News and Opinion from Sisters, Oregon
News and Opinion from Sisters, Oregon
What happens if voters turn down annexation of the site of the proposed new Sisters High School in the March 12 election? The answer is not clear.
"We're pretty sure the voters in Sisters will vote nix on the annexation because they don't want a high school, based on the numbers, but they do want a middle school," said anti-annexation activist Mel Bryan.
However, it is questionable whether the bond approved by voters could legally be used for anything other than a new high school and the middle school remodel project.
School board members have given no indication that they would consider revisiting the middle school option, which they rejected during deliberations before the bond election as being less cost-effective in the long run.
"You've got all that history of research and background and what the voters voted (for)," School Superintendent Steve Swisher said.
While they are exploring contingencies, school officials dispute the notion that most Sisters citizens oppose annexation.
"Actually, the people who are working on getting it passed have quite a different opinion," said Swisher.
School board chair Heather Wester said the options if annexation fails have not yet been formally weighed.
"We haven't had that discussion yet among the board," she said.
However, both Wester and Swisher told The Nugget there are three basic possibilities:
ï Revisit the middle school option. That would require legal counsel on what is allowed to be done with bond money. School board members have indicated that they do not consider that a viable option, because voters approved a bond for a high school.
ï Build the high school on land that is already annexed into the city limits -- i.e. where the football field is now. Fields and other facilities could be placed on the land that the county just allowed into the Sisters Urban Growth Boundary.
City of Sisters planner Neil Thompson and Department of Land Conservation and Development representative Laren Wooley have both confirmed that such a step would be legal and would probably involve a relatively straightforward land use process.
However, Swisher indicated, building on that location would require substantial changes in the site plan for the school complex.
ï Attempt to build on the proposed site without annexation. Swisher said that conversations with Deschutes County legal counsel and members of the board of commissioners lead him to believe that "there is a course of action, but it is an extensive timeline."
County community development director George Read, city planner Thompson, and DLCD's Wooley all indicated that such a move would be unusual if not unprecedented and would almost certainly wind up being a legal question.
Swisher said that building on county land is "not (in the) best interest" of the school district, because a school would probably not have access to city services and bond dollars would have to pay for septic and water infrastructure. The delay in construction -- which could be well over a year -- would also probably drive up costs, Swisher noted.
Jim Cornelius is editor in chief of The Nugget and author of “Warriors of the Wildlands: True Tales of the Frontier Partisans.” A history buff, he explores frontier history across three centuries and several continents on his podcast, The Frontier Partisans. For more information visit www.frontierpartisans.com.
Reader Comments(0)