Temperature control in our elementary schools

[doctorwho]

harry said:

southsidemom said:

M2 has all these glorious years under his belt and has been so kind to explain history since the 1980s.......let's see what he does....or if he even cares.

Cares about what??

He was clearly on the board during those glorious years when most of these buildings' referendums were passed WITHOUT consideration of AC !!!!!!!!!

BS on the "The Sb was sure that, if we included AC, the ref wouldn't have passed"

Did they ask ANYONE if they cared about AC or not before forming the referendum for any of these schools??

Did they pay people for their 'expertise' in this matter as is the current status quo??

Any of you old timers, please chime in any time.

Just as today there were people screaming about fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers then also -- most likely the reason those building do not have AC. Try passing 6 - 7 referendums to get schools built, without the anti tax group screaming. I remember a lot of hand wringing when they put additions on to May Watts and other schools. Many people saw nothing wrong with classes in the LMC, and no art or music room.... you can not please everyone.

Just here on this board there are people who scream how this board spends OUR money like drunken sailors, yet also comments like, this is Naperville, we are supposed to have better than this. How does one balance that ?

Also having spoke to them about this, how can you say 'without consideration' ? AC was absolutely a consideration, but the money available went to sprinklers to meet code changes when they became a mandatory item.

It is amazing how the SB - who is not right in all they do before that accusation comes out- is wrong no matter what happens here. There were not unlimited funds to build whatever they wanted , whenever they wanted. just didn't work that way when the district was one of the fastest growing in the country at the time.

also maybe one day you should ask him, but when it comes to smart comments like, does he even care...do you realize the fact he also has kids in school in this district ? So just what exactly are you trying to say -- the personal attacks are very unbecoming and for me take away from any argument contained with them.

The exact situtation comes up here. If we want AC then let's request a referendum at the next board meeting to get a cost estimate....Do you think it's going to pass ? Already we have people complaining about the operational referendum for the new school/additional kids. Also those who want to take money approved in a referendum for a 3rd HS and move it to AC for other schools, which can't be done - but then why should laws and things get in the way.

[driven]

I am not suggesting that large expensive changes be made for one student, even if that student is mine. What I am saying is that this is not as trivial an issue as some would make it out to be. I think it deserves a REAL evaluation and not from someone who has been on the SB for about 100 years and still makes excuses and passes the buck. Reminder, Fry is only 6 years old and Welch is 8. People were complaining about no AC when Welch opened. The word "retrofit" doesn't seem to fit when discussing such relatively new schools.

[lacy]

bob said:

Driven, if you feel you need to keep your kid home because of the heat, you should.



One side of me says if kids in the 40s,50s,60,70s,80s survived going to school when it was hot out back then, the kids today will to.

Plus the cost is a negative factor.

How many days do would the SD actually need the AC? Maybe 3-4 weeks?

The other side says if the kids can be more attentive and learn more on those hot days with AC. It might be worth the cost.

Right now I am against putting AC in all the buildings.

Bob, this may well be a first (and only). But I agree with you.

It really is a problem for only a short period. And the district actually cancelled school once when my kids were in elementary because it was too hot - so that's another option as well for really hot days.

I would not be for going back and air-conditioning the elementary schools. I feel for the parents and kids, but there are too many other pressing issues in this district.

I did always find it annoying however, that we had sprinklers but no AC - and let's not forget to mention that the offices do have A/C. The principal and office staff aren't sweating it out.

BTW, I found MM's statement to be very whiney.

[lacy]

Doctor - I believe we are talking about LAWN sprinklers vs. AC. Not fire sprinklers.

[driven]

doctorwho said:

harry said:

Cares about what??

He was clearly on the board during those glorious years when most of these buildings' referendums were passed WITHOUT consideration of AC !!!!!!!!!

BS on the "The Sb was sure that, if we included AC, the ref wouldn't have passed"

Did they ask ANYONE if they cared about AC or not before forming the referendum for any of these schools??

Did they pay people for their 'expertise' in this matter as is the current status quo??

Any of you old timers, please chime in any time.

Just as today there were people screaming about fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers then also -- most likely the reason those building do not have AC. Try passing 6 - 7 referendums to get schools built, without the anti tax group screaming. I remember a lot of hand wringing when they put additions on to May Watts and other schools. Many people saw nothing wrong with classes in the LMC, and no art or music room.... you can not please everyone.

Just here on this board there are people who scream how this board spends OUR money like drunken sailors, yet also comments like, this is Naperville, we are supposed to have better than this. How does one balance that ?

Also having spoke to them about this, how can you say 'without consideration' ? AC was absolutely a consideration, but the money available went to sprinklers to meet code changes when they became a mandatory item.

It is amazing how the SB - who is not right in all they do before that accusation comes out- is wrong no matter what happens here. There were not unlimited funds to build whatever they wanted , whenever they wanted. just didn't work that way when the district was one of the fastest growing in the country at the time.

also maybe one day you should ask him, but when it comes to smart comments like, does he even care...do you realize the fact he also has kids in school in this district ? So just what exactly are you trying to say -- the personal attacks are very unbecoming and for me take away from any argument contained with them.

The exact situtation comes up here. If we want AC then let's request a referendum at the next board meeting to get a cost estimate....Do you think it's going to pass ? Already we have people complaining about the operational referendum for the new school/additional kids. Also those who want to take money approved in a referendum for a 3rd HS and move it to AC for other schools, which can't be done - but then why should laws and things get in the way.

Interesting point of view. So what was the cost to install AC in Owen and Peterson? If the SB isn't responsible for making the decision to forgo it when building Welch & Fry then who is? When did it become affordable for Owen and Peterson? It fit the SB's building budget for those schools.

If I do try to change things in this area I wonder if the SB would give me the name of the marketing firm they paid to get their strategy in getting the last referendum passed.

[doctorwho]

driven said:

doctorwho said:

Just as today there were people screaming about fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers then also -- most likely the reason those building do not have AC. Try passing 6 - 7 referendums to get schools built, without the anti tax group screaming. I remember a lot of hand wringing when they put additions on to May Watts and other schools. Many people saw nothing wrong with classes in the LMC, and no art or music room.... you can not please everyone.

Just here on this board there are people who scream how this board spends OUR money like drunken sailors, yet also comments like, this is Naperville, we are supposed to have better than this. How does one balance that ?

Also having spoke to them about this, how can you say 'without consideration' ? AC was absolutely a consideration, but the money available went to sprinklers to meet code changes when they became a mandatory item.

It is amazing how the SB - who is not right in all they do before that accusation comes out- is wrong no matter what happens here. There were not unlimited funds to build whatever they wanted , whenever they wanted. just didn't work that way when the district was one of the fastest growing in the country at the time.

also maybe one day you should ask him, but when it comes to smart comments like, does he even care...do you realize the fact he also has kids in school in this district ? So just what exactly are you trying to say -- the personal attacks are very unbecoming and for me take away from any argument contained with them.

The exact situtation comes up here. If we want AC then let's request a referendum at the next board meeting to get a cost estimate....Do you think it's going to pass ? Already we have people complaining about the operational referendum for the new school/additional kids. Also those who want to take money approved in a referendum for a 3rd HS and move it to AC for other schools, which can't be done - but then why should laws and things get in the way.

Interesting point of view. So what was the cost to install AC in Owen and Peterson? If the SB isn't responsible for making the decision to forgo it when building Welch & Fry then who is? When did it become affordable for Owen and Peterson? It fit the SB's building budget for those schools.

If I do try to change things in this area I wonder if the SB would give me the name of the marketing firm they paid to get their strategy in getting the last referendum passed.

It is always less expensive to build in than retro fit --

still bitter over the vote I guess.....but the way to try and change things is to get involved - so I wish you well in that endeavor.

[doctorwho]

lacy said:

Doctor - I believe we are talking about LAWN sprinklers vs. AC. Not fire sprinklers.

No , we are not, because the initial discussions over sprinklers had to do with do sprinklers save buildings or lives -- I do not believe there is any 'code' that requires lawn sprinklers

"By law, buildings have to be recertified and subjected to a safety review every ten years. At that time, all of the code changes made in the prior 10 years have to now be adopted and the changes need to be implemented in the buildings."

This is NOT lawn sprinklers

[wvhsparent]

FWIW to driven..... I was not trying to be sarcastic at all. We all donate things to our schools for the betterment of our chldren....why is this so different? I would not expect the SD to get an AC unit for one classroom only. I only offered it as a suggestion. Sorry if I offended you.

[lacy]

doctorwho said:

lacy said:

Doctor - I believe we are talking about LAWN sprinklers vs. AC. Not fire sprinklers.

No , we are not, because the initial discussions over sprinklers had to do with do sprinklers save buildings or lives -- I do not believe there is any 'code' that requires lawn sprinklers

"By law, buildings have to be recertified and subjected to a safety review every ten years. At that time, all of the code changes made in the prior 10 years have to now be adopted and the changes need to be implemented in the buildings."

This is NOT lawn sprinklers

Roll your eyes all you want.

I myself am talking about Lawn sprinklers (which our elementary has) vs. AC (which it does not have.) and I personally find this annoying. I am well aware that one is significantly more expensive than the other - but I still found it offensive that we could pay to keep the lawn manicured, but the kids were inside sweltering.

I think others may have been talking about that as well.

I really doubt that anyone would want to forgo fire sprinklers.

[doctorwho]

lacy said:

doctorwho said:

No , we are not, because the initial discussions over sprinklers had to do with do sprinklers save buildings or lives -- I do not believe there is any 'code' that requires lawn sprinklers

"By law, buildings have to be recertified and subjected to a safety review every ten years. At that time, all of the code changes made in the prior 10 years have to now be adopted and the changes need to be implemented in the buildings."

This is NOT lawn sprinklers

Roll your eyes all you want.

I myself am talking about Lawn sprinklers (which our elementary has) vs. AC (which it does not have.) and I personally find this annoying. I am well aware that one is significantly more expensive than the other - but I still found it offensive that we could pay to keep the lawn manicured, but the kids were inside sweltering.

I think others may have been talking about that as well.

I really doubt that anyone would want to forgo fire sprinklers.

I do not believe that is the discussion at hand but I will let others chime in -- the cost decisions on many of the older schools when they were built had to do with fire sprinklers vs AC -- but you answered your own question on relative cost between what you are talking about and AC, both initial cost, montly operating cost etc -- the sprinkler system may be more efficient than hand watering and my understanding is that it was built into the models after some school 'lost' their lawns - and cost to replace is expensive. --

[blankcheck]

I was referring to LAWN SPRINKLERS which our elementary school also has but no AC. Doctor-Please, building need to be built with fire sprinklers.

[momto4]

blankcheck said:

I was referring to LAWN SPRINKLERS which our elementary school also has but no AC. Doctor-Please, building need to be built with fire sprinklers.

The cost difference between lawn sprinklers and AC is tremendous. There would never have been a choice of one versus the other.

[doctorwho]

blankcheck said:

I was referring to LAWN SPRINKLERS which our elementary school also has but no AC. Doctor-Please, building need to be built with fire sprinklers.

that's fine but I have also heard from others that were talking about fire sprinklers - which were not in all buildings here when built - when the decisions on where monies were spent- so you can please me if you want - but not everyone here is on the same page, and the decision time that included fire sprinklers and AC is real and exisited.

[warriorpride]

lacy said:

bob said:

Driven, if you feel you need to keep your kid home because of the heat, you should.



One side of me says if kids in the 40s,50s,60,70s,80s survived going to school when it was hot out back then, the kids today will to.

Plus the cost is a negative factor.

How many days do would the SD actually need the AC? Maybe 3-4 weeks?

The other side says if the kids can be more attentive and learn more on those hot days with AC. It might be worth the cost.

Right now I am against putting AC in all the buildings.

Bob, this may well be a first (and only). But I agree with you.

It really is a problem for only a short period. And the district actually cancelled school once when my kids were in elementary because it was too hot - so that's another option as well for really hot days.

I would not be for going back and air-conditioning the elementary schools. I feel for the parents and kids, but there are too many other pressing issues in this district.

I did always find it annoying however, that we had sprinklers but no AC - and let's not forget to mention that the offices do have A/C. The principal and office staff aren't sweating it out.

BTW, I found MM's statement to be very whiney.

My earlier response probably came off as insensitive. My point was that putting A/C in any, or even 1, ES is not going to happen in the next few weeks. So if a child has a medical condition that is impacted by the heat, then feasible solutions would be to keep the child home, see if the child could have time in the A/Ced office, or maybe even petition to have the child go to one of the ESes with AC. Those are all options that could be considered right now. And, for the future, if enough parents feel strongly about this, they should get a petition going or bring it up with the SB.

[momto4]

I just noticed the Naperville Sun blog is open for discussing A/C in our elementary schools (just below this one is the question of closing schools for election days).


Should elementary schools in Indian Prairie School District 204 have air conditioning, and why weren't they built that way in the first place?


See blogs.suburbanchicagonews.com/newsblog/2007/08/ac_debate_heats_up_in_204.html#more