|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Nov 9, 2007 10:51:32 GMT -6
OK I got the list from M2 now. It is the same as Momto4's list
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Nov 9, 2007 12:00:39 GMT -6
Personal challenge to M2 - work "FUD" (or fear, uncertainty and doubt) into the next article. I'll give ya credit for using any two of the three  I am really questioning the wisdom of granting that interview. All it has done is caused a giant FUD storm! |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Nov 9, 2007 12:02:23 GMT -6
You can have your opinion about HIDING, but until the ink is dry on a piece of paper, they have not closed a deal; to me, that means they are still in negotiations. I'm not sure what other step they can be in if they haven't made a purchase yet. Please enlighten us, since you feel this is all just a big hiding game. No offense arch, but I agree with lacy on this. If they wait until the ink is dry on a deal, it's too late for any community input. I think at some point, before the final deal, and with sufficient time (say 2 weeks) for community input they will need to bring the options out, discuss them in a open meeting and allow community input (speakers). To do otherwise will leave many feeling resentment and that the community was not involved. The link to email the SB has always been there for years, so there has always been a way to channel input to the board. I do agree, and too would like to see THE FINALISTS and THEIR NUMBERS spelled out for community input. Let me restate that another way: People have been crabbing/complaining/crying/whining/voiceing concern/whatever verb or action phrase you want to use to see FULL DUE DILIGENCE for the sites. Coming out and speaking of things WITHOUT that being done does not give the community what they DEMANDED. So, in essence, people are complaining because they are getting exactly what they asked for... I believe it's not done for all sites yet, and coming out with information now would only leave more unanswered questions or unknown numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Nov 9, 2007 12:06:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Nov 9, 2007 12:07:32 GMT -6
Hey so is anybody planning on attending Monday nite's regularly scheduled meeting?
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Nov 9, 2007 12:09:34 GMT -6
Hey so is anybody planning on attending Monday nite's regularly scheduled meeting? Who's bringing the pitchforks and torches ? |
|
|
|
Post by casey on Nov 9, 2007 14:45:45 GMT -6
Q. Do you have any idea what you've spent so far on the legal process? Metzger: I haven't asked (Dave Holm, assistant superintendent for business) but I'd be surprised if our costs are over $1 million. I haven't been posting lately because there was nothing new - just boundary discussions. This new interview is a good one though. I'm ready to start a David Letterman Top Ten List of Favorite MM Quotes. I think the above would definitely make my list! "Golly gee, I have no idea what legal costs are. I didn't know that I should ask. Do you think I should? Let me ask Dave Holm and then I'll get right back to you....." Come on! This is who is leading our SB? Many of you are forgiving and supportive of our existing SB. I am not. I did NOT vote for MM and for that I can be thankful (not that it changes anything). Unfortunately, we are stuck at the will of the SB. They will let us know when it is signed, sealed, and delivered. How many of you would have voted for a proposed referendum that stated "we'll build a 3rd HS, not sure where, not sure how much it will cost, and not sure when it will be built (oh, and for you boundary people, not sure where your kids will go)." Just trust us because we know what's best! Sorry, but I don't think that kind of referendum would have passed but in essence that's what we're working with. I know I'm a broken record here, but I'm curious what happens if the 2009 Operating Referendum doesn't pass. What then? We may (or may not) have a partially built HS and we'll need the funds to get it up and going. Maybe we won't be working with the same SB though, eh? Luckily, our fearless leader, MM, will still be aboard. Speaking of which, did anyone else find it interesting that every time Dr. D. made a comment, MM felt the need to spin it around to get it just right? Who's leading who? |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Nov 9, 2007 14:50:32 GMT -6
I know I'm a broken record here, but I'm curious what happens if the 2009 Operating Referendum doesn't pass. What then? We may (or may not) have a partially built HS and we'll need the funds to get it up and going. I have always assumed that if the operating ref does not pass, all non-essentials (sports, music, art, pe, all extracurriculars) will be cut across the district to get MV up and running. Our new super seems more than happy to increase class sizes, so there is step 1. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Nov 9, 2007 14:52:27 GMT -6
If you are curious or worried about the passing of the 2009 operating referendum, will you roll up your sleeves and help get it passed?
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Nov 9, 2007 14:53:41 GMT -6
That the one thing that I don't like about him is that quote.
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Nov 9, 2007 14:57:33 GMT -6
If you are curious or worried about the passing of the 2009 operating referendum, will you roll up your sleeves and help get it passed? Yes, as that's something that I've definitely done in the past. I sat at the good old bank and called plenty of people urging them to support the referendum. That being said, I hope that the 2009 Referendum is something palatable that I feel I can support. |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Nov 9, 2007 15:08:06 GMT -6
Speaking of which, did anyone else find it interesting that every time Dr. D. made a comment, MM felt the need to spin it around to get it just right? Who's leading who? Did you read that comment about falling in a ditch? Seriously, thank goodness MM was there. He is at least articulate. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Nov 9, 2007 15:11:43 GMT -6
What I am worried about is that 09 ref doesn't pass, the 3rd HS is being built, equals class sizes of 35 becomes the norm.
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Nov 9, 2007 15:19:04 GMT -6
I think many people voted for the referendum based on boundaries. (Yes - I know that was not part of the referendum question). That is how they got so many people out was because of that issue. It is clearly stated in the article that if another location is chosen, there will have to be adjustments to the boundaries. This whole article just states what a complete mess this whole situation is at the taxpayers expense. If our SBpresident/attorney has no clue as to what all this is costing us, we are in real trouble.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Nov 9, 2007 15:34:07 GMT -6
.... If our SBpresident/attorney has no clue as to what all this is costing us, we are in real trouble. Did you know exactly how much the line item was for just the nails that are in your house holding it together? Did you still buy the house? If there was a budgeted amount for legal fees and that ceiling (with percentage water marks) hasn't been reached, then it's really not the most important issue nor is it a 'must know to the dollar figure' factoid. If the finance guy pipes up and says "We are within X amount (dollars or percentage) of what we budgeted for this" then it's time to bring that issue to the forefront. |
|
