OCR Text |
Show A Look At The 'New School1 Proposition In the fall of 1948 I first came to Panguitch to teach The day I arrived the old tabernacle on the corner next to North Ward wag being torn down. I still recall the Incid ent, how the young enterprising citizens Joined in the "fun" to destroy the old eyesore while many of the older people looked sadly on and wondered WHY Now I learn that the old school house on Main and Second Is next. Certainly the superintendent and school board have done their homework well in coming to this decision. After all, they must consider the safety of the youngsters and the learning environment. However, I'm not convinced that the people In Panguitch know why this old museum piece has to go. No one I've talked to seems to have the complete story. Perhaps if I question the decision, little daylight may come forth. Is the bulldiny condemned' Who condemned it? Could the shell be preserved with complete remodeling done Inside. Has a reputable architect been consulted In the matter? Has a statement been made by the superintendent and the board with all the rationale given? Have the principal, his staff, and parents of the school youngsters been consulted? Or - - Is this another decision made from the top on down? Has any poll been taken in coming to this decision to find out what public opinion is on the matter? Has this matter ever been on the board's agenda for public hearing? When I taught in Panguitch, I much preferred the older building to the newer one. The older building had character, substance, quality. The base ment room I taught in may have been darker but it seemed roomier and cosier In In-clement weather. The flooring was rough and uneven and the blackboards awful, but there was old-shoe comfort and a solid, substantial feel to the quarters. Is it more practical and less costly to tear down this building and construct a newer one? Or, should further Investigation be made? If so - what are the facts behind the decision? I hate to see the pioneer past of Panguitch displaced by more functional structures which are denuded and void of all charm. It's a grave mistake, I feel, when this town depends so heavily on tourist traffic. Time and again, when I've been here, I've noticed tourists snapping pictures of the school, the bishop's store house, the Social Hall, and the old Courthouse. And I'm wondering now - after the school house, what is next? Lowell R. Jackson Director of Information and Publications Seattle Public Schools |