|
|
Post by macy on Dec 4, 2007 6:57:08 GMT -6
casey, I am trying to understand the scope of the situation you are describing. My figuring says there will be maybe two ES communities that will have an unusual commute compared to what they would have had with BB. That is a relatively small percentage of the district. Yes, this concerns me and consideration MUST be given to this. It is certainly not ideal. I believe you are wrong to say that that "most of the school will be filled with a 30-40 min commute". If this comes to pass...Maybe there are other ways the district can "make it up" to these affected areas. For example, a good close MS assignment. Or attend a MS that is not split. I do believe energy and effort directed to those plans would be a bit more constructive than some crazy lawsuit. It will likely be at least 3 MS's that will have that commute: 1/ Cowlishaw 2/ Watts 3/ some choice between WE / Gombert -- and you will have other areas like Steck - McCarty split -- this is NOT a small % of the district affected - it is the majority of the 3rd HS. There is no making up for it -- where Watts is located the closest middle school is Gregory. That is not going to happen as that belongs to NV. I believe Gregory may also be the closest MS for Cowlishaw ( Still ?). Then what - you send us there - or to Still and all the kids there go to WV or NV and you bus us to the far ends of the district for HS ? How does that make up for anything - if anything it makes it worse ! And what makes up for the fact that all through HS - when many kids are in cars for a good portion of that time - they get that 30+ minute commute ? ( 45 on the bus as we have 32-35 minutes now to Hill ). The time when it is most dangerous, a northern school makes it more so for those kids. Not mine - and I make no apologies for that opinion. If they told you your HS was at the Bolingbrook site, how well would that sit ? And then as a make up they sent you to a closer MS, but everyone else there was going to WV ? The northern sites are unworkable....without major hardships, and for more than 2 areas...that is just the way it is. It is not meant to be rude to anyone living north, the fact is that the population of the district is heavily south, and that is what drives that. No area should have to go to the furthest HS from it's home.....especially when that commute is twice what the other 2 high schools are - period. When someone shows me a plan that populates a northern HS without this level of disruption, then I would get behind it. I just do not see how that is possible - it is geographic/population driven. This is why if BB fails ( and it appears it has ) - I would fully support a southern site. A southern site does not change the current commute for anyone in the north ( to WV) - and for those potentially burdened with a horrendous commute ( Watts / Cowlishaw/ WE / Gombert ) - they now get WV or NV -- the same commute or slightly less than they have today depending on the area. No one is incrementally 'penalized' commute wise compared to the situation they had when they moved in from a HS standpoint. Tweak the MS's if need be - as that is all bus commute and far far less extra curriculars, especially those that run very late into the evening. I have no problem living with the MS commute to Hill because that is what I signed up for 17 years ago when I moved in.....it is less than optimal distance wise, but it is what it always has been.....it doesn't get any worse. DrWho Well written and I couldn't agree with you more. This statement you made says it all- " When someone shows me a plan that populates a northern HS without this level of disruption, then I would get behind it. I just do not see how that is possible - it is geographic/population driven." |
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Dec 4, 2007 7:00:25 GMT -6
Good point- title1parent/Gatormom I did say that a while ago. I think it's good I'm being reminded. It's not that I have a different opinion now, it's just I'm getting frustrated and angry due to the lack of information as I'm sure many of you are as well. I guess I thought mistakely at the time I made that statement thinking that our opinions would be taken into account (all of our opinions) and we would have a much quicker resolution. The SB/district may have some very good reasons for chosing a northern site, we don't know them and probably won't until the decision is made. Thanks for the explanation macy. You are correct, I think we are all frustrated by the lack of information and a strong desire to move this thing forward. |
|
|
|
Post by title1parent on Dec 4, 2007 7:33:44 GMT -6
Good point- title1parent/Gatormom I did say that a while ago. I think it's good I'm being reminded. It's not that I have a different opinion now, it's just I'm getting frustrated and angry due to the lack of information as I'm sure many of you are as well. I guess I thought mistakely at the time I made that statement thinking that our opinions would be taken into account (all of our opinions) and we would have a much quicker resolution. The SB/district may have some very good reasons for chosing a northern site, we don't know them and probably won't until the decision is made. Thanks Macy, I appreciate the clarification. I too agree with the frustration. |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Dec 4, 2007 7:59:37 GMT -6
The reason BB was chosen was because it's boundaries could be drawn to not disrupt walkers, move the fewest students, lessen commutes, etc. I would hope that if the distirct has to consider alternative sites, they would use the same criteria to make their decision.
But me, I'll stick with BB, added costs and all.
|
|
|
|
Post by rew on Dec 4, 2007 8:02:21 GMT -6
Is the SD really using Wheatland for storage?? Why can't we sell the property for $580k/acre. Even if the district needs a preschool site, surely we can find something less valuable to plop it on.
ETA..can we offer it to BB as partial payment? Then they can sit on it as long as they like. Prime commercial property.
|
|
|
|
Post by title1parent on Dec 4, 2007 8:06:11 GMT -6
I am aware that Sodexho is using some of the rooms for offices in Wheatland. Not that it matters, but the building is being used.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Dec 4, 2007 16:25:10 GMT -6
Is the SD really using Wheatland for storage?? Why can't we sell the property for $580k/acre. Even if the district needs a preschool site, surely we can find something less valuable to plop it on. ETA..can we offer it to BB as partial payment? Then they can sit on it as long as they like. Prime commercial property. They used to use the Really old Granger (at 59 and Ogden - where the Shell station is now) as a storage building. They need to store stuff somewhere...might as well use a building they already own than rent out storage space. |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Dec 4, 2007 16:28:10 GMT -6
That corner on Rt 59...probably $6M - $9M worth of land...kind of a steep price for a SD storage?
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Dec 4, 2007 16:38:06 GMT -6
That corner on Rt 59...probably $6M - $9M worth of land...kind of a steep price for a SD storage? That was long ago - mid/late 80's when 59 was a 4 lane rd and Ogden was a 2 lane rd. and not when you already own it if you are speaking of Wheatland. |
|
|
|
Post by casey on Dec 5, 2007 9:56:02 GMT -6
As rew pointed out, it is ridiculous to leave such costly land sitting underutilized. You can't look at it as "we already own it, so what?". You need to look at it as lost income. If Wheatland is truly just sitting there serving as storage space (I thought it was housing some of the SD preschool  ) the lost potential is insane. We should be looking at selling it off and if we need more storage space let's look north - I hear there's cheaper land that way ;D. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 5, 2007 12:50:17 GMT -6
It is housing the pre-school.
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Dec 5, 2007 13:11:27 GMT -6
As far as I know, the majority of preschool classes are still being held at the HC building but there are several classes taking place at Wheatland. Wheatland is not special needs equipped with regards to stairs, etc. Preschool parents were given a choice as to which site and there were advantages being offered to those that chose the Wheatland site.
|
|
|
|
Post by harry on Dec 8, 2007 21:53:52 GMT -6
What a telling post. This will be the last time I respond to your nonsense. It is petty and the telling thing is how bitter you I am not going to have my daughter drive 20 miles or more round trip to and frond HS - it is unsafe ( especially in winter ) - and she is also not gong to spend 90 - 120 minute a day on a bus to get there. And no she is not a spoiled If you want to continue to bash everyone and everything around you - go ahead, you'll do so without me, |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Dec 8, 2007 22:02:42 GMT -6
mmMM fermented sugars night.
|
|
|
|
Post by harry on Dec 8, 2007 22:03:53 GMT -6
mmMM fermented sugars night. fermented sugars everyday here.... it's all about everyone's reality |
|
) the lost potential is insane. We should be looking at selling it off and if we need more storage space let's look north - I hear there's cheaper land that way ;D.