I live across the street from School 18. Three of my children attended there in their first years of school. One completed all of his k-6 schooling there. Two others attended there in their earlier primary years. I was a member of the PTA there. My children have played on the school grounds there and I have played with them there. I have a level of attachment to the experience of the school and the neighborhood.
Over the last couple of years as the process for planning for the facilities plan unfolded I attended all but one of the meetings regarding school 18 and the plan to replace it. I believe I reflect the views of the people that attended the meetings in that we all want the best for the children of the community. We also agree that the school building is inadequate as a school.
The building is outmoded as a school building. It has no handicapped access, no fire escapes, inadequate bathrooms, is small for the number of students the district feels it needs to assign there, is poorly layed out, has inadequate gym facilities, inadequate playground facilities, inadequate library facilities. The design of the building also has allowed a disreputable element to hang out on the steps late at night threatening safety and well being at times over the years (it certainly doesn't discourage it) and cars, golf carts, and motor cycles to cut through its passage ways from Bertha to Hurlbut.
The building has some historic qualities. I have heard that it might have been historic register nominated but conversely it has also been noted by the state that the school district had "no prudent and feasible alternative to replacing the school". Purchasing another piece of property seemingly would be impractical and probably much more costly.
A process was engaged in to review the use of the buildings and there was considerable time for public review. Although Historic Albany Foundation stated that they preferred that the buildings be re-used in some way they stated of the process that "We are pleased to see that the School District followed an appropriate process in developing its plan" in a letter from Elizabeth Griffin, HAF Executive Director.
If at the "11:59th" hour a substantial move to block the demolition and replacement of school 18 should take place it would be a crime of high order. It would be done at cost to tax payers who have already put out greatly for a much needed facilities plan. Should it prevent the replacement of the school at this point it would be a crime against the children and parents of the neighborhood in providing them a place for high quality education. It also would be an occasion to play into the debate about charter schools as presently the school district is under pressure to compete against charter schools in many respects. Replacing School 18 and other buildings is PART of what the school district can and must do to improve itself in relation to the "threat" of charter schools [needless to say that is a whole additional discussion I need not go into here].
It is important that the work to build a new school in our neighborhood go forward. For reasons of equity with other neighborhoods, for reasons of safety and quality of facilities, and because the replacement is already underway it is necessary that the replacement go forward.
It is worth noting that as of today (7/25) community groups and neighbors have already been allowed to enter the school and remove parts of it for re-use in other building projects. Substantial portions of flooring have already been removed as well as cabinet doors and other features. It is too late to reverse this process for any good benefit.
