DISTRICT MUST MONITOR SOUNDNESS OF BUILDINGS

The Cape Girardeau Board of Education has its hands full with facilities concerns these days. During last weekend's retreat, the board decided to aim for a spring 1993 ballot question on the construction of new buildings in the public school system here. This came not many days after administrators dealt with the near collapse of a roof over the L.J. Schultz School cafeteria. The age of some buildings involved and this recent structural failure have our attention. The hope here is that planning for the future doesn't overshadow the need to address more immediate concerns.

Our confidence is high that members of the school board and administration don't need this reminder, that their interest in the welfare of young people would be hard to surpass. But the nature of these circumstances, and the potential for tragic results, makes it necessary to reinforce the point. The state of Missouri has long planned for a new Mississippi River bridge at Cape Girardeau, but that doesn't cue the abdication of maintenance on the existing span. In this same sense, those with foresight about future facilities in the school district can't become oblivious to the need of assurance concerning the integrity of all current structures.

Due note has been taken that Cape Girardeau has some old buildings in its public school district. Schultz School was built in 1914, Washington School in 1914, May Greene in 1919 and Franklin School in 1927. Years will take their toll on structures of even the most sturdy construction, and problems of deterioration have arisen in some of these buildings. Even before the Schultz cafeteria incident, the south wall of that school building had to be reconstructed five years ago after structural weaknesses became apparent.

The district summoned a structural engineer to its four oldest schools last week to search for possible problems. A cursory inspection turned up nothing menacing, and school officials elected not to have the engineer pursue at this time a more comprehensive structural condition investigation, bearing a cost of more than $10,000. We don't quarrel with the school system balking at this expenditure to a consultant. We can't overstate, however, the need for close monitoring of buildings by ~district employees.

While the time is not right for panic to set in, there are plenty of red flags waving, and we are convinced the school district sees them. Planning for future facility needs is one major part of meeting the problems the district has with buildings. (It is far too premature to speak to the merits of these evolving plans.) Another critical part is ensuring that public school structures remain safe for this community's students. The district must be vigilant in its observance of structural difficulties in all its buildings. Efforts to enhance the educational opportunities of young people amount to nothing if we can't give them a hazard-free place to learn.