|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 19, 2007 15:11:11 GMT -6
drwho, i guess i see why you side with the school district. It seems like you are willing to wait to see what the outcome is before starting to plan for contingencies. I don't think that is the fiscally responsible approach but everyone is allowed to have their own opinion. To me you fall into the sb's trap of if we don't answer it will just go away and we will just hope we get it for our price. For all the taxpayers sake I hope that approach works - if the price is too high the taxpayers will be all over the sb as to why wasn't this addressed sooner. If they start constuction in June and the land comes in too high and the building needs to be changed, I would think it brings a delay to the project and higher costs - stop construction - revise plans - hope the weather is good enough to pick up before winter sets in and hope the school can be completed on time and that the taxpayers vote for the operating cost referendum even though they'll feel betrayed by the sb. My 'siding' is where I believe the children and taxpayers of this district will accomplish what is best for all or else I would not be on it. I am not a naive person when it comes to finances. You can believe what you like as far as fiscal responsibilty, because as you say you are all free to have our opinions, but after a long time in business and being a part of many contracts that were not 'locked in stone' as most are not, especially services type contracts, there is a thing called a calculated risk. And whether one believes in them or not, most of us are part of one of those financially every day of our lives, many may not even be aware of it. How many pensions plans are funded by the stock market ? Car dealerships buy certain amounts of cars based on sales trends and research they do, and finance that inventory based on calculations on when they are sold. The world is rarely black and white. What if all companies freeze, remove their pensions ? For most who have paid nothing into them, they are at best verbal argeements, at worst they mean nothing - trust me I know about these I have fallen into no trap, I have stayed very close to the situation and the decisions that have been made, but yes I do believe that the decisions I have seen so far are based on sound reasoning according to the timeline we have had to adhere to. Could some things have gone better, sure, but point me to where the SB is at fault for those happenings. There is plenty of blame to go around but you seem to have fallen into the ' SB and Howie and everyone else = bad, any alternative ( none of which have amounted to any solid plan) - = good. As far as the taxpayers, I keep hearing this outrage -- is that why 15% of the electorate showed up to vote. If they are so outraged where are they ? The apathy in the voting electorate is very sad. What if corporations continue to offshore another 8 million jobs ( as they have in the past 6 years) and there are no places for our children to work ? What if health care continues to become more and more inaffordable and only the wealthiest will be treated in the future ? What if social secuity also becomes insolvent in 20 - 30 years ? If one wants to worry about fiscal responsibility and fiuciary concerns - there are plenty out there, this one pales in comparison and the risk of the down side of this , is far less than any of the above....so I have chosen to pick and choose my conerns. Ulcers are expensive. Really all the glass empty ( not even half full ) views of everything need to be replaced by something like another alternative plan -- but we never see that, just grumbling which tells me there is no plan, that the goal is to halt the progress made at any/all costs. And while you may not be a part of that, please don't tell us there isn't a contingent that is. but as you say, we are all entitled to our view of this and I am very confortable with mine. btw, although we do not agree, I appreciate your stance as it makes me go back every now and again and reassess my own, which is always a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by casey on Apr 19, 2007 21:16:23 GMT -6
I originally posted this on another thread which was leading that thread off target so I have reposted here where it more aptly applies. Hi all - first time posting here but have been following for a few months. I just wanted to point out that I think the point is being missed in this whole thread. The real issue at hand in my mind is the quick take and the potential impact on our taxes or the proposed design of MVHS. Maybe this should be a new thread and if so I hope the administrator will post as such. Has anyone gotten a true answer from the school board as to "What if the quick take goes through and the jury finds the value to be much higher than budgeted?" From what i have followed, the school boards noncommital reply has been "We are confident that we will get it for our price." How do they know? Are they in land development? They are relying a few appraisals that they hired to have done. I'm guess BB has appraisals stating much higher values because they were hired by BB. Personally I don't believe the price of the land will come out in the taxpayers benefit and wonder what the impact of that will be. Will it be that a smaller school will have to be built because the referendum was approved for $124M and more money will be going towards land and less to bricks and mortar? Will the taxpayers be upset with the school board if this is true thus making it harder for the operational referendum to be approved in the 2009 referendum? Will they come back with a future capital referendum for the additional land price? What will the board members responses be if they are wrong on the price? Will they blame the appraisers for the lower value that will be inaccurate when presented at trial? Will they blame HC because he will be retired when this is resolved and they need a scapegoat? What will the school board's response be if they were wrong about this? They aren't making that much money on the issued bonds to cover the potential price increase (I believe half of the bonds have been issued which would be about $70M earning about 5% with costs of about 3% leaving a return of 2% on the $70M or about $1.4M). The thought just hit me as I started typing this - maybe the current school board members up for re-election wanted this dragged out past the election. Think about it - if it was resolved earlier and the value goes significantly against the taxpayers (I don't use school board because we the taxpayers are the ones it will truely affect) I'm rather confident that the election results would have been a little different yesterday. I just wonder why the school board is so trusted and PL isn't. Is it because he isn't an elected official? A couple of the newly re-elected board members were appointed to the board by their fellow board members. I'm sure they see things in the same light and that is why they were appointed (are they going to appoint someone that is going to raise questions contrary to their beleifs?) The school board thought the quick take was going to be resolved by January and it is still hanging out there. Why are people on here so eager to bash candidates that took the time to actually hear PL's side? To me they were performing the research to be better informed and open minded and prepared in case they were elected. WE ARE THE TAXPAYERS AND ALL STONES SHOULD NOT BE LEFT UNTURNED. I just get the feeling that the "majority" people are satisfied that the school board has done their homework without having to prove the school boards side to the same extent that others are expected to prove theirs. I'm sure i'll get slammed for being pro PL and or pro Macom but i'm a big boy and I can handle it. I will be judged by many on here without being known. I guess the bottom line here is why isn't the controlling body (school board) scrutinized more than someone offering another idea that has no control? Let's be open minded and ask the questions that need to be asked until they are answered. When all is said and done we are on the same side - the taxpayers side Wow! This is probably one of the most intelligent postings that I've read here. I'm in complete 100% agreement. I only wish more persons questioned the big "What ifs?" What if the land cost comes in much higher than anticipated? What if the construction of the 3rd HS is delayed? What if the 2009 Referendum doesn't pass? What if? What if? What if? I've been saying it all along that the SB needs a back-up Plan B. I hope that I'm wrong but I do think it seems hard to sit back and believe that everything will just go the way we'd like. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 19, 2007 21:17:30 GMT -6
The 'what if' questions can go on indefinitely and never cease.
What if everyone asked What If questions all of the time and monopolized the available working time that they had and instead of doing productive things have to spend their time answering hypothetical questions that are all speculation?
Yes, there are some hard questions but that doesn't mean they all will or all need to be answered. Most of the questions being asked require a great deal of speculation to even answer and due to that will generate even more WHAT IF questions based on the speculative answers of the first and so on.
|
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Apr 19, 2007 22:38:42 GMT -6
I originally posted this on another thread which was leading that thread off target so I have reposted here where it more aptly applies. Hi all - first time posting here but have been following for a few months. I just wanted to point out that I think the point is being missed in this whole thread. The real issue at hand in my mind is the quick take and the potential impact on our taxes or the proposed design of MVHS. Maybe this should be a new thread and if so I hope the administrator will post as such. Has anyone gotten a true answer from the school board as to "What if the quick take goes through and the jury finds the value to be much higher than budgeted?" From what i have followed, the school boards noncommital reply has been "We are confident that we will get it for our price." How do they know? Are they in land development? They are relying a few appraisals that they hired to have done. I'm guess BB has appraisals stating much higher values because they were hired by BB. Personally I don't believe the price of the land will come out in the taxpayers benefit and wonder what the impact of that will be. Will it be that a smaller school will have to be built because the referendum was approved for $124M and more money will be going towards land and less to bricks and mortar? Will the taxpayers be upset with the school board if this is true thus making it harder for the operational referendum to be approved in the 2009 referendum? Will they come back with a future capital referendum for the additional land price? What will the board members responses be if they are wrong on the price? Will they blame the appraisers for the lower value that will be inaccurate when presented at trial? Will they blame HC because he will be retired when this is resolved and they need a scapegoat? What will the school board's response be if they were wrong about this? They aren't making that much money on the issued bonds to cover the potential price increase (I believe half of the bonds have been issued which would be about $70M earning about 5% with costs of about 3% leaving a return of 2% on the $70M or about $1.4M). The thought just hit me as I started typing this - maybe the current school board members up for re-election wanted this dragged out past the election. Think about it - if it was resolved earlier and the value goes significantly against the taxpayers (I don't use school board because we the taxpayers are the ones it will truely affect) I'm rather confident that the election results would have been a little different yesterday. I just wonder why the school board is so trusted and PL isn't. Is it because he isn't an elected official? A couple of the newly re-elected board members were appointed to the board by their fellow board members. I'm sure they see things in the same light and that is why they were appointed (are they going to appoint someone that is going to raise questions contrary to their beleifs?) The school board thought the quick take was going to be resolved by January and it is still hanging out there. Why are people on here so eager to bash candidates that took the time to actually hear PL's side? To me they were performing the research to be better informed and open minded and prepared in case they were elected. WE ARE THE TAXPAYERS AND ALL STONES SHOULD NOT BE LEFT UNTURNED. I just get the feeling that the "majority" people are satisfied that the school board has done their homework without having to prove the school boards side to the same extent that others are expected to prove theirs. I'm sure i'll get slammed for being pro PL and or pro Macom but i'm a big boy and I can handle it. I will be judged by many on here without being known. I guess the bottom line here is why isn't the controlling body (school board) scrutinized more than someone offering another idea that has no control? Let's be open minded and ask the questions that need to be asked until they are answered. When all is said and done we are on the same side - the taxpayers side Wow! This is probably one of the most intelligent postings that I've read here. I'm in complete 100% agreement. I only wish more persons questioned the big "What ifs?" What if the land cost comes in much higher than anticipated? What if the construction of the 3rd HS is delayed? What if the 2009 Referendum doesn't pass? What if? What if? What if? I've been saying it all along that the SB needs a back-up Plan B. I hope that I'm wrong but I do think it seems hard to sit back and believe that everything will just go the way we'd like. You say you wonder why the school board is so trusted and PL isn't. How long have you lived here? I've lived here since 1989 and have been around long enough to know these people. The school board members work for free. They are trying to do what is best for the entire community. PL is a business man and his objective is to make money for his company. There is your answer to that particular question. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Apr 20, 2007 5:43:08 GMT -6
Wow! This is probably one of the most intelligent postings that I've read here. I'm in complete 100% agreement. I only wish more persons questioned the big "What ifs?" What if the land cost comes in much higher than anticipated? What if the construction of the 3rd HS is delayed? What if the 2009 Referendum doesn't pass? What if? What if? What if? I've been saying it all along that the SB needs a back-up Plan B. I hope that I'm wrong but I do think it seems hard to sit back and believe that everything will just go the way we'd like. OK, I'll play, I have a "What If" - What if everyone here pledges to look at the merits of the 2009 referendum, and, assuming that they agree that it is necessary and important to the success of 204, work to ensure that it is passed, as opposed to asking "what if it doesn't pass"? |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 20, 2007 5:50:43 GMT -6
Do you know for a fact there is no plan B?
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 20, 2007 6:30:13 GMT -6
Do you know for a fact there is no plan B? Sometimes it seems that the defacto standard is: If someone asks a question, then the basis of the question must be true. Luckily the real world doesn't quite work like that. |
|
|
|
Post by movingforward on Apr 20, 2007 7:22:24 GMT -6
I originally posted this on another thread which was leading that thread off target so I have reposted here where it more aptly applies. Hi all - first time posting here but have been following for a few months. I just wanted to point out that I think the point is being missed in this whole thread. The real issue at hand in my mind is the quick take and the potential impact on our taxes or the proposed design of MVHS. Maybe this should be a new thread and if so I hope the administrator will post as such. Has anyone gotten a true answer from the school board as to "What if the quick take goes through and the jury finds the value to be much higher than budgeted?" From what i have followed, the school boards noncommital reply has been "We are confident that we will get it for our price." How do they know? Are they in land development? They are relying a few appraisals that they hired to have done. I'm guess BB has appraisals stating much higher values because they were hired by BB. Personally I don't believe the price of the land will come out in the taxpayers benefit and wonder what the impact of that will be. Will it be that a smaller school will have to be built because the referendum was approved for $124M and more money will be going towards land and less to bricks and mortar? Will the taxpayers be upset with the school board if this is true thus making it harder for the operational referendum to be approved in the 2009 referendum? Will they come back with a future capital referendum for the additional land price? What will the board members responses be if they are wrong on the price? Will they blame the appraisers for the lower value that will be inaccurate when presented at trial? Will they blame HC because he will be retired when this is resolved and they need a scapegoat? What will the school board's response be if they were wrong about this? They aren't making that much money on the issued bonds to cover the potential price increase (I believe half of the bonds have been issued which would be about $70M earning about 5% with costs of about 3% leaving a return of 2% on the $70M or about $1.4M). The thought just hit me as I started typing this - maybe the current school board members up for re-election wanted this dragged out past the election. Think about it - if it was resolved earlier and the value goes significantly against the taxpayers (I don't use school board because we the taxpayers are the ones it will truely affect) I'm rather confident that the election results would have been a little different yesterday. I just wonder why the school board is so trusted and PL isn't. Is it because he isn't an elected official? A couple of the newly re-elected board members were appointed to the board by their fellow board members. I'm sure they see things in the same light and that is why they were appointed (are they going to appoint someone that is going to raise questions contrary to their beleifs?) The school board thought the quick take was going to be resolved by January and it is still hanging out there. Why are people on here so eager to bash candidates that took the time to actually hear PL's side? To me they were performing the research to be better informed and open minded and prepared in case they were elected. WE ARE THE TAXPAYERS AND ALL STONES SHOULD NOT BE LEFT UNTURNED. I just get the feeling that the "majority" people are satisfied that the school board has done their homework without having to prove the school boards side to the same extent that others are expected to prove theirs. I'm sure i'll get slammed for being pro PL and or pro Macom but i'm a big boy and I can handle it. I will be judged by many on here without being known. I guess the bottom line here is why isn't the controlling body (school board) scrutinized more than someone offering another idea that has no control? Let's be open minded and ask the questions that need to be asked until they are answered. When all is said and done we are on the same side - the taxpayers side Wow! This is probably one of the most intelligent postings that I've read here. I'm in complete 100% agreement. I only wish more persons questioned the big "What ifs?" What if the land cost comes in much higher than anticipated? What if the construction of the 3rd HS is delayed? What if the 2009 Referendum doesn't pass? What if? What if? What if? I've been saying it all along that the SB needs a back-up Plan B. I hope that I'm wrong but I do think it seems hard to sit back and believe that everything will just go the way we'd like. .... To say that the above post was the most intelligent posting you have read is almost comical! Anyone can ask 'What If's  ' , Looking to facts and comparable situations and then drawing educated conclusions seems like a much more intelligent approach to me. Also, what basis is used for believing that the sb will over pay for the BB land? What appraisals/comparisons are used to come to that conclusion? Or is is pure negativity and speculation? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 20, 2007 7:29:39 GMT -6
Also, what basis is used for believing that the sb will over pay for the BB land? What appraisals/comparisons are used to come to that conclusion? Or is is pure negativity and speculation? It probably involves a bowl of corn flakes and urine. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Apr 20, 2007 7:32:44 GMT -6
.... To say that the above post was the most intelligent posting you have read is almost comical! Anyone can ask 'What If's ' , Looking to facts and comparable situations and then drawing educated conclusions seems like a much more intelligent approach to me. Also, what basis is used for believing that the sb will over pay for the BB land? What appraisals/comparisons are used to come to that conclusion? Or is is pure negativity and speculation? It's FUD, actually. Not sure of the purpose. Elections are 2 years away. And, if you ask these folks what the solutions are, or if they've contacted the SB with their questions, concerns, and presumptions, you just hear silence. Lots of energy is being spent here complaining & worrying - I think it could put to better use. |
|
|
|
Post by ric on Apr 20, 2007 7:37:44 GMT -6
Also, what basis is used for believing that the sb will over pay for the BB land? What appraisals/comparisons are used to come to that conclusion? Or is is pure negativity and speculation? It probably involves a bowl of corn flakes and urine. Nice quote from a global moderator Everything on this board is speculation no matter what topic one is referring to cause you are not the SB and you are not privy to insider info period |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 20, 2007 7:38:50 GMT -6
It probably involves a bowl of corn flakes and urine. Nice quote from a global moderator Everything on this board is speculation no matter what topic one is referring to cause you are not the SB and you are not privy to insider info period Neither are you, unless you want to claim or show otherwise. Where are these other comprehensive alternative plans that have been worked out that we are constantly reminded should be pursued instead of BB or even a 3rd HS? Everytime someone here asks for further details about them they never get posted. How come? (Refer back to the QE203 thread, April 7th) |
|
|
|
Post by ric on Apr 20, 2007 7:42:27 GMT -6
Nice quote from a global moderator Everything on this board is speculation no matter what topic one is referring to cause you are not the SB and you are not privy to insider info period Neither are you, unless you want to claim or show otherwise. never claimed to be nor would I ever want to join the utter implosion that continues to occur It's all speculation, hand wringing Nothing will be happening until it happens and no one knows when that will be despite posters 'self importance' on this board o' few |
|
|
|
Post by driven on Apr 20, 2007 8:05:04 GMT -6
I originally posted this on another thread which was leading that thread off target so I have reposted here where it more aptly applies. Hi all - first time posting here but have been following for a few months. I just wanted to point out that I think the point is being missed in this whole thread. The real issue at hand in my mind is the quick take and the potential impact on our taxes or the proposed design of MVHS. Maybe this should be a new thread and if so I hope the administrator will post as such. Has anyone gotten a true answer from the school board as to "What if the quick take goes through and the jury finds the value to be much higher than budgeted?" From what i have followed, the school boards noncommital reply has been "We are confident that we will get it for our price." How do they know? Are they in land development? They are relying a few appraisals that they hired to have done. I'm guess BB has appraisals stating much higher values because they were hired by BB. Personally I don't believe the price of the land will come out in the taxpayers benefit and wonder what the impact of that will be. Will it be that a smaller school will have to be built because the referendum was approved for $124M and more money will be going towards land and less to bricks and mortar? Will the taxpayers be upset with the school board if this is true thus making it harder for the operational referendum to be approved in the 2009 referendum? Will they come back with a future capital referendum for the additional land price? What will the board members responses be if they are wrong on the price? Will they blame the appraisers for the lower value that will be inaccurate when presented at trial? Will they blame HC because he will be retired when this is resolved and they need a scapegoat? What will the school board's response be if they were wrong about this? They aren't making that much money on the issued bonds to cover the potential price increase (I believe half of the bonds have been issued which would be about $70M earning about 5% with costs of about 3% leaving a return of 2% on the $70M or about $1.4M). The thought just hit me as I started typing this - maybe the current school board members up for re-election wanted this dragged out past the election. Think about it - if it was resolved earlier and the value goes significantly against the taxpayers (I don't use school board because we the taxpayers are the ones it will truely affect) I'm rather confident that the election results would have been a little different yesterday. I just wonder why the school board is so trusted and PL isn't. Is it because he isn't an elected official? A couple of the newly re-elected board members were appointed to the board by their fellow board members. I'm sure they see things in the same light and that is why they were appointed (are they going to appoint someone that is going to raise questions contrary to their beleifs?) The school board thought the quick take was going to be resolved by January and it is still hanging out there. Why are people on here so eager to bash candidates that took the time to actually hear PL's side? To me they were performing the research to be better informed and open minded and prepared in case they were elected. WE ARE THE TAXPAYERS AND ALL STONES SHOULD NOT BE LEFT UNTURNED. I just get the feeling that the "majority" people are satisfied that the school board has done their homework without having to prove the school boards side to the same extent that others are expected to prove theirs. I'm sure i'll get slammed for being pro PL and or pro Macom but i'm a big boy and I can handle it. I will be judged by many on here without being known. I guess the bottom line here is why isn't the controlling body (school board) scrutinized more than someone offering another idea that has no control? Let's be open minded and ask the questions that need to be asked until they are answered. When all is said and done we are on the same side - the taxpayers side Wow! This is probably one of the most intelligent postings that I've read here. I'm in complete 100% agreement. I only wish more persons questioned the big "What ifs?" What if the land cost comes in much higher than anticipated? What if the construction of the 3rd HS is delayed? What if the 2009 Referendum doesn't pass? What if? What if? What if? I've been saying it all along that the SB needs a back-up Plan B. I hope that I'm wrong but I do think it seems hard to sit back and believe that everything will just go the way we'd like. sd204taxpayer: I agree that your post was well thought out and well written. I also have MANY of the same concerns. However, these questions have been posted on this board time and time again with no suitable answers. Just ... "no one can predict the future". Why do we study history in school? So that we do not continue to make the same mistake over and over. All one has to do is look at the financial planning history of this SB to see our future. But I caution you to not bring up history on this board. Ever since the boundary decision, it's basically irrelevent. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 20, 2007 8:26:10 GMT -6
Wow! This is probably one of the most intelligent postings that I've read here. I'm in complete 100% agreement. I only wish more persons questioned the big "What ifs?" What if the land cost comes in much higher than anticipated? What if the construction of the 3rd HS is delayed? What if the 2009 Referendum doesn't pass? What if? What if? What if? I've been saying it all along that the SB needs a back-up Plan B. I hope that I'm wrong but I do think it seems hard to sit back and believe that everything will just go the way we'd like. sd204taxpayer: I agree that your post was well thought out and well written. I also have MANY of the same concerns. However, these questions have been posted on this board time and time again with no suitable answers. Just ... "no one can predict the future". Why do we study history in school? So that we do not continue to make the same mistake over and over. All one has to do is look at the financial planning history of this SB to see our future. But I caution you to not bring up history on this board. Ever since the boundary decision, it's basically irrelevent. Or one can look at the financial rating of this SD as well as the expenditures per student and learn from that 'history' also, but of course that is irrelevant. |
|
' ,