Signal Mountain council members faced a barrage of tough questions and lingering concerns last week from area residents opposed to the town’s investigation into forming its own school district.
“I just wanted the council to know that there are people in the mountain, including me, who object to this idea on principle, no matter what the viability of the idea is,” said Signal Mountain resident Leslie Bell, one of the half dozen attendees to speak up during the June 12 council meeting. “Personally, I believe it’s a costly, divisive, elitist and unnecessary idea, and I would be very happy to see the council abandon it completely.”
The community response came just one week after the School System Viability Committee released its first progress report to the public, providing answers to the first batch of questions submitted to the committee by local residents. Some of the concerns were directed to the report itself, with community members voicing frustrations that questions they submitted months before had not yet been included.
Councilwoman Amy Speek, SSVC liaison, assured residents that all questions submitted would eventually be answered, explaining that the viability committee is currently working to answer the second batch of community inquiries.
“It’s just a very long list and it takes a really long time to answer the questions,” said Speek. “We want them to be as accurate as possible.”
Other attendees posed new questions they felt had not been addressed at all.
Residents from the unincorporated area of Hamilton County questioned how those outside Signal Mountain would be able to voice their opinion through a referendum if only town residents were allowed to vote.
“Something that we’re currently part of … is being subject to change, and yet we have no opportunity, no voice at all to participate in a legal, political process where our voice can be heard and our votes can be measured,” said county resident Hugh Bullock.
Hamilton County school board member Kathy Lennon, who was also in attendance, said she and others at the Hamilton County Department of Education wanted to know what the needs of Signal Mountain’s schools are.
“You can’t fix a problem unless you know what it is,” said Lennon, who represents the town. “So we would like to know what it is that we could do.”
Another issue brought up during the meeting was Mayor Chris Howley’s attendance at SSVC meetings. Howley has sat at the discussion table with committee members during several of the investigative sessions, but one resident asserted that his presence tainted what was supposed to be an unbiased process.
Town Attorney Phil Noblett said the mayor, like any citizen, is free to attend any public meeting, but Councilman Dan Landrum questioned if it was appropriate for Howley to be seated at the table, expressing comments and concerns.
Though Noblett said the SSVC could recommend the mayor no longer take part in discussions, if they so choose, Howley said he would not take part in future meetings unless Councilwoman Amy Speek, SSVC liaison, asked him to fill in during her absence, as she had in the past.
“Other than that, I will get out of the way,” he said.
In response to comments about the viability process causing rifts among the community, Landrum also suggested creating a second committee to essentially look at the viability of not creating an independent school system. The committee, he proposed, would research ways to make Signal Mountain’s schools better by working with HCDE instead of splitting away from it.
“It [would also show] the people in Hamilton County … that it’s not just that we want to break away; it’s that we want to make our schools better and we’re going to look at it as scientifically as possible to get the best amount of information,” he said.
The council members are expected to continue the discussion during their work session June 23.