Tisbury has never been a slouch in its commitment to its children and their education. Each Tisbury student currently costs the town $27,000 per year, the highest such figure in the state. More than 50 per cent of the town budget is spent on educating its children.

But this past and continuing commitment does not add up to a green light to pass the Proposition 2 1/2 override to fund a brand-new school. In addition to being environmentally wasteful, tearing down the existing school and building a new one is not fiscally sustainable and raises issues of equity. What does this mean in practice? Not only will all taxpayers have to dig deep to pay the tax increases, but many groups among the bill payers will find themselves getting shortchanged on services that they, and the general public will need in future years (Tisbury already has about more than twice as many seniors as children under 18). The cost of an inappropriate and expensive new school, and the black box of maintenance costs, will preclude many other needed commitments and associated outlays by the town. This is not smart. This is not equitable.

Meanwhile, the town has a still-functioning and serviceable building that can be significantly upgraded and expanded as needed. Historic schools are being renovated all over the state, and the country.

In recent years, the school committee did not spend money on ongoing capital improvements, as it is mandated to do by the state. Committee members apparently assumed that a new school would soon be forthcoming. The committee was derelict in its duty toward its principal asset. Now the signs of neglect are used as arguments that the whole building is derelict — a teardown.

Peter Turowski, the architect, when questioned at town meeting, cited just four elements in of the school’s physical plant that are deficient:

• Windows. Sure, the clouded windows are unattractive. But why didn’t the school committee go back to the firm that replaced the windows in the nineties and insist that the work be rectified under the warranty, or threaten legal action? Fix them now.

• Ventilation. Actually, according to experts, renovation of historic schools is just the time to upgrade the HVAC system.

• Exterior brickwork and lintels over windows. Can and should be fixed. A local firm, Stiles and Hart in Bridgewater, has renovated brickwork for many world-renowned local educational institutions.

• Interior surfaces. Not sure what is meant by this. The school’s original hardwood floors are in quite good condition. Homebuyers swoon when they see floors like this. New hardwood floors cost $8 to $13 per square foot, with another $3 to $10 per square foot in installation costs.

Mr. Turowski mentioned no structural deficiencies.

Flawed premises and flawed process lead, unsurprisingly, to a flawed outcome. Many voters were under various types of pressure to vote yes in open town meeting, or they didn’t even attend.

In the privacy of the voting booth on April 24, voters can correct course, save the town from a serious wrong turn, and open up space to discuss feasible, equitable solutions. Vote no on the Proposition 2 1/2 override.

Katherine Scott
Vineyard Haven