By Robert Zirgulis
The recent survey on whether the Culver City community will support a $106 million bond showed that there is overwhelming support for passage.
I wholeheartedly agree with the survey that we need to pass a $106 million bond to refurbish the infrastructure of our schools. However, I have problems with some survey questions skewed to reflect priorities on how the money on the bond would be spent.
When one asks a general question such as, “Do you think asbestos and fungus should be removed from classrooms?” duh. It is a no-brainer. Everyone in his right mind would consider that a high priority.
However, when you ask specific questions without mentioning the costs of the project, you may get varying responses. For example, the specific question of fixing the Natatorium swimming pool was not considered a high priority item with only 28 percent of survey respondents in support.
A broader question of finding a new home for the Culver Park High students got a higher response. Someone could erroneously conclude that there would be more support to turn the Natatorium into a multi-purpose room that would also house the Culver Park students.
The real question that needs to be asked is, “Does it make sense to demolish the Culver City School Natatorium swimming pool and replace it with a multi-purpose room for 80 students at a cost of $10.3 million or should we fix the Natatorium pool that would serve 6,500 students at a cost of $3 million and use the $7.3 million in savings toward other capital facility needs?
Mr. Zirgulis, recently a candidate for the School Board, may be contacted at zirgulisr@yahoo.com
