As most folks know, spring in Montana is unpredictable and we are now officially into spring by a couple of weeks. One aspect of spring in Great Falls that is almost always predictable is the annual Great Falls Public School District levy. The District rarely misses the opportunity come springtime to bemoan the shortage of funds it needs to properly educate the city’s children. Yes, you’ve heard that it is “for the kids” repeatedly. Is it really?
This year the levy request is for $1,349,048, of which our sources tell us that approximately $500,000 is for contractual obligation increases in District health insurance premiums. The District’s levy presentation provides the math for the Health insurance increases as follows:
If $500,000 is the real number, then have the health insurance premiums increased more than 1%? Probably.
According to the Time.com, Money website – “Preliminary analysis suggests some of the most popular plans could see double-digit premium increases. Health care consulting firm Avalere analyzed initial rate estimates from eight states and found that premiums for “silver” plans (the most popular plans) are rising 18% next year, after a 12% increase this year.”
This isn’t the first time that premiums for District employees have increased, and it will likely not be the last time. In other words, the District has a chronic problem without a solution other than to ask for operational increases every year. When school levies fail, the narrative from the District that the taxpayers are failing the education of our children simply isn’t true and maybe the District administration is the responsible party.
“This isn’t the first time that premiums for District employees have increased, and it will likely not be the last time. In other words, the District has a chronic problem without a solution other than to ask for operational increases every year. When school levies fail, the narrative from the District that the taxpayers are failing the education of our children simply isn’t true and maybe the District administration is the responsible party.”
How can the District’s administrators fail to recognize the fact that Health Insurance premiums will most certainly rise at the time when they are negotiating union contracts? Isn’t that what you call negotiating in bad faith? Does the teacher’s union feel that if the levy fails and several teachers and staff are terminated that the much larger number of teachers and staff will benefit through contractual obligations already incurred?
We should also ask if six-figure salary administrators can afford to pay more for their health insurance premiums. Taxpayers generally receive no help when their premiums go up.
E-City Beat will publish more information concerning the upcoming levy vote, so stayed tuned and most importantly, tell us how you feel.
THE VISIT, THE MIDDLE YEARS, THREE MORE ADDITIONS, THE MONEY, AND THE ARCHITECTS DESIGNS
When in 10th grade there was a NOTABLE EVENT at Great Falls High School, the City, the State, and the Nation. On Thursday, September 26, 1963, more than 20,000 people crowded into Memorial Stadium to listen to a speech about conservation by President John F. Kennedy. I was fortunate to see JFK get off his plane at the Airport and also along his route for his speech at the Memorial Stadium. That day I left school on the seat of my dirt bike, raced to the Gore Hill trails I help brake in, spun the tire up the hill, peered through the airport chain link fence, and hopped back on the bike to parallel his route to the stadium. I was too late to sit in the stadium so I listened as I hung out next to the flag while enjoying the then, park-like quadrangle.
This is the fourth in a series of informational articles that focus primarily on the architectural history of Great Falls High School and campus. The information has been gathered from available records. Missing information may be confirmed upon further research. I will be interested in obtaining that information from you if known.
Part Three talked about the evolution of the campus between when built in 1930 to when facilities were constructed during 1997. During that period there were three major additions and a total window replacement at the original building. All design teams have been led by talented Great Falls companies. Construction had primarily been done by local contraction teams.
Part 4 summarizes major construction on the campus from 1997 to when the last major construction was completed in 1998.
The fourth major addition to the original historic structure was the 1998, 50’ x 110’ Wrestling Addition connected to the north elevation of the original Gymnasium. It was designed by local firm, Davidson – Kuhr Architects. The $300,000 cost of construction was a donation from local attorney Zander Blewett and his wife Andy. The donation was conditioned upon the selection of the architectural firm Davidson – Kuhr. Excavation. Concrete work was donated by Robert McIntyre and United Materials of Great Falls. The Wrestling Addition’s designers attempted to incorporate a simplified interpretation of Collegiate Gothic Revival elements of original school, such as the pilaster design and belt-course of the original school.
Remarkably, Great Falls High School, including the first and second additions, has retained its original interior and exterior finishes and detailing with the exception of the later windows replacement to a Kalwall insulated panel system. Oak trim and cabinetry, plaster ceilings and walls terrazzo and hard wood floors, and many original lighting fixtures are in excellent condition after many years dedicated maintenance. Once completed, the ongoing historical window replacement program should restore the exterior of the building. That will be explained in PART 5.
Backtracking to major additions to the GFHS campus, in 1979 the school district built the stand-alone Bison Fieldhouse south of 4th Ave and disconnected from the original building. It was built as a modern sports facility with 3,600-seat basketball arena, Olympic-size swimming pool, classrooms, weight-training room, boys and girls locker rooms, offices, sports training and conditioning rooms, and parking lot. Local architectural firm, R. Terry Johnson Architects, was the architect of record. Philip M. Faccenda (GFHS 1965) joined the firm in 1978 as design architect. The original design called for a brick exterior and a connector to the main campus. Budget was not adequate so both were cut from program.
In 1995, the Great Falls Public Schools commissioned a study which looked at ways to alleviate overcrowding at GFHS as well as make the school handicapped compliant. The study recommended building an addition to house classrooms and the construction of an elevator in the main building to give students access to science laboratory space on the structure’s second and third floors. The classroom addition to Bison Fieldhouse (known as “South Campus”) opened in the summer of 1998.[10][25] The elevator began operation the same year.
To preserve and recognize the school, during 2011 when the school district started considering their next major project, two GFHS alumni and professional architects, Philip M. Faccenda (GFHS 1965) and Darrell Swanson (GFHS 1965) founded the independent nonprofit Great Falls High School Heritage Foundation. During 2013, as the first project of the organization, they volunteered their time to prepare the sixty-page submittal and successfully placed the original building and campus on the National Register of Historic Places.
PARTS 1 to 4 have explained the development past process and construction at the campus. These projects were successfully funded and managed by the school districted. Design teams were headed by established and talented local architects, engineers, and contractors. It was the basic development process that has not changed over the years. As we approach the $38M major expansion at GFHS this year, Part 5 will discuss the later years. It will talk about the next PART of the GFHS legacy.
Please stay tuned.
Summarized by Darrell A. Swanson
GFHS Class of 1965, Architect/Planner, Tax Payer, Citizen
He can be reached at darrells@swansonarchitects.com or 406.599.6910
THE MIDDLE YEARS 1930 – 1997, THREE ADDITIONS, THE MONEY, AND THE ARCHITECT’S DESIGNS
This is the third in a series of informational articles that focus primarily on the architectural history of Great Falls High School and campus. The information has been gathered from available records. Missing information may be confirmed upon further research. I will be interested in obtaining that information from you if known.
In a few cases, such as what I stated in PART TWO, are as I remember. I am interested in any suggested corrections or happy personal tidbits that expand the history.
Another tidbit from me is that I sincerely liked going to school at GFHS for the three years when it was a grade 10 – 12 high school with 3,000 students. Well, that three years is minus one day when asked by my favorite teacher to leave because my shirt was not tucked in. (At least that is the way I remember it). No matter, I was very anxious to return as soon as the next school bell rang because my previous work day started a bit too early (and my dirt bike did not start) when my Dad put a 16-pound sledge hammer in my hand and told me to break a hole in a concrete wall where he needed an opening for a stair. I was easily convinced that school lunch and drafting class was a much better career builder.
Part Two explained the funding, design. and construction process for the original GFHS building and Memorial Stadium through 1930 when they were built. It was designed to serve 1900 students and was constructed for $1.15 million. ($526 per student). It was an impressive build during the start of the depression and greatly helped the regional economy. A talented team of Great Falls architects and civil engineers were hired who then collaborated with a Minneapolis architectural firm to augment the team. Many construction companies and craftsmen were kept busy on the 1 ½ year construction.
Part Three will talk about the evolution of the campus between when built in 1930 to the facilities that were constructed during 1997. During that period there have been three major additions and window replacement to the original building.
“Part Three will talk about the evolution of the campus between when built in 1930 to the facilities that were constructed during 1997. During that period there have been three major additions and window replacement to the original building.”
The first major project began in 1954 when a second floor was added to the southeast corner of the school above the Art, Journalism and Machine Shop classrooms to accommodate the expanded choir, orchestra and band facilities by the local architectural firm of McIver, Hess & Haugsjaa established in 1953 (9). Angus Vaughn McIver, born in Great Falls, MT in1892, was a 1910 graduate of Great Falls High School and the University of Michigan, whose Montana architectural license number was “6” and was issued in 1918, one year after Montana licensing began. William J. Hess, born in 1914, was a graduate of Montana State College earning a B.S. architectural degree in 1937. Knute S. Haugsjaa, born in 1915, was a graduate of North Dakota State College with a B.S. architectural degree in 1939. The second-floor addition was a congruent design and featured the reuse of original parapet caps and crenels from the existing first floor. Construction contracts were awarded in March of 1954 and work was completed later that year at a cost of $110,400. (14)
The second major project was the $215,000 three-story addition designed in 1963 by McIver and Hess Architects. It is located at the east termination of vertical East-West “T” leg adjacent to 20th Street and created classroom space on the first floor for Homemaking, Commercial, and History, on the second floor for the Library, and on the third floor for Chemistry and Biology. The architect’s adherence to original detailing was exacting, well executed and included several of the brick bonds used on the original structure. The addition created a new “Main Entrance” to the school along the originally established east – west axis. (15)
The original windows were a combination of 12/12 and 9/9 wood double-hung sash. The original wood window frames were found to be rotted through, allowing cold air to enter the building. (16) Beginning in 1966 and programmed as a five-year project, the windows were replaced with Kalwall insulated translucent panels and a single aluminum tempered glass operating light. Budget was $100,000. The windows substantially reduced the transparency and natural light to all rooms of the school.
The third addition, designed in 1975 by the local firm of Davidson – Kuhr Architects, is a nondescript 120’ x 100’ two – story independently sited masonry Industrial Arts building located between the southwest side of the school and Memorial Stadium. It is connected to the school via an enclosed sky bridge from the school’s main east – west hallway adjacent to the Auditorium foyer. When built, the building effectively closed the north-south open commons area in the middle of the campus between 2nd Ave South and 5th Ave. South that included flag court, west side of old school building, senior stair, stadium, field house, and south campus.
Part 4 will discuss the years from the fourth major addition to when the last major work on the campus was completed. Please stay tuned.
Summarized by Darrell A. Swanson
GFHS Class of 1965, Architect/Planner, Tax Payer, Citizen He can be reached at darrells@swansonarchitects.com or 406.599.6910
9 National Park Service 10 “Great Falls High School.” Great Falls High School Bison Football. No date. Accessed 2011-05-06.
14 Wilmot, Paul. “1920s Proved to Be Eventful in Great Falls, Around Region.” Great Falls Tribune. April 11, 2010.
15 Wilmot, Paula. “See How You Fared in Our Area History Quiz of the 1930s.” Great Falls Tribune. May 9, 2010. 16″Find Giant Powder Hidden in Manhole.” Associated Press. August 6, 1929.
24 Prep Notebook.” Great Falls Tribune. April 15, 2003. 25 Les Johnson o/b/o Amanda Johnson v. Great Falls Public Schools. Final Order. HRC Case No. 9504007138. Human Rights Commission of the State of Montana. September 10, 1998, p. 5-6. Accessed 2011-05-06.
In the midst of a conflicts of interest plague, Great Falls seems relegated to loser out status in the tournament of economic development in our state.
Why has Great Falls lost population, manufacturing jobs and a brighter outlook for the future? Certainly, Great Falls Development Authority chief Brett Doney’s stated solution to the problem: “we must recruit and retain young talent” is true. But how do we accomplish this feat?
I think we would all recognize that we cannot win without a team effort and without a level playing field.
When arbiters and decision makers in in our City Commission and School District willfully allow themselves to determine the direction of the City based upon relationships, bias, and mediocrity, they establish a culture that undermines innovation and makes it impossible to establish an environment that attracts and retains talent. In other words, talent attracts talent, opportunity attracts innovation, and no amount of open space, urban trails, great schools, or recreational opportunities can supply sufficient motivation for new talent to immigrate to, return to, or to stay in Great Falls.
“In other words, talent attracts talent, opportunity attracts innovation, and no amount of open space, urban trails, great schools, or recreational opportunities can supply sufficient motivation for new talent to immigrate to, return to, or to stay in Great Falls.”
The truth is that Great Falls was built and succeeded based upon innovation and its decline can only be reversed with a new focus on innovation. If founder Paris Gibson returned to Great Falls, he would surely say that his successors have “dropped the ball”.
FACCENDA ARCHITECTS | PLANNERS
It is interesting to note that when you ask young people what they would like to see happen in Great Falls they often say “more big-name concerts and events”. We are lacking a venue that can compete with the Billings Metra for concerts and events. We lose double A tournaments to the Metra. We lose conventions to the Metra. We lose big-name concerts to the Metra. We lose national political events and rallies to the Metra. Great Falls is Loser Out and we are falling further and further behind Billings, Bozeman, Missoula, Kalispell, and Helena.
FACCENDA ARCHITECTS | PLANNERS
If we want to get back in the game we need to build an events venue that will seat more than the 12,500 seat Metra, say 25,000 seats. A venue that would accommodate multiple sports and events. A venue that is sensitive to our climate. A venue that is the best in Montana.
This is the second in a series of informational articles that will focus primarily on the architectural history of Great Falls High School. The information has been gathered from available records.
In a few cases, such as what I stated in PART ONE about the school’s student population in 1965 when I graduated, is as I remember and lived it. I am interested in any suggested corrections or happy personal tidbits that expand the history. One of many happy tidbits in my case, I enjoyed the first (of three) shifts best, thereby freeing my time at noon each day for work and my chosen sport, dirt bikes. Some may remember my 20th street wheelies as I celebrated another day of freedom after my last class.
DRAWING BY ARCHITECTS GEORGE W. BIRD, JOHANNES VAN TEYLINGEN, ERNEST CROFT, AND FRANCIS C. BOERNER-1928
DRAWING BY ARCHITECTS GEORGE W. BIRD, JOHANNES VAN TEYLINGEN, ERNEST CROFT, AND FRANCIS C. BOERNER-1928
In 1927, the Great Falls Public School system was unsuccessful in gaining voter approval to issue bonds to build a new high school, but a second try in 1928 was approved. Construction began on the landmark $1 million School in 1928 and was completed on July 21, 1930 at a final cost of $1.15 million. The original Great Falls High School campus is located on four city blocks between 2nd and 4th Avenues South and between 18th and 20th Streets South to the East of the Original Townsite of the expanding City of Great Falls.
The design of the new Great Falls High School was a collaborative effort by the Great Falls architectural firm of George W. Bird and Johannes Van Teylingen and the Minneapolis, Minnesota firm of Ernest Croft and Francis C. Boerner. Van Teylingen was one of the most prominent architects in Montana at the time and had designed the Masonic Temple in Great Falls, the Great Falls Civic Center and Turner Hall on the campus of the University of Montana. George W. Bird was by training a civil engineer and was hired as the first City Engineer of Great Falls by Mayor Paris Gibson at the suggestion of James Hill to lay out the new city’s streets, parks and boulevards.
George W. Bird was born on February 4, 1861 and was educated in Philadelphia. He arrived at the confluence of the Missouri and Sun rivers by stage coach in 1882. Eventually, Bird associated himself with Jonannes Van Teylingen, a young native Hollander. The partnership produced such Great Falls buildings as the Emerson and Washington schools, the original Roosevelt School, the Largent School which was originally designed as a junior high, and the Christian, St John’s Lutheran, and First Baptist churches, as well as many other projects. (2)
Van Teylingen and Bird’s association on Great Falls High School was Bird’s last commission and after its completion he retired from active practice at the age of 69. He lived to the age of 100 and passed away in Great Falls, the city to which he was instrumental in giving birth.
Ernest B. Croft (1889 – 1959), of Croft and Boerner Architects, Minneapolis, Minnesota, was born November 19, 1889 in Herman, Minnesota and practiced with Francis C. Boerner (1989 – 1937), the firm’s business manager, from 1916 to 1920. (3) Croft, a graduate of the University of Minnesota in 1911, was affiliated with several firms and spent 3 years in New York City before partnering with fellow University of Minnesota graduate Boerner in 1916. (4) The firm was widely respected having designed the Minneapolis Municipal Auditorium and particularly noted for their high school design experience with many projects across Minnesota and Iowa. It is believed that Croft’s Elk River Senior High School, Elk River, Minnesota, and Great Falls High School, both completed in 1930 were outstanding examples of an evolution in secondary school design by the firm.
The construction of the building generated strong debate over whether the high school’s name should be changed, with former students asking that the school’s name be changed to “Charles M. Russell High School” after local artist Charles M. Russell, while businessmen in the city wanted the name to be “James J. Hill High School”, the chief executive of the Great Northern Railroad and friend of Paris Gibson.
Another debate erupted over the type of brick to be used in the building. The architects, primarily the consulting architectural firm of Croft and Boerner, had specified that the exterior brick be a dark red; however, some business members of the school board wanted to use a lighter local brick. Investigative trips with several school board members to Western Clay Manufacturing in Helena, Montana (16) and Riddell & Watts brickyard in Missoula, Montana (17) were promoted by the architects and a successful compromise to use dark imported brick for the exterior and light, locally-made bricks for the interior. The locally made bricks were twice the price of the imported brick.
The final cost of the building when completed on July 21, 1930 was $1.15 million and opened in the Fall of 1930 with 1,760 students, just under the 1,800 it was designed to accommodate. The three-story school reflects the symmetrical classic T-shape, 515’ North-South and 152’ East-West.
Defining architectural elements such as the typically crenelated parapets, Gothic arch window and door openings, tracery windows and tower are evidenced in the Great Falls High School design. The brick work incorporates five different bond patterns and the extensive use of cut sandstone details produced a structure of unmatched beauty and utility.
The dark red brick building exhibits common exterior Collegiate Gothic detailing including formed-in-place concrete foundation, a low rise concrete base, a sandstone water table, contrasting sandstone window sills, soldier course window headers at the first floor, a sandstone belt course at the second floor window sill with decorative highly articulated brick continuous bracket, soldier course window headers, sandstone third floor window sills and continuous sandstone headers at each of the stepped-out pilaster flanked bays. The walls invoke the Gothic style with a crenelated parapet with terra cotta caps. The crenels are terra cotta and typically spaced at two per bay.
The central corridor interior plan with classrooms opening on to generous hallways was designed to allow maximum fenestration for the classrooms and incorporates a Gothic detailed main entrance at the west elevation forming the top of the “T” and facing the Stadium. The formal symmetry is further evidenced by the main entrance’s position being centered on the East – West axis of Third Avenue South and the flag pole’s placement at the intersection of the East – West axis and the North – South axis of Nineteenth Street. Twin elaborate angled staircases are located at the intersecting north-south and east west hallways adjacent to the main entrance and secondary staircases are located at the north and south ends of the main hallway.
The strict orientation of the site plan and building location can most likely be credited to G.W. Bird. The building is anchored on the North by the Gymnasium and on the South by an elaborate Theatre / Auditorium
The Gymnasium contains two basement locker rooms and a hardwood basketball court surrounded by mezzanine seating that accommodates 1,200 spectators. At the same time, Memorial Stadium, honoring those who fought and served in World War I, was constructed featuring concrete bleachers on the east side of the football field and clad in the same dark red brick on the upper west elevation of the seating.
Two, two-story 256 square foot structures flank both ends of the bleacher seating with the northeast structure connected to the locker room level of the gymnasium by an underground tunnel. In 1957, a reinforced concrete grandstand that included a press box, concession area and restrooms was added at the west side of the stadium.
The construction of the Gymnasium and stadium proved timely, since in 1930 the Montana Supreme Court ruled in McNair v School District no. 1 of Cascade County that a gymnasium was a “necessary and essential part of a school plant” which was lacking in the original 1896 Great Falls High School by William White. (13)
Great Falls High School is anchored on the south by an exquisitely designed Auditorium / Theatre seating 900 on the main level and 300 on the balcony level. The Theatre is accessed from a generous foyer with a ticket booth which is centered on the main hallway of the transverse portion of the formal “T”. The Theatre is replete with ornate plaster work including perforated plaster grilles and original hanging light fixtures. Proscenium, stage and fourth wall are fine examples of period theatre design. The exterior entrance to the theatre is the second most distinctive entry to the school, displaying a shallow sandstone portico with a crenelated parapet and center arch. The entrance is approached by a broad 90-degree stairway that accesses four centered doors with an arched three light transom and two side doors reinforcing the architect’s intent that the school was to be community centric. The entrance leads to a fore-lobby and then to the foyer of the theatre.
An interior stair tower with sandstone arched top windows on the north and west sides, indented upper story masonry corners with chamfered sandstone transition blocks similar to the west main entrance tower. The indented exterior wall from the water table to the parapet incorporates a sandstone and brick heraldic panel above the windows in a chequy pattern signifying “Constancy”. The Chequy panels above single arched top windows also occur at northeast and north west entrances / stair towers to the gymnasium along with upper floor single arched top windows, indented upper floor wall corners and chamfered sandstone transition blocks.
The original campus and building remains a much revered historic icon in the community. Since its inception, GFHS has evolved with many added facilities. Please stay tuned.
2. “Early Day Architects in Great Falls”, anonymous, Great Falls Public Library.
3. “Croft, Ernest B.”, Who’s Who In Minnesota, 1941.
4. “Boerner, Francis C.”, Obit, NW Architect, v.1 #3, January 1937,p.15. (Board of Registration)
13. “McNair v. School District No. 1 of Cascade County (Mont.)”, 87 Mont. 423, 288 P. 188 (1930).
For good reason, Great Falls High School’s historic original building, built in 1930, was recognized in 2017 by Architectural Digest Magazine as one of the Most Beautiful Public High Schools in America. During 1965, my class was the last to graduate before CMR was built. At the peak of its utilization, 3,000 students attended in 3 shifts, starting at 6 AM and ending at 6 PM.
That is a blip in its history that was only 35 years after it was built and 53 years ago today. I assume many would be interested so I intend to chronical the history of Great Falls High School. Please stay tuned.
Editor’s note: This is the first in a series of informational articles detailing the history of Great Falls High School, which is on the National Register of Historic Places.
Doing some research recently on the local CDBG funding debacle I came across a couple of interesting exchanges from the June 20, 2017 Great Falls City Commission meeting which illustrates why so many folks consider our current city commission to be so out of touch with citizens.
In this first short video Commissioner Bronson is in the midst of a long-winded legal explanation as to why it’s okay for him to not have to follow the clear, unambiguous rules that are laid out in HUD guidelines. The rub here is that Bronson then calls on City Attorney Sexe to publicly validate and corroborate his justification for engaging in a blatant conflict of interest regarding the allocation of taxpayer funds.
Now take a look at another exchange between a citizen, Mr. Haffner, and Mayor Kelly that occurred at the same meeting just minutes later. Here, Mr. Haffner attempts to ask Ms. Sexe a question clarifying a legal matter but is immediately corrected by the mayor and told to direct his questions to the Commission, not Ms. Sexe.
So a city commissioner can direct a city employee in a public meeting to inform the public how justified that commissioner is in allocating our money to an organization his son works for but a citizen can’t ask that same city employee a question?
Have these people forgotten who works for who? Maybe it’s because of some kind of silly protocol but it sure comes across as arrogant and unfair.
Mr. Bronson, Mr. Kelly, Ms. Sexe and all the others up there are servants not lords. Their Cadillac city health insurance, salaries, and even the big table and fancy black chairs they’re perched on are paid for by citizens like Mr. Haffner. Like you and me.
I was born in Great Falls, am a 1965 alumnus of Great Falls High School, gained a Masters in Architecture from MSU during 1973, and started my architectural practice during 1978 in Calgary. I have successfully completed many architectural projects in several States and Canadian Provinces. Locally, my family has owned businesses and has built numerous residential and commercial projects since the early 1900’s. I am a property owner, landlord, and have development interests next to the GF International Airport. I am pleased to say that I have been honored with American Institute of Architects building design and academic awards.
I have been watching the E-City-Beat blog since the new editor took responsibly a short while back. Although I do not agree with some of what is said, I see it is an enlightening way to find out opinions about what is happening in and around Great Falls. Whether I agree or disagree with the ECB bloggers, the exposure to the variety of viewpoints is interesting and hard to find elsewhere. Contrary to one bloggers negative comments, I do not see ECB as a loser’s blog, I see it more as a freedom of speech blog expressing varying opinions about our region. It is very annoying to hear negative personal attacks directed toward these caring citizens rather than spending that kind of energy to help find solutions to problems.
Because of my interest to see the GFHS campus better than it is, I have spent considerable time over the last several years thinking about how to do just that by master planning solutions for the very complex problem. In addition, I helped initiate the historic window replacement program, was involved with finding funding for most of the first batch of windows as a demonstration project and preserved the original school building and campus by assisting with placing it on the National Register of Historic Places. https://www.nps.gov/nr/feature/places/pdfs/13000097.pdf
There has been a lot said on this blog about Great Falls High School so I have decided to share my points of view on the subject. Not in response to other blog comments, but to offer my independent concerns and suggestions.
First, I would like to thank Superintendent Tammy Lacey for the time she and her team recently spent to meet with me to review and discuss their third architectural proposal for the much needed GFHS improvements. The District presentation can be seen at the following links where comments about their third proposal can also be made.
I am pleased to see that this third attempt in six years finally incorporates the campus connector where I have advocated and showed them in my architectural designs for that length of time. It is great that the District finally agrees that location for the connector is best and I encourage them to go forward with it.
Although I see the Districts and Bozeman/Seattle Architects proposal as a positive, albeit small, step forward, I believe that the District continues to miss the opportunity to create the best solution for a long term sustainable masterplan. I have many concerns about this third suggestion to the citizens, as I have also had for the two previously rejected plans.
The District’s third architectural proposal would regrettably destroy the beautiful Historic Campus and Kranz Park by arbitrarily throwing down surface parking lots that would have long winter walk times where trees would be removed and lawns would be eradicated. Their ideas seriously lack respect for the Heritage at GFHS by filling up the historic campus with surface parking lots and structures rather than creating a functional heart for the campus. Unfortunately, they propose cluttered spaces with cars, fenced outdoor storage yards, shops, service roads, and delivery trucks instead of facilities with sunlit learning plazas, an articulate all school student stair, and centrally located open areas for enjoyment of the existing and new landscaping.
THE SCHOOL DISTRICT’S PROPOSAL FILLS UP THE HISTORIC CAMPUS WITH SURFACE PARKING LOTS AND STRUCTURES
The District’s third architectural proposal would unfortunately close the east/west pedestrian flow through the campus along the Fourth Avenue South corridor with intrusive walls that would become barriers that negate the residential neighborhood and greatly diminish functionality. That idea would force pedestrians on long time consuming and uneventful voyages around the perimeter of the campus rather than on plazas through the heart of the campus where the best access to the Stadium, Field House, and Main School Entrance should be. The District’s current ideas would be extremely uninviting rather than enhancing the campus with foresight and imagination.
THE SCHOOL DISTRICT’S PROPOSED INTRUSIVE WALL THAT WOULD BECOME A BARRIER VIEW LOOKING WEST FROM 4TH AVE SOUTH AND 20TH STREET
THE SCHOOL DISTRICT’S PROPOSED INTRUSIVE WALL THAT WOULD BECOME A BARRIER VIEW LOOKING EAST FROM 4TH AVE SOUTH AND 18TH STREET
With hopefully an open mind and desire to achieve the best solution, I encourage the District to further minimize connection to the original Historic Structure, place the Commons/Hub/Dining where it will conveniently serve the students and stadium visitors, and save the historic campus by investing in a below grade centrally located three level parking structure that would replace the senior parking lot. With foresight to further achieve a long-term solution, the parking structure would be the foundation for an above grade education center at the upper plaza level.
“With hopefully an open mind and desire to achieve the best solution, I encourage the District to further minimize connection to the original Historic Structure, place the Commons/Hub/Dining where it will conveniently serve the students and stadium visitors, and save the historic campus by investing in a below grade centrally located three level parking structure that would replace the senior parking lot. With foresight to further achieve a long-term solution, the parking structure would be the foundation for an above grade education center at the upper plaza level.”
Rather than destroy our beautiful campus, my hope is that the District opens their minds to evolve the GFHS masterplan into a solution that respects, preserves, and broadens the significance of Great Falls High School’s historic original building that was recognized in 2017 by Architectural Digest Magazine as one of the Most Beautiful Public High Schools in America.
I encourage the District to work hard conceptualizing the GFHS masterplan until a suitable and fully integrated solution is realized. I recommend that they not rest until the design is respectful, sensible, dynamic, functional, economical, serviceable, and fun.
By Darrell A. Swanson-GFHS Class of 1965, Architect/Planner, and Tax Payer A portion of Darrell’s GFHS Master Planning Concept can be viewed at www.swansonarchitects.com The full presentation will be provided upon email request. He can be reached at darrells@swansonarchitects.com or 406.599.6910
Every week should be ‘Sunshine Week’ when it comes to informing citizens about what their local public officials are up to.
E-City Beat has asked me to do some research and writing concerning the recent Community Development Block Grant conflicts of interest issues involving Department of Housing and Urban Development funds and the Great Falls City Commission and Community Development Council.
You can read my piece about Mayor Kelly and his ‘apology’ concerning HUD rescinding CDBG funding here.
Since the local media has chosen to mostly ignore or minimize this embarrassing chapter in our City Commissions handling of taxpayer funds I, and possibly others, will be doing a full expose in the coming days and weeks. A good place to start will be the February letter from HUD to the City of Great Falls detailing the matter.
Below is the full text of that letter. Every citizen should read it a couple of times in order to understand the continuing problems for all of us arising from this fiasco which was totally preventable and one hundred percent intentional.
February 1, 2018
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Community Planning and Development Region VIII, Denver
Gregory T. Doyon, City Manager
City of Great Falls
Subject: Conflict of Interest Finding
Dear Mr. Doyon:
We appreciate the thorough review of the City of Great Falls’ 2012-2017 CDBG funding decisions. Your letter dated December 20, 2017 concluded that the City did not violate Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Conflict of Interest rules at 24 CFR $ 570.611. The City’s opinion appears to be based on a narrow interpretation and application of the regulations.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Region VIII Office of Community Planning and Development must take a broader approach to the enforcement of those regulations to preserve the integrity of the program. The Department’s opinion on this matter is detailed within this letter, which includes a Finding constituting a regulatory violation of the CDBG Conflict of Interest rules at 24 CFR $ 570.611.
Review of Great Falls Funding History
The CDBG conflict of interest regulations at 24 CFR $ 570.611 are necessarily broad. No person in a position to either exercise decision-making authority or to gain inside information may obtain a financial benefit. The regulations cover any “employee, agent, consultant, officer, or elected official or appointed official of the recipient, or of any designated public agencies, or of subrecipients that are receiving funds.” 24 CFR $ 570.611(c).
We emphasize the broad scope, interpretation, and application of the conflicts of interest rules; the purpose is to avoid the appearance of impropriety in the CDBG funding process. Note that a subrecipient organization must also abide by the conflict regulations. While a subrecipient organization may receive funding from multiple sources, the aggregate funding allows the organization to function as a whole. HUD will not trace specific budget allocations in determining whether a conflict exists. If an individual with access to the CDBG funding decision making process works with a subrecipient, there is a conflict. A benefit is available to both the individual and the subrecipient organization.
The broad nature of the conflict regulations does not necessarily preclude those with an apparent conflict from participating in a CDBG activity. Requests for exceptions are available under 24 CFR $ 570.611(d).
With regard to the City of Great Falls, we consider any member of the City’s Commission or Community Development Council to be in a decision-making position and able to gain “inside information” on the CDBG funding process. The City’s letter dated December 20, 2017 identified 14 individuals who participated in the Commission or Council between 2012 and 2017, and who would also be identified as persons covered by Section 570.611(c). In total, $522,252.00 was awarded by the Commission and Council between 2012 and 2017 to entities from which the 14 members noted above, or those with whom they have business or immediate family ties, obtained a financial interest or benefit.
Further, it is the opinion of this office that the Anderson Zurmuehlen & Co., P.C. audit is unnecessary. The introduction of CDBG funding into a subrecipient organization, whether intended or not, supplants other resources and otherwise contributes to the total capacity and growth of an organization as to create a net benefit for all individuals associated with the entity. Carol Bronson’s relationship to Bill Bronson and her position with NeighborWorks Great Falls creates a conflict of interest, because of the exposure to “inside information” and potential for financial benefit for herself and the organization. That her responsibilities and wages are not associated with CDBG activities will be significant and useful information to consider in a request for a conflict of interest exception.
The City of Great Falls must take action to resolve both past violations of HUD’s Conflict of Interest rules and develop protocols to avoid the appearance of future conflicts. The Finding below summarizes the conditions leading to the violation, HUD’s criteria for compliance, the cause of the conflict, its effect on the City’s funding, and the required corrective action to close this Finding.
Finding – Conflict of Interest
Condition: Between 2012 and 2017, both the City of Great Fall’s Commission and Community Development Council included members who had existing business or personal relationships with organization seeking CDBG funding.
Criteria: 24 CFR $ 570.611 prohibits those in a position to participate in the decision-making process for CDBG awards or gain information about such funding decisions from receiving a financial interest or benefit from organizations seeking CDBG funding, either for themselves, family members, or business relations.
Cause: Between 2012 and 2017, the City of Great Fall’s CDBG decision making process included a Community Development Council made up of employees and board members of agencies receiving regular allocations of CDBG funds. The City Commission membership, the final approving authority for the City’s CDBG funding, also included members with business or personal relationships with employees of CDBG subrecipients or subrecipients themselves.
Effect: At a minimum, these actions create the appearance of impropriety in the CDBG funding process, as well as actual conflicts of interest I some cases. As a result, it is likely that the City of Great Falls CDBG funding did not reach the full spectrum of agencies within the community that would have otherwise been eligible.
Corrective Actions:
The City must develop new Project Selection, Citizen Participation and Conflict of Interest policies and procedures that prevent CDBG funding from benefiting a person in a decision-making position at the City or a person with a business or personal relationship with those in a decision-making position at the City. These policies and procedures must be submitted to HUD in advance of the formal adoption for a review of consistency and compliance with applicable policies and regulations.
The City of Great Falls must submit an Exception request pursuant to 24 CFR $ 570.611(d) for its 2017 funding decisions.
Corrective actions must be completed ninety (90) days from the date of this communication. Failure to comply will require the repayment of funds identified as subject to conflicts of interest from 2012 to the present.
Remaining 2017 Allocation
It is our understanding that the 2017 CDBG funding awards for Habitat for Humanity, Rural Dynamics, and NeighborWorks Great Falls have been suspended as a result of the associated conflicts of interest. As noted in the City’s letter, and referenced throughout the Commission and Council meeting notes, there was a procedural error in the initial scoring of the 2017 applications. We need a more precise description of these procedures and the error before our office can provide guidance to help the City move forward with its outstanding CDBG awards. What procedures were violated; when and how were they violated; how was the violation identified; and how did the City respond?
The City may also submit requests for conflict of interest exceptions in order to proceed with the 2017 CDBG awards to Habitat for Humanity, Rural Dynamics, and NeighborWorks Great Falls.
Finally, we are concerned with an exchange between the City Commission and the City Attorney as it relates to the 2017 allocation. The minutes for Great Falls’ June 20, 2017, regular City Commission Meeting, contain a statement by City Attorney Sara Sexe that “a representative from the Department of Housing and Urban Development had reported that there was not a conflict of interest.” This statement is false. While we do not need a response to this issue, we do want to make it clear that this office did not previously review and excuse the City of any Conflict of Interests. We are currently engaged in that process.
If you have any questions about this letter, or need assistance in preparing the corrective action, do not hesitate to contact Don Morris, Senior CPD Representative, at (303) 672-5418 or don.r.morris@hud.gov.
A meeting yesterday between the City’s Planning staff and GFPS representatives about the District’s plan to buy the Campfire property located at 1925 2nd Avenue South, demolish the historic building and build a pocket parking lot, produced some disappointing news. It could also be viewed as some good news if you feel the District’s plan to purchase individual single-family properties around Great Falls High School to provide parking for about 100 cars is a bad decision and a poor planning objective.
Here’s the rub. The school district planned to provide 22 parking spaces on the 50’x150’ lot which could only be achieved by using the full width of the lot using the narrowest stall width allowable. Since the property by legal zoning definition is not contiguous to the GFHS property, separated by a public right-of way, 2nd Avenue South, the high school’s PLI (Public Lands and Institutions) zone cannot be extended to the Campfire property without a zone change. Any rezoning of the Campfire property would likely be viewed as illegal “spot zoning” by a court challenge.
The only other method allowing for a parking lot in the R-3 residential zone would be a conditional use permit, but as the title implies, there would be conditions on the development to protect the neighboring single-family property to the west. The condition would be a landscaped buffer between the parking lot and the house next door.
The buffering area would reduce the available parking lot area and thus the number of parking spaces that could be constructed. Since the District’s goal to place 22 spaces using a double-loaded drive lane is at the very minimum, 49’, and considering a 10’ buffer-strip, the total parking would likely be limited to 10 spaces using 10’ wide stalls.
As previously stated, the purchase price paid by the school district is $100,000. The cost to demolish the historic “Hi-School Store” would likely be $50,000, and the cost to construct the landscaped parking lot could be another $50,000. So, $200,000 invested using tax-payer dollars would likely amount to $20,000 per stall. Wow!
“As previously stated, the purchase price paid by the school district is $100,000. The cost to demolish the historic “Hi-School Store” would likely be $50,000, and the cost to construct the landscaped parking lot could be another $50,000. So, $200,000 invested using tax-payer dollars would likely amount to $20,000 per stall. Wow!”
For a moment consider the District’s intent to purchase more single-family properties in the vicinity of Great Falls High. Would some of those properties have homes on both sides requiring two “Buffers” and even produce fewer parking spaces, like maybe a single end to end row of 7 spaces? Using the same math that would be $28,000 per space.
Knowing that the school district educrats are not urban planners, or design professionals, who advised them to pursue the property purchase in an effort to solve the 50-year-old parking problem at Great Falls High School? Was it the District consultants from Billings, Bozeman, Missoula, or Seattle?
Is it time to think parking structure, solve the parking problem and end this foolishness? You tell us and the District, too!
