|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Apr 14, 2008 22:20:20 GMT -5
We are getting 84.1 acres. 1/2 the TG faction STORMED out, hitting the wall the door was opened with such force. Very immature. I have been struggling all weekend with BB vs Eola because of lawsuits; thinking this was a new opportunity. After the meeting, I feel the right decision was made. Two separate law firms were consulted and both said no precedent. The TG faction laughed and made snide remarks during many of the statements made by the board and even during the speakers time. They are still going to try for 2009. CV was near tears, really, when she withdrew her vote with her erroneous enrollment figures. JC's voice was cracking when she refuted CV's figures. Of course, there was a loud applause for CV. I understand people are emotional but this behavior was unacceptable from some in the audience. So they got opinions from other law firms about the BB suits? That makes me feel better. After the stuff this district has been through, I really hope a judge takes pity on us.
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 14, 2008 22:33:18 GMT -5
I was sitting with the white-shirt group, but I was wearing tan. I never dress right for these things!
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Apr 14, 2008 22:49:49 GMT -5
There goes Sushi, once again when people are feeling their lowest with the negative remarks. I wasn't at the meeting. I didn't want to watch our SB make a big mistake, but how the heck do you know all the upset people were from TG. Just KNOCK IT OFF.
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 14, 2008 22:53:24 GMT -5
It was very interesting to see CV talk about capacity numbers.
Some of my notes include:
She started off by stating she had a different perspective of things. This should be a happy time for the district. This is where she gets a little teary and her voice cracks: She's trying not to make it emotional because she believes it needs to be removed from the decision making process.
There are many different issues from people with legitimate concerns that are personally important to them due to priorities, due to their personal perspective.
2 Pieces:
enrollment figures:
Referendum based on 2006 projections. Based on two years of actual data we now have to compare, in 2013 we should have 8931 students. 200 less than current, 1100 less than GM1 and 849 less than GM2 (I'm hoping I have the numbers right)
Also, must take into consideration the change in land site. Would voters have supported the measure as it stands now in 2006? Especially in this climate of mortgage forclosures.
Issue 2:
No appraisals on AME site.
--AND THE CROWD GOES WILD--
This is where she rescinds her Jan 22 vote for the AME site.
States it's not her idea of best business practice and cannot support this endeavor.
Lots of clapping and shouting.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Apr 14, 2008 22:53:29 GMT -5
There goes Sushi, once again when people are feeling their lowest with the negative remarks. I wasn't at the meeting. I didn't want to watch our SB make a big mistake, but how the heck do you know all the upset people were from TG. Just KNOCK IT OFF. Sushi was probably just tired and meant the NSFOC group. I know that there were some very upset people in the room and they were all wearing STOP stickers. I understand, a lot of emotion.
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 14, 2008 22:55:46 GMT -5
JS spoke next after it calmed down. Thanked all involved. MWGEN, AME, etc. We have to move forward as a district and AME stepped up.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Apr 14, 2008 22:57:05 GMT -5
JS spoke next after it calmed down. Thanked all involved. MWGEN, AME, etc. We have to move forward as a district and AME stepped up. AME really stepped up. I heard they have no land. They are looking.
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 14, 2008 23:02:44 GMT -5
CB was next. Said there were no guaranties in life nor is there any knowing what awaits us down the path. The new information tonight does not cause him any pause. AME is still 12M less. We have always anticipated the lawsuits in our decision. Spoke with two legal firms to discuss the merits. They were advised that there is little to no precedent. No cause to deviate from the path selected 3 months ago. He agrees with the concept of pausing and slowing down, but in reality the world does not pause with us. He went on to talk of:
inflation adding 5-10M to construction materials and costs Thinks they should take the information provided by their legal advisors. Need to move forward. Spoke of accurate info regarding concept of increas in cost for bussing.
By his calculations there is a reduction in miles traveled and a 10-15% decrease on a net basis.
There was much groaning after this.
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 14, 2008 23:07:33 GMT -5
Now it was MM's turn:
Right now there are 100s of children learning in an inappropriate environment. Slowing down would be a disservice. Any drawback of this site can be seen at other sites. His quote of the evening was about a We or Me mentality needs to be a We not Me and then there was something about the rock upon which we build on as an American society. (He kind of lost me there. I have a habit of drifting when I hear his voice. Sorry.)
The school will open in 2009.
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 14, 2008 23:11:42 GMT -5
JC was next and she was a little indignant. Especially in regards to the bandying about of enrollment numbers. From a best practice POV, you do not put your schools at 100% capacity or 105% or 120%. Best practice in the eduational world is 80%. Then she quoted her own numbers of:
2008/2009 8600 2009/2010 9000 the next numbe was 9200 but I didn't get the year.
All numbers are well over max capacity and definitely over optimum level. And there is also MS numbers to contend with. We have to stop the rumors. We need the space and we need it now.
(She was not pleased with Ms. Vickers at all.)
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Apr 14, 2008 23:14:34 GMT -5
I didnt hear anything new from the opposition on how to pay for BB. For example, nobody said to delete the stadium or pool and then pass another ref later.
There was one speaker who said as an option, which he emphasized with his voice, "or give the money back to the taxpayers". I will count him as a no-third-HS person. Other than him, I didnt hear any speaker say we dont need a third HS. (if they did, it was too subtle for me)
And much of the opposition simply said slow down. Do more checking and thinking. CB ,I thought had very good answer on this. In principal, he 100% agreed that a pause could be seen as beneficial. But then noted that unfortanately, the world doesnt pause with us. BG commented that if we wait a year (or two or three?) for lawsuits to finish, there may not be ANY land available in the district from a willing seller. AT commented how the need for the school is now. And 2009 is important because it sees a big jump in HS enrollment. And the MS need is immediate. I personally think it has been a long time since end of Sept with BB verdict and much work has been done on considering different sites and judging them.
SB promised more data to be shown to public. Example is transportation costs.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Apr 14, 2008 23:15:34 GMT -5
Actually the 91M "surplus" was brought up and someone suggested it be used to phase all schools through A/C.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Apr 14, 2008 23:17:25 GMT -5
Good work all...nice job summarizing everything rural....
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 14, 2008 23:29:18 GMT -5
AT addressed JC talking about enrollment. Research shows ideal size between 1000-1500. HS performance will be affected by overcrowding. Overcrowding will reflect poorly on the district. Yes projections were wrong at the time, but at the same time the numbers are over enough to merit the third HS. Respects those that believe we need a 3rd HS. Our district is fiscally responsible. Per pupil expenditures in 204 are ver low in comparison to surrounding districts. We would not receive the recognitions we have if the district were not operating in a responsible way. Agrees with the proposal of sharing data re: Cost: admits the board has not done a good job sharing data. When you have correct information, there are less rumors. They are still very much within budget. Administration will put info on web. Transportation costs: Comparable to time and costs for BB. RE: timelines 2009 vs. 2010 She understands the desire to slow down when you don't have the information. There is a large difference between 08 and 09 in HS student numbers. It would be irresponsible not to try for 2009 if they have the opportunity to. They did not put the timeline ahead of everything else. Always knew that if there were any serious safety concerns they would pull the plug. AME site is further away now and there will be less wetlands to mitigate, less grading. RE: Division in Community. Painful, not wished on anybody. It's very important we all work together to share information. Let everyone understand how we made decisions. It's not about punishing or rewarding any area. Addressing CV concern re: appraisal. However, we all know it takes time. When you consider that taking the extra time to do the appraisal...did not make sense due to time line. They know what the BB verdict was for the land appraisal there. Know what other parcels in the area were sold for. A parcel not too far from AME just sold for 500/acre closer to I-88. Only off by 2 million. This is where another board memeber stepped in Reaffirm that the previous project excess was 4.7 M now its 2M or so. (MM, I think--I just seem to block him out) We're still ahead of our budget. Bids came in lower than expected. There are also site related savings. ETA: Please verify numbers with district video, these are just notes, and I noticed I typed in 100 instead of 1000 above. sorry.
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 14, 2008 23:30:59 GMT -5
BG re: Value of property
Both sides had umpteen appraisals for BB and look where that got us! We're getting 84 acres for 18.9M
225/acre vs. 519/acre
re: comps
Macom was over 300/acre
|
|