As we said in this space a little over a month ago, there is nothing wrong with the site off N.C. 5 where the new Aberdeen Elementary School rises. That’s despite the warping, misreading and mischaracterization of facts and history by some in an attempt to foment opposition to school redistricting and Superintendent Bob Grimesey.

Those attempts have been enough, however, for reasonable people to be worried — regardless of facts to the contrary — that the site is at risk of contamination from nearby sites that are part of the federal list of polluted properties known as Superfund sites.

And so Grimesey told the Board of Education and the public last week that the school district would spend another $25,000 to do what’s known as a “Phase 2 analysis” environmental study.

“It’s a shame that we are forced into doing (the Phase II study) because I think we stand united that the property has the kind of quality, location, safety … everything is there in Aberdeen that we want, and it will truly serve our students in a very safe and habitable manner,” said school board Vice-Chair Libby Carter. “I hope that this will prove to folks that we would not take a step forward that would harm our children in any way.”

Polluted, Then Restored

Look, governments are capable of doing some crazy things from time to time. But given what is widely known about Moore County, its school officials and its decision making, we’re confident no one is recklessly building schools in dangerous locations.

The site was subjected to a thorough and rational — and publicly available — environmental study in 2015 and 2017.

Yes, the new school site sits between two of five Superfund sites that had been the location of pesticide manufacturing and disposal. The current Aberdeen Elementary and Primary schools are also near sites and in far less desirable locations than this new school. This is part of Aberdeen’s unfortunate history.

All five sites were the subject of a multi-

million-dollar cleanup in the 1980s. Hundreds of tons of soil were cleaned and replaced, monitoring wells were sunk, and trees were planted to absorb trace elements left in the ground.

The new school’s location sits uphill of the two nearby sites, meaning groundwater would have to defy the natural laws of physics to flow into the new site.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reviews the Aberdeen sites every five years and releases reports to the public. Its reports in 2013 and 2018 indicate no concerning health issues.

Answer the Doubters

Why, then, spend $25,000 on this study? No amount of money can buy you certainty that disaster will never befall, but a Phase 2 environmental study is as close as the school district is going to get in convincing everyone that the new Aberdeen Elementary site is safe for our children.

OK, fine. Let’s do it.

Unfortunately, no environmental study will guard us from the hazards of toxic politics and personal agendas that seek to undo the school district’s attempt to redraw attendance lines and balance out student demographics.

As we’ve said repeatedly, there is reason for parents and others to be vigilant, questioning and skeptical of the redistricting process as it proceeds this fall. What the school staff ultimately suggests to the Board of Education will affect 13,000 children and families. No one causing that much change gets a free pass from scrutiny.

But let’s focus on the real issues at hand and not the poisoned politics that masquerade as “concern” for our children. Because if that agenda came up against a litmus test, it would register off the scales for acidity.

Test the dirt. Don’t fling it — and soil all of us.

(2) comments

Sara Polkow

Thank you for trying to educate people on this matter. I was so happy to see this this morning. I did phase 1 and phase II assessments for 15 years. As you stated, it’s publicly available for anyone to find. Monitoring of these sites is extensive and again available to the public. Due diligence had to be completed for the land purchase. I wish people would do research before they throw out their “facts”. So when the wells come back clean what will be next? Stay tuned I guess.

Kent Misegades

The author makes the premise that concern for the health of pupils and teachers at this new school is based solely on opposition to reassignments. I would suggest that most taxpayers agree with the Phase II study, regardless whether they have children or grandchildren in government schools. These new schools come at a stunningly high cost to us, and we are already feeling the pain through hefty property tax increases. If it is found that the new site is an issue, we’re faced with even higher costs and the possibility of a $30m building that is unusable plus the cost of yet another expensive government school. This study is the due diligence that any investor would perform before spending money. I’d bet, had this been a private school, there would have been more scrutiny of land that cost 10% per acre compared to the site in Southern Pines. There is a reason it was much cheaper. Private schools can not soak taxpayers when they mess up. Government schools can, and do. See the recent mess with the lost ACT tests at Pinecrest HS. .

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Comments that violate any of the rules above are subject to removal by staff.

Thank you for Reading!

Please purchase a subscription to continue reading. Subscribe today and support local community journalism.

Digital Only Subscriptions

Thank you for visiting and supporting award-winning community journalism. Not everyone wants to have a newspaper delivered to their home, but they want to keep up with the latest news in Moore County. Click here to gain digital-only access and support local journalism.

Starting at
$1.07 for 1 day

Connect Print Subscription to Digital Access

Thank you for visiting Your Pilot subscription entitles you to unlimited digital access. Simply log in. From the home page, click on Subscription Services. Then click on "Pilot All Access Print Subscribers." It should show your phone number . If so, click "Sign Up." After a few seconds, it will take you back to the home page. Log out, then log back in. You're set! For any problems, call our customer service number at 910-693-2487 or 693-2488.

Free access for current print subscribers