Petitioners Against Pell Design Feel 'Vindicated'

On the heels of the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) decision to deny against the design of the Pell Elementary School, Melissa Pattavina spoke for the group, saying they feel “vindicated” by the outcome. Vindicated, but no one is jumping for joy, Pattavina said.

"We feel good that we’ve been granted standing and the opportunity to have this hearing. . .  It feels really good that we sort of won this little piece and it legitimizes what we’re doing, or at least our stance," she said. 

The group has until tomorrow, June 3, to decide if they wish to pursue a hearing against the school committee. Despite the denial to dismiss, RIDE officials have noted the "slim" chance of the group winning the case. Pattavina said the group doesn't feel encouraged by the statement, "but a chance is a chance."

“Despite the Newport School Committee's contention that parents of children who will attend the Pell School lack standing to bring their concerns about the building to RIDE, we've been granted standing and the opportunity to proceed to a hearing,” Pattavina said. The group intends to instruct their lawyer on how to proceed before the deadline runs out.

The group of petitioners includes six school bond supporters and four non-supporters. While non-supporters dropped their slogan with the passage of the school bond, Pattavina said they strive to build the “best possible single school,” and want to be more involved in the process.

“Regardless of our stance prior to the election, we all have vested interest in building the best possible school for our children . . . for the community's children,” she said. “It is so important because the design should support all elements that make up an elementary school. With a new school, the design needs to be responsive to a coherent educational philosophy and support potential changes in curriculum, teachers' needs and socialization for decades.”

Common complaints from community members during the Pell school’s design process have been that residents voted to pass the bond to build the school, yet never had a chance to vote on the design of the school itself.

During a architect Laura Wernick told community members that input from the meeting would be taken into consideration during the design process.

At the same meeting, local architect shaped rendering of the school that made use of natural light, green roofs and use of recycled materials. The school department's architecture team touted their design as a more efficient use of time and space, as students would have walk more than double the length to certain rooms if the “S” design were implemented.

Pattavina said at that stage of the design process,  Asbel's presentation "opened her eyes" to the myriad of design options an elementary school could have. 

"I understand that you have to have something to show to RIDE when you’re trying to say 'We want to develop a school,'" she said. "At that time my mind was open to [the aidea that] we’re not limited to variations of the 'T' designs. . . there are endless possibilities."

After a school committee meeting on Feb. 15, the committee t for the elementary school after a public input session the previous night.

Two days later, Pattavina moderated a to brainstorm ideas as to what the new school should include.

“The compact ‘T’ shape, instead of a circular or ‘S’ shape building, has the least amount of surface area, which cuts down on construction costs," Wernick explained during the forum. “The 'T' allows for teachers to be close together. They can easily share classrooms, and grade levels can work together."

Despite the forums and workshops, Pattavina said the school committee was too slow encouraging and gathering  input.

“The fact remains that [the school committee] wasted three months after the election before seriously engaging the public,” the group stated in its objection to the motion to dismiss.

Should a hearing ensue, the group said it’s a small price to pay to maximize the $30 million bond. 

“Unfortunately, despite efforts by many knowledgeable citizens to address cost savings in design and construction, a hearing decision may be the only way to resolve issues of efficiency surrounding costs, including this unnecessary and expensive construction timeline,” Pattavina said.