In 2005, when Mark Roosevelt became superintendent for the Pittsburgh Public Schools, the school board charged him with creating a national model for academic achievement that would keep and attract families to the city and to its schools.

Among the board's most pressing concerns were a climbing drop-out rate, a widening racial achievement gap and low proficiency scores. The district also was heavily in debt. Annual costs continued to climb while the city's population and school enrollment continued to decline.

The new superintendent therefore was charged with a Herculean task; steer the district back to financial health while increasing student achievement. Three years into Mr. Roosevelt's tenure, the district is stronger financially and more money is being invested in academic improvement.

In April 2007, Mr. Roosevelt presented the board with a comprehensive high school reform plan. This five-year plan included the development of university partnerships and theme-based schools, the introduction of a behavior-improvement program, the addition of curriculum coaches and a new core curriculum, and plans to increase minority participation in SATs and advanced-placement classes. The presentation closed with the introduction of the Pittsburgh Promise, a community pledge to help all students to prepare for and finance a higher education.

As a new school board member thrust into the recent controversy over closing Schenley High School, I have found myself searching for a way to put the Schenley decision into a broader context.

I believe that the superintendent neither expected nor hoped that we would need to close Schenley. But once he was confronted with the physical danger to students and faculty in the deteriorating structure and the significant costs to make improvements, he felt he had no other choice.

This set off a domino effect, forcing the superintendent and his staff to redevelop aspects of the high school reform plan to take into account the loss of the Schenley facility and the need to find a new home for Schenley's students and programs.

Unfortunately, the decision to close Schenley was announced at the same time as other components of the high school reform plan, creating the indelible perception that the Schenley closing was like other aspects of the plan -- a deliberate action on the part of the administration in pursuit of reform goals. This misperception apparently became exaggerated as rumors spread regarding the accuracy of the estimated cost to renovate Schenley and even the extent of the school's safety problems.

Schenley families understandably advocated on behalf of their children, on behalf of a successful academic program, a unique social culture, a glorious alumni legacy and a historic landmark. Schenley represents all of those things.

But as the school board prepares to vote on Schenley this evening, I find my thoughts focused on where we go from here. At Monday's high-school reform workshop, the superintendent once again presented the board with his 2007 plan, along with a revised five-year road map taking into account the closing of Schenley. Our facilities staff confirmed that the cost of renovating buildings to fulfill the plan will run $40 million to $60 million, considerably less than the $76 million estimated cost of renovating Schenley alone. Still, this is a substantial investment, and it is important for the community to understand that the proposed capital improvement projects will increase the district's debt service and also deserve careful analysis.

The people who have given public testimony in favor of saving Schenley are not "the opposition." Indeed, they are exactly the families we hope to attract to the district -- smart, engaged, passionate, caring people, young and old, of different socio-economic and racial backgrounds. They have invested their most precious resource -- their children -- in the success of our school district.

It is crucial for the district to move forward with its courageous and visionary plans for high school excellence that the individuals and families who have spoken out on this topic know that this administration and school board have heard their concerns and will address them.

We should applaud the fact that we have thousands of parents and students who are willing to fight so hard to save a public school. In their passionate fight we see that, to some extent, we already have achieved some of our goals.

My hope now is that we find a way to move forward together, beyond the Schenley decision, to achieve all of our common goals for the district -- to improve academic achievement for all students; to ensure that all students have access to resources and opportunities; to provide safe, welcoming school environments; and to help all students prepare for and finance a higher education.

Like the superintendent, we all have a Herculean task ahead of us. Our success relies on our ability to make decisions that benefit all students and communities equitably, which can result only from a process of careful planning, thoughtful implementation, and transparent and collaborative action.