This is in response to the letters “Enough is enough” and “Vote no” which appeared in the Jan. 21 edition.
I fail to see how helpful it is to keep revisiting the issue of closing Lyman school, especially as this is not what we will be voting about on Feb. 8. My town, Durham, has benefited for years from regionalization of schools and we should not be pitting the two communities against each other in talking about this issue. Rather, we should honor the desires of our partner town.
I bristle at the idea that we should be paying attention to what an unnamed “former Board of Education” member says about voting “no” when our current board recommends spending the money. Further, it is unfair to want to change the regionalization agreement because some people didn’t get what they wanted. Not to mention, it’s highly unlikely that such a measure would pass.
Middlefield has voted consistently to keep Lyman open, and it is the responsibility of both towns to move forward. While I understand the concern about spending money, this cost represents maintenance that should have been done for years and was deferred because some hoped Lyman school would close.
If there is an alternative to spending the money on maintenance that also honors the vote to keep Lyman open, I’m all ears.
Unfortunately, those writing to recommend voting “no” have no such plan. Without an alternative plan, a no vote on Feb. 8 is just an obstructionist vote on the will of the people; the cost of such will be borne by the children who attend Lyman school. In my view, that is untenable.