Letters

I find it confusing that some opponents of the Montauk School bond proposal blame the school for the astronomical cost of living.

The Board of Education, in my opinion, is proposing something reasonable to an almost-100-year-old building that has been deemed unsatisfactory on multiple counts [“Puddles, Bugs and Rodents: Montauk School District Hopes $34.8 Million Bond Is the Answer,” 27east.com, October 29]. This school educates almost 300 families who care very deeply about continuing to live in this community. Most of these families, myself included, lament the high cost of living; however, we continue to try to be resourceful and enjoy the community around us.

We can’t continue to expect the building to function at its best amid the deterioration that is inevitable in a 100-year-old facility anymore. Teachers, staff, groundskeepers and administration have been incredibly resourceful over the years with making things work, but every piece of infrastructure eventually comes up to its due date.

Operating within constraints isn’t sustainable long-term and eventually replaces the more important goals of educating students and preparing them for life outside of school. These goals are numerous and surely have already taken a backseat to more pressing needs despite everyone’s best efforts to be creative, frugal and resilient.

In addition to the age of the building, there’s the added constraints and expectations in school buildings that didn’t exist a few decades ago: heightened security in response to school shootings and accommodations for those with disabilities, for example.

Our town has inherited a great gift from the Fisher family in the form of administrative housing. The Board of Education does not and has never paid the school superintendent/principal’s rent. The portion of the bond for the Fisher House construction amounts to approximately $1.55 per month, per taxpayer.

It seems to me that Montauk’s superintendent and principal is actually among the lowest-paid on Long Island, especially considering that this position is a dual role.

I believe the dire predictions of floundering population and school enrollment could become a self-fulfilling prophecy if this proposal doesn’t pass. I can imagine that there will be some who will be demoralized by the unwillingness of the community to invest in the lives of its youngest members. These children will become our future leaders, whether they are educated in Montauk or elsewhere, but I’d like to see them benefit from living here and then choose this place to give back to when their time comes.

I find the debates about whether the person in the role of superintendent/principal deserves to live in the house that was designated for that specific role to be vicious and unnecessary. I believe the superintendent/principal and his family are welcome to a comfortable, safe house within walking distance to the school so that he can be available 24/7 as we all expect.

Amy Reich

Montauk