Boundaries with MS-North

[macy]

rew said:

This is what redrawing boundaries means...evreybody's cards back on the table. WELCH, SB and CLOW are no more safe than STECK, MCCARTY, GT, or GOMBERT.

Besides, the numbers point to most of these schools moving at some point anyway. They will move to a north AME and the "central school" whether it's WV, BB or Macom.

Rew,

I'm in total agreement with you. From those I spoken with that live in many of the elementary areas you listed, they are not as engaged as we are.

Anything is possible in terms of boundaries. WVHS Parent is right, until we know the site, guessing on what could/should happen is not productive.

[doctorwho]

fence said:

Wow, I can't keep up! All I was trying to say was that it makes no sense to get all riled about boundaries for a northern site when a) no one knows we're getting a northern site and b) no one knows what the boundaries will be if one were chosen. As someone who had a son attend both Watts and Hill, I understand that it's farther than the usual in-neighborhood jaunt most are used to, but I can't help but notice the tendency towards hyperbole in describing the torturous commute 5 miles up River Road.

Having said that, for the record, IMHO, a northern site would be a terrible decision. It would be the site most disruptive to most people, and those people might include you or they might include me. I would prefer Macom as a second choice. And I could care less how much the guy makes in the process of selling us the land.

Although that point of view is admittedly based on the fact that I am thinking about my area vs. about neighborhoods in the north, who would have the longest commutes then in that scenario. But that's the way we all think, and that's normal and not something I think anyone needs to apologize for. There will be a few people getting the short end, no matter what site is picked, and that is just the unfortunate reality of the situation.

Anyway, I'm just not going to start freaking out about who is being sent from 75th street or 83rd street for that matter up to Ferry road until I know that's the decision that's been made. And I have an 8th grader, so we'll feel all the levels of the problem, including changing HS, leaving friends, and feeling the disappointment at the change from BB to another location whatever that ends up to be.

I'm just going to avoid torturing myself over it this close to the holidays....

If you don't think 5 - 6 miles to MS is a great distance, then sign your area up for that MS trip and double it for HS -
as far as hyperbole - the difference between the MS trip and HS is the kids are driving that distance. ( and that trip up River includes a road grade RR crossing ) - - if you don't believe that makes a difference that's fine, but let's not jab at those of us who do.
All trip times I have listed were actual times

None if us 'want' to torture ourselves, but ignoring what is going on got the district where we are today, as most were totally uninformed the first time the school referendum came up - and I am not picking on those people because I was one of them, I will never be that uninformed about something so important again.

[doctorwho]

macy said:

rew said:

This is what redrawing boundaries means...evreybody's cards back on the table. WELCH, SB and CLOW are no more safe than STECK, MCCARTY, GT, or GOMBERT.

Besides, the numbers point to most of these schools moving at some point anyway. They will move to a north AME and the "central school" whether it's WV, BB or Macom.

Rew,

I'm in total agreement with you. From those I spoken with that live in many of the elementary areas you listed, they are not as engaged as we are.

Anything is possible in terms of boundaries. WVHS Parent is right, until we know the site, guessing on what could/should happen is not productive.

The reason I believe it is of some value is to be ready for when it is announced and boundaries are drawn. I have this feeling the boundary process will be short and we will have little time for input - being prepared and thinking through scenarios should make us better prepared to inform our neighbors also.

[casey]

rew said:

This is what redrawing boundaries means...evreybody's cards back on the table. WELCH, SB and CLOW are no more safe than STECK, MCCARTY, GT, or GOMBERT.

Besides, the numbers point to most of these schools moving at some point anyway. They will move to a north AME and the "central school" whether it's WV, BB or Macom.

Please don't forget the magical 4th site. As we may discover these discussions are moot and the SB may just come forward with a new site that we haven't even discussed. I do agree with you, rew, everybody's cards are back on the table. Anyone could be moved to a new HS. No one should make any ASSumptions cuz you know what can happen....

Anyone think we'll get a chance to see the four sites before a decision is made? I sure hope so and I'm holding out hope. A January meeting would be a good idea, eh? Lay the cards out on the table and let everyone see the sites and explore pros/cons, etc. What do you think oh mighty SB members?

[rew]

Evfentually, NV will lose it's frosh center and the boundaries will be 95th and Rt 59 with possibly Old Wheatland in there, maybe one other school -- Welch??

SB, CLOW, TG. PET WE will all be moved elsewhere either to WV, or BB or Macom MV. WV schools will move north.

if the school were at BB or Macom, then Old Wheatland could move there. Kendall etc. The options for who moves out of NV grow.

[EagleDad]

wvhsparent said:

rew said:

I think Tall grass could make a strong argument to stay at NV, they are walkers and they have a bridge, while Springbrook has no walkers and are about equidistant to WV as TG.

Maybe the 95th st corridor is a better way to look to fill a cemtral WV.

Sounds good, but the dash has indicated he thinks of Rt59 as a good boundary, bridge or not.

Where did he say that?

[macy]

I'm not sure, but I think it was at an IPPC meeting.

Anyone?

ETA: I don't think he made a comment on the bridge

[wvhsparent]

doctorwho said:

macy said:

Rew,

I'm in total agreement with you. From those I spoken with that live in many of the elementary areas you listed, they are not as engaged as we are.

Anything is possible in terms of boundaries. WVHS Parent is right, until we know the site, guessing on what could/should happen is not productive.

The reason I believe it is of some value is to be ready for when it is announced and boundaries are drawn. I have this feeling the boundary process will be short and we will have little time for input - being prepared and thinking through scenarios should make us better prepared to inform our neighbors also.

I agree with you doc, but I think we all have tried just about every combo known to man already.
We are just rehashing the rehash of the combos now, and that is not productive, in fact may be more destructive at this time.

[wvhsparent]

eagledad said:

wvhsparent said:

Sounds good, but the dash has indicated he thinks of Rt59 as a good boundary, bridge or not.

Where did he say that?

I thought he mentioned that at one of the last SB meetings.
Not sure though

[macy]

wvhsparent said:

eagledad said:

Where did he say that?

I thought he mentioned that at one of the last SB meetings.
Not sure though

I'm pretty sure he did say that 59 was a "clear choice" in terms of boundaries.

We can guess, infer to rumor all we want but that statement is very difficult to apply to any site available in the district.

Someone has to cross rt. 59 or drive a long way up or down with almost any site selected.

I don't get it? Maybe just me. I sure don't mean to "dis the dash", but I wish he'd have provided more of what his thought process was when he made the statement.

BTW: Whomever coined the "dash".... awesome. love it.

[rew]

Any boundary discussion is destructive, but when BB crashed and burned you were celebrating WVHS P. So say whatever you like, but this is what the thread is for. Discussing boundaries...

[doctorwho]

wvhsparent said:

eagledad said:

Where did he say that?

I thought he mentioned that at one of the last SB meetings.
Not sure though

I got it from people after an IPPC meeting

[doctorwho]

wvhsparent said:

doctorwho said:

The reason I believe it is of some value is to be ready for when it is announced and boundaries are drawn. I have this feeling the boundary process will be short and we will have little time for input - being prepared and thinking through scenarios should make us better prepared to inform our neighbors also.

I agree with you doc, but I think we all have tried just about every combo known to man already.
We are just rehashing the rehash of the combos now, and that is not productive, in fact may be more destructive at this time.

I guess I keep hoping we'll stumble upon a solution that works for any site -- but I think it is far more wishing than anything else

[justvote]

forthekids said:

rew said:

I think Tall grass could make a strong argument to stay at NV, they are walkers and they have a bridge, while Springbrook has no walkers and are about equidistant to WV as TG.

Maybe the 95th st corridor is a better way to look to fill a cemtral WV.

I went into my NV phone book and randomly picked an address in Springbrook and one in Tall Grass - Springbrook was 7.94 miles and Tall Grass 6.21 miles. Not a huge difference but a difference nonetheless.

I'm not sure about the farthest distance from TG to WV, but the shortest distance is about 3.8 miles from the NW corner of TG to WV (95th st & 248th Ave.). SB is a heck of alot further than that from it's nearest corner.

FWIW - I did hear the superintendent state that Rte. 59 is a natural boundary.

ETA: I stand corrected - I just Google mapped it. It's actually 3.5 miles.

[macy]

justvote said:

forthekids said:

I went into my NV phone book and randomly picked an address in Springbrook and one in Tall Grass - Springbrook was 7.94 miles and Tall Grass 6.21 miles. Not a huge difference but a difference nonetheless.

I'm not sure about the farthest distance from TG to WV, but the shortest distance is about 3.8 miles from the NW corner of TG to WV. SB is a heck of alot further than that from it's nearest corner (95th st & 248th Ave.).

FWIW - The superintendent did state that Rte. 59 is a natural boundary. I heard it myself at an IPPC meeting.

He did say that but, I'm struggling, in my mind at least, to figure what he meant.

Brookdale? Someone explain how they can't cross 59 vs. WE, TG, Watts, etc.? Common logic is that somebody will cross 59.

Makes no sense to me? I don't think we can universally apply his comments to any site within the district.