To the editor:

My eight-year involvement in Lawrence public schools has including fund raising, examining curriculum, working on school board campaigns and running classroom parties. Still, I didn’t fully understand all the pressures on the school district. I decided to attend every possible meeting when the DLR Group appeared on the scene. After many months of careful study I have reached the following conclusions:

The school bond would provide desperately needed money for construction and renovation. The small, two-section schools that would emerge from this process would improve educational opportunities for students, create safer buildings, provide better working conditions for teachers and offer a community focus for expanded neighborhoods. These schools will thus enable more efficient fund raising and foster more collaboration between teachers in an environment that truly will leave no child behind.

Moreover, improved schools will likely stabilize neighborhoods and increase property values. A recent letter in this forum asserts that “it is logical to assume that when schools close in Lawrence, entire neighborhoods would decline.” I challenge that logic. In fact, the bond improves neighborhood schools, reduces class size and keeps our “inner-city” schools well below the 300-400 pupil standard for small schools. Better schools attract more families and preserve neighborhoods. Half-empty, inadequately staffed, deteriorating schools with randomly combined grades and wildly varying class size, by contrast, attract no one.

I’m voting yes for the bond.

Julie Nice,

Lawrence