Post by doctorwho on Aug 29, 2008 15:21:31 GMT -5
Okay - new thread by request" last posts copied over:
QUESTION: Especially since they were talked about by SB and Admin - why did we not do a comprehensive boundary adjustment from ES thru HS since this was the perfect opportunity as our last building project is going up.
Why not:
1/ fix all the anomalies that have happened as areas built out over the years
2/ eliminate all satellite locations as much as possible by assigning kids to the closest ES - don't have any kindergartener traveling 5 miles to an ES
3/ eliminate any need for split ES's by doing the boundaries from the ground ( ES ) upward, not HS down
4/ ensure things that we recongized as awful ( i.e. Ginger Woods commute ) - were eliminated by the addition of a 3rd HS- not moved to a different area
5/ apply common criteria across all 3 levels of schools
6/ prepare for the future by ensuring ES/MS and HS bus routes can be set up as efficiently as possible - eliminate need for ANY double buses with the cost of fuel
7/ bring in an outside consultant specializing in school boundaries to eliminate subjectivity and fear of back door deals. We spent more money of lobbyists and hire a PR guy to try and smooth over some issues here - yet cannt add $100K-$200K to a $150M bill ?
8/ why was January a drop dead date for boundaries - they meant no more in January than they would have meant in May.
9/ We have some ES's underutilized, and some overutilized - why not maximize them as best as one can
10/ why with all the intelligent - professional business people we have on the board are we even having to discuss this today ?
Today at 3:01pm, warriorpride wrote:
Today at 2:48pm, doctorwho wrote:
Thank you sardines and you could not be more right. It is why I chose the word ignored and still believe it to be the correct one. Add to that fact that those who submitted our proposal were people who worked tirelessly over the past 3 years to pass the referendum / get people elected /made trips to political officeholders /made calls to Springfield/ and previously held various offices/positions within the district and the deaf ear and lack of response is even more upsetting. None of that means we should have gotten our way - but one would have hoped it would at least have warranted an explanation- and some public discussion. It did not.
Yes BB would have helped us but not the Ginger Woods area and understand why that site would not have been their first choice - am aware of that. I also was vocal that Brookdale's being the only ES from Hill at WVHS needed to be addressed. I don't mind split MS, but not split 3-1. I don't think you'd find many here who would have minded joining them at WVHS.
As far as Owen East - if they were going to split that school then they should have gone to NV - looking at any map. That is not a large population.
I went on the assumption based on what was being said that ALL boundaries were up for review , including ES. This was likely the last chance to do that and fix places like Lehingh Station also- and all of Peterson - as we will not be building any time in the future.
Why was that not done ? What was the magic of announcing FINAL boundaries in January ? I understand why it was done the first time - that was to secure a passing vote for the referendum - we even hired someone to help us figure that one out. But what was magic about January an not taking another 90 - 120 days to address ALL boundary issues at all levels ?
But once the site changed they had an opportunity for NO ONE to have that lousy commute - and we did nothing about it
Doc, you've had literally hundred's of posts about what's wrong with the boundaries, and how you think they shold be "fixed". You do have a comprehensive (ES, MS, HS) plan that you want to share with us? Maybe you can generate some support here. Until we see something, it's vapor-ware. If you do, please put in a Boundaries thread.
We started on it but ran out of time because of the January deadline. Again what was magical about January ? We already had decided on school placement and the ref monies were in hand.
Do you not agree that a comprehensive plans should have been done ( and indeed was talked about by SB members and admin) - to fix all the anomlaies in attendance boundaries ? We created additional ones instead - it just made no sense.
Also yes, we have a team that could do it and have expertise in a number of the areas involved - however do we not have an admin staff we pay to do that ? We can afford a PR guy but not a logisitical expert project manager ? I would gladly have paid an outside consultant to do the work - we spent money on lobbyists but not that ?
I am sure plenty of people are glad it was another instead of me chosen last time, I would have tried as hard as I could to get an expert on school boundaries to address the entire district since the time was perfect. One board member did suggest that but fell on deaf ears, maybe 2 could have made a dffierence. All discussion on favoritism and 'deals' could have been avoided.
Link to Post - Back to Top Logged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“It takes years to build up trust, and only seconds to destroy it”
QUESTION: Especially since they were talked about by SB and Admin - why did we not do a comprehensive boundary adjustment from ES thru HS since this was the perfect opportunity as our last building project is going up.
Why not:
1/ fix all the anomalies that have happened as areas built out over the years
2/ eliminate all satellite locations as much as possible by assigning kids to the closest ES - don't have any kindergartener traveling 5 miles to an ES
3/ eliminate any need for split ES's by doing the boundaries from the ground ( ES ) upward, not HS down
4/ ensure things that we recongized as awful ( i.e. Ginger Woods commute ) - were eliminated by the addition of a 3rd HS- not moved to a different area
5/ apply common criteria across all 3 levels of schools
6/ prepare for the future by ensuring ES/MS and HS bus routes can be set up as efficiently as possible - eliminate need for ANY double buses with the cost of fuel
7/ bring in an outside consultant specializing in school boundaries to eliminate subjectivity and fear of back door deals. We spent more money of lobbyists and hire a PR guy to try and smooth over some issues here - yet cannt add $100K-$200K to a $150M bill ?
8/ why was January a drop dead date for boundaries - they meant no more in January than they would have meant in May.
9/ We have some ES's underutilized, and some overutilized - why not maximize them as best as one can
10/ why with all the intelligent - professional business people we have on the board are we even having to discuss this today ?
Today at 3:01pm, warriorpride wrote:
Today at 2:48pm, doctorwho wrote:
Thank you sardines and you could not be more right. It is why I chose the word ignored and still believe it to be the correct one. Add to that fact that those who submitted our proposal were people who worked tirelessly over the past 3 years to pass the referendum / get people elected /made trips to political officeholders /made calls to Springfield/ and previously held various offices/positions within the district and the deaf ear and lack of response is even more upsetting. None of that means we should have gotten our way - but one would have hoped it would at least have warranted an explanation- and some public discussion. It did not.
Yes BB would have helped us but not the Ginger Woods area and understand why that site would not have been their first choice - am aware of that. I also was vocal that Brookdale's being the only ES from Hill at WVHS needed to be addressed. I don't mind split MS, but not split 3-1. I don't think you'd find many here who would have minded joining them at WVHS.
As far as Owen East - if they were going to split that school then they should have gone to NV - looking at any map. That is not a large population.
I went on the assumption based on what was being said that ALL boundaries were up for review , including ES. This was likely the last chance to do that and fix places like Lehingh Station also- and all of Peterson - as we will not be building any time in the future.
Why was that not done ? What was the magic of announcing FINAL boundaries in January ? I understand why it was done the first time - that was to secure a passing vote for the referendum - we even hired someone to help us figure that one out. But what was magic about January an not taking another 90 - 120 days to address ALL boundary issues at all levels ?
But once the site changed they had an opportunity for NO ONE to have that lousy commute - and we did nothing about it
Doc, you've had literally hundred's of posts about what's wrong with the boundaries, and how you think they shold be "fixed". You do have a comprehensive (ES, MS, HS) plan that you want to share with us? Maybe you can generate some support here. Until we see something, it's vapor-ware. If you do, please put in a Boundaries thread.
We started on it but ran out of time because of the January deadline. Again what was magical about January ? We already had decided on school placement and the ref monies were in hand.
Do you not agree that a comprehensive plans should have been done ( and indeed was talked about by SB members and admin) - to fix all the anomlaies in attendance boundaries ? We created additional ones instead - it just made no sense.
Also yes, we have a team that could do it and have expertise in a number of the areas involved - however do we not have an admin staff we pay to do that ? We can afford a PR guy but not a logisitical expert project manager ? I would gladly have paid an outside consultant to do the work - we spent money on lobbyists but not that ?
I am sure plenty of people are glad it was another instead of me chosen last time, I would have tried as hard as I could to get an expert on school boundaries to address the entire district since the time was perfect. One board member did suggest that but fell on deaf ears, maybe 2 could have made a dffierence. All discussion on favoritism and 'deals' could have been avoided.
Link to Post - Back to Top Logged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“It takes years to build up trust, and only seconds to destroy it”