Dear Mr. Cowart and Members of the SCSD Board:
I would like to request the SCSD Board reconsider the selection of the SCSD High School location based on additional objective information, safety, and total infrastructure cost over the next 5 to 10 years. Request SCSD Board to conduct an objective Civil Engineering Evaluation between the 539 acres in Section 16 1N 5E that SCSD “already owns” and the 103 acres ( 2 parcels) in Section 17 1N 5E being proposed by the Board for the SCSD high school consolidation. After the Evaluation is complete, request the SCSD Board base their decision on
- Civil Engineering Evaluation,
- Total Cost including infrastructure,
- Safety Measures including Road Access changes,
- And any other objective measures
To provide the best, safest, and most economical location for our students and faculty of Simpson County for today and years to come.
During the Town Hall presented on February 22 by Dr. Holloway and / or the Magee News presented on February 25 by Mr. Cowart, Dr. Holloway and / or Mr. Cowart stated reasons for not selecting Section 16 1N 5E. Below are the reasons stated with agreement or counter argument:
- Demographic data - Location should be in the center of the population. A study (completed by someone Dr. Holloway recommended) suggested the location be in the center of the population. This recommendation does rule out Section 16 1N 4E on Hwy 13, but does not rule out Section 16 1N 5E on Hwy 49.
- Right-of-Way and Power Grid - As stated by Dr. Holloway, “Everyone else is doing it, Why can’t SCSD?”. This reasoning appears to be only an opinion. CoLin built a road into the property by obtaining access through Mississippi Game and Fish and also has the power grid within 25 acres of it’s parcel. If it is good enough for CoLin, it should be good enough for SCSD High School. The power grid could be parking and beautiful green space. Plus per 16th Land Manager, the 16th Section Forest lease to WW Hunting Club was reduced by 30 acres to accommodate CoLin’s future needs in the last year’s leases. Surely, SCSD and CoLin can work out an agreement for Right-of-Way across CoLin’s Lease for access. This would also eliminate transportation cost moving students/staff between CoLin on Section 16 and the High School on Section 17. It also provides a safer environment for students, by not leaving campus. Using Section 16 would also promote dual enrollment.
- Cost of access - Mr Cowart stated it would cost $500K to build a road into Section 16 1N 5E. SCSD proposes spending $550K on Section 17 for 103 acres, plus the cost of real estate closures, with an ATT easement across the 63 acre parcel. SCSD could spend $500K on a road and have access to 539 acres of land it already owns. In reviewing the parcels, Section 17 does not have public road access other than Hwy 49. What additional $’s or services will be requested by SCSD to obtain additional lands to provide this safety net and other related infrastructure?
- Topology differences - Dr. Holloway stated Section 16 1N 5E (539 acres) was not considered because of the rise and fall of the topology, stating Section 17 (103 acres in 2 parcels connected by 100 feet) was much more feasible. There appears to be no objective evidence of these statements. By looking at the topology mapping provided by the Simpson County Tax Assessor: the rise and fall appear to be about the same less than 1 mile apart; one can find the appearance of a sinkhole /stagnant waters on Section 17 where Section 16 has a natural spring through the east side feeding the lake; the height of Section 16 is 50 feet higher than Section 17. One should be comparing 103 acres to 103 acres, not the entire 539 acres. The 539 acres could be evaluated in multiple ways, large parcels, smaller parcels, etc. with room for other potential educational facilities (Vo-tech, Alternative School, Central Office, etc). A Civil Engineering Evaluation could provide objective evidence of the best and most economical location for the SCSD High School. The Evaluation can be done via software, such as AutoDesk Civil 3D. This software and resulting evaluation could also facilitate/propose locations for all the athletic fields, sewage lagoon, power plants, etc. for additional planning and budgeting.
Additional reasons for reconsidering the SCSD High School location:
- $550K for 103 acres with more than 14 different borders vs $500K for access to 539 acres with 4 owned borders. Spending $500K on access to 539 acres sure seems more feasible.
- Safety along major highway (49) and railroad within 1000 feet of Hwy 49. If something happened on Highway 49 or on railroad, how do the students/staff get out of the area?? Section 17 has 2 exits, only to Hwy 49 (a 100 ft and a 400 ft access to Hwy 49). Section 16 has 2 exits, Hwy 49 via CoLin and MS Game and Fish as well as Zion Hill Road running through it. Zion Hill Road would direct traffic away from Hwy 49 and the railroad, more safety for our students.
- Section 17 1N 5E with 103 rolling acres might not be enough to build the SCSD High School and all referenced buildings in the brochure labeled “School Bond 2022”. Being fairly new, Brandon High School was built on 85 acres of flat lands with no need for a sewage lagoon. The baseball field has not been constructed and Brandon has used up the 85 acres. Parking is also a problem at major events on campus.
- Revenue of the Forest leases on Section 16 1N 5E has been compromised, impacting potential future timber revenues. The latest Mississippi Forest Commission Management Report for this section states risks for timber growth: 1 - controlled burning may not be able to be used because of the location of CoLin; 2 - Kudzu is invading the forest. FYI: On Section 16, Forest lease revenue would be the only leases affected by consolidation selection, ~$3k / year while other leases account for ~$15k / year ( cell tower, MS Game and Fish, CoLin, and Zion Hill Baptist Church).
- Section 17 has a Gravel Pit as well as an AT&T buried line on it. Today, gravel is still being removed from the pit. If gravel is considered a mineral, will SCSD obtain the mineral rights to the 103 acres? If not, what happens when the owner (of the mineral rights) wants to remove some of the minerals? How will the Gravel Pit and the AT&T buried line factor into the decisions to build on all 103 acres? What acreage will be restricted based on these 2 factors? What will be the additional costs of reclaiming the gravel pit?
Please reconsider and reevaluate the location of the SCSD High School, taking into consideration more objective evidence, evaluations, safety, and all related costs than has been presented to the public.
Sincerely,
LeeAnne W. Lewis
