Evening star., 1951-03-22
Arlington School
Building Costs
ReportAssai|ed
Citizens Committee
In Analysis Coils
Findings Hophozord


A civic groups report on schoo
construction costs today was bit
terly assailed by the Arlington
Citizens Committee for Schoo
improvement.
The attack came in an "analy.
SIS of a report made last fall by
the Arlington Ridge Civic Asso.
citation. The report was calico
fundamentally unsound,' HAP.
hazard" incomplete" "inaccur.
ate" and evidently biased"
The Arlington-Ridge report. il
was said, was distributed shortly
before voters turned down g
ST ,450, 900 school construction bono
issue in November. 1t is being re-
circulated now prior to another
referendum April II on a S4,875,.
900 bond issue. according to citi-
zens' committee.
Points to Inaccuracy.'
Reed K. Pond, chairman of the
Citizens committee, said:
"As sample of the inaccuracy
of the Arlington Ridge report, the
citizens committee for school i'm
provement analysis pointed out
that one school in Prince Georges
County, Md. was described by the
Ridge report as two separate
schools. with differing names
(Thomas S. Stone and Mount
Rainier-Brentwood), different fig
ures as to cost and a different
list of the features included"
| He said copies of the analyst!
now are being distributed to va.
rious groups in Arlington.
The analysis - Mr.. Pond said
made these major criticisms ol
the Arlington Ridge report:
81. The report restricted it.
comparisons to Montgomery anc
Prince Georges Counties in Mary.
land, plus two schools in Alexan.
dria and one in Fairfax County
The CCSI analysis held that the
general construction picture ir
Washington. D. c., is more nearly
comparable to that in Arlington
which has no rural area like parts
of the Maryland counties, and thai
Norfolk and Richmond in Vir-
ginia present better bases of COM
Iparison because they are governed
by the same State curriculum
and construction standards that
govern Arlington Schools.
Items Disregarded.
SO. The report based it's COM
parsons of school costs on two
measures: Cost per square foot
and costs per rated pupil capa-
city. These measures take no ac-
count of such highly important
features as auditoriums. cafete-
rias. gymnasiums, libraries. health
clinics, etc. and disregard the
higher maintenance costs in
volved in cheap construction.
"3. The report compared Airing
ton costs on contracts let after
the Korean crisis with the result
ing general increase in construc-
ton costs with costs in Mary
land on contracts let in October
1949, which was a relatively low
cost period. before the shooting
started in Korea.
a. The report is 'haphazard
in selection of features for com.
parison. For example, no single
feature. not even the number oi
classrooms. is reported for all o1
the 10 schools covered. And such
important features as the type o1
heating system is reported fol
only nine of the. 10 schools ano
toilets for only II.
Statements Unsupported.
"5. The comments and recon-
mendations in the report in large
part are based not upon the sup
posed date, but rather contain
unsupported, arbitrary and evil
dently biased statements concern
ing schools in Arlington with little
or no consideration of educational
and maintenance features
1.-THE CCSI analysis concluded
that the Arlington Ridge report
in spite Of pronouncements to the
contrary, was prepared. published
and disseminated last fall and re.
Gently for the express purpose oil
influencing Arlington citizens ad-
versely toward the Arlington
School Board and it's program TO,
providing the schools needed fol
the children of Arlington
I'm its action. the CCSI urgec
that the recently released report
on Arlington School costs prepared
by the Bureau of Public Admins
tration of the University of Vir-
ginia be accepted by Arlington
voters as, a reliable and souno
analysis of the county's schoo.
construction program and its
costs. The University of Virginia
report found that some minol
economies could be effected ir
the school building program but
in general indorsed the type ot
schools the present Arlington
School Board has been building
and concluded that, overall, Ar.
lington school building costs have
been moderate and appropriate tt