I‘ve previously posted my own opinions on building a new Springfield High School somewhere other than its current location, but something in this SJ-R article has me puzzled.
Tony Leone, representing the Vinegar Hill Neighborhood Association, spoke of Springfield High as a crucial component of the city’s central core. Its departure would send property values plummeting, he argued.
Huh? Superintendent Milton’s plan calls for the old Springfield High building to be turned into a “grades 6-12 science and technology academy”. How would that cause property values to plummet? Why would it make any difference at all? I could see a problem if the school district built a new high school and then just abandoned the old site. But that’s not what they're talking about. It would still be a school.