Allegheny Valley School District struggles with future of Colfax Upper Elementary |
Valley News Dispatch

Allegheny Valley School District struggles with future of Colfax Upper Elementary

Tribune-Review file photo
Colfax Upper Elementary School in Springdale

Allegheny Valley School Board hopes to come to a final decision in October about the future of the now-closed Colfax Upper Elementary School.

The board had planned to make a final decision to sell the building in August.

Among the possibilities being considered, the board could decide to sell the building, demolish all or part of it or find another use for it.

Board member James Gaschler said the public needed ample time to comment on the possibilities.

Board member Donald Rocco felt the new school board that will be seated in December should determine the building’s future.

“The old (current) board will make the decision in October,” said board President Larry Pollick. “We closed the school because we don’t have enough kids in the school district.”

Pollick gave examples of previous school boards making decisions that were carried out by subsequent school boards.

Architects Canzian Johnston & Associates will provide cost estimates for demolishing the entire site and for razing part of the complex when the board meets in October.

Superintendent Patrick Graczyk told board members that the school district has negotiating rights with a potential buyer and the board also can ask the commercial real estate firm CBRE for additional proposals.

Solicitor Matthew Hoffman said there is no sense negotiating if a majority of board members want the building demolished.

“We have an empty building and don’t know what the hell to do with it,” Pollick said. “We know a decision has to be made sooner or later.”

The school board’s October voting meeting is scheduled for Oct. 21.

George Guido is a Tribune-Review contributing writer.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.