One parcel, two trials?

[wvhsparent]

OK back on subjet...sort of... Right now the main data that should be considered is that there are currently more students in the middle school grades than there is room for in the current High School configuration. I agree that the housing has ground to a halt or at least a slow crawl. Which means there won't be many more new students to exacerbate the already overcrowded system....The housing slump could be seen as a blessing in disguise. Maybe that buys us some more time......maybe that means we can miss the 2009 date with less dire consequences. I am OK with that. The main issue is the existing student population. I am not the best number cruncher (Hint, hint) As school will be starting soon, and we will soon have the latest enrollment numbers to guide us. That IMHO is the historical data we souled be relying on.

SSM I think I understand what you were alluding to, that the old housing models are now not accurate and estimates should be revised. Is that correct?

[movingforward]

lacy said:

southsidemom said:

Since the market trends are considered unprecedented, what historical data do you suggest is valid?

BTW: The mortgage company the district invited to its breakfast for local realtors to show off Waubonsie just gave pink slips to thousands of workers.

Let me guess, the new boundaries have you going from Waubonsie to Metea?

Mom, I think you raise an important question (that no one seems to want to talk about). What are the enrollment numbers actually showing? Do they support the district's predictions, or are they less?

And I wasn't offended by your last question. It seems highly likely to me that some people who want BB at all costs and subject to whatever delay have some sort of motive seperate from just wanting the district to move forward and build a third high school. That may explain the extreme hostility toward anyone who has different ideas.

Lacy,

We could say the same about you . You are quick to derail BB because you are personally not satisfied with the boundary outcome or some other aspect of this situation IMO.

Lets not judge others motives when no one truely knows them unless you claim to mind-read. We should stick to the facts and for what is best for this community and our kids. I will have a freshman in 2009 and again in 2010 so I truely want this third high school sooner than later but I am not willing to throw the SD under the bus at every opportunity.

BB was the best sight in the minds of the majority of this community. Lets sit tight and allow the process to play out.

[doctorwho]

lacy said:

southsidemom said:

Since the market trends are considered unprecedented, what historical data do you suggest is valid?

BTW: The mortgage company the district invited to its breakfast for local realtors to show off Waubonsie just gave pink slips to thousands of workers.

Let me guess, the new boundaries have you going from Waubonsie to Metea?

Mom, I think you raise an important question (that no one seems to want to talk about). What are the enrollment numbers actually showing? Do they support the district's predictions, or are they less?

And I wasn't offended by your last question. It seems highly likely to me that some people who want BB at all costs and subject to whatever delay have some sort of motive seperate from just wanting the district to move forward and build a third high school. That may explain the extreme hostility toward anyone who has different ideas.

Why would you be offended as the insinuation has no effect on your area?

Show me another site that can be ready sooner. Almost everyone here wants the 3rd HS as soon as possible - not everyone wants BB - I fully understand that. But because a person wants BB does not warrant being told the reason is because they will move from WV to MV - which is exactly what Mom was insinutating and all the backpeddling has no effect on what was said. I have already stated that I want BB because I like the site positionally in the district - period.

[doctorwho]

wvhsparent said:

OK back on subjet...sort of... Right now the main data that should be considered is that there are currently more students in the middle school grades than there is room for in the current High School configuration. I agree that the housing has ground to a halt or at least a slow crawl. Which means there won't be many more new students to exacerbate the already overcrowded system....The housing slump could be seen as a blessing in disguise. Maybe that buys us some more time......maybe that means we can miss the 2009 date with less dire consequences. I am OK with that. The main issue is the existing student population. I am not the best number cruncher (Hint, hint) As school will be starting soon, and we will soon have the latest enrollment numbers to guide us. That IMHO is the historical data we souled be relying on.

SSM I think I understand what you were alluding to, that the old housing models are now not accurate and estimates should be revised. Is that correct?

But they may not only be incorrect on the low side as I have also stated. Yes there may be more vacant housing - but are those people now in apartments ? When they were looking to build the 109 unit builiding on Rickert drive- the city estimated 9 students to come from 109 units. Yes, 9 ! If there is an increase in foreclosures, does it not also make sense that there may be more children than 9 in 109 units also ?

So yes, I understand what was being questioned, but when did the hosuing slump start ? How long will it last ? Has it peaked, or not yet -- so I also agree - we will have firm numbers of the district attendance shortly - that will be solid data from which to see if any further adjustments need to be looked into - far better than just speculation.

[momto4]

lacy said:

southsidemom said:

Since the market trends are considered unprecedented, what historical data do you suggest is valid?

BTW: The mortgage company the district invited to its breakfast for local realtors to show off Waubonsie just gave pink slips to thousands of workers.

Let me guess, the new boundaries have you going from Waubonsie to Metea?

Mom, I think you raise an important question (that no one seems to want to talk about). What are the enrollment numbers actually showing? Do they support the district's predictions, or are they less?

And I wasn't offended by your last question. It seems highly likely to me that some people who want BB at all costs and subject to whatever delay have some sort of motive seperate from just wanting the district to move forward and build a third high school. That may explain the extreme hostility toward anyone who has different ideas.

I'll be interested to see the enrollment numbers as well and expect to see them UP. I think they usually release numbers as of 9/30 so it will be a while before we have that info.


According to ipsdweb.ipsd.org/Subpage.aspx/KnowYourDistrict
there are 29,000 enrolled and I believe that had to be for 2006/2007 school year.

I, OTOH, was very offended by SSM's question even though it wasn't asked of me. And though Lacy thinks it's highly unlikely that someone pushing for BB to go through would have motives other than just wanting a third HS, I may be an anomaly here but I want the 3rd HS opened ASAP so my children can attend a less-crowded WV. I hope I'm not the only one! I feel sorry for those families who have to leave our wonderful established school (WV) for a brand new just getting set up school (MV). I know it will all be fine in the end, but for those kids in the first few years I think they'd be better off in the established school with upper grades attending. I feel they lose out on a lot but the district worked through it with NV and will do it again.

I don't think there's any chance of another site being available to have a new school opened by 2010, even if we start now, where if things can get moving with BB we have a shot at 2009.

It doesn't really matter why I'd like BB to happen, I just want it to happen ASAP.

[lacy]

movingforward said:

lacy said:

Mom, I think you raise an important question (that no one seems to want to talk about). What are the enrollment numbers actually showing? Do they support the district's predictions, or are they less?

And I wasn't offended by your last question. It seems highly likely to me that some people who want BB at all costs and subject to whatever delay have some sort of motive seperate from just wanting the district to move forward and build a third high school. That may explain the extreme hostility toward anyone who has different ideas.

Lacy,

We could say the same about you . You are quick to derail BB because you are personally not satisfied with the boundary outcome or some other aspect of this situation IMO.

Lets not judge others motives when no one truely knows them unless you claim to mind-read. We should stick to the facts and for what is best for this community and our kids. I will have a freshman in 2009 and again in 2010 so I truely want this third high school sooner than later but I am not willing to throw the SD under the bus at every opportunity.

BB was the best sight in the minds of the majority of this community. Lets sit tight and allow the process to play out.

The community didn't vote on BB. They voted on a third high school. So if we're sticking to facts, let's get that one straight.

And who knows what the "majority" wants at this point. Have you taken a poll? I think plenty are concerned that we were led to believe that BB could be more easily aquired (not to mention the price) than what it has proven to be.

And unless you are a mind reader, you can't read mine. So since your not into "judging motives", perhaps you shouldn't judge mine.

[bob]

[proschool]

wvhsparent said:

OK back on subjet...sort of... Right now the main data that should be considered is that there are currently more students in the middle school grades than there is room for in the current High School configuration. I agree that the housing has ground to a halt or at least a slow crawl. Which means there won't be many more new students to exacerbate the already overcrowded system....The housing slump could be seen as a blessing in disguise. Maybe that buys us some more time......maybe that means we can miss the 2009 date with less dire consequences. I am OK with that. The main issue is the existing student population. I am not the best number cruncher (Hint, hint) As school will be starting soon, and we will soon have the latest enrollment numbers to guide us. That IMHO is the historical data we souled be relying on.

SSM I think I understand what you were alluding to, that the old housing models are now not accurate and estimates should be revised. Is that correct?

Whoever does start to crunch the numbers should realize that the squeeze will hit the middle school level first.

The high school only nets 1800 seats (450 per grade level) because you loose a freshman campus at the same time. The 1200 seat 7th middle school will accomodate 400 students per grade level. The students will be in middle schhol before high school.

Its better to start building on the 25 acres that we own already so that we can get to the students out of the WVHS Gold campus and open the middle school. That also gets some of the pressure off of NVHS gold. It might even make sense to place WVHS Freshman at MVHS in 2009.

[wvhsparent]

bob said:

I LOVE IT!!!!!! My trekkie days are coming back to me!!!!!

[movingforward]

lacy said:

movingforward said:

Lacy,

We could say the same about you . You are quick to derail BB because you are personally not satisfied with the boundary outcome or some other aspect of this situation IMO.

Lets not judge others motives when no one truely knows them unless you claim to mind-read. We should stick to the facts and for what is best for this community and our kids. I will have a freshman in 2009 and again in 2010 so I truely want this third high school sooner than later but I am not willing to throw the SD under the bus at every opportunity.

BB was the best sight in the minds of the majority of this community. Lets sit tight and allow the process to play out.

The community didn't vote on BB. They voted on a third high school. So if we're sticking to facts, let's get that one straight.

And who knows what the "majority" wants at this point. Have you taken a poll? I think plenty are concerned that we were led to believe that BB could be more easily aquired (not to mention the price) than what it has proven to be.

And unless you are a mind reader, you can't read mine. So since your not into "judging motives", perhaps you shouldn't judge mine.

Don't play games here. The boundaries and the BB location were very much a part of the final vote on the 3rd high school.

Your posting history tells me alot about your motives; I need not read your mind....just your posts

[justme]

Wow! What a discussion! Unfortunately not new...

Lacy, I think you are absolutely correct in saying that the community did NOT vote on BB. They voted for a 3rd high school. However, they really voted for the boundaries. If the community REALLY just wanted a 3rd high school they would have been screaming for a plan B long ago.

I am personally open to ANY alternate location. I am also totally opposed to over spending (by at least double IMO) for BB. Therefore, I am vocally opposed to QT.

Unfortunately, it is BB at all costs and always has been.

[justme]

movingforward said:

lacy said:

The community didn't vote on BB. They voted on a third high school. So if we're sticking to facts, let's get that one straight.

And who knows what the "majority" wants at this point. Have you taken a poll? I think plenty are concerned that we were led to believe that BB could be more easily aquired (not to mention the price) than what it has proven to be.

And unless you are a mind reader, you can't read mine. So since your not into "judging motives", perhaps you shouldn't judge mine.

Don't play games here. The boundaries and the BB location were very much a part of the final vote on the 3rd high school.

Your posting history tells me alot about your motives; I need not read your mind....just your posts

I definitely think that goes for most on this board. (you & I included)

[doctorwho]

justme said:

Wow! What a discussion! Unfortunately not new...

Lacy, I think you are absolutely correct in saying that the community did NOT vote on BB. They voted for a 3rd high school. However, they really voted for the boundaries. If the community REALLY just wanted a 3rd high school they would have been screaming for a plan B long ago.

I am personally open to ANY alternate location. I am also totally opposed to over spending (by at least double IMO) for BB. Therefore, I am vocally opposed to QT.

Unfortunately, it is BB at all costs and always has been.

As far as the spending - what property is going to be acquired at this point in time for anywhere near the $257K riding on BB ( due mainly to the reference date) and that total for the 80 acres ?

We keep hearing about plan B however we have been over the list of available properties, again in the last few days, including the other top sites that also were not available for sale -- where is plan B supposed to be ? If there was a plan B available at a cost similar to the bid on BB I do believe you would have heard more firestorm for it -- however that low cost - land available option does not exist. That size parcel in this district isn't exactly plentiful.

[harry]

justme said:

Wow! What a discussion! Unfortunately not new...

Lacy, I think you are absolutely correct in saying that the community did NOT vote on BB. They voted for a 3rd high school. However, they really voted for the boundaries. If the community REALLY just wanted a 3rd high school they would have been screaming for a plan B long ago.

I am personally open to ANY alternate location. I am also totally opposed to over spending (by at least double IMO) for BB. Therefore, I am vocally opposed to QT.

Unfortunately, it is BB at all costs and always has been.

Justme ...very accurately and succinctly put...

However, people who voted for boundaries made an error as boundaries were not on the ballot and neither was BB .

Both can and at this point have a big possibility of being changed.

If the SB doesn't look for a new locale now, and they feel that they can 'wait' until 2010/11 for a MV soft open, ,,,,then truly it points to the fact that there is no over crowding and we can make do. Otherwise, we would be hearing about Plan B and see trailers ordered and MS overcrowding addressed.

The SB has, again, led us astray and let us down...End of story

[harry]

doctorwho said:

justme said:

Wow! What a discussion! Unfortunately not new...

Lacy, I think you are absolutely correct in saying that the community did NOT vote on BB. They voted for a 3rd high school. However, they really voted for the boundaries. If the community REALLY just wanted a 3rd high school they would have been screaming for a plan B long ago.

I am personally open to ANY alternate location. I am also totally opposed to over spending (by at least double IMO) for BB. Therefore, I am vocally opposed to QT.

Unfortunately, it is BB at all costs and always has been.

As far as the spending - what property is going to be acquired at this point in time for anywhere near the $257K riding on BB ( due mainly to the reference date) and that total for the 80 acres ?

We keep hearing about plan B however we have been over the list of available properties, again in the last few days, including the other top sites that also were not available for sale -- where is plan B supposed to be ? If there was a plan B available at a cost similar to the bid on BB I do believe you would have heard more firestorm for it -- however that low cost - land available option does not exist. That size parcel in this district isn't exactly plentiful.

257 is pie in the sky..

The SB already said that they have latitude to pay more so

GET OFF YOUR DUFFS AND DO IT FGS!!!!

Macom and up North is what I have heard so far. Since both properties are as ready as BB, then we are starting at square one for all.

Blank or get off the pot (SB) already.!!! ARGH