has found a third of a million dollars to tear down the Stronghurst Complex. It is vacant building. There is no urgent need to tear it down. It is debatable whether or not that kind of money should be spent on something that has a more direct benefit for students.
APS' John Dufay has reported that the district's emergency reserves are gone, and that the district would have to go to the legislature for more money, if something big happens. (link)
It seems that the leadership of the APS is in a bit of a hurry to sell the land that the Stronghurst Complex sits on. When the truth about the spending at the APS UAC, became public, APS' spin was that it really wasn't going to cost taxpayers anything because the proceeds of the Stronghurst sale would cover the unjustified costs of renovation.
In the first place, selling public property to cover public debt still costs taxpayers, because it is their building and land which is being sold.
More importantly, the method of funding the renovation, does not justify the renovation. The leadership of the APS has never justified the money that they have spent on the Uptown Administrative Complex.
They will not explain, defend, or even acknowledge the amount of the public trust and treasure that has been squandered at 6400 Uptown Blvd.
There is a related story in this morning's Journal.
(link sub req)
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Cash strapped APS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Stronghurst in old and asbestos ladden. Reconstructing sections would be costly to get things up to new building standards. Asbestos that is encapsulated was accepted in buildings for ages. Still is to a certain extent, I think.
This was known when they tried to sell it "as is"; I am not surprised that no one wanted the renovation / building code related nightmares. Tearing the old thing down and starting fresh is smart in this case, perhaps.
And maybe we should think of doing the same with school administrators. If the APS Good 'ole Boy/Gal system is Stronghurst by proxy, all asbestos ladden and antiquated, should we not then flatten it and start with something up to code?
The asbestos is prejudice and fear, is fraud and corruption, encapsulated in the very mortar of our schools. Stronghurst is the proud shambling mass of "this is how we have always done it here" that was good enough fifty years ago, and should be just fine now, by gum! No one wants to let go of a simpler time. But we sometimes must evolve to survive, change to live without fear.
And I agree with you on not selling the land that APS has to fund short term needs. Who knows what population distribution will be like in the future? Will APS have to buy land at a more expensive price later if enrollment in that area warrants a new school?
UAC is cool, I will give it that. It reminds me of the JeffCo Schools admin complex in Colorado, it was near a mall too. I worked out of the maintenance/bus yard from the safety and security trailer (not near a mall, but near a scenic freeway overpass!). We later got digs in the warehouse building, though. But the administrative building housed the degreed professionals, and the lower floors were rented out to the Federal Government renewable energy program. I think JeffCo came out pretty good in that deal on rent.
If APS can use the towers to decrease costs to taxpayers, or just increase revenue for buying educational material, I would be fine with it. But if they just all wanted to be near the mall for lunch, that is ridiculous to spend that much money on.
If all administrative services are really accessible to the public, and all in one place, then it is a benefit to the public; a true convenience and time saver. If the public good is not the concern, but perpetuation of a system that is easily fleeced, then we have a problem.
J. Lopez
Post a Comment