Virginia Beach School Board members and city administrators clashed sharply over a proposed $6 million cross-country running facility during a Tuesday meeting, as city officials urged the district to commit $3 million in leftover budget funds to a project that critics argue does little to address core educational needs.
The proposed facility, detailed by Assistant City Manager Jason Stroud in a presentation to the board, would be built near the Virginia Beach Sportsplex close to Landstown and North Landing Road. The city has pledged half of the total construction cost, asking the school system to contribute $3 million from its unspent budget reversion funds. Under the proposal, the city would take over maintenance duties once the initial construction costs are covered, making the amenity free to use for both the school district and the general public over a projected three-year design and build timeline.
The debate exposes a deep rift between municipal leaders chasing economic development and school board members protective of operating budgets. While city planners envision an athletic draw that fills local hotels and restaurants with traveling competition teams, educators count the running tracks against a long backlog of classroom and facility maintenance demands.
School Board Division Over Budget Priorities
The push to tap district money for a recreational track immediately drew skepticism from board members who questioned whether municipal economic development falls within the purview of public education financing.
“I very much struggle with understanding how a cross-country track is considered a need,” board member Melinda Rogers said during the meeting, as reported by pilotonline.com.
Stroud acknowledged to the board that the cross-country facility itself would not directly generate immediate revenue, telling officials that any financial benefits would likely trickle down to the schools indirectly through tourism. When Rogers pressed whether the city intended to gather additional public feedback on the project, Stroud answered that city leadership had no current plans to do so.
Board member Matt Cummings echoed those reservations, noting an absence of grassroots enthusiasm among his constituents. “I’m all about things that get our folks outside,” Cummings said, according to the pilotonline.com coverage. “My hesitation is that funds voted for public education are to be prioritized to public education. The purpose of public education funds is not economic development. It’s to educate our kids and make sure our buildings are taken care of.”
Mark Bohenstiel also voiced anxiety that construction inflation could eventually drive up the price tag, leaving the school district on the hook for additional contributions.
Weighing Economic Development Against Classroom Needs
Supporters of the partnership argue that a world-class venue would benefit roughly 200 to 300 cross-country runners spread across the district’s high schools while elevating the city’s athletic profile. Board Chair Kathleen Brown emphasized the necessity of forging a consensus among stakeholders to move forward.
Because spending reversion funds requires formal City Council approval, board member Kimberly Melnyk suggested that school leaders adopt a cooperative posture to avoid a punitive response from the city.
“It’s their money to take,” Melnyk said, as reported by pilotonline.com. “We’re arguing … about something they’re probably going to do anyway. So let’s just be friendly about it, and find a way to make this work and to do right by our students.” Melnyk warned that if the school board proved too adversarial, the city council had the authority to simply strip the funds out of the upcoming school year's operating budget.
Superintendent Promises Public Input on Remaining Reversion Funds
The tension over the cross-country facility follows an earlier budget battle where the School Board attempted to direct millions in reversion funds toward the district’s heavily utilized employee health insurance fund. City leaders rejected that move, asserting the health fund required no extra financial injection.
Superintendent Donald Robertson Jr. later assured the board that various options remain on the table for deploying the remaining reversion funds, promising that school administration would deliberately incorporate public input moving forward.
