Disappointment

[slp]

sleeplessinnpvl said:

slp said:

you stated, " you want to avoid middle schools splits to be with WE" .....

I don't think WE or TG cares who they go to middle school with ; they just don't want a split middle school thrown in with the other major change of high schools.

Don't paint a picture that WE and TG are fighting to stay together, we are NOT.

We are both upset about split middle schools; however that can be fixed is fine by me.

Oh, sorry, I guess I misunderstood you. I was just referring to your quote where you said to keep them together. I do know a lot of people at Fry whose kids have friends in WE. So I just assumed you were one of those people that was upset that Fry and WE were being split.

no problem.

If the middle school split can be fixed by keeping WE and Fry together at Scullen I would be happy with that, but it is not the end-all goal to keep WE with TG (IMO).

The goal is not splitting the middle schools of the folks being asked to change high schools too. IMO.

[gatormom]

archwinsome said:

bob said:

This is what I proposed

McCarty and Steck busers to MV
Owen to WV
Welch to Still
WE to Scullen
Ashwood Park to Scullen to make up difference of Welch leaving and WE coming in

Downside or Upside
Still becomes a triple split MS. It will send kids to all three HS.
IMO, that might be good.

Does anyone end up at the furthest HS from their area?

Yeah, half of Gombert but it sure makes others happy, right?

[sleeplessinnpvl]

Bob, what sort of % are we talking about if Welch goes to Still? Is it pretty much 33% MV, 33% NV and 33% MV or is someone really in a minority? I think Owen wouldn't care if they were a minority if they get their distance decreased. I don't know about the rest of the Still folks though.

[sushi]

slp, I certainly wasn't trying to imply that you in particular were negative around your child. It IS going around, though, when my neighbors third grader comes home and tells her she doesn't want to go to WV because there are gangs there.

Your eighth grader will be the new kid on the block; eighth graders are already "the big man on campus", and again, will change with other kids from the neighborhood. It can be very exciting. My eighth grader survived and thrived.

[doctorwho]

archwinsome said:

bob said:

This is what I proposed

McCarty and Steck busers to MV
Owen to WV
Welch to Still
WE to Scullen
Ashwood Park to Scullen to make up difference of Welch leaving and WE coming in

Downside or Upside
Still becomes a triple split MS. It will send kids to all three HS.
IMO, that might be good.

Does anyone end up at the furthest HS from their area?

Unkess I'm misreading it leaves 2 ES's with the 3rd HS yet -- - Bob is that true or did I miss something in this thread ?

[concerned]

IMO a three way split in a MS is better then taking one Neighborhood and splitting the heck out of it!!! This would help Peterson.

[Arch]

gatormom said:

archwinsome said:

Does anyone end up at the furthest HS from their area?

Yeah, half of Gombert but it sure makes others happy, right?

If someone's headed to the farthest then I don't like it because it's not fair across the board. Something else has to shift, IMO.

[sleeplessinnpvl]

doctorwho said:

archwinsome said:

Does anyone end up at the furthest HS from their area?

Unkess I'm misreading it leaves 2 ES's with the 3rd HS yet -- - Bob is that true or did I miss something in this thread ?

I think Bob's just working on one thing at a time. Actually, after he's fixed Owen's problem, maybe he can work on getting the new site changed. Then everyone would be happy.

I don't see how Gombert would be changing anything. That half of Gombert would still be going to MV which does stink but I don't think Bob's proposal made any of Gombert be worse off, did it?

[sushi]

"Everyone" will NEVER be happy, sorry to say.

[gatormom]

sleeplessinnpvl said:

doctorwho said:

Unkess I'm misreading it leaves 2 ES's with the 3rd HS yet -- - Bob is that true or did I miss something in this thread ?

I think Bob's just working on one thing at a time. Actually, after he's fixed Owen's problem, maybe he can work on getting the new site changed. Then everyone would be happy.

I don't see how Gombert would be changing anything. That half of Gombert would still be going to MV which does stink but I don't think Bob's proposal made any of Gombert be worse off, did it?

Nope Gombert is no worse off. Half of our school will head to MV and half to WV. And Dr. Who, it is the 3rd furthest school for those kids going to MV.

I am not complaining. Not happy but not complaining.

[WeBe204]

sushi said:

WE, for the most part, accepted that geographically we are the most logical for change. TG, Ashwood get on board. Swallow the pill, move on.

Sushi, I typically appreciate you pragmatic posts. However, I would like to take issue with the above comments. I think it be-littles the Peterson situation. I do not believe anyone split WE or TG in half. I also do not believe anyone split WE or FRY ES into thirds. And by thirds I mean one of those thirds is about 10%. I also believe no one in TG or WE have asked that small 10% to drive to a Still middle school when you have one next to your subdivision (crone) or drive by one scullen.

[lacy]

sleeplessinnpvl said:

I agree with Sushi. Your kids are resilient. You as parents need to focus on the positives of going to a new school. People that transfer into a new town have to do it all the time. The kids will survive.

That being said, I also agree with 204 family in that you all need to focus on an issue. But good luck with that because there are so many of you and so many issues. What is important to one family (avoid MS splits so I can be with WE) is not important to another family (screw WE, I just want to be a walker so I don't have a long bus ride). I just don't see your area coming together. BUT, I think if you did get together with WE and go for the middle school split thing, at least you would have more power in numbers. Face it, the bridge issue is just Fry. But the middle school split thing is possible. AND, the middle school split extends into the north as well. That is a district wide issue and makes everyone look more altruistic. And if it involved a school that has been safe until now being sent somewhere they don't like, then maybe that is spreading the pain around so you guys don't have to bear it all. There are no easy answers. But I think you guys need to come together and pick your issue. Because if you each go in there and whine about a different issue, you are going to look like "Fry-babies" again and no one wants that. Maybe you guys can use this board to determine which issue you want to tackle.

There are many problems with this whole plan that are district wide. And they should be addressed.

There are also issues that pertain to Fry. Whether people agree or disagree, the bridge is funded by taxpayer dollars and it certainly would be used by students to walk to school. So if people are upset because there seems to be a full-court press from the district to disregard it, so be it. I think those people have every right to be upset - the district included a memo from a woman who seemed to not have ANY facts right and she lives in an area which could be included in the WVHS attendance area, but was not. Why include something that pertains to ONE subdivision in the proposal at all? Doesn't look good.

Secondly, yes we are being sent with part of Petersen - but how many people live over there? The other areas south of 95th street and west of 59 are not going with us (Tamarack, Anderman Acres, etc.) So taking primarily just Fry has upset people - and rightly so.

Lastly, they made a mess of the middle school situation here. And no, we don't need to be pulled out of Scullen to fix it.

My question is - why do just some areas have to take the brunt of this?? There's Fry, WE , Petersen, Gombert-I'm not well versed on all of them - but it looks like some areas were dealt a very poor hand here. And yes, you are seeing some "push back". I think you'll see more. Not yelling and screaming - but some well thought out (and financed) opposition to this.

As for the Welch area specifically, I was at a public place yesterday and heard a woman saying how relieved she was that her area (Stillwater) was "safe". Safe from what?! The obvious implication was that they don't want to go to WVHS. I think Welch needs to be included in some of the sacrifices here - how do they escape any changes whatsoever? To say they all walk is just not true. No one near 87th walks. And that's a pretty big portion of that neighborhood.

Lastly, I think my biggest beef (waves to beefeater) with this whole plan is the underlying plan to build a "new WVHS". The SBs and district's job is to educate the kids - all of them.
Busing people all over kingdom come to accomplish some other agenda of their's is just plain wrong and quite franking disgusting. I'm unhappy that they would use my kid and others to accomplish some goal. They're supposed to be focused on educating the kids. Bu this district is always embroiled in something else. It's really kind of embarrassing.

We really need new leadership.

[lacy]

gatormom said:

archwinsome said:

Does anyone end up at the furthest HS from their area?

Yeah, half of Gombert but it sure makes others happy, right?

I might have missed this - but where is your part of Gombert going?

[gatormom]

lacy said:

gatormom said:

Yeah, half of Gombert but it sure makes others happy, right?

I might have missed this - but where is your part of Gombert going?

My part is going to Waubonsie, and yes it has been stated before that is where my area is going.

Does it make it any better for our kids? Many of our children have known each other since K and they are being split to go to different schools.

Sorry, I am having a hard time feeling the pain of WE and Fry not getting to go to the same MS and having to deal with split MSs. I will also go on record as stating, I would rather see Petersen's split dealt with than ours. We will get over it. I think the Petersen split is not good for those kids.

[lacy]

brad204 said:

sushi said:

WE, for the most part, accepted that geographically we are the most logical for change. TG, Ashwood get on board. Swallow the pill, move on.

Sushi, I typically appreciate you pragmatic posts. However, I would like to take issue with the above comments. I think it be-littles the Peterson situation. I do not believe anyone split WE or TG in half. I also do not believe anyone split WE or FRY ES into thirds. And by thirds I mean one of those thirds is about 10%. I also believe no one in TG or WE have asked that small 10% to drive to a Still middle school when you have one next to your subdivision (crone) or drive by one scullen.

I too, think that Petersen has every right to be upset. As does TG. Therefore, the command to "get over it" didn't sit well with me either.

There are many, many things about this entire proposal that stink. The northern site (Far removed from the population density), environmental concerns about the site, issuing bonds above the referendum amount, unresolved and unknown legal fees at BB, increased transportation costs, and on and on.

No they've just thrown some more gasoline on the fire with this convuluted boundary proposal.

So telling us to "get over it" won't work.