From Lee and Janet Lautzenheiser

Monroe 

To the Editor:

There seems to be confusion when the school administration says they are doing a land swap for zero dollars.  They confirmed at Monday’s Q & A session that the school district would be buying the B&S property at $17,500 an acre and then when the current high school is vacated in approximately three years, B&S would buy the old school and property for the same total price as this proposed land purchase.  Yes, it will come out to zero dollars after the new school is completed, but the district is spending money initially to acquire the land.  A question to consider:   Why are we paying market rate of over one million dollars for property which in the end is a “land swap”?  

The school administration also confirmed that as part of the land swap, the Abraham Lincoln school lot would be divided and the southern portion of the lot would be sold to B&S, therefore reducing the land available for the future needs of the elementary school.  They state that it would still leave plenty of green space for the current school.  However, the school administration also says they need to look to the future needs and that is why they want over 70 acres for the new high school campus, but they don’t seem to be thinking about the future of Abraham Lincoln school.  Why would we give up land that could be used in 15-20 years, especially if we are adding housing to the south side of the city which would add students to that school?   

Finally, there is concern about the traffic impacts from the new location, especially on County KK and along 31st Avenue.  What about the traffic impact to the intersection of 20th Avenue and 13th Street?  This is already a busy intersection, and a new high school at the B&S location will add significantly more traffic at the end of the school day for students, parents, and faculty to get across town.

The B&S site was voted down last December.  While the school board has presented the current “land swap” as more favorable, the concerns we list here, at least for us, make this site even less favorable than when it was initially presented in December.