OCR Text |
Show WHERE SHALL THE NEW BINGHAM ! HIGH SCHOOL BE LOCATED? . . The foregoing question has call-- call-- ed for the most serious consider-' consider-' f : ation on the part of the Board of : I Education and the citizens of i Bingham, "Highland Boy, Upper Bingham, Lark and Copperton, for the past few months. Two lo-? lo-? r4f cations that of the present site, and a new site at Copperton ; f- have held the attention of those ': who are interested. Mass meet-' meet-' - ' ings, committee meetings, and Board meetings have discussed i the matter in an endeavor to ar-j ar-j ' rive at a decision which would be elearly in the interest of the child-; child-; ren, for whom schools -are estfcb- r lished and maintained. At a ! i meeting held in the Jordan High i School auditorium, the Board promised that when a decision was reached, the reasons for such ; . a decision would be made knowx to the citizens initerested, and ii -fulfillment ofo that promise thit " v r statement is made. The arguments which have beer presented in favor of retaining 1 the hitrh school at its Dresent site stant check on drivers, busses and students, has never had a serious accident, which proves tfaat our transportation system has been far safer than private transportation, transporta-tion, which no one advocates doing do-ing away with. 4. The Utah Copper Company is building up Copperton as a home town for its employees. The only way it could profit financially financial-ly by the location of the high school there is by charging higher rentals. No one has intimated that this is to be done if the high school is located there. That Central Bingham property will depreciate because of the removal re-moval of the high school is rather loubrful. The students will be at Jopperton only during school ours. They will be under the arental roof at night. They will pend their energy at Copperton, I ut not their money. Locating 'he University at Salt Lake City r the Agruculiural College at ugan meant much financially to .iose cities, because thousands of 11 aro substantially as follows: 1. Bingham has gone throug J -..-'.!. t'ig circumstances t. 4 ti'-i - i itiself permanently i ( . -;fe canyon and is en.utled to e s h 'i Si'L ol v ithin its presen. .ijr.'.t. - -J. It would be a tremendout burden on the tax-payers to transport trans-port the high school students to .J Jopperton, costing approximately v . . .13J,000 annually. 4 3. Transpor. ation it dangerous ' and especially so on the road from the present site down to Copper-ton. Copper-ton. It is not so dangerous above '; the present site to the upper camps of the canyon as the traffic traf-fic is not so heavy. ? 4. The Utah Copper Company would be the people to be directly benefitted by the removal of the high school to Copperton, as the latter is privately owned by that company; while central Bingham would suffer serious losses in property values by reason of such removal. J 5. Is not the Utah Copper Company Com-pany primarily responsible for the attempt to move the school to Copperton, and for purely selfish reasons, and would not the school be built upon ground owned by the Utah Copper Company 1 J 6. Bingham does not need the I playgrounds which would be available at Copperton. II has "Nature's playgrounds at its very I doors." I 7. To add on to the present high f school building would cost only I about one-third as much as to .luilents go there, live there dur-g dur-g the school year, night and day nd spend their money there ; but .ementary- and high schools, to nich pupils are transposed aily, do not so contribute to the conomic resources of a town. 5. No, the Utah Copper Company Com-pany is not responsible for the attempt at-tempt to remove the Bingham aigh school to Copperton. If the :uove is made, the Utah Copper Company, which hasn't a child of ts own, will have to pay the argest part of the bill. 6. No. 6 above is rather unique ind a new idea, ot long ago .he Board was criticised rather severely for not expending about thirty thousand dollars in removing remov-ing the dump opposite the old aigh school building to provide a iittle playground. Now it is discovered dis-covered that no playground is needed because "Nature's playground play-ground is at our doors." 7. No. 7 above has already been discussed in part in the proceeding proceed-ing paragraph. . " 8. The argument that schools ihould be build within larger cen-era cen-era of population applies very well to 'elementary schools. But Joes that apply to high schools and colleges! 9. Another general statement may properly be added here. Schools are established and maintained main-tained for children. Their welfare wel-fare is of prime importance. Do the arguments which have been advanced against removal of the high school appeal to tihe citizens as aiming primarily at safeguarding safeguard-ing the welfare of the boys and irlst Primarily, it is not property prop-erty values; it is not a slight increase in-crease in taxes which is the crux of the matter. It is, what is for he greatest good of our boys and ,'irls, and is this added expendi- ure justified in the benefits .vhich will acrue to the citizens jf tomorrow 1 ' The Board of Education has, in ts best and maturest judgment, iccided in favor of the welfare of he boys and girls. They have decided de-cided to build a splendid high cuool at Copperton. Now that .his decision has been reached, hy not everybody get back of he Board and make this the fin- .1 school in the State of Utah. UOARD OF-EDUCATION. Jordan School District. I build an entirely new plant at Copperton.. This would save the tax-payers another added burden. ; 8. Schools and colleges should be built within the larger center of population within walking distance dis-tance of the people they serve, f and not out away from these cen- ters if they are to serve as real j community educational centers, f 9. Children should be kept near '. home, available for home calls ' when needed, and should not be beyond the immediate call of the parents. j Several additional minor argu- ments have been advanced, but ;j the foregoing constitute the major i; ones against the removal of thf high school. I Arguments which have been advanced in favor of removing the site to Copperton, and in replv to the foregoing arguments run about as follows: 1 i ghs--m is entitled to 4i : i vc,n ..( lu ul as is any toA '.' n he state far better .ban car rr- r. r.bed at the presr. ' : :..v fte sit And vh:l f :.;:;... at .-.cuts would t- 'i r.ev;i;s in health, hs,'1- f 'k . --'i nwlom by being mo "i '. (:ippcrtoii, so also woulu Mr. high sohnol s udents froi. 1 UgLl.-rri l;ty, Upper Bingham. f ...ar.! and Lcpperton as weu. 2. The cost of transportation I v ::i:l J be increased, but the clain I that it would be increased $30, I OOO annually is sheer exageration. The transportation cost for the f entire Jordan district is now less j than $24,000 annually. This in-4 in-4 dudes the transportation of about fifteen or sixteen hundred child-I child-I ren. Highland Boy, Upper Bing- ham, Lark and Copperton high school students are already being I transported. The additional trans-I trans-I portation cost would come almost wholly in transporting the Bing-J Bing-J ham central high school students i to Copperton, which would cost I approximately five thousand dol-I dol-I lars annually, including depreci- atioon on busses and all other f items. I 3. It is granted that! transporta-. transporta-. i8 gtill somewhat dangerous, but is constantly becoming safer. I Jordan District, through its eon 4 |