Editor, Times-Union: Past Warsaw school boards and administrations apparently have implemented a policy of negligence and mismanagement of school buildings. Prioritizing needs and keeping buildings updated has been neglected while deferring maintenance. Such is the case with Lincoln and Lakeview schools. We have heard repeated talking points exclaiming the portables at Lincoln are "unsafe"; "it is cheaper to build than repair"; "it's for the kids and the future.” If the portables are unsafe, why were they installed and used in the first place? Contrary to the myth of "cheaper to build than repair;" I simply don't believe it is an accurate statement. Deficiencies at both Lincoln and Lakeview need to be addressed. Updates should have been done years ago by including these costs in operational budgets rather than allowing deterioration and expecting taxpayers to approve a bond issue to replace a functional building. Education of students both now and in the future is not in question. Both sides agree. We disagree on the capital expenditures to achieve this. With a career spanning over 30 years in property and casualty insurance as a fraud and arson investigator, claims manager, licensed catastrophe claims adjuster, underwriting supervisor and sales manager, it is rare that building is less expensive than repairing when a building ages. None of the factors that make replacement versus repairing feasible are evident at Lincoln. Supporters of this referendum are comparing apples to cantaloupe. They want a new larger Lincoln rather than repairing the current one and disregard costs of new construction that is included in the current building. (Cost such as grade and site excavation, demolition of the current building, foundations, basement, floors, elevators for a second story building required by ADA, exterior/interior walls, kitchens, roofing and supporting structure, landscaping, parking lot and athletic field/playground, etc.) Repairs and upgrades to roof, electrical, plumbing, insulation, windows/doors, HVAC can be accomplished for five to six million versus over 20 million for new construction. Building a new school on this site presents other problems. The lot is too small to accommodate a school with a larger footprint requiring an athletic field and playground. Parking is inadequate now and will be even worse with a larger building. Where else within the city limits is a larger site available to accommodate all these needs? What do you do with the kids while the new building is being constructed? Bus them to another school for recess and sporting events? A school board member told me that middle schools with 6, 7, 8 grades would not be accepted by the community. Now is the time to consider it again. If approved, it would reduce classes at each elementary school allowing room for expansion while eliminating portables and implementing STEM classes at each elementary rather than just Washington. Don't the students at other schools deserve the same opportunities as Washington? The Inquiry Lab can't serve the needs adequately for the various schools. If Lincoln is replaced with a new building it will reward negligence and deferred maintenance with new construction and establish a trend at all buildings. Lakeview and Edgewood are showing evidence of similar neglect. Vote NO on this referendum forcing the school board to return to the drawing board and offer more cost-effective options. Jim Merritt Warsaw, via email Editor’s Note: The proposed building program targets Lincoln Elementary, Washington STEM Academy and Edgewood Middle School.
