|
|
2005
Jun 1, 2009 21:09:03 GMT -6
Post by macrockett on Jun 1, 2009 21:09:03 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 0:50:40 GMT -6
Post by doctorwho on Jun 2, 2009 0:50:40 GMT -6
Boy Howdy -- they change the numbers and definition to suit whatever they are trying to pass-- look at difference in WVHS capacity between the ref to sell the freshman centers, then suddenly the school shrunk by over 600 spaces to sell the 3rd high school -- amazing nothing up my sleeve- presto ! |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 1:08:56 GMT -6
Post by Arch on Jun 2, 2009 1:08:56 GMT -6
"Now here's something we hope you'll really like'
|
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 11:38:58 GMT -6
Post by macrockett on Jun 2, 2009 11:38:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 12:20:43 GMT -6
Post by sashimi on Jun 2, 2009 12:20:43 GMT -6
From the 3d PDF above:
The community considers "...adopting split shifts as the least desirable" means of creating more capacity.
Hmmmm...now we know where and why the District used split shifts as the scare tactic to induce the yes vote in 2006. They knew that the community favored adding classrooms to the current facilities vs. building a new school, so they needed to inflate the poplutation models and come up with the worse case scanario threat of what their consultants determined was the least favorable option in the community.
We were certainly played as fools.
|
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 12:26:26 GMT -6
Post by doctorwho on Jun 2, 2009 12:26:26 GMT -6
From the 3d PDF above: The community considers "...adopting split shifts as the least desirable" means of creating more capacity. Hmmmm...now we know where and why the District used split shifts as the scare tactic to induce the yes vote in 2006. They knew that the community favored adding classrooms to the current facilities vs. building a new school, so they needed to inflate the poplutation models and come up with the worse case scanario threat of what their consultants determined was the least favorable option in the community. We were certainly played as fools. the firm they used to develop strategy certainly did a number on this district. Yes they got the ref passed - look at the long term cost however in $$ and community rift.... Every member should be ashamed as to how all of this has played out... |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 14:35:42 GMT -6
Post by Arch on Jun 2, 2009 14:35:42 GMT -6
"Every member should be ashamed as to how all of this has played out... "
I think many members are actually damned proud of their part in it... after all, it wasn't "illegal".
|
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 15:20:29 GMT -6
Post by sashimi on Jun 2, 2009 15:20:29 GMT -6
Very clear....they did a great job of doing whatever they had to do to accomplish the goal that they set (to pass a referendum for a third high school).
Unfortunately, as evidenced by their own survey (oh, and by the failure of the 2005 referendum), this was NOT WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTED! So rather than representing the interests of the community, they engaged in manipulating data and resorting to threatening split shifts (because the survey indicated that this was a way to coerce a yes vote).
Forget about illegal....how is this in any way, shape or form ethical or anything other than an abuse of power. They used our dollars to find a way to get a referendum passed that we collectively did not support or want (by threatening the least desirable outcome--one that they knew as not necessary--as the only alternative).
Regardless, the community has now shown that it is completely indifferent by the low voter turn-out and I believe that most everyone's voting decisions were somewhat based on not wanting to be the next Tallgrass, White Eagle ot May Watts. 3d high school is better than split shifts and the status quo is better than getting screwed by the Board and District.
|
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 15:27:38 GMT -6
Post by blankcheck on Jun 2, 2009 15:27:38 GMT -6
I remember all of this well. 400 phone calls? Please. I knew they had hired a PR firm and I would bet they have one ready to go in the wings for the next referendum as well.
We had many discussions about using the land they currently have (which they can't sell) for the middle school, add onto NV and look for another location up north for Waubonsie students for a Frontier campus facility.
Regardless, this is all a mute point now. Just good to keep this information fresh in peoples minds come time for the next referendum.
|
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 15:42:44 GMT -6
Post by doctorwho on Jun 2, 2009 15:42:44 GMT -6
I remember all of this well. 400 phone calls? Please. I knew they had hired a PR firm and I would bet they have one ready to go in the wings for the next referendum as well. We had many discussions about using the land they currently have (which they can't sell) for the middle school, add onto NV and look for another location up north for Waubonsie students for a Frontier campus facility. Regardless, this is all a mute point now. Just good to keep this information fresh in peoples minds come time for the next referendum. That's exactly the point - also fresh in people's minds in a few short years when WVHS closes and people are upset as to why. There will be no excuses then as to who caused it to happen. It wasn't bad luck, or a bad economy...it was bad ( or predetermined ) decision making when the alternatives you talk to above would have worked perfectly well- and they had the correct population stats ( never released them , but we got them anyway) - well before we bought the land or turned one shovel full of dirt. |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 17:10:06 GMT -6
Post by slp on Jun 2, 2009 17:10:06 GMT -6
Very clear....they did a great job of doing whatever they had to do to accomplish the goal that they set (to pass a referendum for a third high school). Unfortunately, as evidenced by their own survey (oh, and by the failure of the 2005 referendum), this was NOT WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTED! So rather than representing the interests of the community, they engaged in manipulating data and resorting to threatening split shifts (because the survey indicated that this was a way to coerce a yes vote). Forget about illegal....how is this in any way, shape or form ethical or anything other than an abuse of power. They used our dollars to find a way to get a referendum passed that we collectively did not support or want (by threatening the least desirable outcome--one that they knew as not necessary--as the only alternative). Regardless, the community has now shown that it is completely indifferent by the low voter turn-out and I believe that most everyone's voting decisions were somewhat based on not wanting to be the next Tallgrass, White Eagle ot May Watts. 3d high school is better than split shifts and the status quo is better than getting screwed by the Board and District. you are absolutely right! People didn't vote in the people they thought were best for the district ; they voted in the people that kept their status quo (with the exception IMO of Dawn DeSart) and their areas "safe". They did whatever they had to to pass the 3rd high school referendum, including road shows designed to 'win over' certain areas with the promise of a new school (knowing full well chances of actually getting BB were very slim to none). But heh, who cares! Get the referendum passed and worry about that little glitch later! |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 21:01:10 GMT -6
Post by Arch on Jun 2, 2009 21:01:10 GMT -6
... They did whatever they had to to pass the 3rd high school referendum, including road shows designed to 'win over' certain areas with the promise of a new school ( knowing full well chances of actually getting BB were very slim to none). But heh, who cares! Get the referendum passed and worry about that little glitch later! Just to clarify the fact: The district won the condemnation lawsuit and had the right to purchase the land. In the 11th hour they said... Nah. Then went and did a financial deal that will cost us more in the long run than building at BB would have.... and both of which are overbuilds anyway based on bullshit enrollment numbers. |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 21:12:49 GMT -6
Post by steckdad on Jun 2, 2009 21:12:49 GMT -6
... They did whatever they had to to pass the 3rd high school referendum, including road shows designed to 'win over' certain areas with the promise of a new school ( knowing full well chances of actually getting BB were very slim to none). But heh, who cares! Get the referendum passed and worry about that little glitch later! Just to clarify the fact: The district won the condemnation lawsuit and had the right to purchase the land. In the 11th hour they said... Nah. Then went and did a financial deal that will cost us more in the long run than building at BB would have.... and both of which are overbuilds anyway based on bullshit enrollment numbers. all was good in the world until BB fell through. |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 21:14:07 GMT -6
Post by macrockett on Jun 2, 2009 21:14:07 GMT -6
... They did whatever they had to to pass the 3rd high school referendum, including road shows designed to 'win over' certain areas with the promise of a new school ( knowing full well chances of actually getting BB were very slim to none). But heh, who cares! Get the referendum passed and worry about that little glitch later! Just to clarify the fact: The district won the condemnation lawsuit and had the right to purchase the land. In the 11th hour they said... Nah. Then went and did a financial deal that will cost us more in the long run than building at BB would have.... and both of which are overbuilds anyway based on bullshit enrollment numbers. As I recall Arch, we also "won" the condemnation AND paid for the 25 acres we are now trying to get rid of. How's that workin for us? ;D Remind me not to hire the D204 Board to handle my real estate needs... |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 2, 2009 21:29:49 GMT -6
Post by macrockett on Jun 2, 2009 21:29:49 GMT -6
Just to clarify the fact: The district won the condemnation lawsuit and had the right to purchase the land. In the 11th hour they said... Nah. Then went and did a financial deal that will cost us more in the long run than building at BB would have.... and both of which are overbuilds anyway based on bullshit enrollment numbers. all was good in the world until BB fell through. all was good until people started to look at the facts Steckdad, i.e., why are we building at all. Some, like Chris Vickers, saw the light on that early, as enrollment wasn't increasing and was little more than a bubble in the classes of 2013 and 2014. Others of us were a little slower but eventually got it. There is no need for a third HS based on our capacity needs. Where the difference exists now is did we need any additional capacity at all. Some say no, others say some. You seem to think that people changed merely because the location changed. First the facts changed and, in addition, it was an evolution as to what we really needed. I don't remember you being with the people who filed that suit so I can't see how you could possibly know the motivation behind it. At best your opinions are pure conjecture. I was there, I do know. |
|
