Wording was flawed; intent sincere
In response to the editorial “Ghetto comment way off base” (T-R 6/29/14) I would like to say that I regret the use of the word ghetto, because it inadvertently hurt the feelings of some in the community. A building in need of repairs would have been a better and more accurate statement. Most importantly, the comment took away the focus of the meeting from the actual issue. The actual issue was that the students’ learning environments must be more important than executive ones. In my opinion, spaces used by students need to come before any that are dedicated to use by adults. It is too bad that the author formed an opinion from only reading the T-R article “School board at odds over pay increase” (6/26/14).
If the author would have actually watched the board meeting, they would have seen that I was not speaking at all about the students, staff or educational program at Anson. The building structure was the only thing being discussed. Furthermore, I feel our “PR” pieces should be the buildings housing classrooms, rather than deluxe remodeling and furnishing of the administration building. I think the deluxe scale of the Support Services Building upgrade is out of balance compared to the level done in the school buildings.
I do not deny that the old Central Office building was in a gross state of disrepair, but so is Anson (leaking window frames in classrooms, bookshelves being used for walls in classrooms, and poor air circulation in classrooms). Yes, Anson School is on the Physical Plan list for remodeling, but there has been no date set, so it could be several years out.
In hindsight I wish I would have used a different word to describe the physical state of the Anson building. However, I stand by my commitment to children first!