The tenor of the Ram Community Centre petition, which appeared in the Penns Valley Area Grape Vine on Aug. 30, suggests that taxation is the sole problem in deciding between a community center and a field house.

That may be the case for certain individuals, but for others the challenge is deeper.

The Ram Centre proposal violates the fundamental principle that public education is the responsibility of the people and should not come under the aegis of entrepreneurial enterprise.

Commercialism in public education invites the potential for disaster. Without a binding contract, commercial ventures are not obligated to remain in place, but can depart or cease to exist as circumstances dictate.

The proposal also threatens the safety of the school campus. With the continuous, day-long ingress and egress of people, special precautions would be required to ensure security. In light of our increasingly violent society, this is no menial consideration and, in good conscience, cannot be dismissed lightly.

The plan, as discussed previously is, at best, a compromise, and, if carefully scrutinized, a problematic one at that.

Commercial enterprise does not belong on any high school campus. A campus field house is a much better choice, but only if it is absolutely necessary.

With regard to the Ram Centre’s taxation vs. no taxation proposition, the take-home story is, “pay nothing and get nothing but trouble in return.”

Lou Hass

Tusseyville