Temperature control in our elementary schools

[harry]

blankcheck said:

This is nothing new. When my kids were younger, the teacher would ask if anyone could donate a fan for the room for awhile. Where have you guys been??? Again air or sprinkler system??? Ask your board members.

Agree completely..I know many people who don't turn their own Ac's on in their houses with multiple children unless it is absolutely necessary

The old adage...

"There are those who watch things happen, make things happen and wonder what happened"

rings true on this board

Can the next post be what the parents did pro-actively to make the situation better for the greater good of the community?

Be it .......

call a principal or supply iceys for a snack or buy a fan???

This is forward movement and nothing else

[EagleDad]

blankcheck said:

As a long time resident, I believe when the older elementary schools were built, the could choose between AC or a sprinkler system. They chose a sprinkler system.

I believe this is false, and that no one made a choice between sprinkler systems and A/C. bc, if you hav any information that this was a choide that was considered and made, please share it.

[momto4]

ipsdweb.ipsd.org/News.aspx?id=15630

Elementary School Air Conditioning
Reported by [e-mail] on 8/28/07

The following comments are from Board President Mark Metzger on elementary school air conditioning:

With warmer temperatures, parents have asked why we don't have air conditioning in each of our elementary schools.

In the 1980s the district began using our model of community involvement in major decisions, including referenda. Referendum committees were established and tasked with recommending what should be placed on the ballot for referendum voting.

In the late 1980s, we built Brookdale and Georgetown as the new prototype elementary schools. At that time, elementary schools were being built at a rough cost of $4 million. The additional cost of air conditioning was about $500,000 or so per building. In the earliest days of the building referenda (late 80s, early 90s), some referendum committee members took great pride in pointing out to their fellow taxpayers that they’d saved $1,500,000 by not including air conditioning in the referendum for three new elementary schools, not to mention the electricity savings.

For some, it was an important selling point that the tax increase was a bare bones approach and fiscally conservative; at 12-15% of the building cost, it also looked pretty smart to a lot of people. Some did question whether that was short-sighted, but the “it’s only really needed for three weeks a year” argument tended to carry a lot of weight, particularly when the parents’ own non-air conditioned experiences were brought back to mind (“We lived without it….”).

Referendum committees adopted a four question approach to doing the work of shaping referendum requests:

1. What do we want?
2. What do we need?
3. What can we afford?
4. What will the public support?

If you read the questions in that order, they force continual reductions: The answers to question 1 are (and were) both expansive and expensive. The “need” question pared the list down from a wish list to a “must have” list. The “afford” and “sell” questions forced difficult decisions with the goal of making painful choices to ensure passage of the most vital of the “must have” elements.

Since 1991, the question of air conditioning has been on every referendum committee’s consideration list from two perspectives:

1. Should we air condition the new elementary schools we are proposing to build?
2. Should we go back and air-condition the older ones?

In the early 90s, the questions were viewed by referendum committees as closely linked. The committees tended to conclude that if they couldn’t afford to air-condition the older buildings, they couldn’t, for reasons of parity, air-condition the newest ones. They concluded that air conditioning the older elementary schools couldn’t be “afforded” at the time because the referendum would be too expensive. Some argued that air conditioning the new buildings was tantamount to thumbing noses at those who built and occupied the older schools and that the resulting disparity would cause the existing parts of the district without air conditioning to vote down the referendum on “fairness” issues.

The mid-90s brought the first waves of really large-scale growth and building. The district grew by about 2,000 new students per year in the mid-90s. Far and away most important goal was ensuring that building referenda would pass, since the consequences of failure were so dire. The same decisions and arguments drove the same results, with the added component that as the number of non-air conditioned elementary schools grew, the line item to “catch up” rapidly got so
large, that it was very easy to take it off at the “afford” level and the parity issue continued to keep it out of the newer schools.

In 2001, the referendum committee for the first time decided that the issues of air conditioning new buildings and air conditioning existing buildings were separate. While they concluded that they did not wish to ask the public for $800,000 per building to air condition the existing elementary buildings, they also concluded that there was no longer any reason to continue to build elementary schools without air conditioning. That's why only two of our 21 elementary schools, Owen and Peterson, are air conditioned.

In some ways, this is perfect proof of the old adage that hindsight is 20/20. From hot August days in 2007, it hardly seems to be sensible not to have air conditioned the elementary schools. From the standpoint of abject terror over failing a referendum by asking for too much in the early 90s, it made a lot more sense. In hindsight it’s easy to forget just how hard-fought these referendum campaigns were. In 1994, there were people who were adamantly opposed to building Neuqua Valley because we would never be able to fill a second high school in this district and it will sit unused.

There is no reason that a group of citizens could not propose a building bond referendum to air condition the remaining elementary schools. There has never been Board or administrative opposition to doing so. Historically, however, referenda initiated and led by the Board and the Administration are doomed to failure, so I doubt such an effort would ever start there.

Mark Metzger, President
Board of Education

[blankcheck]

Again, as a long time resident, ask why we have sprinklers and no air??? It has been going on since my kids were in elementary school.

[harry]

momto4 said:

ipsdweb.ipsd.org/News.aspx?id=15630

Elementary School Air Conditioning
Reported by [e-mail] on 8/28/07

The following comments are from Board President Mark Metzger on elementary school air conditioning:

With warmer temperatures, parents have asked why we don't have air conditioning in each of our elementary schools.

In the 1980s the district began using our model of community involvement in major decisions, including referenda. Referendum committees were established and tasked with recommending what should be placed on the ballot for referendum voting.

In the late 1980s, we built Brookdale and Georgetown as the new prototype elementary schools. At that time, elementary schools were being built at a rough cost of $4 million. The additional cost of air conditioning was about $500,000 or so per building. In the earliest days of the building referenda (late 80s, early 90s), some referendum committee members took great pride in pointing out to their fellow taxpayers that they’d saved $1,500,000 by not including air conditioning in the referendum for three new elementary schools, not to mention the electricity savings.

For some, it was an important selling point that the tax increase was a bare bones approach and fiscally conservative; at 12-15% of the building cost, it also looked pretty smart to a lot of people. Some did question whether that was short-sighted, but the “it’s only really needed for three weeks a year” argument tended to carry a lot of weight, particularly when the parents’ own non-air conditioned experiences were brought back to mind (“We lived without it….”).

Referendum committees adopted a four question approach to doing the work of shaping referendum requests:

1. What do we want?
2. What do we need?
3. What can we afford?
4. What will the public support?

If you read the questions in that order, they force continual reductions: The answers to question 1 are (and were) both expansive and expensive. The “need” question pared the list down from a wish list to a “must have” list. The “afford” and “sell” questions forced difficult decisions with the goal of making painful choices to ensure passage of the most vital of the “must have” elements.

Since 1991, the question of air conditioning has been on every referendum committee’s consideration list from two perspectives:

1. Should we air condition the new elementary schools we are proposing to build?
2. Should we go back and air-condition the older ones?

In the early 90s, the questions were viewed by referendum committees as closely linked. The committees tended to conclude that if they couldn’t afford to air-condition the older buildings, they couldn’t, for reasons of parity, air-condition the newest ones. They concluded that air conditioning the older elementary schools couldn’t be “afforded” at the time because the referendum would be too expensive. Some argued that air conditioning the new buildings was tantamount to thumbing noses at those who built and occupied the older schools and that the resulting disparity would cause the existing parts of the district without air conditioning to vote down the referendum on “fairness” issues.

The mid-90s brought the first waves of really large-scale growth and building. The district grew by about 2,000 new students per year in the mid-90s. Far and away most important goal was ensuring that building referenda would pass, since the consequences of failure were so dire. The same decisions and arguments drove the same results, with the added component that as the number of non-air conditioned elementary schools grew, the line item to “catch up” rapidly got so
large, that it was very easy to take it off at the “afford” level and the parity issue continued to keep it out of the newer schools.

In 2001, the referendum committee for the first time decided that the issues of air conditioning new buildings and air conditioning existing buildings were separate. While they concluded that they did not wish to ask the public for $800,000 per building to air condition the existing elementary buildings, they also concluded that there was no longer any reason to continue to build elementary schools without air conditioning. That's why only two of our 21 elementary schools, Owen and Peterson, are air conditioned.

In some ways, this is perfect proof of the old adage that hindsight is 20/20. From hot August days in 2007, it hardly seems to be sensible not to have air conditioned the elementary schools. From the standpoint of abject terror over failing a referendum by asking for too much in the early 90s, it made a lot more sense. In hindsight it’s easy to forget just how hard-fought these referendum campaigns were. In 1994, there were people who were adamantly opposed to building Neuqua Valley because we would never be able to fill a second high school in this district and it will sit unused.

There is no reason that a group of citizens could not propose a building bond referendum to air condition the remaining elementary schools. There has never been Board or administrative opposition to doing so. Historically, however, referenda initiated and led by the Board and the Administration are doomed to failure, so I doubt such an effort would ever start there.

Mark Metzger, President
Board of Education

And seeing as we have no current plans to build a third HS, this might be a perfect time for those who feel that this is are very important topic, to petition the SB for retro-fitting the balance of the ES with AC, and for WP's sake, adding AC to the WV fieldhouse.

[warriorpride]

Well, as usual, harry took my statements & twisted them. I never suggested that A/C be added/improved to the WV fieldhouse. I was just reporting a 204 event that's just as noteworthy as Peterson having a minor roof leak.

And, come on people, this isn't the hottest it's ever been in August, and A/C hasn't been taken out of the elementary schools. There's nothing different in the elementary schools about temperature this year than any other year. Yes, it's hot, and yes the teachers do what they can.

It really looks like people will come up with anything to complain about in our district, many times in hindsight.

[driven]

warriorpride said:

And, come on people, this isn't the hottest it's ever been in August, and A/C hasn't been taken out of the elementary schools. There's nothing different in the elementary schools about temperature this year than any other year. Yes, it's hot, and yes the teachers do what they can.

It really looks like people will come up with anything to complain about in our district, many times in hindsight.

Thank you for that insightful comment. I will be sure to remember that as I again sit in the ER with my asthmatic child after a day spent in a 110 degree classroom.

With that kind of logic we should be birthing our babies in the fields and taking our children out of school after the 8th grade to work the farm.

[Arch]

So, who is starting the committee to get a referendum on the ballot to get AC in the elementary schools?

[harry]

driven said:

warriorpride said:

And, come on people, this isn't the hottest it's ever been in August, and A/C hasn't been taken out of the elementary schools. There's nothing different in the elementary schools about temperature this year than any other year. Yes, it's hot, and yes the teachers do what they can.

It really looks like people will come up with anything to complain about in our district, many times in hindsight.

Thank you for that insightful comment. I will be sure to remember that as I again sit in the ER with my asthmatic child after a day spent in a 110 degree classroom.

With that kind of logic we should be birthing our babies in the fields and taking our children out of school after the 8th grade to work the farm.

Your child's asthma is triggered by high temperatures??

Are you sure it is not the high pollen, tree pollen, mold et count as is my 2 children??

I have never heard of asthma being 'heat related' and if this were the case for my sons, I would have removed him from Dist 204 to either a private AC school or home school to insure that an attack would not be immenent.

please pm me to answer if more comfortable

[wvhsparent]

driven,
sorry to hear about your child. Maybe you can go to the nearby mall and purchase a portable AC unit and give it to your child's teacher. Sears had a bunch on sale around $300.00 that I saw. You could also probably write it off as a medically necessary expense.

I would not necessarily be opposed to a ref for AC in the ES buildings.

[warriorpride]

driven said:

warriorpride said:

And, come on people, this isn't the hottest it's ever been in August, and A/C hasn't been taken out of the elementary schools. There's nothing different in the elementary schools about temperature this year than any other year. Yes, it's hot, and yes the teachers do what they can.

It really looks like people will come up with anything to complain about in our district, many times in hindsight.

Thank you for that insightful comment. I will be sure to remember that as I again sit in the ER with my asthmatic child after a day spent in a 110 degree classroom.

With that kind of logic we should be birthing our babies in the fields and taking our children out of school after the 8th grade to work the farm.

What do you want the SD to do?

[Arch]

harry said:

driven said:

Thank you for that insightful comment. I will be sure to remember that as I again sit in the ER with my asthmatic child after a day spent in a 110 degree classroom.

With that kind of logic we should be birthing our babies in the fields and taking our children out of school after the 8th grade to work the farm.

Your child's asthma is triggered by high temperatures??

Are you sure it is not the high pollen, tree pollen, mold et count as is my 2 children??

I have never heard of asthma being 'heat related' and if this were the case for my sons, I would have removed him from Dist 204 to either a private AC school or home school to insure that an attack would not be immenent.

please pm me to answer if more comfortable

Bad hot stagnant air can trigger asthmatic problems. It happens, and unfortunately, it happens often.

[southsidemom]

warriorpride said:

driven said:

Thank you for that insightful comment. I will be sure to remember that as I again sit in the ER with my asthmatic child after a day spent in a 110 degree classroom.

With that kind of logic we should be birthing our babies in the fields and taking our children out of school after the 8th grade to work the farm.

What do you want the SD to do?

Simply put, add some %^&* AC!!!!!!

[harry]

archwinsome said:

harry said:

Your child's asthma is triggered by high temperatures??

Are you sure it is not the high pollen, tree pollen, mold et count as is my 2 children??

I have never heard of asthma being 'heat related' and if this were the case for my sons, I would have removed him from Dist 204 to either a private AC school or home school to insure that an attack would not be immenent.

please pm me to answer if more comfortable

Bad hot stagnant air can trigger asthmatic problems. It happens, and unfortunately, it happens often.

Driven will respond in kind.

Interesting how I have also never heard of a dist 204 child suffering from heat related illnesses..............

If there were such a case, I am sure that it would have been either

addressed by the SB

or

reported in the papers

[southsidemom]

wvhsparent said:

driven,
sorry to hear about your child. Maybe you can go to the nearby mall and purchase a portable AC unit and give it to your child's teacher. Sears had a bunch on sale around $300.00 that I saw. You could also probably write it off as a medically necessary expense.

I would not necessarily be opposed to a ref for AC in the ES buildings.

You must be kidding.....go to Sears and purchase? It is time that we stop shelling out more and more money and have the SD spend what we have on things that are important and needed NOW!