|
Post by asmodeus on Apr 9, 2010 7:10:31 GMT -6
Learned by whom? The voters? Perhaps, as we now are wise to the deception that can occur.
The SB? Obviously not, as there hasn't been one word of regret over the entire process.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 9, 2010 7:30:09 GMT -6
Learned by whom? The voters? Perhaps, as we now are wise to the deception that can occur. The SB? Obviously not, as there hasn't been one word of regret over the entire process. exactly - no remorse whatsoever, no we'd do it differently...- in fact 'mocking' such as the comment " well I guess some people couldn't read the ballot " by one SB member -- all they learned is what they could get away with....sorry -- nothing has changed except thmaybe more people will pay attention next time and not trust a damn thing they say.
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Apr 9, 2010 7:51:25 GMT -6
Arch, I have few enlightened ideas.
Frontier campus is a great idea, just focusing on one location in the far southern reaches of the district is misguided. I will try to dig out the stats as to the # of northsiders that took advantage of the program.
The campus was sold for the whole district, the facts pan out that most students that took advantage of it were NVHS students. This population moving over to Frontier campus did relieve some of the crowding that was occurring at NVHS.
If I had a magic wand it would be ideal if this "block college credited" course work could be folded into each of our three high schools. Personally I feel student participation would be greater. Obviously from the tone on "old blue" we as a district have more than enough square footage to accomplish this goal.
This would turn into a "win win" situation for all the 204 family.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 9, 2010 8:03:44 GMT -6
Arch, I have few enlightened ideas. Frontier campus is a great idea, just focusing on one location in the far southern reaches of the district is misguided. I will try to dig out the stats as to the # of northsiders that took advantage of the program. The campus was sold for the whole district, the facts pan out that most students that took advantage of it were NVHS students. This population moving over to Frontier campus did relieve some of the crowding that was occurring at NVHS. If I had a magic wand it would be ideal if this "block college credited" course work could be folded into each of our three high schools. Personally I feel student participation would be greater. Obviously from the tone on "old blue" we as a district have more than enough square footage to accomplish this goal. This would turn into a "win win" situation for all the 204 family. Assuming COD who owns this program wants to be spread out in 3 locations - would this require more instructors ? I agree it was mostly NVHS students- not sure why more WVHS didn't partake - but they didn't- and sure as hell no one going to travel from the hinterlands to 95th street..so another gold star for the brilliant location of MVHS. want some real out of the box thinking ( like we elect people to do, but they don't) - we needed maybe 600 seats. Why not have built a 1000 seat - MAX - magnet HS for exactly the kind of programs as Frontier offers? No need for field turf stadiums etc- and it would have fit on say - oh, maybe less than 25 acres we already owned ? Would have solved the supposed ' crisis' - created an alternative to IMSA where one does not have to live on campus....and been done for maybe 1/2 of what we spent tops. Likely less since we already owned the land. No worries about lack of varsity teams- or crappy ones for a period of time. The amount of students 'moving' a fraction of what we forced -- no worries about splitting siblings unless the parents wanted to... Also that way the only people who would have to travel to it would be those who wanted to..not forced to. but of course that would have meant telling people they were handed a line of bullshit a mile long on population, split shifts etc. And on the survey taken, a magnet school was very similar in positive feedback as the comprehensie 3rd HS - and let's face it, they didn't take the top % getter anyway.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 9, 2010 8:05:17 GMT -6
Arch, I have few enlightened ideas. Frontier campus is a great idea, just focusing on one location in the far southern reaches of the district is misguided. I will try to dig out the stats as to the # of northsiders that took advantage of the program. The campus was sold for the whole district, the facts pan out that most students that took advantage of it were NVHS students. This population moving over to Frontier campus did relieve some of the crowding that was occurring at NVHS. If I had a magic wand it would be ideal if this "block college credited" course work could be folded into each of our three high schools. Personally I feel student participation would be greater. Obviously from the tone on "old blue" we as a district have more than enough square footage to accomplish this goal. This would turn into a "win win" situation for all the 204 family. we'll soon have ( already have at ES leel) - enough brick and mortar to open another small school district 2 ES - 1 MS & 1 HS
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 9, 2010 8:19:26 GMT -6
My neighbor (a WVHS graduate) did it in his senior year. He also had his own car to get to and from and he was on an alternate schedule (outside of normal bus times)...perhaps those factors were looked upon by each family as to whether or not they wanted to or could utilize it... Wouldn't know for certain without asking them but assuming the 'why' and then suggesting to spend more money based on a guess is, well, not very frugal or smart, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Apr 9, 2010 8:27:35 GMT -6
Doc,
I would not have had any issue with building a smaller more defined high school on existing land.
Of course I suspect that many would not have have been thrilled with that option, especially in the "era" that the third school was voted on. Remember the referendum was also sold on the idea that in the short term there would be no increase in the tax rate and that the rate would actually decrease. Some "witty" individual actually put out literature to the affect that it was like refinancing one's home with a much lower rate. And though technically correct not many bothered to do the math as to the "juice" paid over the long haul.
Yes in the new "The Party is Over" era many things that seemed right and good have been looked at with a more critical eye.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 9, 2010 8:38:13 GMT -6
Doc, I would not have had any issue with building a smaller more defined high school on existing land. Of course I suspect that many would not have have been thrilled with that option, especially in the "era" that the third school was voted on. Remember the referendum was also sold on the idea that in the short term there would be no increase in the tax rate and that the rate would actually decrease. Some "witty" individual actually put out literature to the affect that it was like refinancing one's home with a much lower rate. And though technically correct not many bothered to do the math as to the "juice" paid over the long haul. Yes in the new "The Party is Over" era many things that seemed right and good have been looked at with a more critical eye. funny in the survey 60.3% found this acceptable and 66% found a comprehensive HS acceptable- pretty similar-- and remember they were told 10,400 and growing students. so it would have required them coming clean re: true population so that this would work vs 3000 seats and they sure as hell were'nt going to risk that - stay with the non truth now aqgain it would have required critical thinking by the powers that be- as opposed to solutioning everything with an open checkbook- ours.
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Apr 9, 2010 19:32:31 GMT -6
although the percentages are there. more people thought a new school was a good idea vs adding on. (if I am reading it right) and is that all the people they surveyed? 200 or so? please read it again and then if you come to the same conclusion, please show me the math -- Q19 add permanent classroom to those needing space: very acceptable 53.3% somewhat acceptable 35.7% = 89% favorable Q17 - build a comprehensive 3rd HS very acceptable 38.5% somewhat acceptable 27.5% = 66% favorable so how in the world do you see the 3rd HS as more acceptable again ? any other variation of a 3rd HS was even lower.. you can't add various 3rd HS groups together- you only get one sorry...ran out of time to explain. 264 people said they would be ok with the new HS and 177 said ok to expansion
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 9, 2010 20:44:56 GMT -6
please read it again and then if you come to the same conclusion, please show me the math -- Q19 add permanent classroom to those needing space: very acceptable 53.3% somewhat acceptable 35.7% = 89% favorable Q17 - build a comprehensive 3rd HS very acceptable 38.5% somewhat acceptable 27.5% = 66% favorable so how in the world do you see the 3rd HS as more acceptable again ? any other variation of a 3rd HS was even lower.. you can't add various 3rd HS groups together- you only get one sorry...ran out of time to explain. 264 people said they would be ok with the new HS and 177 said ok to expansion see that's the funny thing about using raw numbers vs %'s- it works the other way also -- yes more people voted for a com 3rd HS-- but then a hell of a lot more peope also said the comp 3rd HS was unacceptable 120 to 12 -- so it was 10 times more unpopular as a selection so the %'s still hold up
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 9, 2010 22:29:11 GMT -6
Since when did the SB ever actually do anything a survey suggested?
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Apr 10, 2010 7:15:07 GMT -6
Doc, at least 3/4 of a grade school was built in a subdivision that never quite made it. Down on the southside we still have quite a few dirt hills from overvalued homes and the land that went along with it. I can only wonder what the Macon corp would take for the 82 acres they recently put up for sale off Wolfs Crossing and 248th st.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 10, 2010 8:24:34 GMT -6
At one point it was as low as 12... that point, I believe was the morning before we purchased AME's land for more money.
|
|
|
Post by brant on Apr 10, 2010 9:55:48 GMT -6
The lack of foresight and seeing the entire picture has a way of coming back to bite the ass. The area SSDM refers to was what the SB was counting on to provide more numbers and thus the excuse for MV. So here we are in 2010 in the midst of a terrible economy, lost jobs, foreclosures, etc. Instead of the enrollment skyrocketing like the SB told us we will have less students then before all of this nonsense began. Adding debt, lost teachers and a fractured SD. This is oblivious of course to our friends in the North.
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Apr 10, 2010 10:28:40 GMT -6
The lack of foresight and seeing the entire picture has a way of coming back to bite the ass. The area SSDM refers to was what the SB was counting on to provide more numbers and thus the excuse for MV. So here we are in 2010 in the midst of a terrible economy, lost jobs, foreclosures, etc. Instead of the enrollment skyrocketing like the SB told us we will have less students then before all of this nonsense began. Adding debt, lost teachers and a fractured SD. This is oblivious of course to our friends in the North. While I agree with much of what you say Brant, I don't think you can hold the north responsible. Remember CV, an open critic of MVHS, had a lot of support in the north. There were certainly individuals there who wanted this school badly and openly pushed for it, but it took those in the south as well to get it through. Those that wanted to clear out NVHS of the newcomers, those with the idealism of smaller schools, etc. In addition, it took a tremendous effort by the Board and administration to put out inaccurate and misleading information for over 2 years. It also took a disinterested community failing to seek the truth. But, in their defense, its hard to blame most, as many of those same people simply wanted to trust what you are told by their elected officials and district administration
|
|