The school district’s realization that it now makes more sense to tear down Building A — Vashon High School’s main classroom and administrative building — rather than renovate it raises a few questions.

As some school board members asked last week, why — three months after the bond measure to rebuild portions of the high school passed by nine votes — has this realization suddenly surfaced? If it’s so patently obvious now, as the district’s construction team suggested last week, why didn’t its previous set of experts point this out?

The answer can be found not in construction documents but in political considerations. 

District officials made it clear last week that they believed the only way a $47.7 million bond measure could garner enough support on conservation-minded Vashon was if they put forward a proposal that seemed modest, not extravagant. They’d already made one attempt at a bond measure. Construction costs, currently at an all-time low, were expected to begin to escalate.

The pressure was on. And the desire to be done with it — to get a measure before voters that could win — was great. It’s often said that it’s best not to watch how legislation, like sausage, is made. So perhaps was the case in this situation.

Enter Skanska, a highly regarded construction firm that brought fresh eyes to the situation. Firm officials questioned the rationale of keeping Building A and with a nod from the district took a second look.

What emerged last week is something that’s hard to walk away from: Not only can the district tear down Building A and rebuild it at about the same cost as renovating the oddly configured and much disdained structure, its contractor can do the job more quickly and efficiently. It can reduce the district’s energy consumption by building new. It can erect a structure that integrates the now-piecemeal campus. And it can recycle nearly all of the old building.

One reason to oppose this new approach is out of principle: The measure won as a partially renovated, partially new campus; this new approach makes for an entirely new high school, save for the gym and other athletic facilities. That’s not the measure we voters approved. 

Another reason is out of a feeling of distrust: What else didn’t they tell us during the campaign? And if we let them get away with this, what will they try next?

This is a tough issue, and we understand that some community members will cry foul. At the same time, it appears that there’s no logical reason to walk away from this new proposal. What’s more, we know this school board and these administrators: They’re hard working and well intentioned. They want to do right by the community. Some of them have spent years of their own time trying to craft a measure the voters would approve.

At The Beachcomber, we consider this turn of events unfortunate, simply because it’s played out in a way that may not inspire confidence. At the same time, we encourage the community to support this new plan. It will make for a better school at the same costs. There’s no rational reason to walk away from that.