SB Options for BB now

[warriorpride]

southsidemom said:

gatormom said:

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

Oh I know, but many will not vote YES if it is perceived that funds are not being spend wisely. Already heard moms chatting yesterday after school white waiting for kids. Just food for thought.

Moms & Dads chatter all the time, and a lot of the time it's the phone game (I wonder how many people already think that a decision has been made to buy BB or to not buy BB) - it's easy to be an armchair quarterback.

The need for a 3rd has been established, the referendum to build it was passed, and the SB has a celing for what they can borrow for this. Now, they just need to put in the work to figure out how to get it built - and if they need to make some changes to the design and they need to get creative with where the $ comes from (i.e. corporate sponsorship, sell some or all of the Wheatland property, etc.), so be it.

[Arch]

Give me 15 minutes with any corporate executive and I'll shake a few million out of their pockets. That's such an easy sell.. it'll be just like the old start up days w/ the Venture Capitalists.

It's so doable it's not even funny.

[bob]

Still blinded by rage at BB,jury and our lawyers: If I had a choice between giving money to Macom and BB, it is Macom all the way.

Opinion subject to change depending on mood and time .

[southsidemom]

bob said:

southsidemom said:

Oh I know, but many will not vote YES if it is perceived that funds are not being spend wisely. Already heard moms chatting yesterday after school white waiting for kids. Just food for thought.

And they will be the first ones to whine when student teacher ratios go up and why the band program/choir was cut .

Let's look at the SD to our west and see what happens when spending is cut.

That very well may be, but if the vote does not pass then we have a building sitting empty. Not out of the relm of reason. If anything we should learn from this land situation that the end result does not always turn out the way we project. Outcome is only as good as the majority voters.

[southsidemom]

justme said:

Run Forest, Run!

Any news on those legal fees or current enrollment?

Thank the lord we even have the option to cut and run! Quick Take would have taken away that choice.

I am of the mind set that MV should have EXACTLY the same amenities as WV & NV. Anything less would be unacceptable.

ABSOLUTELY should be of the same caliber. Maybe we can cut the A/C. Just kidding. ;D

[doctorwho]

southsidemom said:

bob said:

And they will be the first ones to whine when student teacher ratios go up and why the band program/choir was cut .

Let's look at the SD to our west and see what happens when spending is cut.

That very well may be, but if the vote does not pass then we have a building sitting empty. Not out of the relm of reason. If anything we should learn from this land situation that the end result does not always turn out the way we project. Outcome is only as good as the majority voters.

And if the majority of voters choose to throw away the $124M they would have already spent to prove some kind of point - and thus screw over the kids in the district- that would make another statement altogether. I have more faith in the people here than that.

[EagleDad]

lacy said:

I read the article in the Trib today and Vickers is quoted as saying we need to look at the enrollment numbers.

Before we pay an extra $15 million, this certainly makes sense to me.

Based on MM's comments, it seems that some members of the school board will spend anything to get this property.

I almost hate to say this, but I agree with you totally on this Lacy.

School Board - Show all of us the enrollment numbers, now, or I can't support going any further.

[momof3]

bob said:

I know that one overcrowded school has lost a full kindergarten class this year.

But did they increase class size instead which seems to be our Super's mantra?

K class isn't a final tally. 1st grader class size is a better indicator.

Agreed - K is not a reliable indicator anymore. Last year our ES lost a K - down to 3 - but had to add a 1st grade this year - back to 4.

[momof3]

eagledad said:

lacy said:

I read the article in the Trib today and Vickers is quoted as saying we need to look at the enrollment numbers.

Before we pay an extra $15 million, this certainly makes sense to me.

Based on MM's comments, it seems that some members of the school board will spend anything to get this property.

I almost hate to say this, but I agree with you totally on this Lacy.

School Board - Show all of us the enrollment numbers, now, or I can't support going any further.

iirc the numbers are released in mid-Oct. but maybe they could speed it up this year
ipsd204.proboards76.com/index.cgi?board=discuss&action=display&thread=1161184385

[gatordog]

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.

Thanks for good info in here, we4.

I see BB as still having inside track on being best choice.

1. The community made detailed considerations on many aspects, and it was deemed optimal choice by consensus. To be fair to the voters, one has to interpret the 2006 Yes vote as the voters themselves expressing this consensus. This doesnt mean there arent other good choices out there (The St John's property....if seller was interested).
2. almost certainly it has best chance of quickest start and finish date. This not only solves overcrowding quickest....but also minimizes construction costs

But to "buy" items 1&2 (and of course the high caliber facility we demand for all our students), it may cost about $30 mil for land and $105 mil for the building, or $135 million total.

Maybe finding the extra $10 million is close to being doable, as implied by MM. As mentioned by other posters, there is value in this extra money in terms of staying with the consensus optimal site and having soonest possible project start.

[Arch]

eagledad said:

lacy said:

I read the article in the Trib today and Vickers is quoted as saying we need to look at the enrollment numbers.

Before we pay an extra $15 million, this certainly makes sense to me.

Based on MM's comments, it seems that some members of the school board will spend anything to get this property.

I almost hate to say this, but I agree with you totally on this Lacy.

School Board - Show all of us the enrollment numbers, now, or I can't support going any further.

We've already established that we need a school. Now we're just haggling over the price.

[wvhsparent]

Agreed - we need the school, but maybe not a soon as 1st thought.

[bob]

wvhsparent said:

Agreed - we need the school, but maybe not a soon as 1st thought.

well over the next 4 years starting with this year, the HSs will have 1252 more students

HS size for the next 8 years using last year enrollment numbers


9154 This is last year's first grade class as freshman
9088
9159
9218
9175
9022
8778
8311 Current HS

[Arch]

We could always throw money into a pit implementing a 'temporary solution' before building the school, then when we actually get around to it we can complain about how much more it now costs and how the SB shirked their responsibility to the tax payer by throwing money down a bottomless pit implementing yet another temporary solution when they should have built the school in the first place because the difference in land price now will be nothing compared to the future ongoing rise in costs and other stop-gap measures.

[bob]

archwinsome said:

We could always throw money into a pit implementing a 'temporary solution' before building the school, then when we actually get around to it we can complain about how much more it now costs and how the SB shirked their responsibility to the tax payer by throwing money down a bottomless pit implementing yet another temporary solution when they should have built the school in the first place because the difference in land price now will be nothing compared to the future ongoing rise in costs and other stop-gap measures.

Sophomore campuses? ;D