by Newcomer

This Academy field expansion has been controversial, especially for the abutters to to the project. Since we’re in a period of economic downturn, I’d prefer to see the WA BOT take this time to do some longe-range planning, if they haven’t already, and engage in some conversations with the residents/taxpayers of Woodstock. If the BOT had meetings all around town like the P&ZC is doing with their POCD, it would be a great opportunity for members of the community to give WA some ideas and input as to their plans. In return, WA would come away with a firm grasp on what the taxpayers will/will not support.

Personally, I think that field expansion or no field expansion, WA is going to outgrow their present location at some point no matter what. I understand the historical significance of the original site to the institution and that should be preserved. But if they need to add science labs and need greater handicapped accessability, as well as an athletic complex, as has been reported, then I would really like to see the BOT start serioiusly exploring the idea of developing a junior and senior campus. I would like to see them put out a search-ring for large parcels of land not too far from the present location and consider building a second campus. The second campus could include all of the things they think they are going to need based on projected enrollment and legality (in the case of IDEA compliance for handicapped accessability). Such a site could include an indoor and outdoor athletic facility. Make some preliminary plans to explore such an option and then host public meetings around town to see if people are willing to support bonding to fund such an expansion. What’s WA’s other option? Even if no one in the historical district objected to this field expansion, unless WA starts buying private homes, bulldozing them, and using the land to expand the physical plant, won’t WA outgrow their current space at some point anyway? At least if they had a junior and senior campus, they could have freshmen and sophmores at the original facility, and juniors and seniors at the new facility (or vice versa). They could accomodate future growth in the student body for years to come, and even add more sending towns if they wanted to explore that and planned for it accordingly. And they could add an all-season athletic center (if they added indoor facilities) and open it to the community for a fee during hours when it wouldn’t be in use by students(ie. gym classes and team practices, etc.)

Heck, I’d even be open to consider the idea (if WA planned for a second campus with athletic facility) of the town buying back the current WA athletic fields from the school. The town could maybe keep the tennis courts and turn the rest into a park or town green of some sort with a walking trail, dogpark, etc. Maybe make a public park or town green or something to compliment the historical district. But here again, why not at least have some public discussions about such things and see what people want and to what extent they’re willing to support it with their tax dollars?

Just because I support K-8 doesn’t mean I don’t also want the best for our students when they reach high school. Just as I have gotten on the BOE’s case in the past for not providing for more community involvement, I could say the same for the BOT. If the powers that be at WA have been upset that there has been some community resistance to the field expansion proposal, then take this opportunity of economic slow-down to step back for a moment and revisit your long term goals and plans. Invite the community at large into the planning phase and you might be surprised at how much support there is around town.