Save schools in disrepair?
The March 9 letter urging voters to “save” closed elementary school buildings has yet again missed the mark.
The Ringgold School District is comprised of several smaller boroughs and townships, as are many school districts throughout Pennsylvania. Last spring, there were signs around the district, proclaiming, “We Are Ringgold”, and listing these areas. I don’t remember seeing “We Are Monongahela” or “We Are Donora.” Perhaps this is because the district needs to unite as a whole a make the best fiscal decision possible.
The activities and services suggested by the author are possible at any location; however, utilizing school facilities and school tax dollars for health care is certainly a new twist. Are you aware that MonValley Hospital is already established? With heightened awareness of mental health issues, I am unsure whether any school would be the proper place for those programs, and shudder to think of the security and insurance risks that would be involved.
To suggest that families are only engaged when a school is close to home only strengthens the opinion that the new middle school should come to fruition; not only is it central for all the Ringgold families, but central for sports, tutoring, and after-school activities. Families are “engaged” because they have made being involved with their child’s education a priority in life, not because of the school’s location.
Regarding strategic renovations at two closed facilities, what many fail to realize are the minimum code requirements for public school use. How selective could those renovations have been? What would you be permitted by law to eliminate? Renovation costs were over $27 million for DEC and MEC. Additional operating costs would have been $445,000 yearly. Let’s show the other side of the coin.
Is this really what the voters want to save? Schools in horrific disrepair, costly potential programs not benefitting the students, and a financial hole being dug deeper year after year?
Gail Glaneman
Eighty Four