A group of W.C. Williams Elementary School parents gathered Wednesday night to rally against a proposal to shutter the school ahead of a specially called Greenwood School Board meeting today to consider the move.
At the meeting at the Greenwood Community and Recreation Center, about 25 mothers and grandmothers of W.C. Williams students spoke out against the proposal, which district officials said would save money, and blasted the administration’s handling of the plan.
Lillian Ramsey, the mother of four students at the school, said she was first informed that the district was considering shuttering the elementary school — which she also attended — on Monday night, after a hastily called parent meeting at which Superintendent Montrell Greene first publicly discussed the proposal. “They waited until the school was getting ready to get out for the summertime to tell us,” Ramsey said. “I think they went about it the wrong way.”
The Greenwood School Board is scheduled to meet at 5 p.m. today at the district’s central office, located at the corner of Howard and Church streets, to discuss “cost-saving measures,” according to a notice posted on a door at the building.
School district officials have cited budget reasons in their proposal to shutter the 85-year-old elementary school, claiming doing so would save about $500,000 per year. According to a district flier passed out to parents at the meeting, the school’s age, smaller size, physical condition and proximity to other schools all played a role in the proposal.
Students currently enrolled at W.C. Williams would be sent to either Bankston or Threadgill elementary schools under redrawn attendance lines, according to the district.
Speaking to the group at the Greenwood Recreation Center Wednesday, Ramsey said that parents needed to turn up at the school board meeting to make their displeasure with the proposal known — and to plea for more time and consideration before a final decision on the elementary school’s future is made.
“We have to get these parents out,” Ramsey said. “That’s the only way we’re going to save W.C. Williams.”
The school board has not previously considered the proposal, and its approval is needed before the school could be shuttered.
Ramsey said she might have been convinced that closing the school was the best option for the district if the administration had filled parents in on budget details and allowed time for feedback. As the plan was presented, “it seems like they’ve made up their minds.”
Parents gathered at the meeting confessed to having strong sentimental attachments to the neighborhood school on Carrollton Avenue. They said, however, they were most upset about the lack of advanced notice and discussion. Most said they suspected the district had been considering closing the school for months before Monday’s announcement.
“I feel like they were supposed to be involving the parents as well,” said Scarlette Smith, who went to Williams and now has a child at Threadgill. She said she felt Williams was singled out because it sits in a low-income neighborhood. “All of the parents (from the district) should’ve been involved, because it’s going to affect all of our kids.”
Latoya Ramsey, the mother of two W.C. Williams students and Lillian Ramsey’s sister, said she felt parents were being “railroaded at the last minute” by a district that was trying to cut parents out of the loop on the decision.
Leflore County District 2 Supervisor Robert Moore, who represents most of the neighborhood Williams sits in, said that parents needed to get organized fast to delay a decision and push the board to reconsider. “Let’s back off and let’s study the situation. Let’s look at the full ramifications if we close our neighborhood school,” Moore said.
The supervisor also expressed his concern that shuttering the school would leave its campus vacant and bring down an already struggling neighborhood. If closed, the W.C. Williams building will “become part of a decaying community,” Moore said. According to a district handout, the building would remain district property but a decision on its future would be made at a later date.
In a statement posted Tuesday to the district’s Facebook page, the district stressed that a final decision on the school has not yet been made but said that squeezed revenues have been pushing the board to cut costs.
“The superintendent, at the last school board meeting, shared a financial longitudinal report spanning five years that showed that district funds have decreased,” the district wrote.
A copy of the report provided to the Commonwealth showed fluctuating balances at the district over the last five years, jumping from about $4 million during the 2010-2011 school year to a peak of $8.8 million in 2011-12. Since then, the balances have declined to $2.5 million at the close of last year — though the report also projected that the district’s current budget would allow reserves to bounce back to nearly $3 million at the end of the current fiscal year.
• Contact Bryn Stole at 581-7235 or bstole@gwcommonwealth.com.
