Report Inappropriate Comments

Bryan Buckley,

I appreciate and applaud your approach, but there are more sources for you to consider besides those you cited.

1) Re: "socio-economical affect" and central location of Vets vice Pilgrim: Very interesting and illuminating points, specifically "bringing more people to the center." Dr. D's explanation that a centrally located Jr. High (ie Vets) is good brought to my mind the question "then how come a centrally located High School isn't good?" You're attempt to address from the other side is a welcome addition to the discussion and worth giving some thought.

2) Your assumptions regarding the size of the student population in two High Schools and student/teacher ratios are incorrect, which undermines some of your arguments. There are 900 kids at Vets and they will be split in some fashion between Pilgrim and Toll Gate, not all will be going to one of the two (ie Pilgrim), which seems to be a common misconception out there. So no school is going to double in size (in fact, this will put the numbers in each school closer to what they were in 2005). Additionally, there will be teachers going with the students so the ratio won't increase any more (and 28:1 is a weighted ratio that is defined in the Teacher contract). Finally, the school department commissioned population projection studies, all of which show Warwick staying--at best--about the same. In other words, there isn't a looming student population boom coming. (Check out the committee's web site for more info).

3) I agree. Pilgrim may have more "cosmetic" fixes than Vets, but ALL schools need serious help. This is a function of not getting adequate funding for infrastructure improvements. It's a complicated issue, but involves a $20 million bond that wasn't released by the Mayor, the continual battles between the School Committee and City Council/Mayor and the plain fact that 85% (at least--no exaggeration) of the school budget goes to paying people salaries and benefits. That's just a fact. The political and fiscal reality behind the school closure/repurpose decisions is that the Schools have been essentially flat-funded for several years, which has meant basically the status quo. The School committee may come up with the budget, but the City Council approves it. It takes political pressure to get the needed funds to make the improvements you desire. That hasn't happened and the School Committee is, frankly, wary of engaging in another no-win battle with the City Council (and taxpayers, frankly) who don't want to pay for improvements (much less new buildings!).

From: Panel favors Vets as Junior High

Please explain the inappropriate content below.