LTE 1/3/08 - Naperville Sun

[doctorwho]

warriorpride said:

doctorwho said:

Yes it is important but I do not believe it was the issue in that situation. Don't want to confuse a small change with ones that would be double an already long commute. They were never asked to make the longest commute -BB was somewhat closer - just like NV is somewhat closer to me than WVHS but we were never part of that discussion either.

Unless I'm missing something, the average MW resident would not be doubling their commute from WV, with an AME commute. I DO understand how some people could have their commute increased by some amount, in the 1-2 mile range.

We've been down this path before and both arch and I have explained that a lot of the population lies SE of the school - but hey that's OK--I know we're not important...it becomes clearer all the time.

How far is AME from WV ? <2 miles ? If not, please stop.

And we won't even talk about what Ferry Road will be - what's that another few hundred feet away for us and 30 seconds drive time past AME?

almost all of Watts lies south of Rickert & Ogden (that WV sits on). But hey if we can drive to AME in 8 minutes as I have been told - it must all be my imagination.

[doctorwho]

slp said:

warriorpride said:

Looks like 1.5 miles to me, including crossing train tracks (if Ogden is taken).

If it were me...

For an increased distance of only 1.5 miles I would choose to stay at my established high school and not move my kids to a new facility with all of the 'start ups' required of a new facility.
That would be a no-brainer for me.

If the increased distance were more substantial then you have a point.

That's approx. the distance difference between NV and WV from my house-- I always viewed that my daughter got the better end of the deal staying at WV at the time for those reasons - but some never seem to have gotten over not attending NV.

[warriorpride]

doctorwho said:

warriorpride said:

Unless I'm missing something, the average MW resident would not be doubling their commute from WV, with an AME commute. I DO understand how some people could have their commute increased by some amount, in the 1-2 mile range.

We've been down this path before and both arch and I have explained that a lot of the population lies SE of the school - but hey that's OK--I know we're not important...it becomes clearer all the time.

How far is AME from WV ? <2 miles ? If not, please stop.

And we won't even talk about what Ferry Road will be - what's that another few hundred feet away for us and 30 seconds drive time past AME?

almost all of Watts lies south of Rickert & Ogden (that WV sits on). But hey if we can drive to AME in 8 minutes as I have been told - it must all be my imagination.

No area is more or less imporant than any other. I don't see a MW commute doubling, that's all. If people are going to throw out stats here, then I think we have a right to question them.

[doctorwho]

warriorpride said:

doctorwho said:

We've been down this path before and both arch and I have explained that a lot of the population lies SE of the school - but hey that's OK--I know we're not important...it becomes clearer all the time.

How far is AME from WV ? <2 miles ? If not, please stop.

And we won't even talk about what Ferry Road will be - what's that another few hundred feet away for us and 30 seconds drive time past AME?

almost all of Watts lies south of Rickert & Ogden (that WV sits on). But hey if we can drive to AME in 8 minutes as I have been told - it must all be my imagination.

No area is more or less imporant than any other. I don't see a MW commute doubling, that's all. If people are going to throw out stats here, then I think we have a right to question them.

you can question all you want - the doubling is if Ferry road is the choice as I have said before - up to doubling - ( my commute will double - drive it with me if you like - I have ) but I'm sure that has been timed as a 10 minute commute -

I already have a 5+ mile commute to MS and HS - so what's 7 or 8 miles as long as some can get the new HS they have wanted since NV opened. I'm getting to the point where I am really not starting to care about any of this.

Do you question the fact that even Wheaton-Warrenville South HS is much closer to my house than AME ? But I guess I'll wake up one day and find that AME is really closer than Naperville Central - and Ferry Road, heck it's just the other side of the post office....good to know.

[lacy]

macy said:

gatordog said:

yes I very much like the 2 or 3 "neighborhood" ES/MS/HS fairness criteria. As a tiebreaker when faced with difficult assignment choices. Dont take it to an absurd point and try to make it a primary consideration. (and actually per your Georgetown example....about 1/2 of the Gtown attendance area is west of Eola and does not have one of those highly desirable neighborhood ES's. This neighborhood in fact is treated exactly fairly in my book..not overserved.)

Let me give you real world examples, the BB HS assigments.
-I think BD was treated in fair and reasonable way (even though they got second choice HS) because they have local ES and MS.
-I think Fry was treated in fair and reasonable way when they, not Springbrook, got the BB assignment for the same reason.

You see, its a reasonable tiebreaker when faced with tough calls.

I think this will be a useful criteria when thinking about MS boundaries. If SB hasnt been formally using it, I do believe I will suggest it to them for their consideration.

So it's a "reasonable" tie breaker? Would you apply the same criteria to a neighborhood that has an elementary and high school within walking distance?

I'm not in agreement at all with you on this point. It's my opinion, you cannot possibly apply it fairly universally throughout the district. Here's yet another example of a neighborhood elementary and middle school... Clow. Same criteria no? In my opinion,this criteria can be subjectively applied.

I'm not in agreement with GD either. It seems to me that most people could plainly see where the schools were located when they purchased their homes. Now maybe they don't like their decision and want to shuffle kids around to accomplish some goal or even punish some areas who live closer to their assigned schools.

It shouldn't be "held against" a neighborhood because they are within walking distance from their elementary and middle schools. The same criteria applied to the rest of the district should be applied to all.

So I agree with the letter writer - if an area will now be considered walkers due to the construction of the pedestrian bridge, then they should be assigned to the school they can walk to.

[slp]

I think the best argument for TG to stay at NVHS has to do with its close proximity to NVHS NOT the argument that the bridge makes them walkers. IMO, constant talk of the bridge may unfairly hurt the cause.

[Arch]

They could always fairly piss everyone off and criss-cross busing. Bus north and WV proximity people to NVHS, bus the south north and scatter the middle people everywhere on a round-robin basis. That way, everyone loses equally.

[doctorwho]

archwinsome said:

They could always fairly piss everyone off and criss-cross busing. Bus north and WV proximity people to NVHS, bus the south north and scatter the middle people everywhere on a round-robin basis. That way, everyone loses equally.

I'm getting to the point where I'd almost vote for that, or back to my idea - build the school anywhere - they put all ES names in a hat and draw them out for who goes where - it would stop all the politicing for the best deal. Second best deals not good enough any more - only the best will do.

[d204mom]

archwinsome said:

They could always fairly piss everyone off and criss-cross busing. Bus north and WV proximity people to NVHS, bus the south north and scatter the middle people everywhere on a round-robin basis. That way, everyone loses equally.

YAY! Option 6 is back on the table! I'm in! Let's make sure to punish neighborhoods with an ES and a MS and make them go double everyone else!

[EagleDad]

archwinsome said:

They could always fairly piss everyone off and criss-cross busing. Bus north and WV proximity people to NVHS, bus the south north and scatter the middle people everywhere on a round-robin basis. That way, everyone loses equally.

From what I'm hearing lately apparently it wouldn't cost anything more in transportation costs. It seems the cost of bussing the kids became a fixed factor magically sometime in the past 6 months and now has nothing to do with distance travelled.

[lacy]

slp said:

I think the best argument for TG to stay at NVHS has to do with its close proximity to NVHS NOT the argument that the bridge makes them walkers. IMO, constant talk of the bridge may unfairly hurt the cause.

The fact is that the bridge is a pedestrian bridge. It's built to allow people to walk or ride their bikes across 59. So if it allows students a pathway to the gold campus, the main campus and back and forth to after school activities, then that should be considered.

I think unfortunately, some who don't live in the vicinity have tried to frame any discussion of it in a bad light. But it really just is what it is: A pedestrian bridge meant to provide access across 59. And what's across 59? NVHS, the library, and Frontier Park mainly.

I don't think it is being built so that people can walk or ride their bikes to McDonald's and Blockbuster. So if people who live in the vicinity want to express their views, then I see no problem with that - that's not a "bad" thing regardless of whether others want to spin it that way. That may have been effective when the bridge didn't exist - but that has changed.

[bob]

Just because there is a bikepath doesn't mean it qualifies under state law for walking/ busing.

[wvhsparent]

lacy said:

slp said:

I think the best argument for TG to stay at NVHS has to do with its close proximity to NVHS NOT the argument that the bridge makes them walkers. IMO, constant talk of the bridge may unfairly hurt the cause.

The fact is that the bridge is a pedestrian bridge. It's built to allow people to walk or ride their bikes across 59. So if it allows students a pathway to the gold campus, the main campus and back and forth to after school activities, then that should be considered.

I think unfortunately, some who don't live in the vicinity have tried to frame any discussion of it in a bad light. But it really just is what it is: A pedestrian bridge meant to provide access across 59. And what's across 59? NVHS, the library, and Frontier Park mainly.

I don't think it is being built so that people can walk or ride their bikes to McDonald's and Blockbuster. So if people who live in the vicinity want to express their views, then I see no problem with that - that's not a "bad" thing regardless of whether others want to spin it that way. That may have been effective when the bridge didn't exist - but that has changed.

lacy,
you are right in your assumptions, however I would challenge you to check with the State standards which probably due to Rt 59, still designate TG to be a bussed area, bridge notwithstanding.
In other words I don't think the bridge would convert TG into a walker area in the eyes of the State, and that is what matters.
I may be wrong, but I don't think so.

[slp]

lacy said:

slp said:

I think the best argument for TG to stay at NVHS has to do with its close proximity to NVHS NOT the argument that the bridge makes them walkers. IMO, constant talk of the bridge may unfairly hurt the cause.

The fact is that the bridge is a pedestrian bridge. It's built to allow people to walk or ride their bikes across 59. So if it allows students a pathway to the gold campus, the main campus and back and forth to after school activities, then that should be considered.

I think unfortunately, some who don't live in the vicinity have tried to frame any discussion of it in a bad light. But it really just is what it is: A pedestrian bridge meant to provide access across 59. And what's across 59? NVHS, the library, and Frontier Park mainly.

I don't think it is being built so that people can walk or ride their bikes to McDonald's and Blockbuster. So if people who live in the vicinity want to express their views, then I see no problem with that - that's not a "bad" thing regardless of whether others want to spin it that way. That may have been effective when the bridge didn't exist - but that has changed.

Lacy

I would be singing the same song if I lived in TG , believe me. I don't disagree with the fact that it is a pedestrian bridge. I am simply stating that your argument for remaining at NVHS is better supported by demonstrating your minimal distance to NVHS and not about a bridge. I will send you a bill for my consulting services.

[gatordog]

lacy said:

macy said:

So it's a "reasonable" tie breaker? Would you apply the same criteria to a neighborhood that has an elementary and high school within walking distance?

I'm not in agreement at all with you on this point. It's my opinion, you cannot possibly apply it fairly universally throughout the district. Here's yet another example of a neighborhood elementary and middle school... Clow. Same criteria no? In my opinion,this criteria can be subjectively applied.

I'm not in agreement with GD either. It seems to me that most people could plainly see where the schools were located when they purchased their homes. Now maybe they don't like their decision and want to shuffle kids around to accomplish some goal or even punish some areas who live closer to their assigned schools.

It shouldn't be "held against" a neighborhood because they are within walking distance from their elementary and middle schools. The same criteria applied to the rest of the district should be applied to all.

So I agree with the letter writer - if an area will now be considered walkers due to the construction of the pedestrian bridge, then they should be assigned to the school they can walk to.

OK, one doesnt have to agree with the criteria I expressed. Even though you havent explicited stated what you WOULD use as a criteria, I am going to assume its one of pure geographical proximity. Period.

One thing I was trying to do in developing some kind of criteria was to go back and understand (yes, after the fact) decisions actually made last time for BB boundaries. (My real purpose was to use this as precedent to guide MS boundaries..... heaven help us that this is cropping up for HS boundary redrawing )

If pure geographical proximity was used--as I understand you to be proposing.... FRY and SB would have swapped HS assignments. And GOM and BD would have swapped (I understand balance reasons also used on this one). However, the criteria I am using does successfully model these outcome.

My point is this: In my mind this is a criteria to use to fairly and as best as we can rationally go forward when "coin toss" assignment choices have to be made. (and there will be some, for sure). And its consistent with recent decisions.

You can advocate for a pure geographical criteria if you desire. But I believe that is a steep uphill battle district-wide in that it goes COUNTER to decisions very recently made and precendent just established.