Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
dance teams are not school sponsored at any school. they are booster club sports and supported by fees and parents. I think lacrosse functions the same way.
for the record lacrosse is club BUT starting next year becomes a school sponsored sport throughout Union County (2014-2015)
I found it odd some BOE members are totally against the idea of trailers/mobile classrooms due to what they deem is a safety issue….so if its a safety issue, why are they being used at multiple schools now?
Absolutely! If it was a safety issue then why are they using trailers at Parkwood Middle and Parkwood High, two of the schools that are below capacity?
well just 3 years ago the ones outside MRMS were used only rarely. Then as the school became too full the used them but only as a last resort. I am assuming that the other schools have done the same thing. This year they are full. If they had not have had them they would have been capped before they were is my guess
mewith3….i get the reason they are using them. But some Board members were vehemently opposed due to what they deemed is a serious safety concern, yet you currently have trailers at multiple schools being used for years….if it was such a serious safety concern, why haven't they been eliminated immediately?
I found it odd some BOE members are totally against the idea of trailers/mobile classrooms due to what they deem is a safety issue….so if its a safety issue, why are they being used at multiple schools now?
Great question. I found that interesting as well. Shootings and natural disasters were mentioned, yes? All kids are at risk for this in trailers. My issue has always been with small kids and having to wander outside alone to use the bathroom, etc. But there are obvious risks which even the board is recognizing. So yet why do we use them? (I assume to avoid the chaos that is occurring right this very moment with the suggestion of redistricting).
Thats my point Sunshine, you seem always ready to do "battle"….got to prove your point and be right at the expense of everything else. Most of us on here want whats best for the "Snowflakes", you seem to want efficient snowplows to clear those snowflakes away as quickly as possible
I have being trying to explain how large organizations, like UCPS, make decisions. It may seem cold to many or seem like its all about efficiency and numbers but it has to be in the end. UCPS system has an $300M+ annual budget to provide services to over 42,000 students by using over 1,000 employees and 52 schools with about 50,000 seats. It can't use emotion in decision making.
Based upon the presentation last night it looks like Ellis and Webb have thought this thru. They laid out 8 options with the costs involved. Not one, not two, eight. By laying out costs involved with each option they are saying to the BoE "here you go, make a decision, and make a decision now". You want to leave the cap in place, fine, we have to cut $2M out of the planned budget. Where do those cuts come from? Well last time there were big cuts it was teacher assistants, wasn't it, so let's cut $2M worth of teacher assistants. You want to do something more expensive, we will just cut more. That's the way it works. Money doesn't grow on trees despite what some including my snowflakes say. Why does a decision need to be made now? Because the budget needs to be presented to the BoE on April 1. Why then? Because it needs to go to the BoCC in early May. It could get even uglier once the state allotments are received in February.
This process is messier and more emotional because politicians and parents are involved.
well just 3 years ago the ones outside MRMS were used only rarely. Then as the school became too full the used them but only as a last resort. I am assuming that the other schools have done the same thing. This year they are full. If they had not have had them they would have been capped before they were is my guess
And schools like Rocky River have used them since the year after they opened. SVHS has had them for at least 7 years (when my oldest was there). So I'm not buying that they are all of a sudden a safety issue.
They laid out options and costs yes. But saying that redistricting costs $0 is not accurate. If that's the case, where is all the extra money going to come from to bus so many kids so much farther? Diesel isn't free.
And as far as year round/multi track....my oldest was on a year round schedule when he was in elementary school. The schools had no problem keeping siblings on the same schedule so it's not a horrendous burden.
I found it odd some BOE members are totally against the idea of trailers/mobile classrooms due to what they deem is a safety issue….so if its a safety issue, why are they being used at multiple schools now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINYTransplant
Absolutely! If it was a safety issue then why are they using trailers at Parkwood Middle and Parkwood High, two of the schools that are below capacity?
They have been rolling the dice, especially on the security issue, and they know this.
I found the reported comment of one BoE member to be very odd considering things.
Then again most people don't talk to their snowflakes about what goes on at school or know about trailer use or think about things like security fences in the first place.
Just because people haven't heard about any incidents doesn't mean there haven't been any...
They laid out options and costs yes. But saying that redistricting costs $0 is not accurate. If that's the case, where is all the extra money going to come from to bus so many kids so much farther? Diesel isn't free.
And as far as year round/multi track....my oldest was on a year round schedule when he was in elementary school. The schools had no problem keeping siblings on the same schedule so it's not a horrendous burden.
Just putting those out there.
Transportation is state funded. UCPS will take a hit if the busses are inefficient. It does not appear that efficiency is determined by total distance but rather utilization of the buses.
The "safety" concern around trailers is valid, but a necessary evil - they are used everywhere... logically, there's a direct correlation between the amount of trailers and the perceived safety. The time needed to get all the kids quickly into brick and mortar is impacted exponentially as you increase the number of trailers. 5 trailers full of kids will happen way quicker than 10. Plus as more and more trailers are used, security becomes harder and harder.
The way I see it, in context to the caps and how bad the overcrowding gets per the forecast, the safety of trailers is secondary... The primary problem is that trailers aren't free. Dr Webb put an estimate down of about $750k for 10 trailers. A plan to just keep buying trailers to handle the overcrowding over the next several years is simply a bad one. Plus there are additional costs beyond just the trailers themselves. They will need to cut from the already slim budget to find money each year for the trailer parks. Where is Savage and Hodges going to cut to pay for all that?
They need to build or expand schools. They need to justify that by using all the seats in the county efficiently.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
