Question 2 of the School District’s Nov. 8 referendum requests $12 million for a second gym at River Bluff Middle School that creates “financial quicksand,” and I will vote “no” on it. Question 1 has a capital request regarding the former Yahara school that I do not support either.
River Bluff should never have been built where it is. The grounds are less than half of the modern 20-acre minimum standard, traffic congestion abounds, and there is no natural way to expand the school. Why was it built there? Because the district owned the land and took the easy way out.
Problems don’t end here. The small campus is congested, containing a beloved National Register Historic building in the 1892 High School, an administration building that is functional but that is all, an art deco community building (gym) that is the 1941 Armory and of local historic value, and a dated maintenance building.
Here is the lesson missed 25 years ago: all significant capital projects need to be accompanied by long-term visioning about what happens next else “good money keeps chasing bad money,” and more gets wasted.
But, this lesson was apparently not learned. Question 1 allows the district to tear down the 60-year old Yahara Elementary School then replace it with a new maintenance building on land worth $200,000 - $300,000 per acre. A maintenance building on prime real estate? The Yahara site sits across from the high school and has at least one outstanding reuse option: a new, 2-story middle school.
Stoughton middle school kids deserve the best, safest, most modern learning environment we can provide. We can do better for them and must. What the community and parents need to see is a comprehensive, long-term vision for district buildings before serious questions of tearing down and re-building start. What is the long-range vision for the entire River Bluff campus and Yahara site?
There is another angle to long-term visioning. Like it or not, Stoughton is in direct competition for young families with Oregon and McFarland and we have been losing ground. Both McFarland and Oregon had significant capital referenda in recent years to build new schools and/or significantly modernize schools.
Having modern facilities that attract young families is essential. Patchwork solutions at River Bluff will not work! We need a long-term vision with community involvement to be immediately undertaken by the district. Question 2 is premature and creates a “sink” for future, unwise spending.
Roger Springman
Stoughton
