|
|
Post by rew on Oct 27, 2007 8:59:24 GMT -6
Your HO doesn't count for much, unless you can tell ne you are a registered architect. A school is a custom building, w retention ponds, pkng lts, egressrds,athletic fields. It's not some builder's model you slap on any old 1/4 acre lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 27, 2007 9:02:37 GMT -6
The promise was to not come back to the taxpayers for it... Spending more money was not out of the question... just coming back to the taxpayers for it was. All in all though, I'd still open up a little wider to just get it done. I've had people underestimate a job and apologize about it and admit they messed up the estimate.. I still payed them the proper amount (what it should have been) because we all make mistakes. I know that's not the norm of behavior around here, but that's the way I am about it. We need the school, build the ()#*&$ school and make it as equal as possible in the best location possible. Duh, things go over budget.. Welcome to reality. At the end of the day, the kids need the school. OK How about this then arch....... Build the school as planned on the BB site. For all overages make a special taxing dist to encompass the MVHS attendance area to pay for those overages....Would that be OK with you? Yes, I would be. Will they retroactively adjust everyone's taxes for the extra NV tax package too, then the 7 renovations to WVHS? It's needed.. build it... |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Oct 27, 2007 9:14:02 GMT -6
Your HO doesn't count for much, unless you can tell ne you are a registered architect. A school is a custom building, w retention ponds, pkng lts, egressrds,athletic fields. It's not some builder's model you slap on any old 1/4 acre lot. No I am not, but I come from a family of Civil Engineers, so I do know what I speak of. |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Oct 27, 2007 9:14:17 GMT -6
I don't see how they're going to get any property in the district for less than $20M (that's $250/acre and I'd say that's unrealistic), And we know walking away from BB is going to cost us a min of $6M. Please, somebody show me a greater cost saving than $6M.
I am almost to the point of saying, if we can't afford BB, than we probably can't afford the third HS.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Oct 27, 2007 9:18:24 GMT -6
OK How about this then arch....... Build the school as planned on the BB site. For all overages make a special taxing dist to encompass the MVHS attendance area to pay for those overages....Would that be OK with you? Yes, I would be. Will they retroactively adjust everyone's taxes for the extra NV tax package too, then the 7 renovations to WVHS? It's needed.. build it... Most renovations to WVHS were done at a time when it was the only school, so yes I paid for those...even before I had kids there. NVHS stuff would then result in a retroactive refund to me and my northern bretheren. So go ahead and propose to the SB that you are willing to incur a special taxing dist to pay for the "extras". I am not sure how it would go over to the rest of the area though. |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Oct 27, 2007 9:30:32 GMT -6
What willthe SB do, if nothing pans out cheaper??
|
|
|
|
Post by proschool on Oct 27, 2007 9:34:56 GMT -6
I don't see how they're going to get any property in the district for less than $20M (that's $250/acre and I'd say that's unrealistic), And we know walking away from BB is going to cost us a min of $6M. Please, somebody show me a greater cost saving than $6M. I am almost to the point of saying, if we can't afford BB, than we probably can't afford the third HS. That would have been the best solution. They also could have started condemnation proceedings the day after the referendum failed. People were confused by the lack of good information and the abundance of poor information at the time of the 2005 referendum. I knew that when they were given the right information they would turn around and support a high school. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Oct 27, 2007 9:35:16 GMT -6
What willthe SB do, if nothing pans out cheaper?? That, my friend, is the 17 Million dollar question........ |
|
|
|
Post by proschool on Oct 27, 2007 9:39:45 GMT -6
What willthe SB do, if nothing pans out cheaper?? I don't know what their choices are given the wording of the referendum. I think they are bound to building a high school. I would support a cheaper district wide freshman center but I don't know if the referendum would allow that. They can raise some money by selling the wheatland elementary site. They can cut programs at the other two schools and use the money for construction costs. |
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Oct 27, 2007 11:34:50 GMT -6
I agree with Macy that it is only fair and equitable that MV have the same amenities as NV & WV. I think a pool and athletic field is something that the Board should make every attempt to include in the new school, and it appears that they are (man, I thought I'd never see the day where I made the statement "I agree with Macy"). How do you reconcile the above statement with the following one you made in a another thread: ..... You can certainly argue that if MV weren't built with a stadium or pool that the students were not being treated "identiical" and that WV & NV students will have the "better"experience. justvote (and others), I do see the point and I do agree that if the community and SB feels pool and stadium are essential to make things equiable....then I support making every possible attempt to get them build with the new school. To me, I just see it as lesser priority. Many other areas (maybe not around here so much....) have county-wide or area HS's that share stadiums. But if it deemed by the community to not be the norm, I am ok with that. I would say however, that our HS's having pools and stadium as baseline essentials should go into the category of "we dont really know how good we have it here." |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Oct 27, 2007 11:59:46 GMT -6
OK, since I am the only one posting this morn, I will take advantage of the bully pulpit. ETA Guess some sleepy heads woke up! ;D After the 05 ref failed, those of us involved knew the ref was victimized. We were caught sleeping at the wheel. We BEGGED HC and the SB to buy BB at the price back then and give us another shot at the ref. They didn't do it. They could have actually had land, before selecting boundaries and drawing plans. Gee, what a novel idea. This is news to me....really? where were the funds for this coming from? Enlighten me. I didn't work on the '05 ref but I was one of those emailing and going to the board meetings begging them to buy all 80. my understanding was that they only had the money for the 25 @ $257 and not enough for the additional 55 @ $240 - in addition, I thought the 55@ $240 deal was contingent on the referendum passage, so was it even valid when the ref failed? |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Oct 27, 2007 12:15:21 GMT -6
OK, maybe this is crazy, but "desperate times, call for desperate measures", right?
The Helen V Brach Foundation, Raymond F Simon, President has a FAX # 312-372-0290.
What if Mr Simon received hundreds of faxes asking them to direct their attorneys to negotiate with the SB to come to a fair deal on their portion of the land,
to help further the education of secondary students in our community
and the library can be named the Brach Center for Learning
or the Auditorium can be named the Brach Center for Performing Arts.
And we can mention that the mascot will be the mustangs, we all know Helen was a horse lover!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by sam2 on Oct 27, 2007 12:30:47 GMT -6
I think rew has a good idea here. One suggestion, let's not ask for a "fair deal" as Brach likely thinks we have a fair deal now and the jury concurs.
But why not appeal for a "below market" sale, and I especially like the naming rights idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Oct 27, 2007 12:32:45 GMT -6
From what I have heard, Brach isn't the problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by rew on Oct 27, 2007 12:47:06 GMT -6
But Bob can't Brach sell their interst for less than Brodie, or can't the foundation return money to the SD in the form of grants???
|
|
