|
|
Post by warriorpride on Sept 27, 2007 19:53:23 GMT -6
that within 30 days the SB will accept the price and move forward? (Everyone does know that the SB does not need to accept the price and can walk away). I do - I'm willing to bet that's there's no clear-cut alternative that is guaranteed significantly less expensive & can guarantee a 2009 opening. |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Sept 27, 2007 19:56:31 GMT -6
You're guessing here - instead of worrying/complaining about there not being a stadium, why don't we wait to see what the SB says - perhaps they can come up with a plan. They ARE meeting with Turner Construction, too, don't forget. That's my fear (meeting with Turner Construction to reduce costs to cover the difference)...we wind up with 1 Taj Mahal, and 1 Paper Mache Mahal. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Sept 27, 2007 20:02:50 GMT -6
that within 30 days the SB will accept the price and move forward? (Everyone does know that the SB does not need to accept the price and can walk away). I do - I'm willing to bet that's there's no clear-cut alternative that is guaranteed significantly less expensive & can guarantee a 2009 opening. I think it's time to give up on a 2009 opening..... |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Sept 27, 2007 20:03:36 GMT -6
Dr. W.... Close the gap? Wow, to me it's more than a gap, it's a giant whole? C'mon, help me. If they accept this price, what is the sacrifice? There has to be something that will be cut. Will it be the pool? stadium? labs? where? If they can't and decided not to come out for more money for Metea, what will fund the 15-18 million dollar difference in land cost? If they have that kind of money to be creative with, what was all the talk about funding AC in the schools all about? You're guessing here - instead of worrying/complaining about there not being a stadium, why don't we wait to see what the SB says - perhaps they can come up with a plan. They ARE meeting with Turner Construction, too, don't forget. I'm not worrying/complaining, but doing simple math. 15 plus more for land than anticipated? and a resolution from the school board not to go out for more money for Metea? Do you really call that complaining? I guess worrying is a better term as I'm very worried at this point. Do the math... With the numbers we've been given, something has to be cut without going out for more money from taxpayers. Help me see the numbers in a more positive way. Enlighten me as to how you can see it differently? Please... eta... Let's hope Turner throws in the pool for free... LOL! |
|
|
|
Post by dcyst on Sept 27, 2007 20:06:26 GMT -6
I think it's time to give up on a 2009 opening
I said that months ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Sept 27, 2007 20:07:25 GMT -6
If they do, the public takes it out in the SB members in the next election cycle. Gone are: Stephens and Glawe (both of which may not run anyways) Vickers (Yipeee!!!!!!) Clark (no comment) and I have to wonder if it's remembered in 4 years. Someone will be around to remind everyone. That's a guarantee. I also see the 09 Operating funds Ref in serious jeapordy....people will be pissed...won't be thinking clearly |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Sept 27, 2007 20:15:57 GMT -6
If they do, the public takes it out in the SB members in the next election cycle. Gone are: Stephens and Glawe (both of which may not run anyways) Vickers (Yipeee!!!!!!) Clark (no comment) and I have to wonder if it's remembered in 4 years. Someone will be around to remind everyone. That's a guarantee. I also see the 09 Operating funds Ref in serious jeapordy....people will be pissed...won't be thinking clearly The SB still has a chance to come up with a reasonable solution to the current situation. In my opinion, walking away from BB is the most prudent decision they can make. Forcing voters to swallow 518K per acre for that land will haunt them for a long time. I say that knowing that there will be sacrifices at some point to meet that price. There has to be a better alternative. Let's all work together to find it. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Sept 27, 2007 20:19:19 GMT -6
You're guessing here - instead of worrying/complaining about there not being a stadium, why don't we wait to see what the SB says - perhaps they can come up with a plan. They ARE meeting with Turner Construction, too, don't forget. I'm not worrying/complaining, but doing simple math. 15 plus more for land than anticipated? and a resolution from the school board not to go out for more money for Metea? Do you really call that complaining? I guess worrying is a better term as I'm very worried at this point. Do the math... With the numbers we've been given, something has to be cut without going out for more money from taxpayers. Help me see the numbers in a more positive way. Enlighten me as to how you can see it differently? Please... eta... Let's hope Turner throws in the pool for free... LOL! OK, if you allowed to guess, then allow me to guess - I have no additional knowledge, this is all conjecture. - The SB said that they had some contingency for a higher land price. They never announced the amount but I get the impression it was a few $M. Let's stretch that out a little & imagine that there's $4M-$5M contingency. - I believe that we've accrued some interest on the intial portion of $ that was borrowed. I don't recall the amount, but there's another source. - Let's hope that Turner can come up with some cost-savings via design and/or materials. As a stretch, let's say that they can come up with ways to save $2M-$3M (and, no ED, MV won't be build out of paper mache). - Let's imagine that the SB gets creative as was mentioned early today & they are able to find one or more sponsors to help subsidize the contruction of some of the main althetic facilities (gym, pool, football field, baseball field, etc.). If another SD can get almost $2M this way, why can't 204? If you add up my purely imaginary scenarios, then we're approaching $10M-$11M of the difference recovered. This suddenly doesn't look like a doomsday scenario. And, in fact , the net cost would be less than I was expecting (I think I has $18M as a guess). I might be way off, too - we'll find out soon. |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Sept 27, 2007 20:21:29 GMT -6
I'm not worrying/complaining, but doing simple math. 15 plus more for land than anticipated? and a resolution from the school board not to go out for more money for Metea? Do you really call that complaining? I guess worrying is a better term as I'm very worried at this point. Do the math... With the numbers we've been given, something has to be cut without going out for more money from taxpayers. Help me see the numbers in a more positive way. Enlighten me as to how you can see it differently? Please... eta... Let's hope Turner throws in the pool for free... LOL! OK, if you allowed to guess, then allow me to guess - I have no additional knowledge, this is all conjecture. - The SB said that they had some contingency for a higher land price. They never announced the amount but I get the impression it was a few $M. Let's stretch that out a little & imagine that there's $4M-$5M contingency. - I believe that we've accrued some interest on the intial portion of $ that was borrowed. I don't recall the amount, but there's another source. - Let's hope that Turner can come up with some cost-savings via design and/or materials. As a stretch, let's say that they can come up with ways to save $2M-$3M (and, no ED, MV won't be build out of paper mache). - Let's imagine that the SB gets creative as was mentioned early today & they are able to find one or more sponsors to help subsidize the contruction of some of the main althetic facilities (gym, pool, football field, baseball field, etc.). If another SD can get almost $2M this way, why can't 204? If you add up my purely imaginary scenarios, then we're approaching $10M-$11M of the difference recovered. This suddenly doesn't look like a doomsday scenario. And, in fact , the net cost would be less than I was expecting (I think I has $18M as a guess). I might be way off, too - we'll find out soon. From what I remember, the SD builds in a 3-5% contingency in the increase of land, construction, ect. Warriorpride, I like your math, but I dont think it's going to fly. We went out for bid (based on the 124 mil) a long time ago. I would have to assume based on what I've read that their costs have gone up more than 3-5%. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Sept 27, 2007 20:21:38 GMT -6
ONE GIANT VEGAS NIGHT AND KEGGER !!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Sept 27, 2007 20:24:07 GMT -6
I think it's time to give up on a 2009 opening I said that months ago. Gave up on that about June myself. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Sept 27, 2007 20:27:35 GMT -6
If they do, the public takes it out in the SB members in the next election cycle. Gone are: Stephens and Glawe (both of which may not run anyways) Vickers (Yipeee!!!!!!) Clark (no comment) and I have to wonder if it's remembered in 4 years. Someone will be around to remind everyone. That's a guarantee. I also see the 09 Operating funds Ref in serious jeapordy....people will be pissed...won't be thinking clearly Hang on, WVHSP, we don't know the true financial impacts of buying vs. not buying BB. If there has to be an additional referendum to complete the construction of MV, then yes, there will be a backlash. If BB can be purchased with the least impact to taxpayers of all the other options, why would there be a backlash on an 09 Operating Funds referendum? |
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on Sept 27, 2007 20:28:01 GMT -6
I think it's time to give up on a 2009 opening I said that months ago. Absolutely. Not gonna happen in 2009. |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Sept 27, 2007 20:29:24 GMT -6
ONE GIANT VEGAS NIGHT AND KEGGER !!!!! Bob, Once again, I'm laughing so hard I can't post anymore without giggling. Is that some weird strategy you have? If so, keep it going. I think we all need some humor. Tee hee.... LOL... HA HA Good one.. |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Sept 27, 2007 20:33:15 GMT -6
OK, if you allowed to guess, then allow me to guess - I have no additional knowledge, this is all conjecture. - The SB said that they had some contingency for a higher land price. They never announced the amount but I get the impression it was a few $M. Let's stretch that out a little & imagine that there's $4M-$5M contingency. - I believe that we've accrued some interest on the intial portion of $ that was borrowed. I don't recall the amount, but there's another source. - Let's hope that Turner can come up with some cost-savings via design and/or materials. As a stretch, let's say that they can come up with ways to save $2M-$3M (and, no ED, MV won't be build out of paper mache). - Let's imagine that the SB gets creative as was mentioned early today & they are able to find one or more sponsors to help subsidize the contruction of some of the main althetic facilities (gym, pool, football field, baseball field, etc.). If another SD can get almost $2M this way, why can't 204? If you add up my purely imaginary scenarios, then we're approaching $10M-$11M of the difference recovered. This suddenly doesn't look like a doomsday scenario. And, in fact , the net cost would be less than I was expecting (I think I has $18M as a guess). I might be way off, too - we'll find out soon. From what I remember, the SD builds in a 3-5% contingency in the increase of land, construction, ect. Warriorpride, I like your math, but I dont think it's going to fly. We went out for bid (based on the 124 mil) a long time ago. I would have to assume based on what I've read that their costs have gone up more than 3-5%. Ok... For the record, I had more to say but I read Bob's post on the kegger and fell out laughing. Sorry, but I am still giggling and can't stop... Bob... Thanks for the laugh.. I think after today's events we all needed a good belly laugh. We can get all mean on each other tomorrow. For now, I'm out with the laughs. Thanks Bob... |
|
