The Way Forward

The following letter, written by resident Steve Diaz, was sent to the School Board Directors on Apr 28, 2011 8:34 am.  It is being reprinted with Mr. Diaz' permission.

Members of the School Board:  In the midst of the din and disappointment over the bids received on "the new high school", it was a pleasure to see the board finally upset with its advisors, particularly Architect Celli, over the failure to accurately comprehend the likely range of project bids.  Most significant, to me, was the board president's cry that Mr. Celli's undisclosed list of 75 candidate reductions "should have been presented to the board a year ago."  Indeed they should.  But many suggestions from the CAC and others on such points were received by a stone ear, as the board was not really interested in such cuts.  One example arises in the LEEDS certification matter. This is a policy value of high significance in the community in Mt. Lebanon, one that was an essential element of the advocacy for the project (see your own brochure, written, printed and mailed to us at our own expense).  Now, Mr. Remely says that LEEDS certification is an easy take away--really?  The underlying issue with the effort to reform the bloated proposal that went out for bids (a rebuild, not a "renovation" project, if we are honest with ourselves) is that the credibility of the board is directly in issue. You seem to have lost your soul by suddenly now demanding answers to questions that you failed to address when the community, including a petition signed by 4,000 voters, asked you to do so. Question the LEEDS standards and the true returns for the cost?  That was deemed unreasonable and unacceptable by the board back during the Act 34 public hearings.  What else might be cut? The third gym? Mr. Remely went shouting after a Municipal Planning meeting that it was a mandatory element of the project to satisfy community demands.  The extra over-sized addition to the new pool?  Notwithstanding substantially decreasing student population trends, that has also been ridiculed as an absurd and miserly approach--the pool was even defended at the risk of not telling the truth when, contrary to published board policy, our superintendent told the Municipal Commission that parking was not in issue because the facility would definitely not be open to the public. Not tear down the newest building on campus?  This was also openly mocked when suggested to the board by the public on many occasions.  Given such items, what do you expect to see on Mr. Celli's obscure list of "75" reductions that might, at this time, have become acceptable (remember, you told the public that the project was as tight as it could be, with no fluff--again, see your own minutes, tapes of meetings, and your boastful brochure)?

The result of such behavior, your own unprompted but closely observed conduct and words, is that you seem to have slight regard for facts, and no actual plan or value other than spending as much money as you can without obtaining review from the voters. With such a decision process, no wonder you find yourselves confused and in disarray.  But on you push.  As Mr. Rothschild has insightfully observed, you cannot push on without completely re-scoping and re-conceiving the nature and the purpose of a "renovation."  It is time to show a modicum of humility and admit that the process has been badly mismanaged for a long time.  Admit that you have not listened to the people.  Admit that you may not be the right decision makers. Has it occurred to any of you who were so invested in the absolute correctness of the proposal that at this juncture you have had your turn at the wheel and perhaps it is time for you to voluntarily step down and allow new leadership to clean up and lead us forward?  Has it been worth all the damage and rift in this community you have caused by your intransigence, disrespect for public opinion and single-minded refusal to compromise, only to come to this juncture?  

It seems to me that a public apology is due from all of you to Mr. Fraasch for the manner in which you treated him.  It seems to me that a clear sign of new-found respect for the petition of 4,000 of your neighbors and constituents is also in order.  It also seems to me that any self-respecting board member with a sense of shame should be willing, publicly and voluntarily, to accept personal responsibility for what you and your policies have done.  Don't look to blame others, chosen by you in the first instance, for your own failures in formulating and achieving successful public policy.  Show true leadership and some measure of maturity---you have not succeeded, don't keep doing that which has not worked for any of us.  

Respectfully.  Steve Diaz