|
|
2005
Jun 5, 2009 10:46:53 GMT -6
Post by doctorwho on Jun 5, 2009 10:46:53 GMT -6
Yesterday at 9:59pm, steckdad wrote: Jun 3, 2009, 9:06am, blankcheck wrote: Steckdad- all was not good before BB fell through. We never knew how much anything was going to cost building on the BB property. How can you vote for something without knowing how much it will cost? Would you build a house like that? I think not. They took the failed referendum, added a PR firm, twisted the numbers and finally it passed. Then they screw the voters who said yes by changing the property site? You tell me, do you really think it would have passed if people really knew where the HS would be built? based on the last election, I would say yes...It would have passed. It must be true then.  *********************************************** Of course it would have PASSED. Does anyone acknolage that ONLY ONE referindum has not passed in 204. The last operating fund that passed was for $0.90, unheard of. Out west of the fox they were trying to pass a dime and were failing. The SB originally couldn't believe that it had not passed. Truth be known the SB probably didn't need boundaries selected or a site selected to pass it the second time just explain the need. Except the need they explained was not real - they missed by 1600-2000 students by their own count today - so that was false. the turnout tripled YTY on the vote - and the crowds at the boundary sessions would be the main reasson... And remember, that was in much netter economic times than today If it was explained that we could have fixed the minimal crowding AND built a 7th MS for money that would amount to tax bills $1500 lower on average per year...I'd like to see it pass then (or now ) |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 5, 2009 12:07:06 GMT -6
Post by macrockett on Jun 5, 2009 12:07:06 GMT -6
Yesterday at 9:59pm, steckdad wrote: Jun 3, 2009, 9:06am, blankcheck wrote: Steckdad- all was not good before BB fell through. We never knew how much anything was going to cost building on the BB property. How can you vote for something without knowing how much it will cost? Would you build a house like that? I think not. They took the failed referendum, added a PR firm, twisted the numbers and finally it passed. Then they screw the voters who said yes by changing the property site? You tell me, do you really think it would have passed if people really knew where the HS would be built? based on the last election, I would say yes...It would have passed. It must be true then. *********************************************** Of course it would have PASSED. Does anyone acknolage that ONLY ONE referindum has not passed in 204. The last operating fund that passed was for $0.90, unheard of. Out west of the fox they were trying to pass a dime and were failing. The SB originally couldn't believe that it had not passed. Truth be known the SB probably didn't need boundaries selected or a site selected to pass it the second time just explain the need. Except the need they explained was not real - they missed by 1600-2000 students by their own count today - so that was false. the turnout tripled YTY on the vote - and the crowds at the boundary sessions would be the main reasson... And remember, that was in much netter economic times than today If it was explained that we could have fixed the minimal crowding AND built a 7th MS for money that would amount to tax bills $1500 lower on average per year...I'd like to see it pass then (or now ) Just wanted to clarify Doc, the $1500 per household is a one-time cost relating to the estimated cost of capital and financing outlay for MV vs. the capital and financing cost of adding on to NV and building a MS. The costs which repeat every year are the incrimental cost of operating a HS and the transportation costs. Of course the tangible/intangible cost of the last paragraph above will be determined in the future. Either way, I agree with the point of your post. |
|
|
|
2005
Jun 5, 2009 12:13:20 GMT -6
Post by doctorwho on Jun 5, 2009 12:13:20 GMT -6
Except the need they explained was not real - they missed by 1600-2000 students by their own count today - so that was false. the turnout tripled YTY on the vote - and the crowds at the boundary sessions would be the main reasson... And remember, that was in much netter economic times than today If it was explained that we could have fixed the minimal crowding AND built a 7th MS for money that would amount to tax bills $1500 lower on average per year...I'd like to see it pass then (or now ) Just wanted to clarify Doc, the $1500 per household is a one-time cost relating to the estimated cost of capital and financing outlay for MV vs. the capital and financing cost of adding on to NV and building a MS. The costs which repeat every year are the incrimental cost of operating a HS and the transportation costs. Of course the tangible/intangible cost of the last paragraph above will be determined in the future. Either way, I agree with the point of your post. thank you for clarification - so $1500 one time and $XXX each year based on operational costs and transportation cost increases |
|
