 By Walt Bolling September 30, 2006
The sentiment to salvage that dear old school is well placed; the contemplated non-profit use and its corresponding cost to the community, in my opinion, is not. The building may very will served public use and be affordable, consider that city hall and the borough building have each received poor report cards from local builders after inspections, and cautions have been delivered about continued use; besides most citizens cannot find convenient access to either. White Cliff could accommodate both city and borough departments with room left over-and there is ample parking. Now would be the time to explore that option since there has been and is now buyers who would like an opportunity to buy those buildings; the proceeds from such sale could well equip and furnish White Cliff for local government. Before approving the $15 million bond issue consider the track record of local assemblies to oversee another re-build of a school building-not only in terms of money; consider the harm to jr. high students associated with the assembly's miss-management record. Consider too that the city in its collective wisdom, divested its-self of responsibility and escaped (maybe) criticism be deeding the property away. We as citizens of the whole of the community may now have the opportunity to require them to do their civic duty and help with the planning. Do we as a community need and want an active arts community? You bet. Local government annually provides public monies to further their efforts; is that enough? I don't know; I do know we would suffer great loss without the arts community and local government should in my opinion encourage their continued contributions to our lives. The question is at what cost? Walt Bolling
On the Web:
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sitnews.
|