I think the current push by some local political groups and blogs insisting that the Elementary School Building Committee choose Fort River as the site of the new school building is ridiculous.
I will wholeheartedly support the new building project regardless of which site is chosen because of the clear and urgent need to replace both Fort River and Wildwood as soon as possible. This is the driving principle above all else that we cannot lose sight of as the proposal is being finalized.
Failing to pass this project now would leave us without any viable path forward to secure state funding to replace these two buildings. That would be an enormous blow educationally, and a disaster financially. The last attempt at this failed because our town chose not to fund its share of the project. Our community is very fortunate to have this second chance at state funding. We must see this done.
So while I have my opinions like anyone else, in the end I don’t really care which site is chosen, but I do care that it’s selected based on a thorough assessment of factual information, and expert review: not in reaction to pressure from a political action committee, and certainly not in response to the demands of a small handful of residents insisting that the project meets all of their personal preferences.
These are the same voices who opposed the less expensive project six years ago, who downplayed the steep cost of inflation we’re now facing as a result, and who have been relentlessly lobbying to build at Fort River long before the Building Committee even began looking at options.
They call it an “obvious” and “clear” choice. Where is the appreciation for the many complex factors involved in a building site selection, respect for the professional expert analysis of these factors, and support for the Building Committee’s deliberate and open-minded approach to evaluating this information?
And where is the acceptance that many residents feel differently about this project — and have for a long time? We’ve heard no acknowledgement from these groups that this project is already a compromise in response to their objections to the last one. We’ve seen no spirit of cooperation with public officials, and no commitment to support the final proposal if it’s not everything they want: just “we know better” and “it must be this.”
We’ve seen this repeatedly with these groups, most recently with the library project: an insistence on getting their way, and a scorched earth policy of destruction when they do not. These groups do not deserve outsized influence in our government decisions, no matter how loudly or actively they try to dominate our public discourse. Loudness of demand does not equate to representation in the community: Our public officials would do well to remember this.
In contrast, the Building Committee has been systematic, thoughtful and inclusive in its evaluation of a complex, multivariable topic, striving to meet the educational needs of all students while working hard to control costs for taxpayers as much as possible. Their efforts have been a great example of how to work responsibly and selflessly in support of the greater good while setting personal preferences aside. As such I will be happy to support their final proposal.
You can let the Building Committee know what you think at Amherst.School.Project@gmail.com. There will always be a strong selection bias toward criticism and personal agenda in the messages sent to public officials and resident volunteers, especially in Amherst. You can help balance this out by sharing how you feel with this committee.
Peter Demling is a member of the Amherst School Committee, serving since 2017.