Quantcast

Editorial: Vote against field has big cost, little gain

These are facts. And when considering them, it becomes clear why school board members are so concerned taxpayers will frown on a plan to put in a new, fancy field, even if it costs them just a few dollars a year.

But it’s more than a little sad that in what has become a frothing public debate, kids end up being trampled time and time again. They don’t have anything to do with shortsighted pension plan promises or a stifling and expensive bureaucracy, after all. They didn’t ask for stack upon stack of regulations that require an endless supply of administrators doing paperwork.

Bethlehem schools are far from poverty stricken. And there are undoubtedly areas in which money is being misspent. But voting down the patching of roofs, replacement of windows, 21st century technology and, yes, even a modern and safe place for athletics programs, will not fix the problems inherent in our education system.

At the end of the day, it will really be up to the BC community to decide: Have things become so bad a message must be sent at any cost, or can the public, government and schools cooperate with one another? Because if they can’t, we have much bigger problems than what kind of grass the football team will be running on.

And as a reminder, sometimes the best way to deliver a message is in person. There will be a public hearing on the bond proposals Wednesday, Jan. 16, at 7 p.m. in the high school auditorium.

0
Vote on this Story by clicking on the Icon

Comments

Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment