|
|
Post by charmant on Feb 25, 2006 13:07:47 GMT -6
I'm all over that solution!!! Yeah, you like that one, other than when you're saying "we'll need a 4th HS". This is true!!!!! The SB will be requesting one within 5 years if they use the same criteria as they used to put forth this one. The 3rd high school ref, in NO WAY means 'great, this is the last referendum we will be paying for'. This is, for clarification for those out there, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Feb 25, 2006 13:11:32 GMT -6
I don't understand how we don't need the third HS now, but if we vote it in the SB will try to justify a 4th HS in 5 years. Could you explain?
|
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Feb 25, 2006 15:30:54 GMT -6
I don't understand how we don't need the third HS now, but if we vote it in the SB will try to justify a 4th HS in 5 years. Could you explain? My question exactly. To me its the same when the NO's say they don't trust the SB's enrollment figures (too high) even though history shows us the SB's enrollement figures have been too low. We don't need a third high school but we'll be asked to vote for a fourth one? Makes no sense. |
|
