|
Post by wvhsparent on Jun 3, 2009 12:44:20 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. ditto. all of my positions have already been posted here (and on blue). I see no need in restating everything. Most also know who I am when they see me (You did ). I've nothing to hide.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Jun 3, 2009 13:18:19 GMT -5
The purpose is to make sure we don't repeat mistakes of the past.
|
|
|
Post by brant on Jun 3, 2009 13:30:32 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. A great post. My thoughts as well and I believe a very sizable portion of the SD agrees. I was fine with where ever they put it just so long as we have a third HS to benefit our kids. The SB has made mistakes to be sure and I haven't approved of everything they have done. But their harshest critics certainly are not without fault themselves; far from it. It is time to move on. Continuing to rehash the past only continues bitterness and resentment which we don't need.
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Jun 3, 2009 13:59:52 GMT -5
The purpose is to make sure we don't repeat mistakes of the past. Decisions have pros and cons, benefits and costs. Just because a decision does not go the way you or I or any one individual would choose, does not make it a "mistake". In this specific case, the choice to build a third HS , one can spend hours,days,weeks trying to score debating points. I dont see much value in that.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Jun 3, 2009 14:18:54 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is that the SB, which controls the majority of taxpayer monies, does not necessarily think of themselves as representatives of all residents. By "all" residents I don't mean those in different geographic areas, but rather "all" meaning all demographics. For example, I believe the SB represents the senior citizen living by himself who has no kids just as much as it works for the students. The SB, however, in all likelihood doesn't care much about the concerns of that senior citizen. And I understand that -- as many have said, the SB members sign on mostly to help better our kids' education, so it's logical they would focus on improving the schools.
So what tends to happen is that when the SB gets an idea in its head -- such as "hey, we ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY need a third high school," it tries to do everything it can to promote that result, even if it means manipulation. When the first ref failed, by definition that meant the majority of voters didn't agree with the SB's proposal. Rather than accept that, however, the SB hired a PR firm to "inform" (scare) voters with the hopes of getting them to vote yes. If that had also failed, there was nothing preventing them from putting it out there again. And again. And again.
This doesn't mean the SB was evil -- as mentioned, it is expected that they will pursue what they truly feel is best for the kids. But they also have a fiscal responsibility to present the facts to all residents in a neutral, objective, emotionless fashion so the voters can come to their own conclusions. Instead, many people feel that the SB went too far in trying to manipulate the results of the second ref.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Jun 3, 2009 20:26:49 GMT -5
The purpose is to make sure we don't repeat mistakes of the past. Decisions have pros and cons, benefits and costs. Just because a decision does not go the way you or I or any one individual would choose, does not make it a "mistake". In this specific case, the choice to build a third HS , one can spend hours,days,weeks trying to score debating points. I dont see much value in that. Amen Gatordog.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Jun 4, 2009 7:13:45 GMT -5
Decisions have pros and cons, benefits and costs. Just because a decision does not go the way you or I or any one individual would choose, does not make it a "mistake". In this specific case, the choice to build a third HS , one can spend hours,days,weeks trying to score debating points. I dont see much value in that. Amen Gatordog. I'm not referring to the basic decision to build a 3rd HS as a mistake. I'm referring to the indisputable, unequivocal mistakes the SB made in the process.
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Jun 4, 2009 23:08:52 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. not sure why posting a dissenting view on blue is being a thorn in the side of the admin. there? Hate to interrupt the negativity over there, but when something is posted that I disagree with, I am going to call baloney...here we go.... a. for the record..I would be technically unaffected. still waiting for your response. b. You calling it stirring the pot. But it is you sir doing the stirring. I am just pointing out you don't need to stir a one quart pot with a 15 foot long spoon. c. compared to yourself i guess I have contributed nothing..making my opinion much less valid than yours. since my kid is in her first year at steck, my contribution record is yet to be determined... d. when I signed up on the boards, I entered the nickname because I thought it was clever, not to be anonymous. I never once have posted a personal attack or anything remotely close to one...I think most people here and a bunch on blue know my name. It doesn't really matter to me what your name or others is though. Your phone number argument is weak. we all have our opinions here and how you are affected shapes them.... thanks...
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jun 5, 2009 7:12:13 GMT -5
I'm not referring to the basic decision to build a 3rd HS as a mistake. I'm referring to the indisputable, unequivocal mistakes the SB made in the process. That could go back to even before 2005 with the Freshman centers IMHO. What I am concerned about is the re-hashing of things that cannot change, or things that people just don't like the decision that was made. Much what has been rehashed falls into those two categories. I have always asked if there is still something anyone feels needs improvement; Mention it, along with your suggestion to improve it.
|
|