|
|
Post by doctorwho on Aug 23, 2010 9:51:54 GMT -6
Please explain to me why a decision that was made 10 to 15 years ago is now the fault of this sb? first off hon you may want to describe what specific topic from 10-15 years ago you are taking about so someone can answer you - that is if you actually want an answer. If it is A/C than at least two member of the board that made the decision to piss away $150M on a new unneeded HS were members of the board as each of those A/C decisions were also made. And those same board members and new ones made decisions to A/C schools like Owen - so they obviously thought that was now a good idea for the schools and learning environment now didn't they. If you actually have apoint to make- try making it. Tell us how the spending of $150M plus an additiona $3-$4M per year in additional transportation costs for the new northern school makes sense. Disupte with us the facts that 8900 is going to be close to the max HS students for this district and after the well defined bubble goes thru it won't be closer to 8000-8200-- please make sure you use real figures like we do- we only use official 204 enrollment numbers so as not to be confused with bullshit. explain how there are 1775 kids ( approx) @ MVHS today for 3 classes not 2400 as they gave the Herald- and that there will be 2250-2275 max nextyear if 100% of the eligible kids go there which they won't - not 3000 they gave the Herald. Please try some facts to support your feelings- this isn't a PTSA meeting |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 23, 2010 10:03:53 GMT -6
Please explain to me why a decision that was made 10 to 15 years ago is now the fault of this sb? Someone on the board has been around that long and still drives policy behind the scene. |
|
hon
Frosh
Posts: 10 
|
Post by hon on Aug 23, 2010 10:39:32 GMT -6
Doc:
Please take a look at the K-5 levels as well not just the MS. Young has 6 K classes this year up from 5. Young still has portables as well. I agree the size is down, however, it would appear to be trending up over the long term. At least in the northern part of the district.
I understand you are upset about this HS and you have the right to feel this way.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Aug 23, 2010 10:59:36 GMT -6
Doc: Please take a look at the K-5 levels as well not just the MS. Young has 6 K classes this year up from 5. Young still has portables as well. I agree the size is down, however, it would appear to be trending up over the long term. At least in the northern part of the district. I understand you are upset about this HS and you have the right to feel this way. the true future lies in the feeders from ES -- official numbers show a 2%-3% drop each year for the last 4 in total ES school population. It si not a mirage, it is reality. The bubble that lies in MS and early HS is the end of that 'growth' - We needed about a 500-600 seat solution for 5 years- not a 3000 seat solution forever - regardless of where you live in the district. we have a number of ES's seriously under capacity - one school that has never been over 65% capacity (and no that's not Peterson) - look at the districts OWN financial projects ( you can ask any SB member for a copy- they are also in the archives here) - we do not make the numbers up...in 5-6 years the district HS population will be 700-800 less than today - then what do we do with all the physical plants ? So yes, I and many here- and some members of the SB have looked very hard at the stats - I encourage you to do likewise. |
|
