Sean,
Thanks for replying. Your answers provide some comfort. However, I take issue with your contention:
"There has been only one decision by the District, and that is where
the school will be located. We feel that is solely our call based on
what we believe is best for the children who will attend the school."
Solely the Board's call? Not likely. Kind of begging to be put in your place on that one, Sean. The sole commandment and most important element of real estate is, of course, LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION. The location of this proposed school will remain the most controversial element of the entire plan and therefore the Public should have been privy to it before said decision was cast. Polly predicts "the one decision [made] by the District" will be the first one vetoed by the public. Considering the location would require homes to be demolished and that the proposed property trade with the Housing Authority could result in public subsidized housing built on the old Glen Oak School site, it amazes me that the School Board didn't predict public outrage on its location "decision."
I appreciate and admire the District's relatively low debt. However, the District still has seven years until its current debt is paid. It is too early to celebrate by acquiring more debt, which is what a bond represents. Moreover, the District needs to come up with a plan to reign its personnel costs before the Public will embrace any new construction. You could build the public school B-8 equivalent of Harvard, but unless and until The Board solves its "annual spending problem", the best new school will solve nothing. In fact, you will ruin the one thing the District may have going for it- it's comparable low debt. No person, business, or institution with a serious "cash flow problem" would be well advised to solve the situation with yet more debt.
As I see it, The Board has four options:
1. Cut waste and/or expenses, (Think Edison)
2. Re-negotiate contracts/benefits with Unions, (Think strike)
3. Raise taxes, (Think bodyguard)
4. Combination of the above. (Think riots)
I think number four is the most responsible alternative, although it won't be popular. I'd rather chew glass than take your job. If your goal is to make Peoria Public Schools the place where parents want to have their kids get an education LONG TERM, The Board must admit and respond to all of its financial problems/mistakes. Otherwise a new school, regardless of its location, is simply frosting on a manure cake.
God speed,
Polly
If your mind is too open, your brain will fall out. Warning: Names, identities, descriptions, and pictures have been changed and/or used to protect the innocent as well as the guilty. PollyPeoria should not be used or quoted as a source for your senior college thesis.
Friday, April 7
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
Links
- Batten Disease Home Page
- Peoria Pundits
- Peoria Chronicle
- Peoria Story
- Peoria Illinoisan
- Merle Widmer's Peoria Watch
- Ahl Things Considered
- Eyebrows McGee Plays in Peoria
- Lollygaggin
- Scott's Blog Experience
- Chef Kevin's Culinary Rant & Raves
- Obrien's Briar Patch
- Market 117
- Vonster
- Pasghetti Place
- Dying In Haiti
- A Bird In The Hand
6 comments:
Mr Matheson says: "There has been only one decision by the District, and that is where the school will be located. We feel that is solely our call based on what we believe is best for the children who will attend the school."
WHT do you believe this? I would really like to hear an HONEST reason why move to Glen Oak Park. No one can tell me that a new school located in the proposed Glen Oak Park location is going to teach kids any better than a new school built on the current Glen Oak site. One may argue that extracurricular and outside activities may be enhanced by the park like atmosphere that the new location will provide, but is that why children are going to school? Please don't insult me by asking about my grade school...it was mostly blacktop.
It's not safer: I can't believe that a huge majority of B-8 graders crossing Prospect twice a day coupled with the temptation of the lagoon is best for "our" children. The best location is the location where it currently stands as there is less traffic and it is more centralized.
Are we looking to teach our children or are we looking for bells and whistles to impress someone?
Could Mr. Matheson explain why putting up a new building on Glen Oak Park property makes more sense than building where the current Glen Oak School is?
Or does that land-swap deal make that point moot?
I sure wouldn't feel too comfortable sending my child to school on the speedway that is Prospect.
Also, Mr. Matheson, instead of assuming that "what we believe is best for the children who will attend the school", wouldn't some dialogue with the people who will be affected by this decision been more sensible?
If District 150 could no longer afford to bus any but the furthest students to school, due to high oil prices, would Prospect be the best location? There is a reason many of these old schools are where they are. Kids WALKED to school. Putting a busy street in their way is asinine.
It amazes me to what degree District 150 busses their student population. They will bus you a measily 4 blocks. That is a 15 minute leasurely walk one way.
Don't think oil isn't going to rise higher. It most certainly will. The demographics assure it.
On another note... look at Sterling Middle School or Loucks on University. No one slows down for the school zone. There is virtually ZERO effort by the police to enforce it either. Yet you see lots of kids walking along the well maintained sidewalks. On the upside, they are 5th-8th graders who should be a little wiser about busy streets. I shudder at having grade schoolers walking home along there.
I still say you can't trust a guy who looks like he's from the Disney-fied "Leave It To Beaver" rip-off... even if he DOES have a PhD... can't you get one of those from University of Phoenix, anyhow?
Wildlife prarie park makes too much sense, massive amounts of open space, the possibility for building enclusures so large and unique that the Chicago zoo would be envious. The place has wonderful overbuilt structures and the support of politicians statewide as well as private folks that have always donated enough money to keep it in the black. The fact that B. Noble has a rabid hatred for Mr. Rutherford, the man that built the place on the private dime, has kept any discussion of the zoo moving to this absolutely incredible location off the table. Oh and did I metion the train.....seems to scream big time big city zoo....why do they insist on re-inventing the wheel.
If you don't like the asphalt, tear it up and plant some grass. Seems cheaper than buying up 15 acres.
People forget why the asphalt was layed in the first place; to cut down on landscaping budgets.
As to actually using all that grass? Pfft... I drive by Sterling Middle school a lot and .. well... the only Phys Ed I ever see outside is a bunch of pre-teens milling about next to the building. Not exactly a compelling case.
Post a Comment