Op-ed: Pathway for building a new Quaker Valley High School
Share this post:
As a taxpayer in the Quaker Valley School system, I am disgusted with our school board’s insistence on building a new high school on a possible landslide location, instead of a significantly lower cost option at our current high school location. They refuse to listen to reason.
The Quaker Valley School Board’s recent op-ed in the June 29 issue of the Sewickley Herald is the most recent attempt by the QVSB to distort the facts in a continuing effort to convince the community and Leet Township officials to support the hilltop site for a new high school. Opposition to this problematic site does not equal opposition to a new QV high school. Futhermore, the hilltop site is not a done deal.
The most obvious, safe and cost-effective place to build a new high school is at the current Beaver Street location. If the “credible engineers” presented abundant evidence of the infeasibility of doing so, then why did the QVSB previously purchase the homes adjacent to the current high school to build a new or renovate the existing high school? QVSB later sold the homes at less than purchase costs.
Credible engineers told the QVSB that they would not recommend building on the hilltop site, even if the property was given to the QVSD. How were their warnings figured in to the QVSB decision?
The flood plain issue is a non-issue. The current site has adjacent buildings such as the Quaker Valley Shopping Center and the Leetsdale Industrial Park (location of QVSD administrative offices) with multiple building that have remediated the flood plain issue. In June 2021, Citizens for a Great School, with the help of local architects, provided drawings that demonstrated the feasibility of building on the current location above the flood plain while maintaining the current building until a new school is built.
Yes, there have been QV board after board elected that unanimously supported the building of a new high school. CGS and its supporters agree with those boards about the need for a new high school, just not on the hilltop site.
While the rigorous search for a new site may have been conducted, one must wonder how rigorous that process actually was. Consider that the properties were purchased for almost $10 million without any out clauses if the Leet Township zoning board refused to grant a special exception, or core drillings found some geotechnical problems. When the zoning board denied QV’s request for a special exception (variance) due to unsafe access, the QVSB decided to use our tax dollars to fight the Leet zoning board’s decision.
The zoning board decision provided the QVSB with the option of ensuring safe access for residents, faculty and students, in return for approval from the Leet zoning board. Judge James overturned the Leet zoning board’s decision. However, an appeal of his decision is scheduled to be heard in October. A question for the QVSB: What happens if the appellate court sides with the citizens that brought the appeal?
The less than rigorous process that led to the purchase of the hilltop site never included a discussion with area first responders who wrote of their access concerns in a July 2022 letter to Leet zoning board. Given the limited access, and the steep and winding road that services the hilltop site, one would have hoped that a more rigorous process would have included multiple meetings with first responders and traffic engineers.
I agree with CGS argument that the environmental damage, traffic issues, inaccessibility for walking or biking students, teachers, parents, and the public to access the school without a car or bus, and over-all costs of the hilltop site should give the QVSB second thoughts.
I also believe that communities that wisely invest in education thrive. However, I ask the question: Why does QVSD spend over $30,000 per year, per student? That amount will rise with the addition of increased debt service on the $120 million cost of a new high school. The QVSB deflects this question by answering, “QVSD has one of the lowest millage rates in Western Pennsylvania.” Good, we understand that, but why are we spending 30% more to educate our students, while the top performing schools spend so much less?
Look out taxpayer, the school board wants to get further into your wallet.
— Dan Telep, Aleppo