We’ve recently learned from our sources that all is not well with many operational considerations. Recently several teachers who were instructed to report to the Mansion for staff training voiced a concern for their safety. (We purposely are not giving much info as to not cause these teachers any additional stress).
So the question remains, why are people still occupying the Mansion if it is unsafe? And how unsafe is it really? Is the engineering firm that furnished the report on the building condition the same company that would be contracted to oversee the repairs? Can you say conflict of interest? Or how about collusion? We can continue but you get the idea. Is the Consolidation Bond issue that Dr Chase, Trustees Terry Williams, Lloyd Newland and David Warner all favored still a game plan for them as their legacy? The legacy should be about education, and improved metrics for the students. The Board should have learned something when the bond was overwhelmingly defeated – and not only that they poorly communicated with the taxpaying public. Are they trying to better understand what the taxpayers, including those with children in the school, were trying to tell them by voting against the bond.? Fix the existing schools, don’t sell them or move them!
A hypothetical question was raised at a recent
neighborhood meeting we attended. The question was, “What is the first thing(s)
that needs to be done to start improving the school buildings?” The answer
was resounding, “Fix the roofs at each of the schools.” It was also asked,
“Why wouldn’t they just do that anyway?” The answer was stunning: “Because it
wouldn’t allow them to continue with their narrative that the schools are
falling apart and need to be jettisoned while new buildings were constructed at
Warburg.” The crowd was in disbelief.
Here’s a couple of questions raised for
which we need answers to from the Board. First, Why did the staff remain in
the mansion for roughly a month if the conditions were as dire as Dr Chase
insisted? Second, has the Board considered having the building evaluated by an
engineering or architectural firm that is a disinterested party with
nothing to gain by championing a campus consolidation? Third, has the
Board already moved to initiate roof repairs? Fourth, once roof repairs
are made what will be the next round of repairs and will they be
made in stages of seriousness? Fifth, what is the next bond offering going to cover?
Will it be for major, minor, all or some repairs? Most well run districts float
bonds every couple of years so that major maintenance, such as roofing, can be
done in a timely and scheduled manor. Why does our Board insist on ignoring
necessary periodic maintenance bonds? Trustee Williams insisted during the
Consolidation Bond presentation that the taxpayers in the past had always
defeated the bonds. Why do you think that happened?
This Board, (except for its two newly elected
members) and this Superintendent have not given the public the confidence that
they need to be assured that the right decisions are being made for our property where we
send our children to learn. The fantasy that was purported during the
Consolidation Bond forums was that the children would learn better in brand new
buildings, with state of the art smart boards, lights and other peripherals.
What was also mentioned was that we have great teachers. Great teachers can
teach under a tree if they are truly great. We’re not saying they should all
adjourn to the great outdoors to teach. But instead of worrying about speaking
Mandarin or having a press booth on the football field, let’s worry about
teaching and learning in a productive environment. Fix the roofs. That’s a
start – it needs to begin somewhere. It’s the first step to make A
Better Greenburgh School District.
