District 204 growth slows

[justme]

proschool said:

bob said:

What marketing company? Do you mean the compmnay that did the survey?

If it was a marketting company they are not that clever. We know that the district will be built out some time soon (within the next 5-7 years IMO. The land is just to valuable to be farm land)but I don't understand why they said that they had any idea of how built out it would be in 2007.

Oh I disagree. They (the marketing company) were brilliant. It is my understanding that they were brought in to figure out how to get the referendum passed, period. They don't worry about the if it needs to be passed. IMO the marketing did exactly what they were paid to do. I would hire them.

[Arch]

justme said:

proschool said:

If it was a marketting company they are not that clever. We know that the district will be built out some time soon (within the next 5-7 years IMO. The land is just to valuable to be farm land)but I don't understand why they said that they had any idea of how built out it would be in 2007.

Oh I disagree. They (the marketing company) were brilliant. It is my understanding that they were brought in to figure out how to get the referendum passed, period. They don't worry about the if it needs to be passed. IMO the marketing did exactly what they were paid to do. I would hire them.

I had a voodoo ballot that I was punching YES on all day long.
I think that had more to do with it passing.

[justme]

archwinsome said:

justme said:

Oh I disagree. They (the marketing company) were brilliant. It is my understanding that they were brought in to figure out how to get the referendum passed, period. They don't worry about the if it needs to be passed. IMO the marketing did exactly what they were paid to do. I would hire them.

I had a voodoo ballot that I was punching YES on all day long.
I think that had more to do with it passing.

;D

[bob]

What is the name of this marketing company?

Are you saying the SD paid a markerting company to help support the referendum?

[justme]

bob said:

What is the name of this marketing company?

Are you saying the SD paid a markerting company to help support the referendum?

That was pretty well known during the boundary / referendum process and even discussed on this board.

When I get a chance I will try to look it up. I want to know too because you never know when you will need a good marketing firm.

Back to work for me!

[Arch]

justme said:

bob said:

What is the name of this marketing company?

Are you saying the SD paid a markerting company to help support the referendum?

That was pretty well known during the boundary / referendum process and even discussed on this board.

When I get a chance I will try to look it up. I want to know too because you never know when you will need a good marketing firm.

Back to work for me!

I'm tellin ya, the voodoo trick works there too. Just keep poking the salesperson with the hatpin until they sell enough.

[blankcheck]

Nice sarcastic remarks. Remember the lovely fliers sent out with pictures of overcrowded schools?- Go figure - they used stock photos not ones even from our own school.

Since Bob was so nice to post before the District enrollment models lets look at those:

Current students NO GROWTH - Actual 2007 #'s Difference
Middle school enrollment 6887 7,026 +179
High school enrollment 8536 8,182 - 354

Model 1 K increases by 40 for 10 yrs
200 students entering as 1st graders not new growth
4000 students from new growth over 10 yrs=400/year
new growth students entering K-9=40 per grade per year

Actual 2007#'S Difference
Middle school enrollment 7127 7026 - 101
High school enrollment 8656 8182 - 474

Model #2 K increases by 30 for 10 years
200 students entering 1st not new growth
3,000 students from new growth over 10 yrs = 300/yr
New growth students entering K-9= 30 per grade per year

Actual 2007 #'S Difference
Middle school enrollment 7067 7026 -41
High school enrollment 8626 8182 -444

So at best, there closest figures come close to modeling the first analysis for current students with no new growth. If you look at their final figure that = 9108 high school students in the
year 2015-2016. Middle school = 6873 in the year 2015-2016.

[Arch]

This reminds me of a wall street earning's projection, where if you are wrong (higher or lower) your stock price will still take a pounding even if you were in the black overall.

[harry]

THANKS BC

I can't wait to hear the reasons why we STILL need a new hs . Why hasn't anyone started a new thread regarding solutions to the current overcrowded sitch in the MS and HS??

Also, does anyone know any stats as to how much 'housing' land has been re zoned for commercial since the housing market continues to be in the tank???

[blankcheck]

Arch-give me a break. The district presented 3 projection models of which the lowest one seems to fit the bill. Say what you want facts are facts.

[bob]

Nice sarcastic remarks. Remember the lovely fliers sent out with pictures of overcrowded schools?- Go figure - they used stock photos not ones even from our own school.

So 204FTK was a marketing company? I thought it a was pro-referendum group.

So BC what is the name of the marketing company that the SD hired?

[harry]

blankcheck said:

Nice sarcastic remarks. Remember the lovely fliers sent out with pictures of overcrowded schools?- Go figure - they used stock photos not ones even from our own school.

Since Bob was so nice to post before the District enrollment models lets look at those:

Current students NO GROWTH - Actual 2007 #'s Difference
Middle school enrollment 6887 7,026 +179
High school enrollment 8536 8,182 - 354

Model 1 K increases by 40 for 10 yrs
200 students entering as 1st graders not new growth
4000 students from new growth over 10 yrs=400/year
new growth students entering K-9=40 per grade per year

Actual 2007#'S Difference
Middle school enrollment 7127 7026 - 101
High school enrollment 8656 8182 - 474

Model #2 K increases by 30 for 10 years
200 students entering 1st not new growth
3,000 students from new growth over 10 yrs = 300/yr
New growth students entering K-9= 30 per grade per year

Actual 2007 #'S Difference
Middle school enrollment 7067 7026 -41
High school enrollment 8626 8182 -444

So at best, there closest figures come close to modeling the first analysis for current students with no new growth. If you look at their final figure that = 9108 high school students in the
year 2015-2016. Middle school = 6873 in the year 2015-2016.

The silence is noted on the board...because facts are facts are facts.

.with the 2nd place excuse of "But we still need a 3rd hs just because." holds zero appeal

[bob]

What silence? the name of the marketing company the SD hired?

[bob]

So blanckcheck what were assumptions behind those models? 100% Build out? New home sales?

Why don't you show the next 7 years for HS using what is in the system?

[Arch]

Maybe someone is mistaking Ehlers for a marketing firm.