SB Options for BB now

[wvhsparent]

Given what we know what would you do?

[proschool]

Given what I know i said pay it becasue I don't know if there is another option on the table. When I see another option I will reconsider.

[warriorpride]

proschool said:

Given what I know i said pay it becasue I don't know if there is another option on the table. When I see another option I will reconsider.

Yep, we've been hanging in the appeal process for almost 1.5 years, and unless the SB can come up with a slam dunk, much cheaper option within the next week - pull the trigger & start digging.

Note: I would have preferred that they pursue St Johns as a backup, but since we haven't heard anything, I'll assume that they haven't - who knows maybe they'll surprise us.

[casey]

What a mess! I think they should RUN from the BB land. The cost is too high and we can't afford it without major sacrifices.

Maybe we should build a MS on the BB property that we already own. Then look at increasing attendance/offerings at Frontier Campus and consider addition to Neuqua. Not a perfect solution especially not for the long-term but there are many who question the long-term need for a 3rd HS anyway. To be honest, I don't think that the SD can do much with the Referendum $$ They can't just willy-nilly decide to build a MS, addition, or something else. I'm thinking it's a HS or nothing based on the wording of the Referendum, right?

[gatordog]

wvhsparent said:

Given what we know what would you do?

Shop around and see if there are other sellers out there. BB might still be lowest overall cost....or maybe not. The jury didnt just give BB a potential windfall...they gave one to all potential HS site property holders in 204.

I cast my vote for
I dont care....whether or not MVHS is built at BB, I just want the highest caliber facility at the best location available for $124.6 million

(maybe not the question the pollster was asking....but we all know its an imperfect science!)

[southsidemom]

warriorpride said:

proschool said:

Given what I know i said pay it becasue I don't know if there is another option on the table. When I see another option I will reconsider.

Yep, we've been hanging in the appeal process for almost 1.5 years, and unless the SB can come up with a slam dunk, much cheaper option within the next week - pull the trigger & start digging.

Note: I would have preferred that they pursue St Johns as a backup, but since we haven't heard anything, I'll assume that they haven't - who knows maybe they'll surprise us.

My understanding is that St. Johns is not willing to sell. So are you saying that we should condemn land owned by a church?

[warriorpride]

southsidemom said:

warriorpride said:

Yep, we've been hanging in the appeal process for almost 1.5 years, and unless the SB can come up with a slam dunk, much cheaper option within the next week - pull the trigger & start digging.

Note: I would have preferred that they pursue St Johns as a backup, but since we haven't heard anything, I'll assume that they haven't - who knows maybe they'll surprise us.

My understanding is that St. Johns is not willing to sell. So are you saying that we should condemn land owned by a church?

I don't think that I ever said that. I think that St Johns is the next best location. If they are unwilling to sell, then it's time to move on. I'm only interested in Macom if it's much, much, much less expensive than BB AND we could still have a 2009 opening.

[southsidemom]

warriorpride said:

southsidemom said:

My understanding is that St. Johns is not willing to sell. So are you saying that we should condemn land owned by a church?

I don't think that I ever said that. I think that St Johns is the next best location. If they are unwilling to sell, then it's time to move on. I'm only interested in Macom if it's much, much, much less expensive than BB AND we could still have a 2009 opening.

Good point. We do need to move on and look at viable options.

[Arch]

Building a MS on the 25 acres now will be moot when the HS eventually gets done and the freshman centers are converted back.. then everyone will be complaining about wasting money on a MS instead of just building the HS in the first place.

Pay it and get it over with. Look forward, not backwards.

Put another way.. just rip the bandaid off and build that school.

[macy]

archwinsome said:

Building a MS on the 25 acres now will be moot when the HS eventually gets done and the freshman centers are converted back.. then everyone will be complaining about wasting money on a MS instead of just building the HS in the first place.

Pay it and get it over with. Look forward, not backwards.

Put another way.. just rip the bandaid off and build that school.

How can we pay it if we don't have the funds to cover the construction of the building? Are you in favor of scaling back the school?

[Arch]

macy said:

archwinsome said:

Building a MS on the 25 acres now will be moot when the HS eventually gets done and the freshman centers are converted back.. then everyone will be complaining about wasting money on a MS instead of just building the HS in the first place.

Pay it and get it over with. Look forward, not backwards.

Put another way.. just rip the bandaid off and build that school.

How can we pay it if we don't have the funds to cover the construction of the building? Are you in favor of scaling back the school?

I am in favor of working with the builders to cut out any 'fluff' or other non-essentials and seeing what that price works out to.

In addition, the total sum is not due today or by Monday at 4PM.

Are you in favor of keeping the idea of building a school alive but never actually building it? Keep in mind, your way still has no land and still has no contruction cost increase factored in due to delays.

[southsidemom]

archwinsome said:

macy said:

How can we pay it if we don't have the funds to cover the construction of the building? Are you in favor of scaling back the school?

I am in favor of working with the builders to cut out any 'fluff' or other non-essentials and seeing what that price works out to.

In addition, the total sum is not due today or by Monday at 4PM.

Are you in favor of keeping the idea of building a school alive but never actually building it? Keep in mind, your way still has no land and still has no contruction cost increase factored in due to delays.

What type of "fluff"/non-essentials do you think we should cut out of the 3rd HS? Would need to be quite substantial amount of items to reduce cost significantly.

[we4]

macy said:

archwinsome said:

Building a MS on the 25 acres now will be moot when the HS eventually gets done and the freshman centers are converted back.. then everyone will be complaining about wasting money on a MS instead of just building the HS in the first place.

Pay it and get it over with. Look forward, not backwards.

Put another way.. just rip the bandaid off and build that school.

How can we pay it if we don't have the funds to cover the construction of the building? Are you in favor of scaling back the school?

Found this in today's Sun. Below is just the end of it. The whole article is at www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/578519,6_1_NA28_LAND_S1.article.

Additional revenues

In 2006, voters in District 204 approved a $124.6 million referendum to fund the construction of Metea Valley. The bonds were issued in July 2006 and have been gaining interest. In May, David Holm, assistant superintendent for business and finance, said the interest was at $10.5 million from the $62.3 million in bonds.
That, combined with $2 million in land-cash donations the district saved and $900,000 in construction monies from other projects, could give the district an extra $13 million for the project.

Metzger said although that doesn't cover the entire extra cost, the district has options.

"Certainly there is some cushion provided by that, but it also doesn't fill the entire gap," Metzger said.

[southsidemom]

we4 said:

macy said:

How can we pay it if we don't have the funds to cover the construction of the building? Are you in favor of scaling back the school?

Found this in today's Sun. Below is just the end of it. The whole article is at www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/578519,6_1_NA28_LAND_S1.article.

Additional revenues

In 2006, voters in District 204 approved a $124.6 million referendum to fund the construction of Metea Valley. The bonds were issued in July 2006 and have been gaining interest. In May, David Holm, assistant superintendent for business and finance, said the interest was at $10.5 million from the $62.3 million in bonds.
That, combined with $2 million in land-cash donations the district saved and $900,000 in construction monies from other projects, could give the district an extra $13 million for the project.

Metzger said although that doesn't cover the entire extra cost, the district has options.

"Certainly there is some cushion provided by that, but it also doesn't fill the entire gap," Metzger said.

Well that is good news. Although we still have the expense of what needs to go inside the buiding, for example teachers.

[gatormom]

southsidemom said:

we4 said:

Found this in today's Sun. Below is just the end of it. The whole article is at www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/578519,6_1_NA28_LAND_S1.article.

Additional revenues

In 2006, voters in District 204 approved a $124.6 million referendum to fund the construction of Metea Valley. The bonds were issued in July 2006 and have been gaining interest. In May, David Holm, assistant superintendent for business and finance, said the interest was at $10.5 million from the $62.3 million in bonds.
That, combined with $2 million in land-cash donations the district saved and $900,000 in construction monies from other projects, could give the district an extra $13 million for the project.

Metzger said although that doesn't cover the entire extra cost, the district has options.

"Certainly there is some cushion provided by that, but it also doesn't fill the entire gap," Metzger said.

Well that is good news. Although we still have the expense of what needs to go inside the buiding, for example teachers.

That was not included in the referendum to build the school, the 2009 referendum will cover that, no surprise there.