I support the recall effort wholeheartedly. With our shrinking population, our aging population, and the predicted budget deficit of $6.1 million this fall (per the Board), the Board of Education should prove fiscal responsibility and live within the budget given them by a generous taxpayer base. The recent Newsweek ranking proves, Bloomfield students are doing well. We don't need a $79 million tax bond with interest, amounting to over $100million for an over the top high school. 12,000 people voted NO to an almost identical ballot proposal in Nov.2010 and to a larger bond in 2007. Just 4 years ago, some of our current trustees swore that the best thing for our community was two, brand new high schools for $121 million! Wouldn't that have been a mistake! We in Bloomfield should learn from what happened to Howell, MI, Walled Lake, MI and to a town in California, which spent $100 million on a new school and have it padlocked because they can't afford to open it! We disagree on what is best but I think people like Bloomfield 20/20 members who publicly stand up for what they believe, with growing membership, by the way, are the community members who really care for what will happen to our community.

As a 47 year resident, a Way, BH, Andover grad, and with 2 daughters in the district, I have never seen things this bad. It was bad in the 70s, but this time it is mean, and ugly. This fight has been going on for a decade now. We can not afford 2 full staffs for 2 high schools. I believe the real problem is a flawed facilities plan that is based on the presumption that we have to have a new high school. Yes Andover and Lahser are in need of renovation. I believe there are a number of alternatives that I don’t think have never been considered, or if they were, never presented to the community. The high school constraint has limited our choices. Frankly, we are the laughing stock of the state. We have a bunch of people, running around like spoiled children, a school board that, despite there assurances that they don't, vote with the administration every time, unanimously; and an administration that is unresponsive to the wishes of the community. It is time to put these petty differences to rest and get back to educating our kids. Otherwise, “Comprehensive education at its finest” will just be another empty marketing slogan. BTW, I am a young parent and I did vote. You can put a silk dress on a pig, but it is still a pig. The best teachers and a strong comprehensive curriculum will make us competitive, not fancy new buildings. You don't see Cranbrook or Country Day tearing down their buildings. Ironically, they make due with our old buildings.

One other point I want to make about facilities and our “competition”. Sacred Heart is using the same building that they have always used, St Hugo is using the same building they have always used, U of D Jesuit, is using the same buildings they have always used, Country Day is using their old building plus two buildings they bought from Birmingham, an elementary and middle school. Cranbrook and Kingswood are using their facilities that they have always used and purchased Vaughn from us. Roper is using their buildings, Brother Rice and Marian, are both using the same old buildings they have used. Birmingham is making due with Seaholm. Trust me when I say, a new high school was more about one upping Walled Lake Northern more then anything else. Yes some of these buildings have been renovated, which I totally support. Yet every one of these schools are on par or higher then Bloomfield. The International Academy, #2 in the country, is using one of our old elementary schools. There is no correlation between having a new building and have superior academic achievement. If that was true then Harvard, Yale, Cornell, and all the other Ivy Leagues schools, not to mention their prep schools like Andover in MA, better start building new facilities soon cause their days are number in those old stuffy halls.

Oh my, where to begin! The recall is ridiculous. Board members voting in the best interests of the students instead of the interests of 20/20 is NOT a valid reason for recall.
Now, to answer some of the other comments...
First of all, seniors are not a monolithic group. I am a senior and have been voting for school improvement all my life. There are many seniors who are interested & involved, who want the best facilities as well as the most comprehensive education possible for present and future generations. Many of us want the Board not to build a 70% new single high school, but a 100% new high school. The difference in our tax bill between the two is not worth being stuck with 30% of a building full of inadequacies.
Secondly, all the private schools mentioned who use older buildings do not offer the comprehensive curriculum that the BH schools do. The International Academy deserves better; they succeed IN SPITE of their building. Most of us want kids to have opportunities to attend school in the best facility we can provide, so they do not have to contend with less than desirable circumstances. Birmingham totally rebuilt/modernized Seaholm HS (with the exception of one small area, "B" building). And Cranbrook/Kingswood just spent millions constructing a modern, new middle school for their girls.
Thirdly, due to decreasing enrollment, in order to maintain a comprehensive curriculum & be economically responsible, we need a single high school. End of story.

Yes, of course this school board must be recalled.
Mostly because they have ignored the voters after THEY scheduled a vote asking if we want to fund a consolidated high school. the taxpayers of Bloomfield Hills said NO>

Nw, the board wants to begin building the high school without having the funds to complete their plan!
Who does that?

Besides, we gave them money to maintain and repair our schools through the sinking fund- $50 million, I believe. If that is the money they are planning to use to build the new high school, how will they fund maintaining the elementary and middles schools in the district?
I can't be the only one concerned about that.

It seems they will get the high school half built and then come to the taxpayers asking for money to finish the job. We've already said NO... they should maintain and repair the existing buildings as voters indicated they wanted TWICE!

I find it totally irresponsible and question the legality of withholding Sinking Funds from that which they were intended, the upkeep of ALL the Bloomfield Schools. The School Board has more than once alluded to those funds being used to initiate the construction of the one new high school. Now with the plan to split the students between 2 schools, where is the cost savings re: principals and assistant principals? Which positions will you be eliminating?

As an addendum- in response to Ann Bieneman's comment about the lack of money invested in the Bloomfield Schools. The money is there and has always been there- our school board chose NOT to make those funds available for their intended purpose- the upkeep of our schools.

I completely support the recall. This school board votes in unison on everything like they are all conjoined at the hip. Don't any of them ever dissent? I have watched or attended several board meetings and many of them don't even ask questions about multi million dollar spending plans. Bloomfield school district taxpayers are extremely generous to the tune of allowing our school system to spend approx. $22000. per student. If you can't educate and and maintain buildings with that they should resign.....that is what the recall will accomplish. Where do I sign? This board spits in the eye of every taxpayer in this district with their lockstep decisions defying the outcome of every ballot proposal that told them what the community wants. This consolidation plan is a ruse in my opinion to bleed more money from the taxpayers. $22000 per student??? .......this school board can't get it's act together? It's time to move on.

THE WHOLE ISSUE OF BUILDING A NEW HIGH SCHOOL WOULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED IF EVERY HOUSEHOLD IN OUR DISTRICT WOULD HAVE PAID THE SAME LEVY. IF THE "SUPPLEMENTAL" PART OF THE PROPERTY TAXES WOULD HAVE BEEN PAID BY PARENTS WHO HAVE CHILDREN AT SCHOOL. YOUNG COUPLES WHO LIVE IN INEXPENSIVE HOMES WANT THE COMMUNITY TO SUBSIDIZE THEM. THIS WAS ALWAYS THE ISSUE--GET SOMETHING FOR NOTHING WITH OTHER PEOPLES MONEY. IF YOU YES PEOPLE WANT A TAJ MAHAL YOU, ONLY YOU MUST PAY FOR IT.

Ms. Bieneman of course we need to update our facilities, just as Cranbrook and DCD have done over the years. But DCD bought the middle school on Maple about 30 years ago, and didn’t make any updates for years. Yes Cranbrook has a new pool and it is great. Cranbrook has 2 gyms, neither one has changed in 50 years. The locker rooms haven’t changed since I went to summer camp there in the 70s. The picture hanging over the exit is the same picture of Plimpton that has been there since he wrote Paper Lion. It still smells the same. Andover got a major overhaul in the arts wing in the late 70s/early 80s. We got the new cafeteria. Once we saw the new theater everyone was yelling that the theater at Lahser was so bad. Then Lahser got a new theater and everyone is saying look how bad Andover is. Andover got a new pool, Lahser has the same pool. West Hills got the field house. No one is saying we need to keep things static and make no improvements. We can do a lot with the facilities we have. I support updates like what Seaholm did and I suspect that many in the community will as well. I can support combining the high schools into one, but I beleive that all of our problems are because we do not have a comprehensive facilites plan that looks at all available alternatives.

To R Gibson, if I have proved your point in your mind, it certainly is not the main point of the discussion of the future. Just because IA is successful in a woefully inadequate building does not mean that we want to saddle our future students with similar sub par buildings. The whole idea of keeping BH an outstanding district means that we want to IMPROVE the environment in which our students learn, not confine them to outmoded and inefficient places of learning. Because our enrollment is such that two small high schools are no longer economically or educationally feasible, we must consolidate into one high school. Neither Andover or Lahser is appropriate for the future, nor is either large enough to house the combined student bodies at present, hence we need a new facility that will provide great support for a comprehensive 21st century education AND ensure that our community property values and the appeal of this district to new residents will remain high.

Furthermore, You said ”The whole idea of keeping BH an outstanding district means that we want to IMPROVE the environment in which our students learn, not confine them to outmoded and inefficient places of learning.” I agree. Does that mean that the rest of the buildings can all fall apart but as long as we have a shiny new high school? What about the elementary buildings, aren’t they important? What about the middle schools, BH is just as old as Andover is, what should be do about that? If we want the best facilities for our kids to be educated in then we need a comprehensive facilities plan that is not constrained by one item. Following your logic we should have kept Pine Lake open and closed Lone Pine. Pine Lake is bigger, it is a nicer building, it has a front office for security, the access and egress is better, the classrooms are bigger and nicer, the playground is reletively flat and the most important thing is lots and lots of natural light. But that isn’t how the administration looked at it. They said, well we can sell Pine Lake easier than we can Lone Pine, and we have the Blooming Tots addition to Lone Pine which we owe money on so we will just close Pine Lake. But Lone Pine can’t hold all those kids, so then they put the 4 and 5th graders at West Hills when they should be in an elementary environment. Why? Not because the best facility was chosen, but because it was about the money.

There were a lot of considerations that went into the decision to close PIne Lake and Hickory Grove. All our elementary schools are old & need renovation,. Lone Pine and Fox Hills are the newest ones. Unfortunately those two were also built under the CPC plan, with all open spaces that have now been enclosed...hence the windowless rooms at Lone Pine. If I had my "druthers" Booth, Lone Pine, Pine Lake, Eastover & Fox Hills would all be sold; West Hills would become a west side elementary school, East Hills would become an east side elementary school, Conant and Hickory Grove would also be elementary schools. BHMS and Lahser would serve as the middle schools, with IA also residing at Lahser; Traub (the present IA) would become the administration building. But that is sheer fantasy, because the folks who want small neighborhood schools would never go along with such a plan, and for sure there is insufficient $$ for renovation to embark on such a radical idea. Once upon a time Birmingham had 2 high schools, 5 middle schools and 17 elementary schools. Today I believe they have 2 high schools, 2 middle schools, one 3-8 magnet school and 8 elementary schools. An additional elementary is their senior center. One of the present elementary schools was once a middle school. So, could BH exist with 1 high school, 2 middle schools, 4 elementary schools? Probably not. Most of the parents would be in revolt over such heresy. But yes, we DO need to fix the other old schools.