SUN LTE 2/25

[doctorwho]

hopefull said:

wvhsparent said:

Well Watts could go to Still and Gombert to Gold.
Steck stays at Granger and Longwood stays at Hill.

Good geographic solution, but I wonder what the achievement at gold would be with 3 of the 4 lowest performing schools?

Then send Watts to Gold - situation resolved. It's not like we lose much distance wise from Hill and we gain much more than that back on the high school trip - when kids have more extracurriculars and also are driving.

Where do we sign ?

[wvhsparent]

doctorwho said:

hopefull said:

Good geographic solution, but I wonder what the achievement at gold would be with 3 of the 4 lowest performing schools?

Then send Watts to Gold - situation resolved. It's not like we lose much distance wise from Hill and we gain much more than that back on the high school trip - when kids have more extracurriculars and also are driving.

Where do we sign ?

There ya go...problem solved...I like it too.....WTG doc!!!!

[doctorwho]

wvhsparent said:

doctorwho said:

Then send Watts to Gold - situation resolved. It's not like we lose much distance wise from Hill and we gain much more than that back on the high school trip - when kids have more extracurriculars and also are driving.

Where do we sign ?

There ya go...problem solved...I like it too.....WTG doc!!!!

I wish there was some way to get this little engine that could train started, at least to be looked at-- I think it's a solid plan

Maybe if the SB and SD admin would have at least recognized Watts existed during the discussions this could have come up also -- since nothing was pre determined before the meeting

[rural]

doctorwho said:

I wish there was some way to get this train started, at least to be looked at-- I think it's a solid plan

Doc, I agree with the plan and could not understand why something like that wasn't implemented. But I think Arch was right about the can of worms for walkers, and that is why it was overlooked. I don't mean to rain on your parade, but in reality I can't imagine boundaries being re-examined until there is either a new board or the new HS is open. (Yes, Arch, or if they choose a new site because of environmental issues at the AME site. :

[doctorwho]

rural said:

doctorwho said:

I wish there was some way to get this train started, at least to be looked at-- I think it's a solid plan

Doc, I agree with the plan and could not understand why something like that wasn't implemented. But I think Arch was right about the can of worms for walkers, and that is why it was overlooked. I don't mean to rain on your parade, but in reality I can't imagine boundaries being re-examined until there is either a new board or the new HS is open. (Yes, Arch, or if they choose a new site because of environmental issues at the AME site. :

Oh rural, I totally agree with you as to why this was not opened up for general discussion - and because they don't want to deal with the bridge issue - Watts gets pulled under in the rip current -- I think that's really bad. Owen East was left out there as a red herring, no one will convince me differently.

I agree April 09 is the best chance to revisit some of this - but for those of us with 8th graders - we can't wait that long for a 'potential' solution.

Until then it is full speed ahead for Fall 2009, for a partial school , but likely the states' largest bus lanes to accomodate the herds of busses from Watts / Cowlishaw / Owen West to even remotely get close to those published times.

[mandmmom]

doctorwho said:

wvhsparent said:

There ya go...problem solved...I like it too.....WTG doc!!!!

I wish there was some way to get this little engine that could train started, at least to be looked at-- I think it's a solid plan

Maybe if the SB and SD admin would have at least recognized Watts existed during the discussions this could have come up also -- since nothing was pre determined before the meeting

They really don't care unless it is going to benefit them....they are supposed to represent all the kids in 204....and frankly I don't think they are doing that. That is why I am not happy with our SB, they did not listen to anyone last Tuesday night and this is unacceptable....I am really hoping some of the changes can be fixed either after the next SB election, or if a new site for the HS has to be determined.....

[mandmmom]

doctorwho said:

rural said:

Doc, I agree with the plan and could not understand why something like that wasn't implemented. But I think Arch was right about the can of worms for walkers, and that is why it was overlooked. I don't mean to rain on your parade, but in reality I can't imagine boundaries being re-examined until there is either a new board or the new HS is open. (Yes, Arch, or if they choose a new site because of environmental issues at the AME site. :

Oh rural, I totally agree with you as to why this was not opened up for general discussion - and because they don't want to deal with the bridge issue - Watts gets pulled under in the rip current -- I think that's really bad. Owen East was left out there as a red herring, no one will convince me differently.

I agree April 09 is the best chance to revisit some of this - but for those of us with 8th graders - we can't wait that long for a 'potential' solution.

Until then it is full speed ahead for Fall 2009, for a partial school , but likely the states' largest bus lanes to accomodate the herds of busses from Watts / Cowlishaw / Owen West to even remotely get close to those published times.

So what is going to happen when the published bus times are not achieved....KB guaranteed us that no kid would be on a bus for more than 40 minutes....so if they are not met is she is going to get more buses...oh great, more pollution, half full school buses, more transportation costs, more risk for accidents....great what a wonderful solution....seems to me that they need to go back to the drawing board and come up with solutions that are more cost effective....

[Arch]

mandmmom said:

doctorwho said:

Oh rural, I totally agree with you as to why this was not opened up for general discussion - and because they don't want to deal with the bridge issue - Watts gets pulled under in the rip current -- I think that's really bad. Owen East was left out there as a red herring, no one will convince me differently.

I agree April 09 is the best chance to revisit some of this - but for those of us with 8th graders - we can't wait that long for a 'potential' solution.

Until then it is full speed ahead for Fall 2009, for a partial school , but likely the states' largest bus lanes to accomodate the herds of busses from Watts / Cowlishaw / Owen West to even remotely get close to those published times.

So what is going to happen when the published bus times are not achieved....KB guaranteed us that no kid would be on a bus for more than 40 minutes....so if they are not met is she is going to get more buses...oh great, more pollution, half full school buses, more transportation costs, more risk for accidents....great what a wonderful solution....seems to me that they need to go back to the drawing board and come up with solutions that are more cost effective....

They just need to go back through their INBOX.

[concerned]

IMO the administration was told to move only the schools that were going to go to BB. They should of started from scratch, since it was a new site. These boundaries make little sense and I feel are very unfair.

[WeBe204]

concerned said:

IMO the administration was told to move only the schools that were going to go to BB. They should of started from scratch, since it was a new site. These boundaries make little sense and I feel are very unfair.

I completely agree with this statement. IMO, it was an exercise to try and move the already displaced. I do not think it was a winning strategy. It's the only reason I can understand Wheatland still being at NVHS.(minus the small section right under NVHS) I am not sure of the numbers but it seems like they could have taken more of the sw side to WVHS opened up room for all of Owen at NVHS. And then pulled more to the north from the central west side to relieve the over-crowding at WVHS. Of course I am not a boundary calculation person.

My wheels keep coming off here because I just do not think enough analysis was done. Yes, I am off topic and beating a dead horse.

[sleeplessinnpvl]

brad204 said:

concerned said:

IMO the administration was told to move only the schools that were going to go to BB. They should of started from scratch, since it was a new site. These boundaries make little sense and I feel are very unfair.

I completely agree with this statement. IMO, it was an exercise to try and move the already displaced. I do not think it was a winning strategy. It's the only reason I can understand Wheatland still being at NVHS.(minus the small section right under NVHS) I am not sure of the numbers but it seems like they could have taken more of the sw side to WVHS opened up room for all of Owen at NVHS. And then pulled more to the north from the central west side to relieve the over-crowding at WVHS. Of course I am not a boundary calculation person.

My wheels keep coming off here because I just do not think enough analysis was done. Yes, I am off topic and beating a dead horse.

I agree too. If they would have pulled Owen east to NV and moved everyone west of 59 to WV it would have made cleaner borders and looked less political, at least in the south. Would have solved the Owen east distance and the Petersen split. Very frustrating.

[sushi]

Brad, Sleepless: At the meeting it was discussed at length whether to move Owen east to NV or WV. At first it seemed the majority favored NV. MM argued that if Still was the feeder for Owen it would be easier on parents with more than one child to keep them both in same direction.

I say again, as far as WE and TG; it's all geography. Welch is REALLY walkers year round. No one else is as close.

[WeBe204]

sushi said:

Brad, Sleepless: At the meeting it was discussed at length whether to move Owen east to NV or WV. At first it seemed the majority favored NV. MM argued that if Still was the feeder for Owen it would be easier on parents with more than one child to keep them both in same direction.

I say again, as far as WE and TG; it's all geography. Welch is REALLY walkers year round. No one else is as close.

Not really sure what this post had to do with TG or WE or Welch. Is it all about you, Sushi? I get it already you live in WE.

It was just an opinion of mine that detailed analysis was not performed. It was an exercise of the already moved.

[sushi]

sleeplessinnpvl said:

brad204 said:

I completely agree with this statement. IMO, it was an exercise to try and move the already displaced. I do not think it was a winning strategy. It's the only reason I can understand Wheatland still being at NVHS.(minus the small section right under NVHS) I am not sure of the numbers but it seems like they could have taken more of the sw side to WVHS opened up room for all of Owen at NVHS. And then pulled more to the north from the central west side to relieve the over-crowding at WVHS. Of course I am not a boundary calculation person.

My wheels keep coming off here because I just do not think enough analysis was done. Yes, I am off topic and beating a dead horse.

I agree too. If they would have pulled Owen east to NV and moved everyone west of 59 to WV it would have made cleaner borders and looked less political, at least in the south. Would have solved the Owen east distance and the Petersen split. Very frustrating.

All about me??? I'm onboard with WV, Brad. Guess I should have addressed my remarks to concerned also who expressed the opinion that the board was told to move only the schools that were already moving; you concurred. I say it was a logical decision based on geography. I have known since the first ref. was conceived that WE would move out of NV based on location.

[Arch]

sushi said:

Brad, Sleepless: At the meeting it was discussed at length whether to move Owen east to NV or WV. At first it seemed the majority favored NV. MM argued that if Still was the feeder for Owen it would be easier on parents with more than one child to keep them both in same direction.

I say again, as far as WE and TG; it's all geography. Welch is REALLY walkers year round. No one else is as close.

They have the numbers. How many parents would that have been and did they ask them? (Owen east)



I'd help advocate Fry/Peterson to WV in full as already mentioned, Owen east to NV for a shorter commute, Owen West to WV due to proximity, Cowl main to NV, Watts main to WV, both satellites to MV (since that's closer to those areas), steck/McCarty busert north to MV, walkers to WV or send them all to MV if someone on the board doesn't want their area split. gombert to WV in its entirety.

What it basically does it make just about everything N and West of Ogden be MV destined save for the stragglers that are attached to Cowl main by feldot.
Everyone south and east of ogden and N of 75th to WV, Welch and everyone east of 59 south of 75th to NV. Everyone else (west of 59, S of ogden) WV.

Draw the map.. it's pretty clean.

Voilla, no area goes to the furthest high school and your gap is around 3.7 top to bottom, WV being the #2 school {new WV, image problem solved}

... or so said a bar napkin.. allegedly.