|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 18, 2007 21:48:59 GMT -6
I don't understand why people are projecting/worrying about illogical boundaries for a northern site. Clearly boundaries would need to be re-evaluated on several levels if a northern site is chosen. Arguing about who has a longer drive to H**L isn't productive. 1. what part of them was illogical in your opinion - after Brooks / Brookdale/ Young / & Longwood you need 3-4 more feeder schools - what do you see as the logical ones to fill the other half of the school ? Even those who I disagree with on site I thought put a good deal of quality time and effort into the potential makeup of a northern school... 2. yes they will be evaluated but you still need x number of kids to fill a HS, you can't physically move where kids reside. 3. Yeah I get it that talking about 50 minute bus trips and 18 - 20 mile round trips depending on site ( Ferry ) isn't productive - but if it was you who would end up with the longest commute in the district - I believe you might look at it differently. If not - you're a better person than me and I tip my hat to you. |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Dec 18, 2007 22:13:13 GMT -6
Where is Momof3?
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 18, 2007 22:46:44 GMT -6
unfortunately it appears she signed herself out -- I hope she returns. ( if you're reading as a guest - please consider returning ) |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Dec 19, 2007 6:37:40 GMT -6
What I would say is the SBs definition of "no addtl costs" may not reflect the true cost of a different site to the community. If your kid passes your nearest school to go to another one...that is a cost, a cost to you and your family.
It doesn't show up on the SD balance sheet, but it's real, and the community needs to think very seriously about that "cost" when considering the alternatives.
Addt'l monies to build at BB eventually go away. They are real as well, but they go away. Other sites have costs that may be lasting and may worsen over time.
The SB needs to recognize all the costs to the community as it proceeds.
|
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Dec 19, 2007 7:16:58 GMT -6
Some kids would be passing their nearest high school to attend MVHS at BB. So that was something that would have affected BB as well. I'm not sure there are any sites where this issue wouldn't affect someone.
|
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Dec 19, 2007 7:17:38 GMT -6
I suggest that anyone with concerns about a site or boundaries email the SB. I did, and I was pleasantly surprised that several responded pretty quickly. So, I think they're still reading their email.
Given the current crowding at the MS & HS levels, I think many people look forward to construction to begin ASAP.
|
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Dec 19, 2007 7:37:06 GMT -6
Some kids would be passing their nearest high school to attend MVHS at BB. So that was something that would have affected BB as well. I'm not sure there are any sites where this issue wouldn't affect someone. Hi lacy, I'm just curious what schools would have passed their nearest HS in the way to BB? |
|
|
|
Post by slp on Dec 19, 2007 7:37:51 GMT -6
I think it much improves the commute for Brookdale and Longwood and Ginger Woods section of Young. I have never heard Brooks, or Young complain about their commute to WV? I won't argue it improves it for them, but more like from OK to great, rather than unreasonable to reasonable. Didn't Brookdale vote against the 3rd highschool? |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Dec 19, 2007 7:42:34 GMT -6
yes, overwhelmingly
|
|
|
|
Post by rew on Dec 19, 2007 7:43:26 GMT -6
And construction could have begun this Oct on BB. And yes Lacy, that would have been the case for TG, and Gombert, but I think there is a difference when it is half the district.
The SB offered to pay $20M for BB and they obviously are willing to spend a minimum of $6M to walk away, the judgement was for $32M. So we will walk away from a more ideal spot for $6M on a $125M project?
IMO, penny wise pound foolish.
|
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Dec 19, 2007 7:45:22 GMT -6
I think it much improves the commute for Brookdale and Longwood and Ginger Woods section of Young. I have never heard Brooks, or Young complain about their commute to WV? I won't argue it improves it for them, but more like from OK to great, rather than unreasonable to reasonable. Didn't Brookdale vote against the 3rd highschool? What does that mean? Should the high school should be built only to benefit the areas who voted for it? I just don't understand that. I thought Metea was for the benefit of the entire district, whether one voted yes for the referendum or not. After all, whether you voted yes or not, you are still paying the taxes on it. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Dec 19, 2007 7:47:27 GMT -6
I think it much improves the commute for Brookdale and Longwood and Ginger Woods section of Young. I have never heard Brooks, or Young complain about their commute to WV? I won't argue it improves it for them, but more like from OK to great, rather than unreasonable to reasonable. Didn't Brookdale vote against the 3rd highschool? is this relevant? |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 19, 2007 7:48:16 GMT -6
Some kids would be passing their nearest high school to attend MVHS at BB. So that was something that would have affected BB as well. I'm not sure there are any sites where this issue wouldn't affect someone. passing ? Not in the literal sense as I remember it - can you please state who, it's possible I have forgotten. Now if you mean going further than the closest - well welcome to my world - we have never gone to the closest middle or high school. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 19, 2007 7:49:47 GMT -6
Didn't Brookdale vote against the 3rd highschool? is this relevant? no , except in the sense you are saying people just want to get the 3rd HS and 7th MS open because of the overcrowding - regardless of site -- well that didn't appear to be true there then, what's changed ? One can't have that argument both ways - now areas that voted no 'just want the school built to relieve overcrowding' where before they were no voters - that said, I agree with GM in that the school is for everyone regardless of how anyone voted, IIRC no kids voted, only parents and other adults. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Dec 19, 2007 7:53:21 GMT -6
Didn't Brookdale vote against the 3rd highschool? What does that mean? Should the high school should be built only to benefit the areas who voted for it? I just don't understand that. I thought Metea was for the benefit of the entire district, whether one voted yes for the referendum or not. After all, whether you voted yes or not, you are still paying the taxes on it. Here's way-out-there comparison: suppose you didn't vote for President Bush, but he pushed through a tax cut. Do only the people that voted for Bush get the tax cut? Sorry, but I am not interested in hearing what areas "deserve" or don't "deserve" the site or boundaries to be more or less benefitial than any other area based on how an area voted for the last Ref, or what they've "gone though" in the past. All areas have "gone through" the growing pains of 204 in variuos ways. And the there are people in all corners of the SD that HAVE and HAVE NOT supported past referendums. |
|
