|
|
Post by macy on Dec 4, 2007 19:12:05 GMT -6
Please don't sit there and say we're all being selfish. Like JV and GM, I too will be voting for the operating referendum regardless of how good or bad I think their site location is or their boundary choice. It's needed, so they need to stop all the 'activity' and actually 'accomplish' something. I want them to make a decision, and I'll just deal with it however I choose to deal with it... but make the darn decision and get the ball rolling so the district has a 3rd HS and a converted back MS which is what was voted on by the public. Haven't you said your kids will not go to Metea at either Macom or St John's due to sub station? What if we all said that? Who is happy then? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Dec 4, 2007 19:16:23 GMT -6
Please don't sit there and say we're all being selfish. Like JV and GM, I too will be voting for the operating referendum regardless of how good or bad I think their site location is or their boundary choice. It's needed, so they need to stop all the 'activity' and actually 'accomplish' something. I want them to make a decision, and I'll just deal with it however I choose to deal with it... but make the darn decision and get the ball rolling so the district has a 3rd HS and a converted back MS which is what was voted on by the public. Haven't you said your kids will not go to Metea at either Macom or St John's due to sub station? What if we all said that? Who is happy then? Yup, they won't attend a school at those sites. I don't make decisions to make people happy. There's a difference between saying something and doing something. I don't really care if the SB takes my opinion into account or not because I will do something about it afterwards if I don't like what they decide. They need to just do their job and decide. After that, I can do my job if I have to. |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Dec 4, 2007 19:20:53 GMT -6
Never say never, but I HC himself said that if enrollment dropped well below current levels, the SD would close the remaining freshman center and have 9-12 in the three high schools the fresh center would become a middle school and one of the MSs would be closed.
A more modest drop in enrollment, would though cause a problem if the school is situated in an area of low student density, because to fill that school, you end up having to pull students from farther and farther away.
Or say you have with a 20% drop in HS enrollment, that = NV at 3400, WV at 2400 and the northern school at 2400.
If you have a school centrally located, now you can redistribute and close the frosh center and have 2700 at each HS.
But suppose that WV closes and now we only have one north and one south, you still have 65% of the students south of 75th.. so a 50/50 split sends many students south of 75th to a northern site?? Does that really seem reasonable to people?
ETA: I do not oppose a northern site for my area, I have problems with it working for the district, now and in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Dec 4, 2007 19:31:10 GMT -6
Haven't you said your kids will not go to Metea at either Macom or St John's due to sub station? What if we all said that? Who is happy then? Yup, they won't attend a school at those sites. I don't make decisions to make people happy. There's a difference between saying something and doing something. I don't really care if the SB takes my opinion into account or not because I will do something about it afterwards if I don't like what they decide. They need to just do their job and decide. After that, I can do my job if I have to. well, I'm starting to see your point as to wanting to make your own choice. What if we all think the same? Will they let us all "grandfather" and chose our own school choice? Somehow, I don't think so. |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Dec 4, 2007 19:57:51 GMT -6
OK I will propse this to those who MUST have BB...... Would you be willing to shoulder the entire cost overrun to have BB? Meaning that the BB attendance area would be set with a special taxing Dist to cover the added cost? If you say OK...I'll jump on the BB bandwagon. Yes, I would. Your seat on the wagon is picked out. |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Dec 4, 2007 20:01:52 GMT -6
Alka is at Watts PTA tonight, I believe she may hear about the northern site tonight -- of course most people are unaware of it yet. doc or anyone that went to this meeting... could you please post an update of what went on? |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 4, 2007 20:04:23 GMT -6
Yup, they won't attend a school at those sites. I don't make decisions to make people happy. There's a difference between saying something and doing something. I don't really care if the SB takes my opinion into account or not because I will do something about it afterwards if I don't like what they decide. They need to just do their job and decide. After that, I can do my job if I have to. well, I'm starting to see your point as to wanting to make your own choice. What if we all think the same? Will they let us all "grandfather" and chose our own school choice? Somehow, I don't think so. no they won't - in fact they try and stop it altogether to avoid that -- but making one's own choice also includes: St Francis / Benet / Rosary / Marmion etc. The financial hit is staggering, but all of these choices are tough ones. I agree with Arch in that I don't think much feedback is going to influence whatever future decision is coming - so let's get it over with so we all know what we're dealing with. I'd like to think that the decision will be one best for the overall 204 community - and will hope for the best. |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Dec 4, 2007 20:04:55 GMT -6
I can't believe we haven't heard anything credible regarding the AME site. There are lots of people that attend that church - surely someone would have heard something from the pastor...? I'll tell you my feelings on the church as well. If the School District comes out and announces a unilateral decision to buy the church property (without fully expressing the cost differential with the legal fees and damage costs, or fully pursuing other sites), I'll be the first to demand immediately that the Church be out of holding services on all school facilities forever. We will have no business continuing to subsidize their fundraising after a back room deal. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Dec 4, 2007 20:17:10 GMT -6
Alka is at Watts PTA tonight, I believe she may hear about the northern site tonight -- of course most people are unaware of it yet. doc or anyone that went to this meeting... could you please post an update of what went on? I could not attend but will have an update for you as soon as I receive it. |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Dec 4, 2007 20:22:15 GMT -6
Alka is at Watts PTA tonight, I believe she may hear about the northern site tonight -- of course most people are unaware of it yet. doc or anyone that went to this meeting... could you please post an update of what went on? Everything would be better if we just had more cowbell! Thanks for the laugh! |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 4, 2007 20:32:54 GMT -6
If it is a northern site, is it ironic that the guy who spent $18k to defeat QT, still winds up sending Ashwood to WV?
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Dec 4, 2007 21:15:03 GMT -6
doc or anyone that went to this meeting... could you please post an update of what went on? Everything would be better if we just had more cowbell! Thanks for the laugh! Easy, lacy.. I put my pants on just like the rest of you - one leg at a time. Except, once my pants are on, I make gold records.  |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Dec 4, 2007 21:26:20 GMT -6
LOL!!! Another quote from the infamous cowbell skit:
"what does that mean?"
Ha Ha, so funny!
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Dec 4, 2007 21:51:04 GMT -6
Some good comic relief during this time is certainly welcome and appreciated  |
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Dec 4, 2007 22:48:08 GMT -6
The bigger question is, how does the Northern AME site make a bigger majority happy? The SB may be figuring that a bigger majority will be happy with simply delivering the school on budget. Even if benefit is less than it otherwise could be. (The overall degree of less can be debated). Going back to arch's earlier post on "pick any three"....SB may figure that cost is one to stick with. As we all know with BB walkaway costs....the land saving must be SIGNIFICANT for it to financially be justifiable. I have a hunch that the real estate value for a northern site is a bit lower than other areas. I am not a real estate expert but I wonder....can we find any land south of route 34 cheap enough to cover the walkaway costs? I guess I am saying a northern site selection would be all about money, and staying slavishly on budget. Which, when considered in a vacuum, is of course a decent principal. One that understandably will appeal to many voters. Yet, there is a deep complexity to the problem that many will not delve into. As others have said.....it is a tough, tough call that our SB has to make. |
|
