The post regarding the NASD's possible desire to use eminent domain to acquire 2/3 of the Calandra's property against their wishes upset quite a few people (myself included).
The post drew many comments (over 40 as of this morning) and many were not consistent with what is typically posted on this site. As a result this morning I made a comment on the post and am repeating it below.
This site has been a great resource because of the contributions of many people - please help me keep it that way by staying focused on facts, information, and supported opinion, not by name-calling and nit picking. Thanks! Ross
New day, big breathe, count to 10 (maybe 100), and could we all please stop nit-picking one another and name calling.
Let's put the focus back on the fact that the NASD itself claimed to have reviewed 50 properties with 20+ acres each and chose the one that would provide them with a campus where they could build a building that would house two grades.
The building would have a capacity of up to 1340 students for two grades, thereby allowing each grade to have up to 670 students at a time when the largest current class in the district is 429 (9th grade) followed by 414 (7th). Entire enrollment growth k-12 has been roughly 100 students per year or less than 8 per grade.
They have chosen to create an additional transition year, increase traffic in the Tatamy Rd, East Lawn, Friedenstahl area, and increase logistics problems for parents.
They have further chosen a building that requires redundant facilities and have opted to create new athletic fields surrounding the building. The building also has higher annual operating costs than an elementary building would.
Finally, in order to make this plan work they need to raise taxes, borrow $50 million that won't be paid off for 30 years and they will need to take 2/3 of a family's property against their will.
No name calling necessary - and I should point out there is more than one person responsible for all this. It is a collective body of the school board and administration.
I'd encourage everyone who disagrees with this plan to send email and attend the next School Board Meeting.
25 comments:
Yes, this topic really appears to have touched a nerve in the Nazareth community, and specifically that residing at NOC.
Where there were some comments that were nothing more than personal attacks, many (including myself) aimed our comments at the board as a whole, although Mr. Keller is the very public face of that board.
I am curious as to why they want to go on the cheap for the property, but are more than willing to spend as much as possible on all the bells and whistles.
We all know that this one building will be a temporary fix to the crowding situation. That is unless all the local governments stop all future development.
I would think looking towards the future, the board would acquire a piece of real estate large enough to handle future expansion (read more classrooms), and pay at todays prices as opposed to paying a much higher cost in the future.
The main point is that we need more classroom space to educate our children. We don't need a fancy facade, we don't need all weather sports fields (I played in the mud and did just fine), and we don't need a pool. At least, not at this point and more important, at the high price tags they have.
What the board needs to be is fiscally responsible. Pay for what we really need at this point and as future monies become available, take care of the wants.
Of course, this will again force the board to be forward thinking in that they should PLAN for inclusion of those wants so that they don't have to go back to the drawing board in the future.
This isn't rocket science, just basic common sense. Something that seems to be lacking in our current leadership.
I still can't get my head around the fact that the board spent over $280,000 for the architect to do a "study" on the costs of building a pool. It's become apparent that the board has no "checks and balances" before spending. I would perfer to see voter referendums on all costs not related to student education.
Ross,
I vehemently disagree with your statemnet that the Calandra's do not want to sell. They were quoted in the Morning Call saying the price was too low, even at $108,000 per acre, and that they have been hearing offers for over two years. Seems like they probably thought a sale was close last year when they subdivided the land into two lots. One containing the building and two acres, the other containg vacant farm land.
If I remember correctly, I believe that the cement company gave them that land many years ago when they had issues with the blasting and having large rocks bombard their property in Stockertown.
Ok, they may be willing to sell if the price is right in their minds, but they don't want to be compelled to sell at whatever price the NASD offers.
Clearly, they don't like the offer and have been put in a terrible position forcing them to hire an attorney to fight having it taken by NASD via eminent domain.
They may have considered it, been open to it, listened to offers, but the price wasn't right in their minds.
Now they need to find a way to stop having their land taken from them at a price they don't believe is fair (and you or I may think it is, but that doesn't really matter - it is there land, regardless of how or when they got it).
My recollection is that there was something to do with the blasting impacting the manufacturing process of their products, but I don't know for sure. Could very well have been debris, but again, it doesn't matter. It is there land. They should have the final choice in what they do with it and they shouldn't have to be forced to sell at someone else's price.
Again, why is this parcel/location critical to improving education? It is not. It provides the campus the NASD for whatever reason desires.
Thanks for the note and comments - have a great week.
I do believe that the proposed new school is being planned to accomodate an expected student population of 1000 by 2019.
The rationale, as I understandit, for the fieldturf, which is much different than astroturf, is that it enables that field to be used constantly and have very little need for maintenance(mowing, fertilizing, painting, resodding, etc). This saves the district from needing to have seperate fields for Football(4 teams), Field Hockey, Soccer, Lacrosse, Band activities, Phys Ed classes. Beside not having the physical space to provide all the needed grass field area, the development and maintenance of all this would be greater than the option presented. Also, there has been comments on this site stating that artificial turf is being eliminated across the country because of injury issues. This is actually the opposite of the reality. More and more professional, college, and high school fields are being converted because of all the benefits, least of which is less injuries.
Part of the project is the expansion of available parking. Beside having more student parking available on school property, the new lots will help keep more of the event parking out of the neighborhods.
As far as traffic concerns along Friedenstahl, part of this proposal includes installation of traffic lights at the intersection of Friedenstahl with Tatamy Road and one at East Lawn Road. Both of these intersections are already dangerous and these signals will hopefully alleviate all traffic issues.
I agree that the cost seems staggering, but the costs will only be higher if we delay the inevitable.
Not sure I follow the enrollment, 1000 per grade by 2019? 100 students per year has been the current rate of growth and that equates to just under 8 per grade per year.
If highest grade right now is 430 and the building will accommodate up to about 675 thats 245 kids/8 it would take 30 years to fill the school.
Which is great but I'd imagine by then we'd have to build a new HS which would have no room to expand on the current campus and at least a new IS and Elem.
The parking probably won't make much of a difference for events. People tend to park where it is most convenient. If I'm attending an event at the HS Aud or Gym, I don't think I'd park at the new MS lot walk across the bridge, up the hill and around to the gym or aud, I'd just park as close as I could. Football might absorb more parking, but alot of people park on the streets to avoid getting stuck in the lot afterward.
I doubt the traffic lights will be installed by the school. They will put that on the townships. I believe in a public meeting Mr. Lesky has already noted it is a township issue.
The cost is staggering because we are replicating facilities we already have for this school grade level. We don't need a campus, we need to alleviate overcrowding. And as has been mentioned here previously, it can be not at a much lower cost that would allow us to do some of the other things that people would like, such as new fields, pool etc. And as some others have pointed out grabbing a big chunk of land now for the future might not be a bad idea (but not if its going to bankrupt us).
The traffic lights might help however, expect a huge back up of cars etc when the lights are red and 5th st stop sign. Morning nightmare: The traffic light at 191 and Friedenstahl is actually going to be installed by Meadowview Homes, J. Carty, as this was a trade off for the development he will be building off Schoeneck.
We are all conjecturing that "maybe " the Calandra's want to sell or "maybe " they don't. And this is giving false reports which is NOT good
What I believe is that they expect the total enrollment at the new school, both grades, to total 1000 by 2019.
I think what Dr Lesky was referencing when he said it was a township issue were sidewalks on Friednenstahl. But I may be mistaken
And no matter how or who installs the traffic lights, they will be there. At the increased number of events at the stadium, it would make the new lots the place to park to get easy exit; right out onto friedenstahl and then out at a light.
I could also see that there may be some advantages to the campus concept. Less duplication of ancillary facilities, an ability to share faclities, easier and more efficent to supervise/administer come to mind quickly.
I have read what you think is wrong with this plan. Now I would also like to see what you view as the positive things in this plan?
Sidewalks were not mentioned at the meeting I was at. The traffic on Friededstahl Ave and 5th St stop sign was refered to by Dr. Lesky a township issue not nasd.
As I recall from the article Sunday the Calandras don't want to sell at the price being offered and as a result took their case to an attorney and the press.
I'm sorry to come across as negative on this but there aren't any significant positives to this plan that I can see.
At the heart of the matter is having enough classroom space. This is the reason we are building.
The building being proposed is about 1/3 traditional classrooms (I believe there were about 33 total in the plans. Consider 25 students per room thats 825 meaning the other 515 students will be in non-traditional classrooms. Doesn't seem like enough classrooms for the numbers to me.
I don't like pulling 4-5 out of elementary. I don't understand (except to have a campus) why we are replicating facilities in the new MS that already exist at the old MS.
If we need traffic lights and athletic facilities lets look at those separately, but let's first resolve the space issue, even if it is in planned stages.
Putting the building in this location restricts future growth of the HS and reduces the space available for athletic facilities and parking.
I like that we are trying to solve the space problem, I just don't think this plan addresses the core issue, considers the added costs, and additional negative consequences.
I read an article in the newspaper recently that the race track property is still in the works for 1400 homes. Has the NASD taken this into consideration with the numbers of students they expect enrolled in the near future because this sounds like it could bring alot of students. I don't think this type of school for two grades with only 33 classrooms is going to solve our problem especially with all the housing developments that are yet to be built. They say the lower Nazareth elementary school is overloaded and may have to move some to shafer, what will happen with the elementary schools if this one housing development brings in 1400 homes, figuring one child per home=1400 more kids to educate. How is this 2 grade school going to aleviate our problem. I don't understand.
It is very interesting how you have this picture of the school board as being villains. Well, let me tell you a story. I've been attending just about all of the school boards meetings for going on 4 years now. Where have all of you self-righteous people been? It has always amazed me how few show up at the school board meetings. And I was you at one time, easier to complain then learn (attempt to make better). The only time the concerned citizens of Nazareth show up at board meetings is in droves to plead their case and disappear (whatever the current cause may be at the time). Most of the board tries, for the most part, to attend most committee and board meetings. That is more than I can say for most of you. I do not always agree with the school board but almost all of the conspiracy theories I've read on this site need to be righted. You are acting like the district woke up yesterday and said we need a new school and we are going to build the biggest and most expensive building we can. This endeavor started, I think, 3 years ago when the district did a population growth survey and was concluded how Nazareth school would look in the future. So far they have been right on the money. They started a design team to see what we needed best to educate our children. They had several meetings on what, where, for what grade levels and etc. all of which any one of you could have attended. The point is this story of the new building has been ongoing and I suggest that if you are really concerned your concerns take a greater meaning if you show at all the meetings instead of speculating about them.
TO 6:14AM
Perfectly said!!
Anon 8:55P-
The district is well aware of the planned development at the former racetrack site. At one of the past meetings I attended, this very issue was brought up by a community member.
Both Dr. Lesky and Mr. Keller had comments to the fact that (a) the board is aware of the planned development and (b) the development itself faces some major hurdles. Specifically cited were sewer and water constraints.
Anon 6:14A-
I am not arguing against a new school. Enrollement has gone up in the past 10 years and several of our elementary classes are above the district target. What I am arguing against is THIS proposed school.
The proposed MS is very nice looking. But there is alot of 'extras' that are duplicated throughout the district. The building plan calls for 33 classrooms but over 1/2 the building is for non-instructional purposes. But we just built a MS less than 10 years ago. It should have had all the things we are duplicating now.
Does anyone know, is this buidling beinbg designed to accomodate expanding it in the future, if needed?
The diagram shown in the Act 34 papers shows the all-weather track to the west, athletic fields to the north (on what is now the calandra property and clipper field), and friedenstahl avenue to the east. South has parking and athletic fields.
Given the space, road, and surrounding structures, I don't imagine you could expand much.
I do recall the architect mentioning he had designed it to be able to put an addition on. Nobody asked which way, maybe up?
My understanding was they could connect over the large courtyard areas or by connecting the wings of the building. However given the increased enrollment, it still would not be to expand to keep up. As Mr Maher concern was are we short changing ourselves. You have have only some many students with other students you have many many students and room to expand.
Sorry wanted to state the other building site would of allowed for more students and classrooms.
This response is for anon 6:14AM.
I don't feel you are making a fair assessment of the majority of people in this community. We elect the officials who represent us. We are under the assumption that they will act in our best interests in regards to the school and the communities. Between jobs, work, family and other obligations the "average joe" does not have time to attend all the meetings. We are under the assumption that if a person runs for office it is their desire to put forth the time and effort to make the organizations run smoothly. What happened in Nazareth, and what is now happening with the school board is contrary to what the majority of the public desires to see happening. We are not oblivious to what is going on....we read the newspaper and this forum. We do indeed CARE about our communities and our schools. Sure, there may always be some decisions made that someone doesn't agree with. But we generally follow the will of our ELECTED officials. Yes, it does take a MAJOR issue to get people up in arms. We feel like the people who desired to serve us, and were chosen by us, will do just that. When our elected officials blatently go against the majority of voter's wishes they will, and do, react. And rightfully so. I don't look at this as a case of people not caring. It is a case of the trust of the electorate being left down by the officials we voted into office.
To 5:35PM
Perfectly stated
I’m sorry you feel I’ve misjudged the Nazareth community. And it is easy to hide behind the guise of assumption. Do you think that if the school board had a crystal ball they would have a fighting chance to know what the community wants or doesn’t want? My point was that you can’t change anything by sitting on your couch and complaining. And by the way amazingly enough, I work a full time job, run my daughter to her various activities and still find time to attend the meetings. If indeed you attended a meeting even once and awhile, you would have a better working knowledge instead of piece together facts. The newspapers and this site don’t always cover a complete set of facts. So when you say you are not oblivious, I have to beg to differ. Our elected officials be it township, county or school board are there to serve us but if we choose not to be heard they have to go with their gut because there was no opposition. After an incident 4 years ago, my daughter told me I needed to get an education (be informed), what an education. I was there when the 1st seed was planted that we would need a new school because of our growth potential and am still there 3 yrs. later. I think that after listening to all of the special interest groups that have attended board meetings pleading their case have been represented in the new building plans. It is an expensive project but these plans represent the desires of those willing to show up and stand up for what they believe in. I didn’t think we needed a pool but my husband, who grew up in Nazareth, attended school there and has a real problem with higher taxes, feels that it is high time this district has a pool. If indeed, we waited on some of these wants what would be the price tag be later. I think that if we are going to spend money might as well get it right and what an investment in our future, our children. Giving our children the tools to be the best they can be can never be wrong. I never said the people of Nazareth didn’t care. Of all the places I’ve lived Nazareth has a draw all its own and that is remarkable. It’s like any relationship, it will never grow to its true potential if left to its own defenses. The relationship needs to be nurtured and an ongoing effort by all not just the elected few.
Traci (anon 6:14AM)
I don't disagree that people need to be involved. People do need to chose how and where they will be involved. No individual can do it all.
I applaud you for going to the school board meetings and would appreciate any reports you could send to share with everyone else about what happens.
But there are others who attend the Borough Council meetings, their township meetings, Church meetings, community groups and organizations meetings. People also volunteer for causes, donate time and money to groups and organizations, and help out in a myriad of other ways.
The point is we can't all be at every meeting. It goes back to the whole purpose for having this site. Instead of being upset with people for not coming to the meetings, share with them what is happening, and hope they will share with you information from meetings and events they attend.
Regarding the Board, I don't think they are villains, but I do think we have a history of not thinking things through well enough before we proceed and for that reason issues are being raised to ensure we don't do it again.
To 5:32 you are right on. You don't get complaints when things are going well, but you do hope there are a few vigilant residents following along so nothing takes place that is a surprise. For the most part, people find out about school spending when the tax bill arrives and they realize it is bigger than the year before. I understand there are times when it will need to increase, I just want to be sure the increase is warranted.
Elected officials should not go by guts or public will, but they should make decisions based on facts and the best known anticipated consequences of their actions. When their plans are announced, then they should consider public opinion in light of these facts and consequences.
As I mentioned earlier we don't have the best track record. From little things to big things, we don't seem to think things through well enough and it always costs more money to fix it later compared to doing it right up front.
And has been stated here and on other posts, for this particular upcoming board meeting, I do hope a lot of people show up.
VERY VERY WELL SAID TRACI.
Post a Comment