SUN LTE 2/25

[wvhsparent]

Letters to the Editor


February 25, 2008

Board, administrators are owed an apology

We as a community of District 204 parents undoubtedly owe our administrators and members of our school board an apology for what we have put them through these last several months of determining a new site for our third high school and drawing of new school boundaries.
These volunteer board members have spent countless hours away from their own families and careers attempting to do what is best for all students of this great district, only to be criticized for their every move, as if they are the enemy.

And perhaps our administrators have a few other tasks to manage in running a school district than listening to the constant whine of unhappy parents.

We thank you for all that you have done on behalf of students today and for many years to come! Let's move forward and put the ugliness behind us.

Janine Horne

Naperville

[Arch]

Thank you Brookdale Racquet Club.

What a change 2 years makes.

[warriorpride]

wvhsparent said:

Letters to the Editor

February 24, 2008

Education should be fiscally responsible

In recent letters, Sue Anderson and Jamie Berdt each took exception to my recent letter regarding Benet Academy's highly acclaimed $16 million addition that is to be completed in a mere 15 months versus District 204's $150 million multiyear boondoggle that has yet to actually even secure a contract for land much less any facility for teaching.
Ms. Anderson countered that Benet has 1,294 students while District 204 has 8,182 students. This means that Benet's addition is at a cost of $12,364 per student while District 204's is already running at $18,332 per high school student and is likely to go higher given the district's history of cost overruns when Neuqua Valley High School was built.
...

I'd be very interested to hear how comparing the Benet apple to the MV orange is at all relevant, fair, sensible, or even non-laughable.

- What capacity is being added to Benet? Probably not quite 3,000
- What does the cost per current number of students have to do with anything? This is a one time construction cost that will impact thousands of student every year (relieving crowding in HS AND MS), over many years.

[wvhsparent]

Paul White doesn't let a little things like facts or relevance get in his way.

[doctorwho]

wvhsparent said:

Letters to the Editor


February 25, 2008

Board, administrators are owed an apology

We as a community of District 204 parents undoubtedly owe our administrators and members of our school board an apology for what we have put them through these last several months of determining a new site for our third high school and drawing of new school boundaries.
These volunteer board members have spent countless hours away from their own families and careers attempting to do what is best for all students of this great district, only to be criticized for their every move, as if they are the enemy.

And perhaps our administrators have a few other tasks to manage in running a school district than listening to the constant whine of unhappy parents.

We thank you for all that you have done on behalf of students today and for many years to come! Let's move forward and put the ugliness behind us.

Janine Horne

Naperville

Amazing that this comes from a Brookdale resident - the apology should start with your neighbors who voted 80% NO based on BB and the last boundary set. Unless she is one ofthe 20% - then this is the height of hypocracy.

The whine of unhappy parents must have been deafening in her area the last year or so.

[doctorwho]

warriorpride said:

wvhsparent said:

Letters to the Editor

February 24, 2008

Education should be fiscally responsible

In recent letters, Sue Anderson and Jamie Berdt each took exception to my recent letter regarding Benet Academy's highly acclaimed $16 million addition that is to be completed in a mere 15 months versus District 204's $150 million multiyear boondoggle that has yet to actually even secure a contract for land much less any facility for teaching.
Ms. Anderson countered that Benet has 1,294 students while District 204 has 8,182 students. This means that Benet's addition is at a cost of $12,364 per student while District 204's is already running at $18,332 per high school student and is likely to go higher given the district's history of cost overruns when Neuqua Valley High School was built.
...

I'd be very interested to hear how comparing the Benet apple to the MV orange is at all relevant, fair, sensible, or even non-laughable.

- What capacity is being added to Benet? Probably not quite 3,000
- What does the cost per current number of students have to do with anything? This is a one time construction cost that will impact thousands of student every year (relieving crowding in HS AND MS), over many years.

It truly is apples and oranges as Benet's addition is a state of the art science facility & labs - as an addition to the school, not increasing school capacity as I understand it at all. There will also be a new cafeteria located there. While I am thrilled itis opening,and will then allow the current science facilitiesto be gutted for state of the art physics facilities - there is no correlation to building a new HS

[concerned]

Funny how one can have such a view after getting what they want. Sure that letter would not of been written it the site was still BB.

[204vet]

Just an observation here. I am a Brookdale resident who voted Yes to the referendum last year even though I, along with my neighbors, had many concerns and frustrations with the process and some of the details of the outcome. It was not a happy vote for me but I truly felt it was for the good of the district and that smaller high schools overall would be best for all. So I voted yes, quite reluctantly.

So many of you seem to be blaming Brookdale for voting 80% no. Put yourself in their shoes. Wait, some of you are actually in those shoes because the location is not ideal for your area, the commute is long, you don't feel your voices were heard. etc. etc. As a Brookdale resident, I know exactly how that feels. OK, if the referendum were held today, feeling as you feel, do you vote "Yes" because it's for the good of the district? I did. You are consistently berating Brookdale for having a majority vote "No" so can we assume you would do differently?

You can insist that the circumstances now are so much different than what was facing Brookdale last year and that you have much more legitimate reasons for voting "No" if the election were held today. It's not productive to start a compare and contrast of then vs. now and I"m not going to do it. I can tell you that I think feelings of frustration and disappointment are similar. As for Brookale, whining this whole last year, I didn't see that happen. People I know moved on and hoped that the issue of splitting Brookdale off from it's middle school alone would somehow be addressed with middle school boundary changes.

I don't feel that comfortable posting here but I just felt it needed to be said.

[doctorwho]

204vet said:

Just an observation here. I am a Brookdale resident who voted Yes to the referendum last year even though I, along with my neighbors, had many concerns and frustrations with the process and some of the details of the outcome. It was not a happy vote for me but I truly felt it was for the good of the district and that smaller high schools overall would be best for all. So I voted yes, quite reluctantly.

So many of you seem to be blaming Brookdale for voting 80% no. Put yourself in their shoes. Wait, some of you are actually in those shoes because the location is not ideal for your area, the commute is long, you don't feel your voices were heard. etc. etc. As a Brookdale resident, I know exactly how that feels. OK, if the referendum were held today, feeling as you feel, do you vote "Yes" because it's for the good of the district? I did. You are consistently berating Brookdale for having a majority vote "No" so can we assume you would do differently?

You can insist that the circumstances now are so much different than what was facing Brookdale last year and that you have much more legitimate reasons for voting "No" if the election were held today. It's not productive to start a compare and contrast of then vs. now and I"m not going to do it. I can tell you that I think feelings of frustration and disappointment are similar. As for Brookale, whining this whole last year, I didn't see that happen. People I know moved on and hoped that the issue of splitting Brookdale off from it's middle school alone would somehow be addressed with middle school boundary changes.

I don't feel that comfortable posting here but I just felt it needed to be said.

No one is claiming any area would have reacted differently - but remember one of the issues was the only ES from Hill to go to WVHS - and I absolutely agree that needed to be addressed and I thought it would be when ES and MS were done. I don't blame anyone for not having patience to wait for the fix I know would have come, I am not a patient man myself


However, you were remaining at the high school you currently were at, not going to the furthest HS ( NV) - and have an ES and MS walking distance - please compare that with some other fates. ( i.e. travel to 3rd closest MS - 3rd closest HS - and change high schools )

That being said the part that bothers me is not that the area voted no - what bothers me is the happy dance and suddenly many posters on here basically telling others to shut up now and move on. When the shoe was on the other foot you didn't like it - I would think the area would know better. So let's not confuse the no vote and the reasons for it with the fact that now suddenly being on board and telling others to suck it up and deal with it - ala the LTE !

deal ?

[Arch]

To be fair, 204Vet, the shoes are not anywhere near the same.

BD's commute did not grow longer under the old scenario. It remained exactly what it was, no change.
The land itself last time did not have physical 'issues' other than the price tag.

BD had 0 change from what has always happened for that area. Same HS as before.

Many have issues w/ the longer commute... It was no issue before.
Many have issues w/ the environmental safety uncertainty/ambiguity of the site... not an issue before.

I understand that they were unhappy before. As to why, I would hope someone could actually equate the downside of remaining at the HS you've always gone to into true detrimental figures (money, health and/or time)

[wvhsparent]

204vet said:

Just an observation here. I am a Brookdale resident who voted Yes to the referendum last year even though I, along with my neighbors, had many concerns and frustrations with the process and some of the details of the outcome. It was not a happy vote for me but I truly felt it was for the good of the district and that smaller high schools overall would be best for all. So I voted yes, quite reluctantly.

So many of you seem to be blaming Brookdale for voting 80% no. Put yourself in their shoes. Wait, some of you are actually in those shoes because the location is not ideal for your area, the commute is long, you don't feel your voices were heard. etc. etc. As a Brookdale resident, I know exactly how that feels. OK, if the referendum were held today, feeling as you feel, do you vote "Yes" because it's for the good of the district? I did. You are consistently berating Brookdale for having a majority vote "No" so can we assume you would do differently?

You can insist that the circumstances now are so much different than what was facing Brookdale last year and that you have much more legitimate reasons for voting "No" if the election were held today. It's not productive to start a compare and contrast of then vs. now and I"m not going to do it. I can tell you that I think feelings of frustration and disappointment are similar. As for Brookale, whining this whole last year, I didn't see that happen. People I know moved on and hoped that the issue of splitting Brookdale off from it's middle school alone would somehow be addressed with middle school boundary changes.

I don't feel that comfortable posting here but I just felt it needed to be said.

Very well written 204vet........You are right it's basically the same...there are few differences as noted above, but the basics are still the same.

[204vet]

Safety is of course an issue for all. I agree on that. I knew many of you would see it as a completely different situation. It always is when you are being affected. As to the idea that there is a downside to remaining at the high school you have always gone to...don't think there is. There was much more to it than that. Guess we need to agree to disagree.

[Arch]

204vet said:

Safety is of course an issue for all. I agree on that. I knew many of you would see it as a completely different situation. It always is when you are being affected. As to the idea that there is a downside to remaining at the high school you have always gone to...don't think there is. There was much more to it than that. Guess we need to agree to disagree.

This is where I would like to actually understand the 'more to it than that' parts.

If the downside did not exist remaining at WVHS last time, what was the downside that turned out such a vote percentage and some even said the PTA itself was drumming up a NO vote. What were the actual issues at that time? Please help those of us who were not aware of the issues at least understand them.

[204vet]

I agree with you Dr. Who that no one likes to be told to suck it up and move on. Seriously, I do understand that.

[204vet]

archwinsome said:

204vet said:

Safety is of course an issue for all. I agree on that. I knew many of you would see it as a completely different situation. It always is when you are being affected. As to the idea that there is a downside to remaining at the high school you have always gone to...don't think there is. There was much more to it than that. Guess we need to agree to disagree.

This is where I would like to actually understand the 'more to it than that' parts.

If the downside did not exist remaining at WVHS last time, what was the downside that turned out such a vote percentage and some even said the PTA itself was drumming up a NO vote. What were the actual issues at that time? Please help those of us who were not aware of the issues at least understand them.

It's in the archives. Lots of concerns were expressed. None of them having to do with remaining at WVHS as an issue. Sorry, not going to do it again.