|
Post by warriormom on Jun 1, 2009 11:07:45 GMT -5
like i said, we agree to disagree. have a wonderful day!
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Jun 1, 2009 14:02:54 GMT -5
If true, that would be an indictment of the SB.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jun 1, 2009 14:29:27 GMT -5
If true, that would be an indictment of the SB. Or a certain past Superintendant
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Jun 2, 2009 21:30:28 GMT -5
I am only going by past history. This thing is over and done with. Why bring it up now? All right say I agree with you that everything was not done on the up and up. Say I agree with you the SD lied, cheated, stole etc. Why not bring it up earlier during the court case? I think the taxpayers that agree with your stance already are aware of and agree with what you are saying. It has been rehashed over and over. And the law says it is legal. Everything has been quiet since the SB elections. Why bring all this material out unless you have future plans for it. The reason I bring "this" up brant, is to try to remind everyone about why we are here. I have laid it out over on Blue under Misc Law-School Board... under District Information. It isn't about you or me or North and South or boundaries or the third HS other than to point out how I believe our Board let everyone down in building a third HS at all. It didn't matter whether it was build at BB or Eola. It was that it was build at all. It is about the effective and efficient use of our assets. Far too many people in D204 are uninformed about their district, for whatever reason. I'm simply trying to show them why it is important to get informed and involved. I am also trying to give people in the District information that the Board will not. For example, long before our Superintendent talked about the budget crunch facing the district, I had already FOIA'd the documents and started distributing them. In the March meeting and the School Board candidate forums when I spoke about those projections many were unaware. When I spoke the following month about the additonal funds used for MV as being illusory people were unaware, may people still don't understand why. I will be laying that out shortly on Blue. In 2011 or earlier we are going to have an operating referendum because of the budget shortfalls in the coming years. Had we thoughtfully analyzed the best way to satisfy our capacity needs that referendum would have been much easier to stomach in that rather than paying our for bricks and mortar to the extent we are in debt and interest, we would have been easily shouldering the necessary referendum. Now we will be doing both. I talk about the past because I am looking at the future. If people don't get involved by seeking information, asking questions and voting, the mistakes of the past are bound to repeat themselves to the point that we will have to make serious cuts in staff and programs to the detriment of our children. I say this as a parent, a CPA and licenced attorney and a concerned citizen of D204. When I started paying attention last January (2008) to the decision making process I started to get concerned. Since then I have spent at least 1000 hours looking at documents, reeducating myself on "fund accounting" and generally looking at the financials and the decision making process that went into the decision to build the third HS, the entire chronology. I hope this helps you understand my motivation.
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Jun 2, 2009 22:09:16 GMT -5
I am only going by past history. This thing is over and done with. Why bring it up now? All right say I agree with you that everything was not done on the up and up. Say I agree with you the SD lied, cheated, stole etc. Why not bring it up earlier during the court case? I think the taxpayers that agree with your stance already are aware of and agree with what you are saying. It has been rehashed over and over. And the law says it is legal. Everything has been quiet since the SB elections. Why bring all this material out unless you have future plans for it. The reason I bring "this" up brant, is to try to remind everyone about why we are here. I have laid it out over on Blue under Misc Law-School Board... under District Information. It isn't about you or me or North and South or boundaries or the third HS other than to point out how I believe our Board let everyone down in building a third HS at all. It didn't matter whether it was build at BB or Eola. It was that it was build at all. It is about the effective and efficient use of our assets. Far too many people in D204 are uninformed about their district, for whatever reason. I'm simply trying to show them why it is important to get informed and involved. I am also trying to give people in the District information that the Board will not. For example, long before our Superintendent talked about the budget crunch facing the district, I had already FOIA'd the documents and started distributing them. In the March meeting and the School Board candidate forums when I spoke about those projections many were unaware. When I spoke the following month about the additonal funds used for MV as being illusory people were unaware, may people still don't understand why. I will be laying that out shortly on Blue. In 2011 or earlier we are going to have an operating referendum because of the budget shortfalls in the coming years. Had we thoughtfully analyzed the best way to satisfy our capacity needs that referendum would have been much easier to stomach in that rather than paying our for bricks and mortar to the extent we are in debt and interest, we would have been easily shouldering the necessary referendum. Now we will be doing both. I talk about the past because I am looking at the future. If people don't get involved by seeking information, asking questions and voting, the mistakes of the past are bound to repeat themselves to the point that we will have to make serious cuts in staff and programs to the detriment of our children. I say this as a parent, a CPA and licenced attorney and a concerned citizen of D204. When I started paying attention last January (2008) to the decision making process I started to get concerned. Since then I have spent at least 1000 hours looking at documents, reeducating myself on "fund accounting" and generally looking at the financials and the decision making process that went into the decision to build the third HS, the entire chronology. I hope this helps you understand my motivation. how have you been affected? that may give a window into your motivation as well.
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Jun 2, 2009 23:24:27 GMT -5
The reason I bring "this" up brant, is to try to remind everyone about why we are here. I have laid it out over on Blue under Misc Law-School Board... under District Information. It isn't about you or me or North and South or boundaries or the third HS other than to point out how I believe our Board let everyone down in building a third HS at all. It didn't matter whether it was build at BB or Eola. It was that it was build at all. It is about the effective and efficient use of our assets. Far too many people in D204 are uninformed about their district, for whatever reason. I'm simply trying to show them why it is important to get informed and involved. I am also trying to give people in the District information that the Board will not. For example, long before our Superintendent talked about the budget crunch facing the district, I had already FOIA'd the documents and started distributing them. In the March meeting and the School Board candidate forums when I spoke about those projections many were unaware. When I spoke the following month about the additonal funds used for MV as being illusory people were unaware, may people still don't understand why. I will be laying that out shortly on Blue. In 2011 or earlier we are going to have an operating referendum because of the budget shortfalls in the coming years. Had we thoughtfully analyzed the best way to satisfy our capacity needs that referendum would have been much easier to stomach in that rather than paying our for bricks and mortar to the extent we are in debt and interest, we would have been easily shouldering the necessary referendum. Now we will be doing both. I talk about the past because I am looking at the future. If people don't get involved by seeking information, asking questions and voting, the mistakes of the past are bound to repeat themselves to the point that we will have to make serious cuts in staff and programs to the detriment of our children. I say this as a parent, a CPA and licenced attorney and a concerned citizen of D204. When I started paying attention last January (2008) to the decision making process I started to get concerned. Since then I have spent at least 1000 hours looking at documents, reeducating myself on "fund accounting" and generally looking at the financials and the decision making process that went into the decision to build the third HS, the entire chronology. I hope this helps you understand my motivation. how have you been affected? that may give a window into your motivation as well. You know Steckdad, your mission in life seems to be to stir the pot, like questioning the motives of Arch and Doc, calling them whiners and bitchers. If anyone should explain themselves it's you. What have you contributed here other than being a thorn in the side of Arch and Doc? Have you put forth any useful facts? Have you ever spoken in front of the Board? How about in forums while running for the Board? Have you ever FOIA'd any documents and brought them to the attention of the community? Every thing I have to say and have said is out there in the public from last year and this. It is also in this board and the Blue, with my name on it, not a pseudonym. I have nothing to hide. I tell you what Steckdad, I will leave you with my phone number. If you want to call me and tell me who you are, I will answer any question you have, then you can decide for yourself.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jun 3, 2009 8:07:20 GMT -5
We are still going to have to disagree over the need for the 3rd HS. The research that has been done by myself and many others here on green still point to the need for the HS, albeit it's not as dire as 1st indicated.
BTW I've been paying attention to whats going on in the district since way before the 2005 ref.
I took exception to your involvement in the lawsuit which the ultimate goal was MVHS at BB or not at all. To me that contradicts your above stated position. OK I grant you , things have changed, and you have the right to change your mind.
I know you are a CPA/Atty. While am neither of those, I do have an accounting degree too, and have experience doing forensic accounting. I read your handouts from your campaign, and came away with a different interpretation than you. Unfortunately I don't read blue anymore so I won't be able to comment on your posts there.
|
|
|
Post by brant on Jun 3, 2009 8:56:30 GMT -5
I am only going by past history. This thing is over and done with. Why bring it up now? All right say I agree with you that everything was not done on the up and up. Say I agree with you the SD lied, cheated, stole etc. Why not bring it up earlier during the court case? I think the taxpayers that agree with your stance already are aware of and agree with what you are saying. It has been rehashed over and over. And the law says it is legal. Everything has been quiet since the SB elections. Why bring all this material out unless you have future plans for it. The reason I bring "this" up brant, is to try to remind everyone about why we are here. I have laid it out over on Blue under Misc Law-School Board... under District Information. It isn't about you or me or North and South or boundaries or the third HS other than to point out how I believe our Board let everyone down in building a third HS at all. It didn't matter whether it was build at BB or Eola. It was that it was build at all. It is about the effective and efficient use of our assets. Far too many people in D204 are uninformed about their district, for whatever reason. I'm simply trying to show them why it is important to get informed and involved. I am also trying to give people in the District information that the Board will not. For example, long before our Superintendent talked about the budget crunch facing the district, I had already FOIA'd the documents and started distributing them. In the March meeting and the School Board candidate forums when I spoke about those projections many were unaware. When I spoke the following month about the additonal funds used for MV as being illusory people were unaware, may people still don't understand why. I will be laying that out shortly on Blue. In 2011 or earlier we are going to have an operating referendum because of the budget shortfalls in the coming years. Had we thoughtfully analyzed the best way to satisfy our capacity needs that referendum would have been much easier to stomach in that rather than paying our for bricks and mortar to the extent we are in debt and interest, we would have been easily shouldering the necessary referendum. Now we will be doing both. I talk about the past because I am looking at the future. If people don't get involved by seeking information, asking questions and voting, the mistakes of the past are bound to repeat themselves to the point that we will have to make serious cuts in staff and programs to the detriment of our children. I say this as a parent, a CPA and licenced attorney and a concerned citizen of D204. When I started paying attention last January (2008) to the decision making process I started to get concerned. Since then I have spent at least 1000 hours looking at documents, reeducating myself on "fund accounting" and generally looking at the financials and the decision making process that went into the decision to build the third HS, the entire chronology. I hope this helps you understand my motivation. Mr Crockett I do appreciate the work you have put into this. I agree we all need to be as informed as possible. And yes I do believe money has been wasted beginning with the building of Neuqua. There was no reason to build the most expensive HS in the country in 204 and I suppose Mr. Crouse is to blame for that and the fact that he bailed out right in the middle of our current situation. But as a parent I do believe we need a new HS and voted for it both times. Again I commend you for your research but I only question your sincerity due to your past activities concerning the lawsuit which was self serving and only sought to bring relief to one small area who felt their needs overshadowed the rest of the district.
|
|
|
Post by brant on Jun 3, 2009 9:12:52 GMT -5
how have you been affected? that may give a window into your motivation as well. You know Steckdad, your mission in life seems to be to stir the pot, like questioning the motives of Arch and Doc, calling them whiners and bitchers. If anyone should explain themselves it's you. What have you contributed here other than being a thorn in the side of Arch and Doc? Have you put forth any useful facts? Have you ever spoken in front of the Board? How about in forums while running for the Board? Have you ever FOIA'd any documents and brought them to the attention of the community? Every thing I have to say and have said is out there in the public from last year and this. It is also in this board and the Blue, with my name on it, not a pseudonym. I have nothing to hide. I tell you what Steckdad, I will leave you with my phone number. If you want to call me and tell me who you are, I will answer any question you have, then you can decide for yourself. Mr. Crockett the point about these boards is we can all exchange ideas and often become engaged in spirited debate. It is only natural the exchanges become heated concerning such an emotional situation that has dragged on for too long. I myself was once on the blue board and offered my point of view. Doc and Arch disagreed but were respectful and courteous. The same could not be said for some of the others (Macy, Lacy, Casey D204mom, Researching) and a few others who continually ripped into me viciously. I didn't need it and just left. So while Steckdad may say some things you consider below the belt please remember your home board. Steckdad is rather mild considering the above I mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Jun 3, 2009 9:16:25 GMT -5
We are still going to have to disagree over the need for the 3rd HS. The research that has been done by myself and many others here on green still point to the need for the HS, albeit it's not as dire as 1st indicated. BTW I've been paying attention to whats going on in the district since way before the 2005 ref. I took exception to your involvement in the lawsuit which the ultimate goal was MVHS at BB or not at all. To me that contradicts your above stated position. OK I grant you , things have changed, and you have the right to change your mind. I know you are a CPA/Atty. While am neither of those, I do have an accounting degree too, and have experience doing forensic accounting. I read your handouts from your campaign, and came away with a different interpretation than you. Unfortunately I don't read blue anymore so I won't be able to comment on your posts there. WVParent, lay out what you specifically disagree with and, in addition, make your case regarding the need for the third HS, we can do it right here if you like. As for the lawsuit, WVP, it was pretty clear there wasn't going to be a HS at BB, so what was the alternative? Nothing. Which meant to start over, reexamine. In addition, time and information are not static, the more time you spend looking at the issue the more you learn. I would say I have learned quite a bit since the law suit. So, as I said, we can debate right here. Tell me what I have said or written that you disagree with. We can look at each point you bring up. In addition, show me what you and others on the green have that supports the need for a third HS as opposed to an alternative solution. I will do the same. One thing you said in reply #14, "A lot of those "ills" started under the watch of Howie and involved The BB land to start..." I have to say I agree that one of the biggest problems in this distrist is the lack of trust. When you have a board that isn't transparent and isn't honest about what the facts are or has its own agenda, regardless of who it affects, we all lose. I'd like to hear your perspective about that period. Finally, the fact that there are two boards troubles me as well. That, and the use of pseudonyms, only adds to the distrust. Maybe one day this district can be a place where we all get back to the mission statement but I doubt that will happen without everyone finding some common ground for a start. In addition, since we know who each other is, I suggest we get together for lunch one day and see if we can further diffuse the situation.
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Jun 3, 2009 9:35:03 GMT -5
The reason I bring "this" up brant, is to try to remind everyone about why we are here. I have laid it out over on Blue under Misc Law-School Board... under District Information. It isn't about you or me or North and South or boundaries or the third HS other than to point out how I believe our Board let everyone down in building a third HS at all. It didn't matter whether it was build at BB or Eola. It was that it was build at all. It is about the effective and efficient use of our assets. Far too many people in D204 are uninformed about their district, for whatever reason. I'm simply trying to show them why it is important to get informed and involved. I am also trying to give people in the District information that the Board will not. For example, long before our Superintendent talked about the budget crunch facing the district, I had already FOIA'd the documents and started distributing them. In the March meeting and the School Board candidate forums when I spoke about those projections many were unaware. When I spoke the following month about the additonal funds used for MV as being illusory people were unaware, may people still don't understand why. I will be laying that out shortly on Blue. In 2011 or earlier we are going to have an operating referendum because of the budget shortfalls in the coming years. Had we thoughtfully analyzed the best way to satisfy our capacity needs that referendum would have been much easier to stomach in that rather than paying our for bricks and mortar to the extent we are in debt and interest, we would have been easily shouldering the necessary referendum. Now we will be doing both. I talk about the past because I am looking at the future. If people don't get involved by seeking information, asking questions and voting, the mistakes of the past are bound to repeat themselves to the point that we will have to make serious cuts in staff and programs to the detriment of our children. I say this as a parent, a CPA and licenced attorney and a concerned citizen of D204. When I started paying attention last January (2008) to the decision making process I started to get concerned. Since then I have spent at least 1000 hours looking at documents, reeducating myself on "fund accounting" and generally looking at the financials and the decision making process that went into the decision to build the third HS, the entire chronology. I hope this helps you understand my motivation. Mr Crockett I do appreciate the work you have put into this. I agree we all need to be as informed as possible. And yes I do believe money has been wasted beginning with the building of Neuqua. There was no reason to build the most expensive HS in the country in 204 and I suppose Mr. Crouse is to blame for that and the fact that he bailed out right in the middle of our current situation. But as a parent I do believe we need a new HS and voted for it both times. Again I commend you for your research but I only question your sincerity due to your past activities concerning the lawsuit which was self serving and only sought to bring relief to one small area who felt their needs overshadowed the rest of the district. brant, when you support a lawsuit of course it is, to an extent, self serving. That is by definition. The question is, would everyone in the district be better off had it been successful. I believe stopping and reexamining as a community was the best course of action then. That was my motivation. As I looked further into the facts regarding enrollment, etc,, as well as the due diligence of our Board, my opinions were further reinforced. I can assure you that if my motivation was "to bring relief to one small area who felt their needs overshadowed the rest of the district" or that any of the principals who filed the suit believed that, I would not have supported it. As I have said many times, you can attribute motives to anyone you want, but what are your facts to support those conclusions? I can easily do the same with you, but rather than do that I will continue to provide as many facts as I can to shed light on our Board and the decisions they make. To me that is the most productive thing I can do. I have one motiviation, whether you choose to believe it or not, spend the money that we as parent and taxpayers give this district in the best interest of our children and the community. Pure and simple.
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Jun 3, 2009 10:04:34 GMT -5
..... I believe our Board let everyone down in building a third HS at all. It didn't matter whether it was build at BB or Eola. It was that it was build at all. It is about the effective and efficient use of our assets. . michael, I also appreciate your detailed posts and thorough investigation of information. I firmly stand by the community's choice that the third HS will be effective and efficient. (I made a post to that effect, looking into the far future). That is not to say that other ad hoc approaches could have lead us to muddle through the next dozen years and more...but as a matter of quality, 204 is willing to support three HSs. Let me give one very specific example: As a matter of quality, the WV Gold campus being disconnected from the main by two busy streets creates more of a disconnect here than at NV. There is another matter of quality that you are discounting too greatly: the communities desire to get away from the "mega-high schools". People look at all our neighbor communities and typically see ~2500 enrollment HS's. Are we "spending foolishly" to more approach that size when that is what the neighboring HS's do? The community feels that our students will benefit from the smaller schools, as a matter of quality. As others have said, I think the specifics of the 2005-2008 third HS are not the real crux of the issue. I agree with you and others that better communication and openness is what we need. I look forward to the new SB delivering that. Speaking of effective and efficient use of our assets....our time and community attention is an asset. I hope to use much of this in welcoming students transitioning into existing yet different schools and supporting the starting up of brand new ones.
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Jun 3, 2009 10:17:39 GMT -5
You know Steckdad, your mission in life seems to be to stir the pot, like questioning the motives of Arch and Doc, calling them whiners and bitchers. If anyone should explain themselves it's you. What have you contributed here other than being a thorn in the side of Arch and Doc? Have you put forth any useful facts? Have you ever spoken in front of the Board? How about in forums while running for the Board? Have you ever FOIA'd any documents and brought them to the attention of the community? Every thing I have to say and have said is out there in the public from last year and this. It is also in this board and the Blue, with my name on it, not a pseudonym. I have nothing to hide. I tell you what Steckdad, I will leave you with my phone number. If you want to call me and tell me who you are, I will answer any question you have, then you can decide for yourself. Mr. Crockett the point about these boards is we can all exchange ideas and often become engaged in spirited debate. It is only natural the exchanges become heated concerning such an emotional situation that has dragged on for too long. I myself was once on the blue board and offered my point of view. Doc and Arch disagreed but were respectful and courteous. The same could not be said for some of the others (Macy, Lacy, Casey D204mom, Researching) and a few others who continually ripped into me viciously. I didn't need it and just left. So while Steckdad may say some things you consider below the belt please remember your home board. Steckdad is rather mild considering the above I mentioned. You're right brant, there should be an environment where people can voice their opinion without getting ripped into, I agree 100%, but there should also be an environment where peoples' motives aren't questioned as well. Feel free to question what they say by presenting your own facts as asmodeus said earlier. As i said to WVP, the use of pseudonyms imo is unfortunate as it allows people who use them to say what they want without accountability, to the extent their identity isn't otherwise known. I chose to come in here using my own name. As in speaking before the board, or in the forums as I did, I want to be held accountable. I believe everyone should. Finally, as to Steckdad, he certainly hasn't ripped into anyone. However, he continues to criticize people for questioning the Board or decisions they have made. He also appears to want to be the moral compass of the boards questioning the motives of the people here rather than present arguments that support a conclusion. Again, I'm sorry for your experience on Blue. Perhaps I can do something over there to diffuse the rhetoric somewhat.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Jun 3, 2009 11:21:35 GMT -5
I don't know that the community has in fact decided that "mega-schools" are bad. Many mega-schools, such as Stevenson (in Lincolnshire) are tremendous high schools with national reputations for excellence. I'm not arguing that they are better or worse...but it is obvious that students can indeed thrive and can receive wonderful educations from schools that have 4500+ students.
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Jun 3, 2009 11:55:45 GMT -5
I believe the third high school doesn't only address "capacity needs" but continued excellence in education and opportunities for our students. I am thrilled that all of our students will be in smaller high schools rather than going the sardine mode of stuffing them in and getting by. The downturn in the economy has only made the overcrowding accelerate less quickly than it had been, giving us some breathing room so that opening this year instead of last isn't as bad as it could have been.
I voted twice for a third high school, preferred BB location but am thrilled that we are getting the school at all, especially after the lawsuit was filed that could have prevented a third high school from ever being a benefit to any of my own children.
As for using pseudonyms, that's the way the boards were set up in the beginning and I think most of us thought it was going to be very short term (a couple of months) and would have chosen differently had we known we would still be at it more than three years later. Many know who I am but for those who don't, I'm happy to have a little anonymity. I have not exactly been hiding...
I continue to believe that the School Board is made up of volunteers who put in countless hours to do what they believe is right for our district. I still believe they believed they could get BB and that that site was their only plan, and that AME was ruled out initially mostly because they were so certain of BB.
I also would like to believe that most who voted for a third high school did so in order to provide the best for our students, and not because they wanted their children to attend a certain school. By the same token, I hope that voters in this spring's school board election did as I did - voted for those that they thought would do the best job for the district as a whole and whose beliefs/platform most closely matched their own vision of the district.
There are many good things going on in our district all the time or most of us wouldn't be here.
I don't see much value in rehashing whether or not we needed to build a third high school, nor whether or why other sites were better, nor to attribute negative motives to those who made the decisions.
Let's look to the future, be glad that we will have ample space and opportunities for our students, continue to generate excitement in students about the schools they'll be attending this fall, and even possibly give some input as to what sort of superintendent might best lead us in the coming years knowing what issues are coming.
|
|