|
Post by momto4 on Sept 11, 2008 11:02:09 GMT -5
What would have happened if the quick take happened as the SB wanted? Would we now be building on BB, crying about fiscal irresponsibility, or would the SB have had second thoughts and tried to walk away anyway? (I'm not even sure they could have walked away from a quick take.) It would seem that the "fiscal responsibility" folks should not be thanking the SB but be thanking their lucky stars that BB fought the quick take. I don't think we would/could have walked away but would have immediately started building. Or at least that's what I hope would have happened. I thought I heard that if we'd been able to build on BB a year earlier at the higher land cost it all would have balanced out the difference we are paying a year later to build on the new site. Doesn't matter anymore, we'll never know.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Sept 11, 2008 11:20:42 GMT -5
What needs expounding? That someone with an income of 400k may have a different world view than someone making 40k?
All you have to look at is the debate over fiscal "responsibility." Some people didn't view the extra cost of BB as a huge issue, some did.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Sept 11, 2008 11:25:56 GMT -5
What needs expounding? That someone with an income of 400k may have a different world view than someone making 40k? All you have to look at is the debate over fiscal "responsibility." Some people didn't view the extra cost of BB as a huge issue, some did. I don't understand. Different view of the world, yes. Different view of the importance of education? You should get to know the people you speak of before you make assumptions based on income.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Sept 11, 2008 12:07:47 GMT -5
What needs expounding? That someone with an income of 400k may have a different world view than someone making 40k? All you have to look at is the debate over fiscal "responsibility." Some people didn't view the extra cost of BB as a huge issue, some did. What's this have to do with the alleged need for geographic diversity of the SB? There are pockets of low-income. middle-income, high-income spread throughout 204.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Sept 11, 2008 12:14:11 GMT -5
I am saying that many people voted on 'platform' - not necessarily individual. I know some people who had a real hard time x ing the box for one in particular - but the 3 represented no more changes ( at the time ).
People were tired and voted for that as opposed to potential for more changes/battles. I understand your characterizing that the candidate platform of "no changes" was voted in. I agree with you. But one huge element of "no changes" was to build a complete school with the already-voted-on referendum money. Circumstance from the jury trial caused change, one way or another. Either site (and or course boundaries) changed OR the scope of the school bldg (stadium/auditorium etc. ) and need for a future ref to complete changed. The SB used their judgement for which change was best for the entire district. I know, a lot of people are hyper-focused on boundaries. But there are plenty who understandibly focused on tax dollars spent. For fiscal responsibility, the SB did not want to force that form of change onto the district. Where I have an issue with not voting on is the way the money is being spent ( as well as total Money spent) is going to change also. Spending $10M ( maybe more) for expedite charges was not in the original plan - and the final cost of this school may very well be much more than the $124M and a 'little bump' that was sold. We get no commodity back for that $10M plus - not land , not extra bulding, just sooner delivery. Long term that doesn't add up on a balance sheet. And while we will eventually deliver a complete school- we are not doing so upon delievery even with the expedite charges - this was unacceptable at BB ( and many commented loudly on being at the school with construction regardless of where it was) and is unacceptable here IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Sept 11, 2008 12:36:02 GMT -5
We may not get a commodity that is tangible in dollars and cents but we do get a school that is open for business next year. Is that worth 10 mill., I don't know. As for the original plan (I am assuming that was BB) that went out the window when we as a district lost the lawsuit. We must come to terms that yes we lost that suit and the next best situation is the one at hand. This district had to make some hard decisions after B.B went south and that has happened. As for folks commenting loudly about construction while school is in session---One thing is certain in our district and that is that many comment loudly about various situations at hand.
Construction while school is in session may not be ideal, it is containable, acceptable and happens all the time at other schools.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Sept 11, 2008 12:41:56 GMT -5
Do you honestly believe what you're typing?
Where did I say anything about the importance of education? Did it occur that people may agree on the importance of education but have vastly different opinions on how to provide it? Maybe I want a magnet school with no sports...maybe you don't. Maybe I want to send my kids to private school...maybe you don't. Maybe you want a swimming pool and I want a hockey rink. Maybe I want year-round schooling and all teachers to have their Masters.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Sept 11, 2008 12:52:21 GMT -5
Do you honestly believe what you're typing? Where did I say anything about the importance of education? Did it occur that people may agree on the importance of education but have vastly different opinions on how to provide it? Maybe I want a magnet school with no sports...maybe you don't. Maybe I want to send my kids to private school...maybe you don't. Maybe you want a swimming pool and I want a hockey rink. Maybe I want year-round schooling and all teachers to have their Masters. We are clearly not communicating very well with each other. I am still trying to grasp why it is important that an area have representation to the SB. So far, you have used socioeconomic differences, educational need differences, and now a wish list of what we both may or may not want in a school. Can you tell me why does any area need a SB member to represent their area, other than boundaries? I really think, and this is only my opinion, that the need for a SB member from an area is more a perception that the area is not being ignored more than anything.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Sept 11, 2008 13:03:59 GMT -5
Basic fairness?
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Sept 11, 2008 13:17:01 GMT -5
What is your definition of fairness? And why is it unfair now?
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Sept 11, 2008 13:21:27 GMT -5
We may not get a commodity that is tangible in dollars and cents but we do get a school that is open for business next year. Is that worth 10 mill., I don't know. As for the original plan (I am assuming that was BB) that went out the window when we as a district lost the lawsuit. We must come to terms that yes we lost that suit and the next best situation is the one at hand. This district had to make some hard decisions after B.B went south and that has happened. As for folks commenting loudly about construction while school is in session---One thing is certain in our district and that is that many comment loudly about various situations at hand. Construction while school is in session may not be ideal, it is containable, acceptable and happens all the time at other schools. It is intangible and 'operational' in nature, and operations was not part of the referendum and from a 'fiscal responsibility' aspect which was the post I responded to, it is not a commodity and I guarantee a few years from now no one will care if the school opened in 09 or 10 or whenever- we will still be paying for that $10M -$15M, plus interest. I'm not so sure the in school with construction hapopens all the time- Plainfield East waited until this year even though the school was finished not long after last year started - Oswego East did not have construction after opening - those are the last 2 schools around here to open. I distinctly remember when the discussion was to open BB - as early as Fall 2008 ( sad to even type that ) - there was howling by some over the dangers of construction while kids were in school - insurance liabilities - health effects etc.-- yet no one seems to mnd now. The change baffles me.
|
|
Arwen
Master Member
Posts: 933
|
Post by Arwen on Sept 11, 2008 13:41:30 GMT -5
I think it would be beneficial to have a diverse SB. That diversity should and could be reflected on many different levels:
- racial/ethnic diversity - gender - area of residence - age of children including someone with no children or grown children - maybe age of SB member herself - someone with a special needs background vs. others without
We may not always achieve diversity on all strata, but having people of different backgrounds and in different places in life will always yield more ideas. I don't agree that geographic dispersion will always lead to the diversity of thought that would be ideal. I think some of these other strata might be more beneficial in mixing it up a bit. As an example, you might get two white Republican men with middle school kids that think very similarly even if one lives in Stonebridge and the other in WE (this is not to say that WE and Stonebridge are full of white male republicans!).
Aside from boundary issues, the areas where some geographic diversity might be beneficial in my mind are: - transportation issues (short commutes vs. longer commutes may mean more awareness of a need for activity busses) - some diversity across the HS for awareness of issues particular to the age of the buildings
I don't think either of these areas require geographic diversity but having it may provide more points of view. I also think that having reps from every MS won't ensure that everyone's voice would be heard and would yield too large a board. Take Hill for example - Watts and Brookdale both go there. Do you think one SB rep from either ES area could have championed both areas to their satisfaction over the last 3 years? I don't.
|
|
|
Post by gman413 on Sept 11, 2008 14:25:38 GMT -5
How? That school board members are expected to be non-partisan and other types of elected officials are not? Would you be happy if all seven board members had absolutely impeccable credentials but all lived in Tall Grass? Or in Bolingbrook? Would you be happy if all nine Supreme Court justices were ultra-conservative or ultra-liberal, even if they were highly qualified? The point is that people can be extremely competent yet unavoidably all carry their own preferences, biases, agendas, and viewpoints about what they think is right for the district/city/country/world.
I don't know why this concept is so offensive to people here. To be honest, it's kind of the same "move on, shut up" attitude some of us are tired of. Since that (above) is the point, it doesn't matter what corner of the district they come from...
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Sept 11, 2008 15:33:12 GMT -5
How? That school board members are expected to be non-partisan and other types of elected officials are not? Would you be happy if all seven board members had absolutely impeccable credentials but all lived in Tall Grass? Or in Bolingbrook? Would you be happy if all nine Supreme Court justices were ultra-conservative or ultra-liberal, even if they were highly qualified? The point is that people can be extremely competent yet unavoidably all carry their own preferences, biases, agendas, and viewpoints about what they think is right for the district/city/country/world.
I don't know why this concept is so offensive to people here. To be honest, it's kind of the same "move on, shut up" attitude some of us are tired of. Since that (above) is the point, it doesn't matter what corner of the district they come from... So should we do away with the way the 2-senators-per-state rule and just elect the best 100 regardless of where they come from? Or how about this. Why not abolish all local school districts, have one state district, and have a SB elected at large without any restrictions on how many come from certain regions? Would you be happy with that?
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Sept 11, 2008 15:35:26 GMT -5
Since that (above) is the point, it doesn't matter what corner of the district they come from... So should we do away with the way the 2-senators-per-state rule and just elect the best 100 regardless of where they come from? Or how about this. Why not abolish all local school districts, have one state district, and have a SB elected at large without any restrictions on how many come from certain regions? Would you be happy with that? The two senators per state can live anywhere in the state, even on the same block. I do get your point, anyway, though I still disagree.
|
|