Do we need or do we want a new Bethel Park high school? ["Some in Bethel Park support new school," South, July 2.] The issues used for and against this project are safety, present campus condition, going green and cost.

Safety: The present campus has on average three entrances per building, making for 24 entrances total. Looking at the drawings for the new building; there are 14 entrances. It only takes one open door to allow someone in. Keep in mind that entrances are also exits.

Condition: Yes, the campus is not in the best condition, but that is not because the buildings are old. It is because the board does not take a proactive role in maintaining school properties. Take a walk around our school properties and you will see many things that need to be addressed.

Do you think that when the sidewalks crack in a few years or when the grass turns to mud, or something else goes wrong in the new building that it will be immediately repaired? In a few years, the new building will need repairs just like others.

Green: If you are a true green supporter, then you need to tear your house down if it's more than two years old and build new. Be prepared to repeat this process every couple years as "green" standards change. So yes, let's spend $98 million plus 20 percent to 30 percent for cost overruns to save $300,000 per year on utility costs.

Cost: Yes, the current out of pocket for each household is minimal. But why wouldn't it be, since this year's tax increase will only be used for this year's $70 million budget? Let's not forget that only a few years ago, the annual budget was in the $40 million range. In a couple more years it will be in the $80 million range. What will your taxes be when there are still many years left to pay off the bond issue for the new school and it's time to start making repairs, the teachers' contract expires, health care costs increase and the retirement fund is millions of dollars underfunded?

I think it's safe to say that people want it for all the wrong reasons. Bethel students excel and they are doing it in 50-year-old buildings, and they will do the same in a new building. Students excel because of their parents, teachers, coaches and support of church, community, family and friends. The building has very little to do with the process.

This new school plan was conceived in different economic times; it no longer makes sense.

JIM SILER
Bethel Park

I am writing this in response to a letter supporting the new school. ["Some in Bethel Park support new school," July 2, South.]

After reading, attending and speaking out at the last two board meetings, I am beginning to notice a pattern in the way supporters of the new school think. People who want the new school are afraid their children are not receiving the same quality of education as in other schools. They worry about their ability to sell their houses. They take the numbers the school board gives them and sit complacently, thinking they will not be affected.

Bricks and mortar do not educate a child. Awards that other school districts have won were not won on the merits of walls and roof. Schools win awards because of the quality of the education, as delivered by the teachers. If we want our children to receive the best, we should invest in the tools necessary to obtain it -- not the building to house it.

And what about resale of homes? People across the country get riled up about taxes, but if anyone has the right to complain, it is the citizens of Bethel Park. The Web site citytowninfo.com ranks Bethel Park among the least livable communities in the entire commonwealth for property taxes. And the taxes keep going up. What happened in 1996 when the high school was last renovated? The board raised taxes by three mills, promising to lower them as soon as the debt was paid off. It never happened.

Unless the school board reduces taxes, all higher property values mean is even more money being shoveled to the district.

Supporters of the new school have shown no evidence of attempting to follow the numbers. The current plans for the school indicate a necessity to raise $93 million. While the latest tax increase may seem manageable to supporters of the school, they fail to realize that at the current tax rate, over the entire taxable property of the municipality, it would take 236 years to pay off the debt, without interest.

I understand some of the reasons put forward for needing a new school. Security is always a concern, but there is no such thing as a safe school. The buildings are getting old, but proper renovations and maintenance could not cost us nearly as much as this project would surely run. A new school would be good, but the current one is not sufficiently bad to warrant this outrageous use of taxpayers' money.

MICHAEL HOWLEY
Bethel Park

This is in response to the West Mifflin school board meeting and the firing of Coach Phil Shar. ["West Mifflin girls' basketball coach replaced," July 2, South.]

Although I could not attend the meeting, I have been told that the board did not surprise residents. Members had their minds made up before the meeting, regardless of what taxpayers wanted.

Once again, they did not tell the truth and are not acting in the best interest of students. The firing of Coach Shar is a personal attack. Board members need to stop and think what this man has done for these girls -- past and present -- and do what is best for our kids. This is a coach who has devoted his time and money for these girls.

The only time any board member comes to a game is when the girls make the playoffs. The only sport the board supports is football; just ask the other sports teams. The board needs to be reminded of all the scholarships Coach Shar has gotten for these girls, both academic and athletic.

What has the board done for them? They can't even make sure the team's section winner banners are hung in the gym in a timely manner. Then again, it is basketball and not football.

This is for Mr. Risha: From now on, all my daughter's excuses from school will read: "My daughter was physically and mentally able to attend school, but on the advice of her doctor she stayed home."

I figure that if that excuse is good enough for our superintendent, who doesn't even live in our borough, then it is good enough for her.

JUDY LUCAS
West Mifflin

All letters are subject to editing and will be verified before being published. Only one letter from an individual will be published every three months. When there are many letters on the same topic, sometimes only one will be used, although the names of other letter writers will be published.