|
Post by drdavelasik on Mar 4, 2008 22:50:49 GMT -6
I am curious.....is there any room to do add-ons to WV and NV?
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 4, 2008 22:52:09 GMT -6
Ugh. Painted the wrong target.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Mar 4, 2008 22:53:51 GMT -6
Hi,
I am curious. This is to anyone who attended the meeting.
How many people were at the meeting? Did the group hire the attorney?
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 4, 2008 22:58:35 GMT -6
Hi, I am curious. This is to anyone who attended the meeting. How many people were at the meeting? Did the group hire the attorney? I have to think about a guess at the number - the large meeting room was full with people standing - parking lot was full with cars lined up on the street Don't know about the other as I had to leave before it was over. ( can say a lot of background work has already been done )
|
|
|
Post by proschool on Mar 4, 2008 22:59:58 GMT -6
Was there any mention that BB could get around to selling the land for any price? Don't forget we canot go after the land again in court.
|
|
|
Post by WeBe204 on Mar 4, 2008 23:00:20 GMT -6
I am curious.....is there any room to do add-ons to WV and NV? It has been stated that the main WV building can no longer be added onto. NV was purpose built for add ons. However two issues: 1) The hallways were not properly built and thus they are too narrow for traffic flow. Thus adding more space would only make this current design flaw worse. 2) You have to ask yourself if a 3500 person school is already a bit too big to allow for student opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 4, 2008 23:07:31 GMT -6
Ok, I'll take a plunge and jump in with my thoughts. I was at the meeting tonight. I thought it was calm and sincere. These people are, like Doc said, running on the premise that the SB did a bait and switch. They can't ask for it to be at Macom. They can't ask to go back to NV. They can only ask for the SB to keep their promise and build on BB. I was amazed at the number of people just opening their checkbooks! They complained on one hand how the SD rushed into buying Eola yet they are rushing into a lawsuit that they aren't even thinking about the consequences if they win. The attorney was very honest though in that if they win, the ramifications are that the SB builds on BB which we know won't happen or we are back to square one with another referendum. And basically there's no guarantee that the good ol' Reverend will sit around while we go to court. He may sell his property and then we have nowhere to build. So we are looking at a referendum to OK 2 megaschools. I guess I have a problem with a small amount of people trying to significantly change the ramifications of this 3rd HS. I really don't think 70% of 204 is not OK with this site. The actions of a few people can really impact all of us. I also am a bit confused by their logic. I could really have supported them if they stressed environmental concerns. That does not seem to be their case. They are going on "they promised us this school with this boundaries" and then changed them on us. To me, if I were a judge, I would need them to show proof that the school board fraudulently deceived us and never intended to build on BB or use those boundaries. I don't believe they could prove that. If our Illinois governor promises us no taxes if we vote him in and then changes his mind and raises taxes, can we sue him? IMO the board acted responsibly by finding a cheaper site and building on it. Is that exceeding their discretion? Would a judge see this as a good thing or bad? I think good. People would have been in more of an outrage if they would have proceeded with BB at all costs. < So we are looking at a referendum to OK 2 megaschools< how is this the only scenario ? What about Macom or Oswego - or pursuing other places in Bolingbrook etc. I think the 2 megaschools is a reach as the only scenario. Also just my opinion - when all is done and said will AME really be that much cheaper than BB - with ALL the costs included - remembering that the damages could be zero - but they could also be a lot more ? and in fairness the risks at MWGEN were cited as a concern - as well as referenced from the SB's own document ripping the place 18 months earlier. Hard to sue on the exact grounds there yet because all the tests are not back. They did say the complete strategy was not reealed tonight numerous times - depending on the test results I would assume it could also play a factor - just not yet as of 3-4-08. As far as 70% not being upset - only because it doesn't affectmany of them ( today) - ask areas that did not get selected for change how they would be if they did - and that 70% number is likely right on. Springbrook, McCarty / Steck - if moving - are they then OK - mostly no. I maynot live and die with the 70% number upset - but yet the SB runs an equally flawed survey on the site and those numbers are perfectly accepted ? Why ?
|
|
|
Post by refbasics on Mar 4, 2008 23:08:26 GMT -6
I am curious.....is there any room to do add-ons to WV and NV? It has been stated that the main WV building can no longer be added onto. NV was purpose built for add ons. However two issues: 1) The hallways were not properly built and thus they are too narrow for traffic flow. Thus adding more space would only make this current design flaw worse. 2) You have to ask yourself if a 3500 person school is already a bit too big to allow for student opportunity.[/b][/size][/size] ------------- 'student opportunity'?- if things are so bad at NV, why doesn't anybody want to volunteer to leave? ashwood is the 'new kid on the block'- why would you want to go to a school with less 'student opportunity?'
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 4, 2008 23:09:16 GMT -6
Was there any mention that BB could get around to selling the land for any price? Don't forget we canot go after the land again in court. the question was asked if the BB land was still available for us to purchase - there was a very quick yes it is response --- maybe I'm reading too much into that, but it seems they have checked with them
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 4, 2008 23:10:49 GMT -6
Hi, I am curious. This is to anyone who attended the meeting. How many people were at the meeting? Did the group hire the attorney? My guess (and I'm bad at estimating) was 150-200 people. It looked like they were going to hire him. But they did admit they don't have enough money yet to do a full fledge all out legal action.
|
|
|
Post by WeBe204 on Mar 4, 2008 23:11:51 GMT -6
It has been stated that the main WV building can no longer be added onto. NV was purpose built for add ons. However two issues: 1) The hallways were not properly built and thus they are too narrow for traffic flow. Thus adding more space would only make this current design flaw worse. 2) You have to ask yourself if a 3500 person school is already a bit too big to allow for student opportunity.[/b][/size][/size] ------------- 'student opportunity'?- if things are so bad at NV, why doesn't anybody want to volunteer to leave? ashwood is the 'new kid on the block'- why would you want to go to a school with less 'student opportunity?' [/quote] I am sorry. What exactly did I say to elicit this response? Or am I just an easy target today? Edit -- Still waiting. I would really like to know why this is the respone.
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 4, 2008 23:15:01 GMT -6
Ok, I'll take a plunge and jump in with my thoughts. I was at the meeting tonight. I thought it was calm and sincere. These people are, like Doc said, running on the premise that the SB did a bait and switch. They can't ask for it to be at Macom. They can't ask to go back to NV. They can only ask for the SB to keep their promise and build on BB. I was amazed at the number of people just opening their checkbooks! They complained on one hand how the SD rushed into buying Eola yet they are rushing into a lawsuit that they aren't even thinking about the consequences if they win. The attorney was very honest though in that if they win, the ramifications are that the SB builds on BB which we know won't happen or we are back to square one with another referendum. And basically there's no guarantee that the good ol' Reverend will sit around while we go to court. He may sell his property and then we have nowhere to build. So we are looking at a referendum to OK 2 megaschools. I guess I have a problem with a small amount of people trying to significantly change the ramifications of this 3rd HS. I really don't think 70% of 204 is not OK with this site. The actions of a few people can really impact all of us. I also am a bit confused by their logic. I could really have supported them if they stressed environmental concerns. That does not seem to be their case. They are going on "they promised us this school with this boundaries" and then changed them on us. To me, if I were a judge, I would need them to show proof that the school board fraudulently deceived us and never intended to build on BB or use those boundaries. I don't believe they could prove that. If our Illinois governor promises us no taxes if we vote him in and then changes his mind and raises taxes, can we sue him? IMO the board acted responsibly by finding a cheaper site and building on it. Is that exceeding their discretion? Would a judge see this as a good thing or bad? I think good. People would have been in more of an outrage if they would have proceeded with BB at all costs. < So we are looking at a referendum to OK 2 megaschools< how is this the only scenario ? What about Macom or Oswego - or pursuing other places in Bolingbrook etc. I think the 2 megaschools is a reach as the only scenario. Also just my opinion - when all is done and said will AME really be that much cheaper than BB - with ALL the costs included - remembering that the damages could be zero - but they could also be a lot more ? and in fairness the risks at MWGEN were cited as a concern - as well as referenced from the SB's own document ripping the place 18 months earlier. Hard to sue on the exact grounds there yet because all the tests are not back. They did say the complete strategy was not reealed tonight numerous times - depending on the test results I would assume it could also play a factor - just not yet as of 3-4-08. As far as 70% not being upset - only because it doesn't affectmany of them ( today) - ask areas that did not get selected for change how they would be if they did - and that 70% number is likely right on. Springbrook, McCarty / Steck - if moving - are they then OK - mostly no. I maynot live and die with the 70% number upset - but yet the SB runs an equally flawed survey on the site and those numbers are perfectly accepted ? Why ? Yes, doc. You are right. There are other options out there. It is just my personal opinion that if the train is stopped, the school board may just give up. Macom and Haaman are still just as iffy as AME so there are no guarantees those are going to work. The SB wants a solution to the crowding ASAP. IMO the next step would be to add on asap to solve the problem and probably keep the costs down. (No athletic field etc.) I have a question regarding building on.....could the SB actually expand the gold campuses and have 9th/10th at gold and 11/12th at main? I guess they would have to build on to accommodate 1500 kids at each school so that could be tough.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 4, 2008 23:15:44 GMT -6
It has been stated that the main WV building can no longer be added onto. NV was purpose built for add ons. However two issues: 1) The hallways were not properly built and thus they are too narrow for traffic flow. Thus adding more space would only make this current design flaw worse. 2) You have to ask yourself if a 3500 person school is already a bit too big to allow for student opportunity.[/b][/size][/size] ------------- 'student opportunity'?- if things are so bad at NV, why doesn't anybody want to volunteer to leave? ashwood is the 'new kid on the block'- why would you want to go to a school with less 'student opportunity?' [/quote] I think one would get varying opinions on the size issue. I am not crazy about the thought of an even bigger HS - yet who can argue with the success of a school say like New Trier who has 1045 freshman and 4150 10-12 graders., or a Stevenson at 4451.
|
|
|
Post by wolverine on Mar 4, 2008 23:19:12 GMT -6
I guess I have a problem with a small amount of people trying to significantly change the ramifications of this 3rd HS. I really don't think 70% of 204 is not OK with this site. The actions of a few people can really impact all of us. I also am a bit confused by their logic. I could really have supported them if they stressed environmental concerns. That does not seem to be their case. They are going on "they promised us this school with this boundaries" and then changed them on us. To me, if I were a judge, I would need them to show proof that the school board fraudulently deceived us and never intended to build on BB or use those boundaries. I don't believe they could prove that. If our Illinois governor promises us no taxes if we vote him in and then changes his mind and raises taxes, can we sue him? IMO the board acted responsibly by finding a cheaper site and building on it. Is that exceeding their discretion? Would a judge see this as a good thing or bad? I think good. People would have been in more of an outrage if they would have proceeded with BB at all costs. I think the legal strategy needed to be based on something they could act upon quickly. Personally, I agree that the environmental issues should have been at the forefront. He did cite another district that spent 9 months doing due diligence on a farm property, yet we're trying to ram-rod ours through in a few weeks, on a site with significant environmental issues. I'd say there were over 120 - 150 people there. Parking lot was full, as was the room.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 4, 2008 23:25:57 GMT -6
Here's a workable solution:
Take the $$ now and get BB. I'm sure there's enough connected talent around town to make it happen from many different angles. This puts to bed all of the enviro and site hazard concerns. This saves us from damages if the connected parties can do their thing or at leasts minimizes it. During construction, figure out what the difference will be (if any) and take that to a vote ASAP.
Then, put every area into a hat, draw and that's where they go.
That way, no one area entirely 'gets their way' because it levels everyone back to the same playing field.
Since laidlaw is so awesome, it won't matter who draws what because they can make even the most pathetically long commute be just about 30 minutes.
|
|