Hamman

[rew]

I was looking at the numbers...

The district does not have a sales contract on the 25 acres, which actually threatens AME being on budget for 09. If they don't sell the 25 acres, they run out of money. And since they did not put in any inflation into 10 construction, it could happen in 10.

The site with the biggest financial cushion is Hamman.

The boundaries for Hamman are straight forward

BU, GRHM, KNDLL, PET, FRY

All are w/in easy distance and easy commute (east - west). Yes they cross 59 but at less congested intersections.

The school is where the growth is and the five newest ESs open the new school. Leaving the established neighborhoods at their established schools. Scullen and Crone feed the new HS.

Regarding NVHS and WVHS. If you keep WVHS at 4000, then you probably wind up moving Owen out to NV. But at least that is a move that is close. You move WE, Welch, PAT and Owen into Gold MS.

If you leave NV at 4000, then you could possibly move Watts and Cowlishaw to NV too.. But again at least it's close. Still becomes OW, WE, WEL and PAT.

If you are looking for fiscal responsibility, Hamman deserves closer inspection.

[bob]

Not enough kids. You have to bring in WE and Gombert and take out BU.

[warriorpride]

rew said:

I was looking at the numbers...

The district does not have a sales contract on the 25 acres, which actually threatens AME being on budget for 09. If they don't sell the 25 acres, they run out of money. And since they did not put in any inflation into 10 construction, it could happen in 10.

The site with the biggest financial cushion is Hamman.

The boundaries for Hamman are straight forward

BU, GRHM, KNDLL, PET, FRY

...
If you are looking for fiscal responsibility, Hamman deserves closer inspection.

If someone can tell me what the achievement gaps would be with these proposed boundaries, I'll let you know my thoughts on this. My gut tells me that this will produce a wide gap between WV and the other 2 schools - we do not need WV to be treated as the ugly step-sister even moreso.

As much as I hate Lehman, if the SB selected Macom, I think boundries with a decent gap might have been possible & I would be OK with that. But with Hamman, I don't think so. We all have our priorities, and mine are getting MV open in 09 and having a reasonable achievement gap across all 3 HSs, it looks like AME and BB are the only sites that can provide this, and BB is unfortunately cost-prohibitive.

[rew]

bob said:

Not enough kids. You have to bring in WE and Gombert and take out BU.

at buildout:
BU 1075
GHm 725
KNDL 900
FRY 900
PET 900

TOTAL 4500 X .67 = 3015

WP - I will calc and let you know

[casey]

rew said:

I was looking at the numbers...

The district does not have a sales contract on the 25 acres, which actually threatens AME being on budget for 09. If they don't sell the 25 acres, they run out of money. And since they did not put in any inflation into 10 construction, it could happen in 10.

The site with the biggest financial cushion is Hamman.

The boundaries for Hamman are straight forward

BU, GRHM, KNDLL, PET, FRY

All are w/in easy distance and easy commute (east - west). Yes they cross 59 but at less congested intersections.

The school is where the growth is and the five newest ESs open the new school. Leaving the established neighborhoods at their established schools. Scullen and Crone feed the new HS.

Regarding NVHS and WVHS. If you keep WVHS at 4000, then you probably wind up moving Owen out to NV. But at least that is a move that is close. You move WE, Welch, PAT and Owen into Gold MS.

If you leave NV at 4000, then you could possibly move Watts and Cowlishaw to NV too.. But again at least it's close. Still becomes OW, WE, WEL and PAT.

If you are looking for fiscal responsibility, Hamman deserves closer inspection.

Agreed. Hamman deserves a better look. It appears that it got the cursory glance even though the cost is considerably less. IMO, the SB didn't want it simply because it is south and they don't want the perception of the south side 204ers getting it all. You know, the poor northerners of the district. Hey, this is like the civil war ;D.

Interesting though when you look at the Land Report the Hamman site compared to AME the disadvantages are more clearly spelled out for example, land samples/surveys not completed specific to school site (duh! they didn't get time to do that yet but it shouldn't be included as a disadvantage) and they list Annexing Hamman "into 204 subject to uncertain and time consuming process" (but for AME they say simply "must still go through the process of annexation"). Bottom line is that the SB is doing everything to make AME look better even if it is located on a former power plant site. I don't see that included on the disadvantage side .

FWIW, I agree with you that filling a far SW side school would be much easier than AME. There's plenty of kids around to fill that school without a horrendous commute.

[rew]

Wp. I am having a little trouble with the ach gaps because I still don't know where the boundaries will lie with AME? I never have gotten a handle on that.

The current GAP is 88-93. With Hamman, if WV stays at 4000, the Gap is the same, if you drop it to 3000 and move Watts and Cow, then Gap widens 87-93.

[gatordog]

casey said:

Agreed. Hamman deserves a better look.

I agree with you casey. And I think Hamman will get full consideration by the SB.

My opinion is there are two real options on the table:

1) St John's with 2009 opening.
2) Hamman with 2010 opening.

After reading things last night, I think the vast majority will agree that BB is out (funds not available), and Macom is out (multiple owner complexity, road and power line relocation cost and schedule complexity)

I think its progress that we can narrow down to two choices.

[gatordog]

As I was looking closer at St John vs Hamman, I wanted to point out a "read between the lines, political" advantage of St J over Hamman:

St J is touted as having "City of Aurora support".
while Hamman's advantage is "already annexed into City of Aurora". (I never would have guessed that land there was Aurora.)

I strongly suspect that the City of Aurora would encourage and desire our SD to choose the northern site, where school would be located in the midst of lots of Aurora voters. There very possibly would be no Aurora voters whatsover going to a school requiring city of Aurora support. That would be a strange situation.

I wonder how resitant the City of Aurora would be to Hamman? What is the cost of this?

[wvhsparent]

Also include what would Oswego SD have to say about our SD taking land out of their tax rolls.

Remember it is outside of our Dist too.

[bob]

Hamman also has a big disadvanatge of being outside of the SD. You think Oswego SD really wants our HS on their land?

[bob]

jinx

[wvhsparent]

bob said:

jinx

DOH!!!! ;D

[al]

Just speaking for our situation on the far SW side specifically, but there's something that makes so much sense about having both our MS (Crone) and HS (Metea) both on 111th and so close to each other. Choose AME if it is proven to be the better site, but we deserve at least due diligence from the SB in looking seriously at this site.

[rew]

But I was told the land is zoned residential so it does not take away commercial property. And it is 80 acres? Would we really miss an 80 acre parcel in our district?

Why not do due diligence and check it out?

[al]

^ zoned residential? IMHO again, 80 acres removed from the possible residential base is also a good thing!