Macom site consequences

[macy]

archwinsome said:

macy said:

??

It was a reply based on what was being replied to. I'll parse it more clearly:

Obtaining a land and starting to build a HS do (solve problems). I was agreeing with you, spitting doesn't, so *WE* should stop it.

Thanks for clarifying. I was not being sarcastic, just didn't get what you meant.

I think many of us want to obtain land and start to build a HS. The disagreement is should we overpay for land priced well beyond what we "anticipated" (does that work?) without looking at other available land.

[Arch]

Ludacrious amounts are paid all the time for things that are NEEDED.

I believe the phrase is 'bent over a barrel'. It's a horrible feeling to be in but it happens some times. We can take ourselves off the barrel and stay focused on the goal: Getting a 3rd HS delivered for fall of 2009. I wish I could have appreciated and embraced that quote back in March. With the delays we might miss that time frame, but we need to deliver it ASAP. If not, I can just imagine what we'll *REALLY* be complaining about in 2 years....

[macy]

archwinsome said:

Ludacrious amounts are paid all the time for things that are NEEDED.

I believe the phrase is 'bent over a barrel'. It's a horrible feeling to be in but it happens some times. We can take ourselves off the barrel and stay focused on the goal: Getting a 3rd HS delivered for fall of 2009. I wish I could have appreciated and embraced that quote back in March. With the delays we might miss that time frame, but we need to deliver it ASAP. If not, I can just imagine what we'll *REALLY* be complaining about in 2 years....

Yes ludacrious amounts are paid all the time. But... there is an accountability factor here I think that just cant be ignored. If there is a way find less expensive viable land, it needs to be explored, evaluated, presented to the public prior to making a final decision.

I won't even comment about being "bent over a barrel". Yikes!

[Arch]

lacy said:

archwinsome said:

Yes, they did:

"If that's not what the SB anticipated (and only what they offered), then they lied to us. Plain and simple."

Something was clearly wrong with their analysis then - because they were supremely confident but way, way wrong. I'm just exploring all options for the situation we're in. It's gotta be something.

You were the one that brought up language such as "offered vs. anticipated". So it begged the question if they were ever completely truthful with the voters.

And I think that's a valid question.

In a negotiation and with a pending trial, I (and many others) did not expect them to throw out the highest possible number. There's no room for negotiations at that point.

Did they underestimate it? Absolutely.. Everyone sees the number. Of course they way underestimated what a jury may potentially have come back with. Were they truthful w/ the voters? Yes, I believe they did believe in their heart of hearts that the dollar price tag would not come back anywhere near as high as it did.

So, what seems like a lie to some may simply be a clueless guess that turned out to be completely wrong.

[Arch]

macy said:

archwinsome said:

Ludacrious amounts are paid all the time for things that are NEEDED.

I believe the phrase is 'bent over a barrel'. It's a horrible feeling to be in but it happens some times. We can take ourselves off the barrel and stay focused on the goal: Getting a 3rd HS delivered for fall of 2009. I wish I could have appreciated and embraced that quote back in March. With the delays we might miss that time frame, but we need to deliver it ASAP. If not, I can just imagine what we'll *REALLY* be complaining about in 2 years....

Yes ludacrious amounts are paid all the time. But... there is an accountability factor here I think that just cant be ignored. If there is a way find less expensive viable land, it needs to be explored, evaluated, presented to the public prior to making a final decision.

I could buy a cheap sleeping bag and try to sleep in single digits this winter w/ the scout troops. Or, I could spend a bit more and get a better bag and be better off because it happens to have many plus things that overall just simply work better together. The bag may not be worth the $180 but it's worth far more than 3 cheap $30 bags.

Bad analogy maybe.. but sometimes price isn't the most important thing to consider.

[macy]

archwinsome said:

macy said:

Yes ludacrious amounts are paid all the time. But... there is an accountability factor here I think that just cant be ignored. If there is a way find less expensive viable land, it needs to be explored, evaluated, presented to the public prior to making a final decision.

I could buy a cheap sleeping bag and try to sleep in single digits this winter w/ the scout troops. Or, I could spend a bit more and get a better bag and be better off because it happens to have many plus things that overall just simply work better together. The bag may not be worth the $180 but it's worth far more than 3 cheap $30 bags.

Bad analogy maybe.. but sometimes price isn't the most important thing to consider.

Tell that to the taxpayers when the district goes out in 2009.

[lacy]

archwinsome said:

macy said:

Yes ludacrious amounts are paid all the time. But... there is an accountability factor here I think that just cant be ignored. If there is a way find less expensive viable land, it needs to be explored, evaluated, presented to the public prior to making a final decision.

I could buy a cheap sleeping bag and try to sleep in single digits this winter w/ the scout troops. Or, I could spend a bit more and get a better bag and be better off because it happens to have many plus things that overall just simply work better together. The bag may not be worth the $180 but it's worth far more than 3 cheap $30 bags.

Bad analogy maybe.. but sometimes price isn't the most important thing to consider.

If we overspend on the land, it will take away from the other things that matter too. (like the amenities of the building which are part of our kids' education too)

And if we spend the land-cash donations on this, they can't be spent on anything else useful.

Expensive land won't educate my kids.

[Arch]

We'll overspend more moving south due to delays and other 'issues' with the site.

I'll wager a nice cold one on that. That will put the 2009 referendum even more in jeopardy.

Sometimes one has to choose the evil they know instead of the one they don't know.

[warriorpride]

Hi all - I have nothing new to add other than to reiterate that I wouldn't give PL the time of day, ley alone bail him out of some land that he isn't bulding houses on nearly as quickly as he wants to - and, of course it's all due to WV and NOT the downturn in the housing market.

Actually, gatormom was kind enough to point out that I had 999 posts on this board, so I just wanted to say that this is my 1000th post.

Thanks, and now back to your regularly scheduled discussions...

[warriorpride]

macy said:

archwinsome said:

It was a reply based on what was being replied to. I'll parse it more clearly:

Obtaining a land and starting to build a HS do (solve problems). I was agreeing with you, spitting doesn't, so *WE* should stop it.

Thanks for clarifying. I was not being sarcastic, just didn't get what you meant.

I think many of us want to obtain land and start to build a HS. The disagreement is should we overpay for land priced well beyond what we "anticipated" (does that work?) without looking at other available land.

Exactly - many in 204 want to obtain land and start to build a HS, and to get it opened soon, too. If you start with that criteria as your guidelines, there aren't many options, and it sounds like the SB is going to work on that over the next few weeks.

[macy]

warriorpride said:

Hi all - I have nothing new to add other than to reiterate that I wouldn't give PL the time of day, ley alone bail him out of some land that he isn't bulding houses on nearly as quickly as he wants to - and, of course it's all due to WV and NOT the downturn in the housing market.

Actually, gatormom was kind enough to point out that I had 999 posts on this board, so I just wanted to say that this is my 1000th post.
Thanks, and now back you yoru regularly scheduled discussions

1000! Congratulations... we need something to celebrate lately!

Keep em comin'!

[macy]

warriorpride said:

macy said:

Thanks for clarifying. I was not being sarcastic, just didn't get what you meant.

I think many of us want to obtain land and start to build a HS. The disagreement is should we overpay for land priced well beyond what we "anticipated" (does that work?) without looking at other available land.

Exactly - many in 204 want to obtain land and start to build a HS, and to get it opened soon, too. If you start with that criteria as your guidelines, there aren't many options, and it sounds like the SB is going to work on that over the next few weeks.

Well, what do you expect?

Everyone to just go, okay... forget the other options you told us you had all along. just spend it and be done with it.

I think that's a major mistake. For now and any future request for funds.

I am not asking for other "criteria" at this point. I'm simply seeking what we've been told would be presented if the BB land came it too high- options.

[macy]

archwinsome said:

We'll overspend more moving south due to delays and other 'issues' with the site.

I'll wager a nice cold one on that. That will put the 2009 referendum even more in jeopardy.

Sometimes one has to choose the evil they know instead of the one they don't know.

I won't even begin to "wager" until we hear what the result is of the SB meeting with Macom or St. Johns.

Without knowing any of the "real" numbers, how can you state any other option than BB will cost more?

If it were that simple, why isn't the SB telling us that right now and putting us all out of our misery?

We need to see the "real" numbers. Not just the ones we are all speculating on.

[Arch]

Short answer, Macy: Yes, with some qualifiers.


Sometimes, things just won't be perfect. One has to stay focused on delivering a HS on time for the students who need it.

I am seeing 'options' in the form of how to afford the land for the site that was selected as the best for the district.

People can choose to look at is an 'at all costs' but that's simply not true. If the financing can be done with what we have to work with and it moves forward, that's exactly what the voting public expected them to do.

If there's no way to make the money work to afford the land and the building, then it's not going to happen there. Right now, I believe they are working through ALL OPTIONS on BB because a clock is ticking. If it can be done, it will be. If it can't, it won't be and we'll walk away and pay a nice hefty Mea Culpa fee and be right back to square one.

[macy]

archwinsome said:

Short answer, Macy: Yes, with some qualifiers.


Sometimes, things just won't be perfect. One has to stay focused on delivering a HS on time for the students who need it.

I am seeing 'options' in the form of how to afford the land for the site that was selected as the best for the district.

People can choose to look at is an 'at all costs' but that's simply not true. If the financing can be done with what we have to work with and it moves forward, that's exactly what the voting public expected them to do.

If there's no way to make the money work to afford the land and the building, then it's not going to happen there. Right now, I believe they are working through ALL OPTIONS on BB because a clock is ticking. If it can be done, it will be. If it can't, it won't be and we'll walk away and pay a nice hefty Mea Culpa fee and be right back to square one.

if the "on time" factor was the most important criteria, without a doubt the wait for BB has failed us. Clearly, "on time" (in my opinion) has not been at the top of the priority list until now... Delivering the HS by 2009 really couldn't have been at the top of the priority list.. If so, why did we wait for BB?

Secondly, you cannot assume without knowing the facts that another option is not possible.

Have you met with Turner recently? Do you know the ramifications of a delay in construction in terms of cost? Also, it would be interesting to know how much the price has escalated since 2006 when the referendum passed. That would give us an idea on how much we are really paying for having to wait this long for BB.


Do you know the cost of walking away? What is the final amount we will pay for attorney fees?

Do you know the price per acre we would pay for another parcel?

Do you know how long it would take to get another parcel ready?

Do you know how much we can count on in "land cash" donations and interest on bonds, etc?

What you are missing from what I've been saying all along is that some of us may need to see that information in order to justify spending for BB.

You may not need that information to be confident in your decision, but many do. I guess you may have all those answers in your head... I don't. I'm not going to guess at them. I'd like some real information before I decide whether or not it's best for us to proceed with BB.