MON SCHOOLS AND THE STATE TRY TO RUN AND HIDE IN PLAIN SIGHT
Who released the WV Department of Education statement on the green school? When? Where? To whom? Why? Upon whose initiative?
No one at the WVDE was willing to sign off on it individually or comment on it on the record? Why?
“Monongalia County has followed the provisions set forth in Policy 6200 related to new school facilities. The West Virginia Department of Education approved the county’s plans after confirming that the county followed all procedural requirements. At this time, we do not see any reason to halt the project.” -WVDE
No one from the state apparently wants to be connected by name with this “project”?
The only comments in the media from any named individual are from Superintendent Devono. No other official is mentioned by name in the Dominion Post article.
Why such a weak statement?: “At this time”!
“At this time, we do not see any reason to halt the project.”
“At this time” is a cover-your-rear statement. Much weaker than “There is no reason to halt this project.”
“At this time,” no reason. But hey, tomorrow is another day! Did they think someone would mistake what time they were talking about?
Also, who is “we”? Could “they” go more conspicuously unnamed?
It’s comical. The BoE is running scared. Meanwhile, apparently no one from the state wants to be individually connected with the “project”.
Why was no one in the public given any chance to respond to the statement and its release with comments in the article?
What does it mean that:
“Monongalia County has followed the provisions set forth in Policy 6200 related to new school facilities.”
“Policy 6200” is otherwise known as the WV state “Handbook on Planning School Facilities.” It’s over 250 pages long.
Has Mon Schools followed all the provisions? Any ones in particular? What’s the evidence that this is so, in specific, for any of the contested provisions? Where’s the explanation?
That state offers none. No evidence. No explanation. No specifics. Nothing.
Policy 6200, Article 202, Section 06:
For the safety of students, the site shall be located away from hazards and undesirable environments, such as:
a. …arterial highways, heavily traveled streets, traffic and congestion
WBOY’s statement is far more accurate than the state’s hollow assertion.
The state has failed to explain anything to the public in regard to Policy 6200, Article 202, Section 06.
And no wonder. What could it possibly say?
We have long since stated the obvious. The intended new school site is a state policy violation. The siting breaks state law.
The state can claim what it will; the evidence to the contrary is plain as day.