The security upgrades were in the works prior to the recent tragic events that have highlighted the need to attend to the issue of gun violence in the US. They are and were previously expected to be completed this summer, regardless of any referendum result. That the district wants to show the public that this is important, and will be done in a timely manner seems completely up-front. And yes, if you have to ask the question of yourself, then I'll answer. You sound way worse than cynical.

Would you be more or less supportive if the District had tried to sell $10M for security, when $1.9M is the right number?

Come on Alain, take off that tin foil hat and come back down to earth. Bottom line is you have an issue with spending $30 million on athletics and you are worried that there is a much better chance of this passing this time. If they had listed athletics #1 and security #5 you would have written this letter about how they aren't prioritizing security in light of "recent public emotions". Feel free to voice you're concerns regarding the referendum as long as they are based on the facts rather than wild conspiracy theories...keep those for your cats....

Poor indoor air quality can lead to a security issue. When PE classes, athletics teams, and rentors (e.g., club swim teams) prop outside doors open in an attempt to get fresh air circulating, the school is made less secure. Also, keep in mind that laws and other unfunded mandates force issues like ADA that must be responded to. The athletic facilities are not accessible. They are also are not safe. Would you rather plan ahead or face litigation?

Since ADA compliance, or the need for it, is being mentioned here, as well as in the D113 mailer, why is referendum money needed for what, by law, ought to be budgeted for annually? ADA was signed into law in 1990. It would also seem logical that the money budgeted annually for security and safety could cover the $1.9m over the five year implementation period for this project. BTW, the cost of the new pools, diving wells and gyms is actually $40.8m, according D113’s mailer.

There is only so much retrofitting that can be done economically. The building only needed to be compliant to the standards in effect when it was built. That is the letter of the law. The spirit demands that our pool decks and balconies be accessable. The spirit tells us that a student (or adult family member) shoudn't have to go outside and 100 yards down the block in winter just to get to a Gym. Not a very secure way to handle in-out traffic either. At Highland Park there are multiple different levels on each floor, with a few stairs here and a few there, along with ramps, and many areas completely inaccessable. There are gyms without water or bathroom/locker facilities. These problems call for the comprehensive solutions developed in the Long Term Facility Master Plan and the current plan for referendum funds.. Band-aid solutions are no-longer viable to solve these problems

They've had 23 years to become ADA compliant, to read all that's being written here the pools have not been touched in decades, shouldn't D113 have been following the spirit of ADA all along rather than waiting until now?

Gee HPSsider....we speak the same (boondoggle) language.