As we have stated we have received answers to the questions we presented to the Pocatello School District. We are planning to respond to those questions in their entirety. It is taking longer than we had hoped. While we complete that effort we thought it might be of interest to post one of the questions and their answer.

Our Question:

Is a total of 90 community comments considered adequate for a development plan of this type?

School District Response:

Yes, in an effort to get the public involved early in the process, we opened up the process to the public on for comment on Friday, September 7, 2018, the day after the publicly noticed Special School Board meeting, (publicly noticed on August 31) at which time two architect firms presented their proposals to the board of trustees for consideration. The comment period relative to the the selection of an architect ended on Friday, September 14, 2018. It is important to bear in mind that the Board of Trustees members also received a great deal of verbal feedback about the selection of the architect. The questions presented here assume that the majority of citizens are upset about this process or decision and that is not an accurate representation of all feedback received. The majority of comments we received both personally and in writing are positive about the design and express excitement about the project.

Save Pocatello High School's Response:

This was a question of effectiveness not effort. A question which the School District did not address.

While we and the vast majority of citizens "feel excitement about the project," we are dismayed to see that the Board of Trustees considers 90 comments an adequate representation of the over 80,000 people that live in Pocatello/Chubbuck area.

The School district simply did not try hard enough to inform the public.
We believe that as the local community becomes more aware of the process and the decision to build a modernist-glass enclosed addition and to irretrievably alter the front of the existing main facade, that the discontent with the process and the decision will continue to grow.

One must ask if 90 comments is adequate then why is it that 1700 comments are not given more consideration?