This is the blog section of the PURE Reform website. Please leave your thoughts and comments here.
PURE Reform has created this blog as a forum for parents, teachers and community members to share information and voice concerns regrading the reform process in the Pittsburgh Public Schools. Although we would like to foster constructive dialogue, PURE Reform does not edit content. The views expressed by bloggers in this forum are not necessarily views held by PURE Reform.
To comment on an existing topic, go to the line at the bottom of the post for that topic that begins "Posted by..." That line will list "1 comment," "2 comments," etc. Click on "comments," then leave your comment in the box provided. To post as Anonymous, no registration is required, OR you can choose an identity.
To suggest a new topic, go to this month's post labeled "Start a New Post" and add your comment (as described above) about the new suggested topic. PURE Reform will use these comments to start new posts.
Not a bad article, but did Roosevelt ever really specify that asbestos was only a $6-8M item?
Most people understood asbestos as the explanation that renovation estimates Roosevelt gave were so much higher than the $40M or less figure given by the Schenley task force group of architects, etc. Roosevelt insisted that all the plaster had to be removed.
Also the article does not touch on a key issue- the "emergency" move that wasted up to $20M that the district very much needs and badly disrupted the high school experience of hundreds of students. And readers may still not understand the big news from the 2009 report- that Schenley actually has minimal asbestos in its plaster!
The article is avoiding the very important fact that the latest vote to sell the building was CLEANLY AND CLEARLY DIVIDED ALONG RACIAL LINES WITH THE 4 AFRICAN AMERICAN BOARD MEMBERS VOTING NOT TO SELL THE BUILDING!!!!!! What does that say about our school board and about the PPS if the board is divided in this way?? At a time when the focus is on EQUITY IN THE SCHOOLS this seems like a slap in the face.
The figures regarding asbestos issues seem garbled. The article seems to imply that in 2008, the cost of asbestos related work was placed at 6M - 8.5M and it was later learned that the cost was only 1M. But that is not exactly the case. A third figure for the work was also given, a figure of $18M plus, and that was the figure corresponded to the highest renovation estimates. Of course, if the plaster is not asbestos then figures for removing it are no longer relevant.
Bottom line is that now that we know there is minimal asbestos in the Schenley plaster, we need an updated and realistic figure for renovation as requested by the petition (along with figures for the alternative renovations that will be coming up such as renovation of Peabody and renovated athletic facilities at U Prep).
More on numbers. The 2009 report specifies that the cost to remove all plaster believed to contain asbestos is $192,000. The $1M figure includes items like floor tile which are found in virtually all PPS and were never said to pose a danger.
More on race. Will someone please bring up this "courageous conversation" about the board vote being divided along racial lines when it comes to the issue of selling Schenley?
Interestingly it is only on the PPS board that opinion was split along racial lines. In the community, among alums and on the petition people of all races are united and recognize the value of Schenley and the Schenley building.
Hey, while you're at it, see if you can get some answers about furloughs and why 300 teachers were canned but no administrators. I'd ask my fellow teachers to start a petition drive like what you have done, but that would be asking too much.
7 comments:
Not a bad article, but did Roosevelt ever really specify that asbestos was only a $6-8M item?
Most people understood asbestos as the explanation that renovation estimates Roosevelt gave were so much higher than the $40M or less figure given by the Schenley task force group of architects, etc. Roosevelt insisted that all the plaster had to be removed.
Also the article does not touch on a key issue- the "emergency" move that wasted up to $20M that the district very much needs and badly disrupted the high school experience of hundreds of students. And readers may still not understand the big news from the 2009 report- that Schenley actually has minimal asbestos in its plaster!
The article is avoiding the very important fact that the latest vote to sell the building was CLEANLY AND CLEARLY DIVIDED ALONG RACIAL LINES WITH THE 4 AFRICAN AMERICAN BOARD MEMBERS VOTING NOT TO SELL THE BUILDING!!!!!! What does that say about our school board and about the PPS if the board is divided in this way?? At a time when the focus is on EQUITY IN THE SCHOOLS this seems like a slap in the face.
The figures regarding asbestos issues seem garbled. The article seems to imply that in 2008, the cost of asbestos related work was placed at 6M - 8.5M and it was later learned that the cost was only 1M. But that is not exactly the case. A third figure for the work was also given, a figure of $18M plus, and that was the figure corresponded to the highest renovation estimates. Of course, if the plaster is not asbestos then figures for removing it are no longer relevant.
Bottom line is that now that we know there is minimal asbestos in the Schenley plaster, we need an updated and realistic figure for renovation as requested by the petition (along with figures for the alternative renovations that will be coming up such as renovation of Peabody and renovated athletic facilities at U Prep).
More on numbers. The 2009 report specifies that the cost to remove all plaster believed to contain asbestos is $192,000. The $1M figure includes items like floor tile which are found in virtually all PPS and were never said to pose a danger.
More on race. Will someone please bring up this "courageous conversation" about the board vote being divided along racial lines when it comes to the issue of selling Schenley?
Interestingly it is only on the PPS board that opinion was split along racial lines. In the community, among alums and on the petition people of all races are united and recognize the value of Schenley and the Schenley building.
Hey, while you're at it, see if you can get some answers about furloughs and why 300 teachers were canned but no administrators.
I'd ask my fellow teachers to start a petition drive like what you have done, but that would be asking too much.
Post a Comment