were very open to talking to faculty and students. Many of them ate lunches in the cafeteria and on more than one occasion I heard them comment positively about interactions with students. I will also note, that, for the most part, few people consistently attended the board meetings, even when they were open.
For me the closure of SJ was a significant shock, but not a surprise. I think it has been difficult for most all concerned, including the administration and the board. Based on what I witnessed in board meetings and other conversations with them, I really doubt any of them wanted to see the school close or took the decision lightly.
Having said all this, I definitely acknowledge that many of the employees and students who have been effected by this, have not felt treated with respect, and for many people there will be lingering and justifiable pain, anger, and frustration as a result. It would have been nice if somehow, someway, all of this could have been done more gracefully. I am not sure what, if anything, can be done about that now, however.
SJ will need much healing to be fully restored. In more ways than just money.
Money talks and BS walks... I'm still trying to sort through Thads editorial tonight... what are the advantages of having SJ continue to be a pert of this community? Like I say leave the feel good fuzzy stuff at home and lets talk BrassTacs (money). For instance what does the Hames center do for the school distric? I'm sure that there will be plenty of people to step up for the daycare but the gym...? It may be a slow death for SJ, to bad they did not sign a DNR (do not resessate)(sp)
The gym has plenty to do with the school district. For one basketball teams use the facility to practice. There is not enough gym space when boys and girls seasons are at the same time. Also the C.G. uses the pool a couple times a week for a reason. PLENTY of people use Hames. There is nothing like it in the community. (pool, gym, weights, racket ball) all is one building.) It is really to bad people have to cut Hames shot of the purpose it provides this town!
Just as long as they pay for the use instead of me.
Has anyone figured out-- in addition to the funding lost by the school-- the total economic impact of the closing of the college?
I would like to know how much the community lost in terms of salaries paid to SJ employees as well as an approximate amount that was lost that the students brought to the community for rent/food/business/etc.
It is frustrating to hear the assembly debate about the little details and not talk at all about the "big picture." Losing over 100 jobs in a community the size of Sitka is huge. Where is the responsibility they have for keeping our community economically healthy and maintaining the economic diversity?
I will be the first to say that I don't think the SJC board did a good job nor did the SJC administration, but I am so frustrated at the lack of effective leadership we have in this community with our current assembly.
I totally agree with this andrew guy!
we survived the mill closure..
Post a Comment