|
|
Post by fence on Apr 25, 2008 21:14:36 GMT -6
Yeah, I was the one who'd rather be in Brit Lit  Well, this is about as much fun as physics class  .... Glad to hear from another fan of physics! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 25, 2008 21:23:13 GMT -6
doctorwho: What are projected numbers for HS? Would you happen to have those handy? Somehow my recollection was that that was significantly higher than ~7000. I could be wrong. Don't NV and MV have that combined capacity now? Capacity is the key phrase. I also have a copy of a letter from STR to Howie Crouse ( upon the SB's request for an estiamet( that said NV Gold @ 85% capacity was over 1300. Now capacity has been used and abused from the SD admin / SB members/ and seemingly everyone else here and in the district - maximum/ optimal and all things in between, spun out. They didn't like the answer from their site planning people - so created their own numbers -I do not believe there is any concensus on what capacity is: Utilizing Frontier Campus also... Yes I believe there is a potential HS crowding issue - but not the 10,400 touted and 5000 + kids per high school as some like to throw out as if it's around the corner in 2009. No it's not. And if 204 keeps losing students to private school at the accelerated rate of this yearm 8931 will be lower. 1570 lower than the number frquently used for 3 school populations, is 1/2 a high school- really complicates the picture more. here is the latest SB HS numbers - from same presentation: 2009 -- 8488 2010 -- 8630 2011 - 8816 2012 - 8898 2013 - 8931 so not a 3000 student issue - How would a site for a new MS - and a 600 student addition for NV ( estimate delivered to SD for $13,000,000 that also included fixing the hallway situatiion supposedly) - look ? ( would still have that money left even if Brodie gets their $20 M ) I don't know, I am just asking as I have always been pro 3rd HS. However I will admit that was based on 10,000 +. Remembering schools like New Trier and Stevenson ( always get mentioned) are two of the top performing schools in the state and are that size or larger. ( Yes, I realize some of the issues with schools that side even if performance is good - not advocating, just asking and why I still lean towards 3rd HS, but more people might not today ) |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 25, 2008 21:41:34 GMT -6
doctorwho: Interesting observation on the clock resetting for NCLB - time for me to do some more research. ---------------------------------------------- Less well known, but soon to become much more familiar, are the law's more drastic measures for schools that miss AYP for four or five years. After four years, schools are required to choose one of the following: Replace school staff relevant to the failure. Put in place a new curriculum. Decrease management authority at the school. Appoint outside experts to advise the school. Extend the school year or the school day. Restructure the internal organization of the school. After five years, the choices are: Reopen as a charter school. Replace all or most of the staff. Contract with an outside entity to operate the school. Institute other significant governance and staffing changes likely to improve the school. Turn over operation of the school to the state. Since NCLB sanctions are cumulative, schools also must presumably continue to offer transfer and tutoring while instituting these measures |
|
|
|
Post by player on Apr 25, 2008 21:48:11 GMT -6
Yeah - at 10,400 a 3'rd HS looks mandatory. Thats dodgy at 8,900 max enrollment. I believe your numbers show we still need an additional 1000-1500 capacity by 2009 (not 3000) to make sure NV and WV aren't over capacity. I guess I'm not against a 3rd HS as if NV and WV operate 10-15% less than full capacity, that can only be good for our kids. I'm pretty positive the referendum will not pass if it comes to revote.
fence: you're right - $8M is $8M - thats some real change for folks like us. And it sucks that it's going into vapor. That is water under the bridge at this time. And I agree a deep breath and re-evaluation would be beneficial. Too many wheels are in motion for that. Somehow, we have to transcend the past for the sake of our future. I have no idea how - all I know is that a positive outlet for this tension our community feels has to be found.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 25, 2008 21:50:34 GMT -6
doctorwho: Interesting observation on the clock resetting for NCLB - time for me to do some more research. the key would be - would the State of Ill and Feds agree that changing 65% or so of the school is ' restructuring ' IN White Eagle ( not w/ BB )
Fry ( not w/ BB )OUT Watts ( either way ) Cowlishaw ( either way ) 1/2 Gombert ( either way ) 1/2 Owen ( either way ) Brooks ( would stay with BB)
Brookdale ( would stay with BB)
Young ( would stay with BB ) STAYING 1/2 Gombert ( would not if BB )McCarty Georgetown Steck Quite the change- easy to argue this is a 'restructured school' BB makes this claim a lot harder. Explains to me why some areas were thrown under the proverbial bus and not even acknowledged that traveling to the furthest HS from their home, not a very good thing since we are spending $150M to ADD a HS, not make 3 enitre areas commues horrendous. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 25, 2008 21:57:52 GMT -6
Yeah - at 10,400 a 3'rd HS looks mandatory. Thats dodgy at 8,900 max enrollment. I believe your numbers show we still need an additional 1000-1500 capacity by 2009 (not 3000) to make sure NV and WV aren't over capacity. I guess I'm not against a 3rd HS as if NV and WV operate 10-15% less than full capacity, that can only be good for our kids. I'm pretty positive the referendum will not pass if it comes to revote. fence: you're right - $8M is $8M - thats some real change for folks like us. And it sucks that it's going into vapor. That is water under the bridge at this time. And I agree a deep breath and re-evaluation would be beneficial. Too many wheels are in motion for that. Somehow, we have to transcend the past for the sake of our future. I have no idea how - all I know is that a positive outlet for this tension our community feels has to be found. Cheers. Here's where we get back to the 'capacity' number. Our own real estate firm told us that 1300 was 85% capacity at NV Gold. So we are running far below that ( way more than the 10% - 15% cushion you desire - and I would agree is likely a good thing) - So that crux is what is really capacity in the main campus's also. I sincerely believe you would not get two groups in this district to agree on that #. |
|
|
|
Post by WeBe204 on Apr 25, 2008 22:07:16 GMT -6
WeBe204: We disagree on some points, but we agree on some. Yes - I do believe Eola is "good enough". You will have to take me through your logic on why we only have an MS probem in 2009 and not an HS problem - if you are right, that would make me lean towards nixing the $150M hammer altogether. And I am open to amending my stance. Presumably you are referring to the Open Meetings Act angle in the latest filing from NSFOC? I'm not sure it will stick, but as you said, the courts will tell us what the right interpretation is. Short of catching the SB having done something manifestly illegal, the NSFOC has a tough job making its case. I completely agree that the NSFOC suit had the unintended pleasant side effect of having MWGen pull out - but I dont think anyone anticipated that AME would come through and bail the SB out, giving them cleaner land to fight with. In effect, it weakened the environmental case considerably. But, if the HS is built on Eola, I will sleep better as a result. So while I'm not going to "pat" their back ( as I dont believe that was their intended end result), I do appreciate the outcome. The Brodie suit is solid. I checked a lot of Illinois statutes, and I can't see how they wont get a nice chunk of change. But nowhere near $20M. And, I appreciate you recognizing that Eola or no HS is not just a stance in favor of the SB, but a clear and present condition - pretty much a statement of fact. The tragedy is that all camps are passionate in their support for their stance, NSFOC, SB, Eola supporters, BB supporters, and very firmly entrenched in their camps to dislodge them for any middle ground. So, as you say, the current trajectory is what we must accept as fact - with Eola or a referendum being the likely outcomes. How are you suggesting we approach "cleaning up after the BB mess"? Arch: Our math differs. I got to run - got a family to feed before they get irate, but I'll post my logic after dinner. Cheers. Hmmm... Where to start.. "You will have to take me through your logic on why we only have an MS probem in 2009 and not an HS problem" The big push for 2009 is to re-take WVHS Gold campus as a middle school. Again, I will refer you to the archives. I also think the Doctor has covered off on this pretty well at this point. (Thanks Dr) "Presumably you are referring to the Open Meetings Act angle in the latest filing from NSFOC?" No, actually not. You can go back a couple days in my posts and you will see I was a bit skeptical about that aspect. I am talking about the fliers created with district dollars right before the ref vote. "And, I appreciate you recognizing that Eola or no HS is not just a stance in favor of the SB, but a clear and present condition " This feels like a administration talking point. Yes, Eola is a present condition so are the current lawsuits. I assume everyone pretty much is in agreement on the fact this situation have been handled poorly by the admin/sb. The current difference of opinion centers around where we go from here. "The tragedy is that all camps are passionate in their support for their stance, NSFOC, SB, Eola supporters, BB supporters, and very firmly entrenched in their camps to dislodge them for any middle ground." I agree this is a tragedy. In business, I rarely play zero sum games or burn bridges. I try very hard to keep my ego and personal feelings out of my dealings. I need to allow everyone to walk away with something. I also know I need to manage people's expectations and make them feel part of the process. Sure I am not a double PHD but I am a fairly successful entrepreneur. Or maybe this works... "treat others as you would like to be treated" Dash wants to use a stick by sneering "Entitled" at a community do not be surprised when the community picks up a stick and swings back... Edit: missed the last point. How to clean up the BB mess.. Well finish off the lawsuits would be a good start. Rushing to build and hoping the judge takes pitty seems childish. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 25, 2008 22:38:55 GMT -6
Yeah - at 10,400 a 3'rd HS looks mandatory. Thats dodgy at 8,900 max enrollment. I believe your numbers show we still need an additional 1000-1500 capacity by 2009 (not 3000) to make sure NV and WV aren't over capacity. I guess I'm not against a 3rd HS as if NV and WV operate 10-15% less than full capacity, that can only be good for our kids. I'm pretty positive the referendum will not pass if it comes to revote. fence: you're right - $8M is $8M - thats some real change for folks like us. And it sucks that it's going into vapor. That is water under the bridge at this time. And I agree a deep breath and re-evaluation would be beneficial. Too many wheels are in motion for that. Somehow, we have to transcend the past for the sake of our future. I have no idea how - all I know is that a positive outlet for this tension our community feels has to be found. Cheers. Player - not sure you remember the whole capacity debate, state view of capacity / our building company vew of capacity / the district view of capacity ( redcued by a 'utilization' factor etc etc Here is a quick go thru that still to this day makes my head hurt: www.suburbanchicagonews.com/sunpub/naper/top/n05204ref.htmHow many kids can you fit in a school? By Britt Carson STAFF WRITER How many students can you fit into the two high schools in Indian Prairie School District 204? How many do you want to squeeze in? How many students are yet to come? These are the hottest questions surrounding the $124.7 million referendum measures voters are being asked to approve on March 21 to fund construction of a third comprehensive high school. Two camps have organized, one for and one against the referendum measure. One group, 204 the Kids, is on one side supporting the third high school, while the Citizens for Options group is has its own plan in opposition to the district's proposal. Both sides have their own projections and numbers and ideas on how to solve the space problem at the middle and high school level. The district currently has 9,200 students in second through fourth grades without factoring in any new growth. The district says it can only house 8,400 of them at its existing two high schools — Waubonsie Valley and Neuqua Valley. That leaves a shortfall of 800 students. To help alleviate overcrowding at the middle schools, the referendum measure calls for the freshman center at Waubonsie Valley be to converted back into a middle school. That displaces about 1,200 students bringing the total number of high school students the district will need to house to at least 2,000 without factoring in any new students. Yet the Citizens for Options group believes the district is underestimating the capacity at the high schools and that this is a bubble of students, after which enrollments will decrease. They have suggested use of portable classrooms or additions to house students in the short term. District 204 Superintendent Howie Crouse lists the capacity at the high school level at 8,400 students. The Citizens for Options group says that number is wrong, relying on part of an application to the Illinois State Board of Education's Construction Grant Application Worksheet to back that up. The district filed the application in March of 2005 in hopes of getting state money to help build schools; however, the program has not been funded. In that application's Available Capacity Worksheet, the state, usingits own formula, takes the square footage per room and figures out how many students can fit each room. Those numbers come up with capacities of 4,231 students at Neuqua Valley and 4,767 students at Waubonsie Valley for a total of 8,998 students. Those numbers include the two freshman centers. Citizens for Options has been using those numbers to back up their claims that the district can fit more students into the high schools and that a third high school isn't necessary. However, a full copy of the application worksheet obtained by The Sun showed those numbers are only part of the process. The state takes the figures and multiplies them by 0.80 utilization factor to gain the available capacity at each school. Crouse said the 0.80 factor represents using a high school at 80 percent, though District 204 operates at a higher level. The utilization factor represents actual class sizes not just how many students can fit into a room. The result is 7,200 students — 1,200 students lower, not higher, than what the district suggests is the capacity at the high schools. Lisa Ohlhausen, speaking on behalf of the Citizens for Options group, said the group stands by the original numbers on the first part of the worksheet. "CFO has verified with the Illinois State Board of Education that the first sheet is for capacity and the second sheet with the multipliers is for funding and doesn't relate to capacity," Ohlhausen said. Crouse posted the second part of the worksheet with the formulas and a response on the district's Web site last week. He said the utilization factor represents a realistic approach to factoring in class sizes and how many students should be in a room, not necessarily how many can literally fit into one space. "The state recognizes that schools cannot and should not operate at a theoretical maximum capacity," Crouse said in his response. Crouse posted the information on the district Web site to clear up what he called misinformation about the capacity of the high schools. "I think it is unfortunate that only half of the story has been told by some people and that is misleading and irresponsible," said Liz D'Addario, co-chair of the 204 the Kids group. D'Addario, who has children in grade, middle and high school, said the issue shouldn't be a numbers game. "Whether you can fit more kids in a building is not the issue. It is whether we want to," she said. "Why in the world when we are already in an overcrowded situation where our kids are already feeling the negative impact ... why add more kids to this? Why are we settling for a less than acceptable solution for our children." Contact Britt Carson at bcarson@scn1.com or (630) 416-5269. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Apr 26, 2008 8:23:37 GMT -6
"Presumably you are referring to the Open Meetings Act angle in the latest filing from NSFOC?" No, actually not. You can go back a couple days in my posts and you will see I was a bit skeptical about that aspect. I am talking about the fliers created with district dollars right before the ref vote. There was a similar case brought up before the referendum. But I see Collin's point is slightly different than Rosenthal's; that the flyers were only to state FACTS and school district $$ was used to state that the school would be built on BB. So if the district didn't build on BB they are violating state election laws; (which they argued in Will County that they were only stating FACTS) so this ruling strengthens Collin's case ... ? District 204 flier meets Will Countymuster; FAQs not an endorsement for levy, Mock says
Naperville Sun, The (IL) - February 6, 2006
Author: Tim WaldorfIn a flier and in a list of frequently asked questions posted on its Web site, Indian Prairie School District 204 didn't tell residents to vote for its proposal for a third high school. Consequently, the WillCounty State's Attorney's Office has concluded that the district didn't violate election laws. Ari Rosenthal of the Will -DuPage Taxpayers Alliance asked the state's attorneys of both Will and DuPage counties to examine a flier the group believes was distributed at each of the district's elementary schools, as well as at public hearings held Jan. 17 and Jan. 19. According to Rosenthal , the flier "may be construed as advocating for the passage of District 204's upcoming third high school referendum (measure)" by lauding it as the "best solution" and predicting split shifts and the need to move gym and music classes into the hallways if voters turn down the district's request. State election laws state that "no public funds shall be used to urge any elector to vote for or against any candidate or proposition." The law does not "prohibit the use of public funds for dissemination of factual information relative to any proposition appearing on an election ballot." "At this time, we're going to withhold any comment on that situation," Paul Darrah, a spokesman for DuPage County State's Attorney, said Friday. On Thursday, WillCounty First Assistant State's Attorney Phil Mock told The Sun that, in the information he was presented, he didn't see a "clear-cut violation that would warrant further scrutiny." Mock said the District 204 school board explored the options available to it and decided that the current referendum proposal is the best solution to what it has judged to be a problem facing the district. "I think it falls under their statutory authority to disseminate what they think is factual information," Mock said. Mock also said the alleged violation isn't "egregious enough to take a look at" because very little taxpayer money is needed to print fliers and post frequently asked questions on a Web site. Simply put, Mock said taxing districts are typically safe from violating election laws as long as the information they distribute doesn't say "vote yes" or "vote no." District 204 Superintendent Howard Crouse could not be reached for comment. |
|
|
|
Post by cornholio on Apr 26, 2008 9:07:10 GMT -6
"Presumably you are referring to the Open Meetings Act angle in the latest filing from NSFOC?" No, actually not. You can go back a couple days in my posts and you will see I was a bit skeptical about that aspect. I am talking about the fliers created with district dollars right before the ref vote. There was a similar case brought up before the referendum. But I see Collin's point is slightly different than Rosenthal's; that the flyers were only to state FACTS and school district $$ was used to state that the school would be built on BB. So if the district didn't build on BB they are violating state election laws; (which they argued in Will County that they were only stating FACTS) so this ruling strengthens Collin's case ... ? District 204 flier meets Will Countymuster; FAQs not an endorsement for levy, Mock says
Naperville Sun, The (IL) - February 6, 2006
Author: Tim WaldorfIn a flier and in a list of frequently asked questions posted on its Web site, Indian Prairie School District 204 didn't tell residents to vote for its proposal for a third high school. Consequently, the WillCounty State's Attorney's Office has concluded that the district didn't violate election laws. Ari Rosenthal of the Will -DuPage Taxpayers Alliance asked the state's attorneys of both Will and DuPage counties to examine a flier the group believes was distributed at each of the district's elementary schools, as well as at public hearings held Jan. 17 and Jan. 19. According to Rosenthal , the flier "may be construed as advocating for the passage of District 204's upcoming third high school referendum (measure)" by lauding it as the "best solution" and predicting split shifts and the need to move gym and music classes into the hallways if voters turn down the district's request. State election laws state that "no public funds shall be used to urge any elector to vote for or against any candidate or proposition." The law does not "prohibit the use of public funds for dissemination of factual information relative to any proposition appearing on an election ballot." "At this time, we're going to withhold any comment on that situation," Paul Darrah, a spokesman for DuPage County State's Attorney, said Friday. On Thursday, WillCounty First Assistant State's Attorney Phil Mock told The Sun that, in the information he was presented, he didn't see a "clear-cut violation that would warrant further scrutiny." Mock said the District 204 school board explored the options available to it and decided that the current referendum proposal is the best solution to what it has judged to be a problem facing the district. "I think it falls under their statutory authority to disseminate what they think is factual information," Mock said. Mock also said the alleged violation isn't "egregious enough to take a look at" because very little taxpayer money is needed to print fliers and post frequently asked questions on a Web site. Simply put, Mock said taxing districts are typically safe from violating election laws as long as the information they distribute doesn't say "vote yes" or "vote no." District 204 Superintendent Howard Crouse could not be reached for comment. The information in the flier must be factual. If the flier stated Brach-Brodie. Then Brach-Brodie must be the site or the flier is false. |
|
|
|
Post by researching on Apr 26, 2008 9:38:45 GMT -6
WeBe204: We disagree on some points, but we agree on some. Yes - I do believe Eola is "good enough". You will have to take me through your logic on why we only have an MS probem in 2009 and not an HS problem - if you are right, that would make me lean towards nixing the $150M hammer altogether. And I am open to amending my stance. Presumably you are referring to the Open Meetings Act angle in the latest filing from NSFOC? I'm not sure it will stick, but as you said, the courts will tell us what the right interpretation is. Short of catching the SB having done something manifestly illegal, the NSFOC has a tough job making its case. I completely agree that the NSFOC suit had the unintended pleasant side effect of having MWGen pull out - but I dont think anyone anticipated that AME would come through and bail the SB out, giving them cleaner land to fight with. In effect, it weakened the environmental case considerably. But, if the HS is built on Eola, I will sleep better as a result. So while I'm not going to "pat" their back ( as I dont believe that was their intended end result), I do appreciate the outcome. The Brodie suit is solid. I checked a lot of Illinois statutes, and I can't see how they wont get a nice chunk of change. But nowhere near $20M. And, I appreciate you recognizing that Eola or no HS is not just a stance in favor of the SB, but a clear and present condition - pretty much a statement of fact. The tragedy is that all camps are passionate in their support for their stance, NSFOC, SB, Eola supporters, BB supporters, and very firmly entrenched in their camps to dislodge them for any middle ground. So, as you say, the current trajectory is what we must accept as fact - with Eola or a referendum being the likely outcomes. How are you suggesting we approach "cleaning up after the BB mess"? Arch: Our math differs. I got to run - got a family to feed before they get irate, but I'll post my logic after dinner. Cheers. Hmmm... Where to start.. "You will have to take me through your logic on why we only have an MS probem in 2009 and not an HS problem" The big push for 2009 is to re-take WVHS Gold campus as a middle school. Again, I will refer you to the archives. I also think the Doctor has covered off on this pretty well at this point. (Thanks Dr) "Presumably you are referring to the Open Meetings Act angle in the latest filing from NSFOC?" No, actually not. You can go back a couple days in my posts and you will see I was a bit skeptical about that aspect. I am talking about the fliers created with district dollars right before the ref vote. "And, I appreciate you recognizing that Eola or no HS is not just a stance in favor of the SB, but a clear and present condition " This feels like a administration talking point. Yes, Eola is a present condition so are the current lawsuits. I assume everyone pretty much is in agreement on the fact this situation have been handled poorly by the admin/sb. The current difference of opinion centers around where we go from here. "The tragedy is that all camps are passionate in their support for their stance, NSFOC, SB, Eola supporters, BB supporters, and very firmly entrenched in their camps to dislodge them for any middle ground." I agree this is a tragedy. In business, I rarely play zero sum games or burn bridges. I try very hard to keep my ego and personal feelings out of my dealings. I need to allow everyone to walk away with something. I also know I need to manage people's expectations and make them feel part of the process. Sure I am not a double PHD but I am a fairly successful entrepreneur. Or maybe this works... "treat others as you would like to be treated" Dash wants to use a stick by sneering "Entitled" at a community do not be surprised when the community picks up a stick and swings back... Edit: missed the last point. How to clean up the BB mess.. Well finish off the lawsuits would be a good start. Rushing to build and hoping the judge takes pitty seems childish. WeBe204: as usual, I agree with you on many levels. What this entire situation screams out at me is your statement I highlighted in red. The rush reminds me of when my kids were toddlers and I would tell them to stop doing something and instead of stopping they would do it faster because they knew that as soon as I reached them they were going to be forced to stop. So essentially the SB / Admin. (M2 & Dr. D) are behaving like toddlers and forcing the courts to parent them. Nice.  |
|
|
|
Post by researching on Apr 26, 2008 9:44:44 GMT -6
doctorwho: Interesting observation on the clock resetting for NCLB - time for me to do some more research. ---------------------------------------------- Less well known, but soon to become much more familiar, are the law's more drastic measures for schools that miss AYP for four or five years. After four years, schools are required to choose one of the following: Replace school staff relevant to the failure. Put in place a new curriculum. Decrease management authority at the school. Appoint outside experts to advise the school. Extend the school year or the school day. Restructure the internal organization of the school. After five years, the choices are: Reopen as a charter school. Replace all or most of the staff. Contract with an outside entity to operate the school. Institute other significant governance and staffing changes likely to improve the school. Turn over operation of the school to the state. Since NCLB sanctions are cumulative, schools also must presumably continue to offer transfer and tutoring while instituting these measures Doc, you and I are in complete agreement on this point. As usual this SB / Admin. are taking a reactionary stance. They just don't have the forsight to be proactive. What is it my mom use to say? "A day late and a dollar short." By all means 204 SB/Admin., just shuffle the issue around, don't solve the real problem and don't accept ANY responsibility for the occurence of the issue to begin with. It's those entitled, elitist, racists who are the real problem.  |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 26, 2008 10:04:28 GMT -6
Well, this is about as much fun as physics class My issue like others have already mentioned is that the MGEN site choice was poor from a perception and PR perspective. It was destined to create controversy, especially after the SB themselves publicly ruled it out. As for BB, just call it for the disaster that it is. $8M in damages or $20M or $80M is irrelevant to me - wasting any number of millions in tax dollars is just wrong. There is no getting past that for me as I pay my tax bill and watch my home value plummet and fight with each other over the contract we just signed for the next piece of property. It is unfair, irresponsible, and inexcusable that we are entering in to a land contract with this hanging over our heads. Literally wasting what amounts to $1,000 per student on the low end to pay damages to BB because we were stupid is just enough to make sick. Imagine what could have been done with that money. It is disgraceful. Alright, that's enough. I don't think that AME is the problem or that another piece of property is the answer. I think we need to concede that we've made a mess, stop, and take time to reevaluate, and that means thinking about whether or not we really need to build the school at all, considering enrollment, cost of damages, the extra help WV needs, and track record of poor decision making and execution. It's like what they say to addicts when they're on a road they don't want to be on - stop and do the opposite. I'm sorry if someone has addressed this later in the thread, but after reading it I just had to jump in. How does not building a 3rd HS address the BB issues? We're still not buying the property and we'll still be liable for any damages there? While it is my position they will be minimal, if any, this argument just doesn't make sense to me. Those lawsuits won't just vanish if a 3rd high school does. |
|
|
|
Post by fence on Apr 26, 2008 10:14:54 GMT -6
First, operating at less than capacity doesn't mean it will be "better for the kids." There is no relationship there. I am interested to understand why we'd just assume that connection. Apply your EMF "prove it" talking points to the theories of education. Good, positive, nurtuing education that is "better for the kids" goes beyond a building, beyond teacher student ratios, beyond minutes in core classes, beyond capacity. For every small school that succeeds, an equal number are not. For every large school that does not, one does. Plenty of "over capacity" schools see great success. Plenty of "under capacity" schools don't. Making a statement like that is an end-game supporter, not a logical connection. I don't believe that as we are making these decisions that we are truly showing best practices in education. I know, I know, 204 is great. But let's be realistic. Kids who are not responding to our traditional system will NOT benefit from back to back core classes. Giving them more of what they are not responding to is not the answer. Moving them from one school to another doesn't change a single thing in my mind. Middle school kids are NOT going to be enlightened with 10 minutes added to core as they get rushed through the halls, rushed through lunch, and given no outlet to just talk during the day about things that are important to them (connections). I am sorry, but who are we kidding? I feel like we are administering the process of education, to the peril of real learning. And with the current enrollment numbers not going where we thought we'd go, with the state of the market, with the absurd taxes we pay, with the recent debacle of money mismanagement, I am sure another referendum would NOT pass. I personally would not vote yes again until we had a full re-evaluation. And paying millions in damages, whether $8 or $60M should never be called "water under the bridge." It should be a consideration point in how we come to a final decision here. Dismissing this as "oh well, we f-ed that one up" and then billing me for it just makes me really angry. Treat me like a shareholder, not like an ATM. Yeah - at 10,400 a 3'rd HS looks mandatory. Thats dodgy at 8,900 max enrollment. I believe your numbers show we still need an additional 1000-1500 capacity by 2009 (not 3000) to make sure NV and WV aren't over capacity. I guess I'm not against a 3rd HS as if NV and WV operate 10-15% less than full capacity, that can only be good for our kids. I'm pretty positive the referendum will not pass if it comes to revote. fence: you're right - $8M is $8M - thats some real change for folks like us. And it sucks that it's going into vapor. That is water under the bridge at this time. And I agree a deep breath and re-evaluation would be beneficial. Too many wheels are in motion for that. Somehow, we have to transcend the past for the sake of our future. I have no idea how - all I know is that a positive outlet for this tension our community feels has to be found. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 26, 2008 10:25:33 GMT -6
Is it as much about operating capacity as it is about class size?
That is my greatest concern. Especially an important factor when it comes to students at risk for falling through the cracks.
|
|
