Letter: Costs at T.C. Walker
At the joint meeting of school and supervisor boards on Sept. 18, Supervisor Borden, et al, asked a reasonable question of Mr. Kiser and his minions. What are you planning to do at the closed T.C. Walker School that will cost $3.5 million?
Due to that question being asked, we now know that the repurposing plan includes almost $2 million to freshen up the campus; $475K to modify hardscape; almost half a million for furniture and nearly $300K for architectural fees. Oh, and $222,132 for the areas that will serve as the meeting place for Head Start kiddies from around the county.
In a previous letter to the Gazette-Journal, I bemoaned Head Start as an ineffective 1960s-era poverty scam. That’s because of a study that was done by the government that determined that the program had no discernible positive effect on the kids who were attending. Doubt me as did some readers? Google: Brookings Institute, Head Start, Grover Whitehurst and see for yourselves.
Now we are told that the county wants to spend a quarter of a million dollars to doll-up the paths and driveways for the part of T.C. Walker that Head Start will occupy. It’s a $7.235 billion annual national waste of money and our community wants to spend money we don’t have to improve access. H-e-l-l-oooooo.
Another conundrum for the school board is the desire by county supervisors that they vacate the 16,000 square feet they occupy in Building 2 at the Court House and find offices elsewhere. At the joint meeting Mr. Kiser said that he needs space for the 75 people in administrative roles. I may have missed with some numbers, but 16,000 divided by 75 is 213 square feet per occupant. The standard for office space as published in "Architectural Graphic Standards" is 120 square feet per occupant. My rough calculations inform me that those 75 people should require 9,000 square feet, not the 16,000 they have in Building 2 or the 21,000 they want to have at T.C. Walker.
Someone in the county needs to get a space planner onboard to give these pipe dreams a hard look. And maybe they need to apply the same calculus to all the other county functions for which taxpayers are asked to provide office space.