Sonja and Bill Slattery's analysis of the AvalonBay plan is the most intelligent, lucid and honest discussion of the subject that I can recall. And we did not even have to pay a consultant's fee for it! When you give the AvalonBay plan some thought, you have to wonder, "What's in it for us?" Maybe I am missing something, but it seems that the only real benefit to be realized in our lifetime is that we would get to look at the St. Paul's façade as we drive by. (Of course that beautiful façade might have a couple of hundred cars parked in front of it.) When you ponder the impact of the AvalonBay plan on the land and the intersection, the potential number of non-real estate taxpaying families with students in our schools (which are now at or near capacity), the increased expense related to the various taxpayer-funded services such as sanitation, fire, police, etc., you have to wonder what on earth we are thinking! The million-dollar up-front payment is chump change. As the Slatterys point out, it would not buy a single house around the corner from St. Paul's. Let's face it. We could prop up the St. Paul's façade like a Hollywood set and have much the same result, without the aggravation, expense and potentially disastrous consequences.

So what to do? Knock it down? Perhaps we should revisit the notion of moving the high school to the site. The high school building has been in a terrible state for many years, and pales in comparison to others in similar neighborhoods. The St. Paul's site is more centrally located for teachers and administrators, and the adjacent property owners could hardly object, as St. Paul's had been a school. There is ample space for athletic fields. The village could sell the high school land for residential housing, which I am sure would be welcomed by its neighbors - a win-win situation?

Colette M. Landers