Just the facts

Comments

eudorqian 6 years, 10 months ago

Make home schooling mandatory in eudora, problem solved!

0

EudoraBoss 6 years, 10 months ago

eudorqian, there's an idea. Then we could tear down all the "old" schools and put in more houses that will be falling down in 40 years. LOL

0

DOUGHBOY 6 years, 10 months ago

Well put, Greenman!

In fact, it is apparent that regardless of the plan, the no voters on this forum are so hung up in the past and paranoid of their perceived lies from the district that they will never be satisfied with what the district proposes.

0

eudorqian 6 years, 10 months ago

Is there any rules/regulations that a bar & school can operate within so many feet of each other?..just wondered with this new school location, how that impacted Cecil Monday's next door.

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

Do you feel we need 46 acres to build a new school on ? Do you think we can not add on to our existing schools ? Do you see your tax`s going down with this bond ? If you have to stop and think about any of the above, that is a reason for a NO VOTE. A no vote will lead to a better system and a much better Eudora. VOTE NO. School Bond. Vote smart and vote wize.

0

proudcitizen 6 years, 10 months ago

Why would you expect taxes to go down with a bond? Is it just about money? Then ok, if a decrease in your taxes is your objective, then this bond is not for you. Do I want to add on to Nottingham? Have you smelled it lately? Do we need 46 acres for a new school? Heavens no! But I don't know how much land it takes to build a large elementary school, (built for growth), a couple of parking lots, a bus turn around, a couple of ball fields (actually 3 weren't there?) and 10 or so acres of green space. Do you? A better system? Show me, with truths, no more fiction.

0

proudcitizen 6 years, 10 months ago

There is so much documentation out there that it's amazing that so much falsehood can be allowed to go unchecked on this forum. However, fiction has found a home concerning this bond issue. First of all, it's totally inconceivable that the school board would propose a figure (38%) that was unsubstantiated. And ok, put your doubting Thomas hats on and spin that old worn out dialog..."all politicians are justa buncha crooks and they'll tell you anything you wanna hear." Oh please! Kick your mentality up a notch and look it up. It's not hard to find. Fact: The state aid is approved by the Kansas legislature and has been in effect since 1992. This aid was used to help build both the current Eudora Middle School and Eudora High School. In fact, Eudora was the first community to take advantage of this funding when the bond was passed to pay for the current middle school in 1992. The funding program continues to be active and current at this time. Kansas Deputy Commissioner of Education Dale Dennis provided this information directly to the district on Oct. 22, 2007: "The bond and interest state aid for USD 491 for the 2007-08 is 38 percent. This percentage is computed based upon the assessed valuation per pupil. ... This issue is outlined in KSA 75-2319 et seq." The KSDE finance office may be reached at 785-296-3872 if further documentation is desired. This information comes from the district website, however...the KSA 75-2319 information is located at http://kansasstatutes.lesterama.org/Chapter_75/Article_23/75-2319.html Just read it.
Eudora is made up of intelligent people and antagonists. Fortunately the intelligent people will not have trouble finding the truth in this whole issue. This bond is the best and most affordable opportunity this community has had in a long time. Just ask the teachers who have publically come out in support. I'm locking arms with the people who have the sense to see the timing is right. VOTE YES! It truly is a no brainer.

0

EudoraBoss 6 years, 10 months ago

Truths? How about bringing back the plan that we were shown when they got the high school bond passed, which is now the middle school. We liked that plan and voted for it. We were told that this IS the future of where we were headed, with all of our schools on the same property. We were told and told and told that this is the TRUTH, we can do ALL of this with this one property, it is big enough that this plan WILL WORK for Eudora.

Truth? What about the fact that they told us that building a high school on the opposite side of the highway from the football field would NOT be a safety problem. They told us that they would bus all the kids back and forth and it would NOT be a problem. Why all of a sudden is this now a problem?

Truth? You are right, the truth is this funding has been there and will be there. The school board is trying to make you believe that this program will be gone if this bond does not pass.

Truth? Truth is, we don't need 46 acres to build another school on, we already have the room to build it. This is just more foolish spending and attempts to cover up what they have told us before to get what they want.

Enough is enough. No more foolish spending. VOTE NO.

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

proud, do you know what refurb means ? It would make Nottingham like new again and very safe and not smelly. Do you know the term add on ? This would change all the space to the south that is now portable units, to usable classroom space instead of buying new land and building a whole new school. It is a win win deal.Yes any plan will cost us, but a smart plan will get us more bang for our education buck. If we vote this plan down and submit a 25 million dollar plan and the state does kick in the 38% we just saved many many millions of $$$$$$.Then we work on a plan to get our teachers paid better to keep them here. There are several issues on this one bond plan we have before us now. 1. Build an uneeded school. 2.Build onto west elementry(needed).3. Get teachers paid better ( needed ) 4. Build a new football and track area ( Not needed) 5. Some administartive mumbo jumbo not realy clear to anyone. This is why this bond stinks, we need to stop it and get another plan in place. ALL school board meetings in the future should be open to the public and at a time when most can make it. Now they have secret ones and too early in the evening when folks are driving home. That is why some dont go to them, they cant.Believe me some folks have been awakend by this issue and will go to meetings now.A NO VOTE will save us millions and get us better schools as well. VOTE NO, VOTE SMART..

0

lmatt 6 years, 10 months ago

I saw a post earlier that mentioned class sizes. Kids per class. How many kids are now in a class room? What determines this number, if anything? Also, has anyone noticed the great old house on the proposed property that will be torn down for the new school? Guess old victorian style houses in Eudora dont mean anything to people.

0

dbmskr 6 years, 10 months ago

  1. Build a needed school. The teachers who educate the kids-back this bond-they believe it is needed. The same teachers who watched the kids lining the hallways and watching videos and having lessons in the main building the other day when it was pouring because they couldn't get the kids back to those wonderful modulars many are thrilled with. Those same teachers that see a need and have backed the need in writing! The teacher's union would not endorse this plan if they did not see the need.

We keeping hearing refurb, refurb, refurb-but no plan for how that can occur without disrupting our day, endangering our kids, not add more craziness to our parking situation along with solving the drop off and dismissal issues and make the school new like is proposed.

0

proudcitizen 6 years, 10 months ago

MoneyWatch, This is too easy. Ok again...let's look at the facts. If you have educated yourself on this bond, you will see what is fact and what is fiction. It isn't rocket science to see that Nottingham is overcrowded, a traffic nightmare and deteriorating.
1)An elementary school somewhere off Church Street is very much needed. 2)Building on to West Elementary? Actually it's renovating. Ok, they are "building on" additional bathrooms to accommodate younger children. 3)Although this bond issue has nothing to do with teachers getting paid better, it will relieve the general fund of many burdens....leaving money for salarys. If this bond does not pass, teachers will not only be subjected to more overcrowding, insufficient facilities, etc. but increases in salary's would be less likely. 4) A new stadium is needed. Ask any soccer player or football fan that would actually like to sit in the stadium, or child that has to run across Church street because there is limited parking at Laws Field. (like I said, this is too easy) And lastly... 5)Nothing in this bond even relates to anything in administration. Could you (MW) be talking about the Technical Facility? You know, the one that will be built on the High School/Middle School campus.
Please please use the facts. Yes much of this is opinion and opinions often differ, but when you want to sway public opinion, have truthful information to back it up.

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

There is my point. It is all shadowed for us to think one thing and get another. You got it.new bathrooms (add on) new football field ( are we 8-0 now ) anyone been hurt while walking to and from ever ???? Is not easy for our older folks to walk to and from Laws Field ?????? Dispose of Nottingham and then what ? new school on 46 , yea 46 acres ???? this is BS.... The little secret ideas that are blended into the bond stink. VOTE NO and get the answers in black and white. Think smart VOTE NO and get a good plan in place.

0

mattg 6 years, 10 months ago

And what happens to the school during a $25 million renovation? Where do all the students go? Any guarantee that the state would pitch in 38% for a renovation as opposed to a new building? Where would parking go for a renovation?

The school board has taken all these questions into consideration, and has found that the best solution is to build a new school. In small communities like ours, schools make or break the town's success. Vote YES for our kids future. Vote YES for the towns future, promoting economic and commercial growth. Vote YES for the big picture.

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

Give up before your head hurts from banging it against the wall. Proudcitizen, you've made the mistake of pointing out all of the flaws in their plans and arguments - so what do they do? Change the argument. Wrong on 38% - well then what about the 46 acres - oh wrong on the need for that - well then, what about adding on - doesn't make sense - well then what about what they told us in the past - the community has changed and the plan has changed, (I'd say to have two fairly new buildings already paid off is pretty darn good planning!) - well, that 38% isn't for sure - here's the proof - well that's too much land - and around we go.

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

mattg The renovation would be done durring the off time (summer) . The addition could be done the next off time or even while school is on. The whole north end (ballfields) could be used for parking.This is more than enough area for a nice lot and a safe area for picking up the kids. The ball field can be replaced very easy, like other towns let private land owners build them and earn money from them and pay tax`s on them (good business)This is working for Many towns such as Spring Hill, Edgerton , Lawrence , Olathe and many more. Just ask Danny Manning if it is a great plan. What most dont know and havent been told. Nottingham can be more than doubled in classroom space, and be like a whole new school.It could take us 10 15 or even 20 years down the road, depending on growth. At this time growth is stalled and no start up in sight.Matt, think about it please. Yes more space is needed. Yes our kids are our future. We need to keep things in perspective though, do you not agree ?Why 46 acres, nobody can tell me why. Not even a board member will answer this. Why not if it has to be, why not 15 acres ? Why not over off towards the north several blocks ? Land is lots cheaper and the utilities are over there.This is the stuff that needs to be thought over and changed to do it right if at all. Nottingham will be a better choice to refurb and add onto.The rentevation will not cost 25 million either. It would be less and if the state will kick some in BONUS !!!!!! You , Me , DC , Greenman and all of us can get involved when we stop this plan and get another that is best for eveyone.That is what i am asking folks to do. We agree on lots of points, but like a jury, we need to be 100% on all features of the plan and we are not.This is a huge issue and a huge sum of money we have to think about. It will affect you me and all of us.I also ask you this. If we build a new school, we still will have the water issue with build up in the pipes and then what , build another school ? Lets fix what we have and have the city fix there end and then we have what we need to go into the future, sound fair ?

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

Having had some dealings with the folks in the K-10 association, I do believe there are more than a few pretty good business minds in the group. Here is what they have to say in a letter to the editor:

On behalf of the K-10 Corridor Association Inc., I want to express the association's support for the Eudora USD 491 measure on the Nov. 6 ballot. A "Yes" vote on Nov. 6 will contribute to Eudora's future success as a place to live, work and raise a family.

The growth and success of all of the communities along the Kansas Highway10 corridor has been the high quality of our public education systems, the quality of the facilities and the strong business and voter support for public schools. Great schools and school facilities contribute to economic development of our cities. As noted in the association's goals, support for community facilities attracts high quality residential, commercial and industrial development.

I encourage the voters in the Eudora School District to vote 'yes' on Nov. 6.

Kathleen Huttman, president

K-10 Association Inc.

0

Jason_Bourne 6 years, 10 months ago

As a parent in this community in the "middle class" I look to vote YES after attending a "neighborhood meeting" with our superintendent. Do I look forward to our taxes going up, not really? However, I went into the meeting with an open mind, thinking about all issues, not just money. I have two young children in the district and we moved over here form Lawrence because we liked the idea of small town living. That "idea" can include newer schools and athletic fields. I hated the fact that in Lawrence our kids would be in modular trailers having to move back and forth between classes. Well, we are back at that now. Again, not that rough to walk, they enjoy playing, but I don't think they're ready for "campus life" just yet. I can see that if this doesn't pass, we will be dumping more money into these trailers to equip them for plumbing, electrical, etc. I look at this like the Pool issue, I saw a bunch of folks who were against it for the start no matter how it was explained. My taxes didn't go up that much and we've enjoyed the pool since it opened. We traveled to Baldwin or Gardner to swim in their pool until we got ours built here. Can't really just change schools that easily though.

I can see the same issue for the school, yeah, it's a lot of money, but given the track record of the district here, they appear to know what is actually going on. I've read the board here and finally decided to weigh in. I see folks who hate the idea and don't really have had facts and I've been to a meeting. I've visited with my children's' teachers and they appear to be fully in support of this bond. We are out of space-not running close, but actually out of space now. Yeah, I don't remember life in grade school, but based on what I'm seeing now, we need a new building. If the bond does not pass, we will have to pay more money in the future, the land price will go up, the construction price will go up and that in turn leads to my taxes going up even more, which to me = not a good solution. Why not pass it now? Vote YES

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

Just wondering if she "Kathleen " Lives in Eudora, or in the school district ? No big deal just wondered. Keep in mind a NO VOTE is a Smart Vote Nov 6th .

0

EudoraBoss 6 years, 10 months ago

Jason probably the best reason that your taxes haven't gone up much because of the pool is the fact that it's not on your tax roles yet. When you get your tax statement very soon, you will see that the city added nearly 3 mils to your taxes for that pool.

0

dad3kids 6 years, 10 months ago

My kids took a small check with most of the kids they have classes with and most don,t seem to back the bond the way it is now. They seem to think like most adults do , that it is too much now.I just thought that would be some good information to have.I also want to let anyone who is interested in knowing YOU CAN NOT PUT SIGNS ON THE POLES around town.I think that was in poor taste so whoever it is, please don,t.Thats not good to show our kids or other adults.

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

Having had some dealings with the folks in the K-10 association, I do believe there are more than a few pretty good business minds in the group. Here is what they have to say in a letter to the editor:

On behalf of the K-10 Corridor Association Inc., I want to express the association's support for the Eudora USD 491 measure on the Nov. 6 ballot. A "Yes" vote on Nov. 6 will contribute to Eudora's future success as a place to live, work and raise a family.

The growth and success of all of the communities along the Kansas Highway10 corridor has been the high quality of our public education systems, the quality of the facilities and the strong business and voter support for public schools. Great schools and school facilities contribute to economic development of our cities. As noted in the association's goals, support for community facilities attracts high quality residential, commercial and industrial development.

I encourage the voters in the Eudora School District to vote 'yes' on Nov. 6.

Kathleen Huttman, president

K-10 Association Inc.

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

Just wondering if she "Kathleen " Lives in Eudora, or in the school district ? No big deal just wondered. Keep in mind a NO VOTE is a Smart Vote Nov 6th .

0

minnie3 6 years, 10 months ago

Apparently some area communities are willing to take the plunge. Basehor-Linwood just passed their $39.9 million school bond proposal. It passed by only 29 votes.

0

Proud2bEudoraMom 6 years, 10 months ago

" Number 5 small school in the KC Star this week. Check it out in today's paper!" October 18, 2007...previously posted.

I sit back and listen to everyone complain about their taxes, however they don't get the fact that the bond is not going to raise their taxes.

Would it be different if we were an outstanding school district, that was reaching for excellance, passing standard education by leaps and bounds. Constantly pushing our children to excell and receiving awards for our education. Would it help to know that our school is looked at by surrounding communitites as a role model? Would it help to know that our teachers are highly qualified, our children love them and receive awards for their abilities? Would it help if our community stood behind our athletes and cheered them on every step of the way? Would it help to know that our football team is ranked in the top 25 of the state?

WOW! Look at what we can do now, and yet you don't want to praise our students, teachers and administrators with a new school that they deserve, they earned, they worked hard for.

Eudora has an excellant school program and our children deserve more. I am voting yes.

0

thiisiknow 6 years, 10 months ago

We are ranked with the conditions we have in place!? How could that be? I am very proud of our students and the teachers are OUTSTANDING!!! It is nothing against either if a voter chooses to vote against the bond. I have to vote my conscious and my pocketbook. I would love to see Eudora get alot of the city issues fixed before we build a new school. We can save and plan better so we are not building every few years.The buildings that were built previously also were built using numbers of enrollment increases and the numbers LIED!!!. Or, we just built enough to get by. Do we just want to build enough to get by again? Let's plan better.

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

So, thisiknow, do you think the current plan should include more space? I don't understand. The district did the most with what the public allowed them to spend in the past. The middle and high school are paid off! They were both designed and built with expansion in mind. I guess I don't see where the poor planning was. The buildings are serving their purpose and are paid off and the district is asking to continue the debt to plan for more growth. Again, I'm sorry about the bitterness that is obviously still with some of you from the past but a no vote will create the same situation: throwing good money after bad at Nottingham and not meeting the needs for growth. Eventually a bond will pass and we'll get less for more money AND STILL NOT MEET THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. And then we'll be right back here AGAIN a few years after that with another bond on the table. I was involved with a bond issue in another district. It took 7 elections to pass the issue over 5 five years. The original plan called for over 100,000 sqft at a cost of around 5 million - what did we get when it finally passed? Less than 80,000 sqft at a cost of almost 9 million and five years of propping up and maintaining an obsolete building. I hope that's won't happen here.

And with regard to the land issue - it is smart planning, if the ground is available in convenient area, to have enough land in order to create a buffer around the building. The land in questions has been compared to that needed to build a Wal-mart. Could be. However, Wal-mart, within reason, doesn't really care what's next to it. The district has an obligation to select property that they know will be a good, safe location for a long period of time. You can cram a school into a smaller space and save some money but you lose control over who moves in next door. The district has obligations some of you don't or won't consider.

0

Eudorkie 6 years, 10 months ago

thiisiknow: "I would love to see Eudora get alot of the city issues fixed before we build a new school. We can save and plan better so we are not building every few years.The buildings that were built previously also were built using numbers of enrollment increases and the numbers LIED!!!."

What numbers lied? Our student base has grown at a rate of 65% over the last 15 years! This is unpresidented when Lawrence struggles to see any enrollment growth! Since building the Middle School(originally the new High School) our District leaders have warned us we would be needing more schools. AND they consistantly underestimated enrollment growth.

How can you compute more children and fewer problems? Where is the parking, traffic flow and game day traffic going to go when you take up the parking lot with your "renovation"?

What kind of traffic do you expect to see when the Tonganoxie Turnpike exchange opens, feeding Levenworth 1 into Eudora? Especially during game days?

I am so frustrated with the conspiracy theory slant to these posts. If you are so sure the Board Members and school leaders are so crooked, why do you continue to vote them in to office? You talk about your "groups" I wonder if you are not just 5 - 10 conspirators out of the 4500+ citizens Eudora now boasts.

I'm going to vote "YES" on the forward thinking plans for my grandchild's future.

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

Desoto, bond failed, They are money smart voters.They want to get it right and do what needs to be done that the city can afford.We will see how our vote turns out. I look forward to tuesday and hearing the numbers. Remember a NO VOTE will get us the classroom space needed and an even better school system. VOTE NO Tuesday Nov 6th...

0

dbmskr 6 years, 10 months ago

DeSoto also has buildings that are not full. They have built and built and built, but they do not have the enrollment growth that we are seeing. Comparing us to DeSoto is like comparing us to Lawrence-we are in a league of our own and we have a serious need at this present moment. The teachers back this plan-they see the need and the bond plans for the future, plenty of room for growth in the preschool/kindergarten building, new elementary and beyond. Could we possibly see that building at capacity down the road-absolutely, but we aren't predicting 300+ new elementary students in the next couple of years, but, wow wouldn't that be a great problem to have-more students means more taxpayers, just what the opponents are wanting!

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

At least two of the board members in De Soto were against the bond - I know, they are my customers. Can you imagine? The board presenting the bond being split? AND IT NEARLY PASSED!!!! De Soto, although 6 miles away, is a COMPLETELY different district than Eudora. Eudora is a community - De Soto is being sucked in by sprawl. There is De Soto and there is Shawnee, so much turmoil. We are blessed to have an actual community with no sprawl from a metropolitan area - what a great place to move to - especially with a new elmentary school and a vision for the future! Basehor would probably be a better, although somewhat flawed comparison - ummm...I believe their issue passed.

Nice try, though - Moneydude.

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

BUT the ones that did pass, did not have the issues at hand we do.They needed new schools, Eudora does not. We just need to add on to what we have to get us good for 15 years or even 20. To hit the national average of student 2 teacher ratio of 19.2 to 1 , we would need to gain about 346 students with what space we have now. I think we are at a fair rate "12-1 to 15-1 but i do agree we need to add on and gain some space anyway to give the kids a better education and quality as well.With Eudora,s last 3 years growth rate , hate to say it, but we are starting to shrink.Check out the latest census numbers. We went down acording to the feds numbers.Also the number of couples having kids has droped dramaticly and a large portion are not having any kidos. Glad i was born before this started .My opinion, a NO VOTE is best for us all.

0

Eudorkie 6 years, 10 months ago

Money Watch, are you suggesting Eudora should increase our student/teacher ratio to 19 to 1? Are you kidding? Do you understand that Eudora BOASTS of our student/teacher ratio? That more actual teaching happens in less time when there is a lower student/teacher ratio? Do you understand how hard it is to teach with a 19 to 1 ratio? It is hard enough when the 15 students in your class are all on different levels, with different learning styles and ONE teacher is suppose to reach every one untill they LEARN? I for one want to keep our student/teacher ratio lower than the national average so our children have more one-on-one time with the teacher and the teacher can build relationships with their students. Vote "Yes" for the good of our community, students and teachers!

0

MoneyWatch 6 years, 10 months ago

19-1 That is the average in the US as of now.To be at that rate though, we would need to have 346 more students in the district ( aprox growth ) I feel the mational average is good, but to keep it 1 or 2 below is good as well. I will say this, while i was in school we had 1 teacher and 60 students in some classes. Lots of very very smart people came from those large classes. I feel a good teacher can teach a large class of 20 students, if not, just might be time for that teacher to think about another job. If kids cant be kept interested and learn, that i think is a teachers issue. Sorry to get off track. Remember a NO VOTE is a SMART VOTE. My independant poll has came up with 11 yes votes 157 NO VOTES. VOTE NO NOV 6th......

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

Money, it all depends on how you are counting - are you dividing by actual classroom teachers or by all certified personnel? Makes a big difference. But we are talking about facilities here. Eudora has seen steady four percent growth the last nine years. That IS a fact. You site poor planning in the past, yet you don't want them to plan for the future - only put on band-aids for fifteen or twenty years. I'm trying to be civil, but it is obvious you know very little about schools or how to run them. Why don't you leave that to the professionals and you go back to doing scientific polls on local issues of import.

0

EudoraBoss 6 years, 10 months ago

I can remember having around 40 in our classes at Nottingham back in the 70's. I think most of us turned out fine. I don't have a problem, as most people don't, with a new school or adding on to what we have. I just don't think that putting a school on THAT property is a good idea.

Marty said that one of the traffic issues is a proposed bank at 14th and Elm. BULL. There IS a bank at 14th and Elm and has never caused a traffic issue. Even the bank that is downtown, that is proposed to move there is NEVER busy between 7 and 8 in the morning and during the afternoon when school is out. The only time that banks have a traffic issue are on Friday nights. Nothing would be wrong with building a new elementary on the high school property like was proposed in the beginning.

We have the property, put it under a roof instead of mowing dozens of acres. The district is not in the lawn care business.

I think that if a plan was presented that went along with the original plan that "they" told us, there would not be near as much opposition.

One other point, Phil Katzenmeier is quoted in the paper that we have the "worst" facilities of the places that we compete, and that it is "unsafe" to bus kids. Does that mean that the district "lied" to us when this issue was brought up in the early 90's and they said that it WAS NOT a problem to bus the kids from the high school to Laws field? Or did that change now to suit their wants? The people that have been here through the school bond issues KNOW what was told to us then.

Enough is enough. VOTE NO.

0

DOUGHBOY 6 years, 10 months ago

60 students in some classes?!?!? Holey moley! Was that Kindergarten? I went to a high school with over 2,000 students and do not recall any classes with that many students. That is too funny! Wait, did I log on to the wrong forum? Are we passing a bond to build a college or university or an elementary school? I guess "back in the day" when moneywatch was in school that may have been possible, but I don't think that too many of the "truly great" teachers we have in this district feel that they would be able to meet the standards and/or the students' needs. Really, to me it seems that you just like to sound your opinion and claim that to be reality. I am sure that you did not take the time to look up the information that dbmskr referred to in an earlier forum post regarding teacher/student ratios and the research behind class sizes, because if you had I would think that your posting would be a little more coherent unless you would like to post where your research is coming from. I also believe last April you referred to our teachers as being lazy and that they should be paid for their workload-so from your statements you believe our teachers are paid well or should even be lower since they advocate for smaller class sizes. How did you take your independent poll? I am a little skeptical about those #'s!

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

This vote is about the future, not the past. If you love the '70's so much, what in the world are you doing using a home computer? I mean, if you think what was good enough in the '70's is good enough now, I'm assuming you have a rotary dial phone, three channels on your tv, go to a Dr. that has had no training since the '70's, right and you never use the internet for anything, right? Just because you WENT to school doesn't make you capable of RUNNING a school district. I go to church on Sundays, but I don't think I'm qualified to run a church.

The land issue: The board and the district has an obligation to plan for the future. Purchasing land for future use is a common practice among districts. Lawrence is looking at buying land for a third high school they are not going to need for 15 or 20 years. You buy pieces of land that size for a couple of reasons: 1. To have a buffer around the property so that you have some control over who your neighbors are - safety and logistical concerns. 2. You simply cannot predict what the future will bring or what the needs of the district might be. You can't just assume that their will always be extra land for purchase around a school. Why? As soon as the school purchases the ground, the land becomes more desirable and is likely to be purchased or if it isn't purchased it increases in value making it more expensive to buy should the district need it in the future. Buying land for future use is an accepted, responsible practice for school districts. And anyone who thinks that putting kids on a bus everyday and transporting them to Laws Field is safer than walking out of a building and across some grass to practice probably shouldn't be helping make decisions about kids and schools.

0

EudoraBoss 6 years, 10 months ago

I didn't mean in my post that 40 student was ok for today, just that it was how many we had then. I have no problem with 20 or maybe fewer in a class. I just disagree with the plan on the table. Personally I think that all teachers should be getting around double of what they receive now. They spend tens of thousands for college and have to keep going and updating all the time just to keep there teaching certificate current. However, we know that this will never happen and I realize that these are separate issues, but these teachers deserve a fair contract and should have one BEFORE the school year begins, not after they have done their job for the year.

0

EudoraBoss 6 years, 10 months ago

greenman says: "And anyone who thinks that putting kids on a bus everyday and transporting them to Laws Field is safer than walking out of a building and across some grass to practice probably shouldn't be helping make decisions about kids and schools."

Maybe you should ask Theresa Abel for the archives from the stories when the high school bond was passed. We TRIED to tell the board that this was not safe then, this is EXACTLY what the school board told us, that it WAS NOT an issue. Now that they want a new stadium, it suddenly becomes and issue.

Just like the 40 year old buildings that are "falling apart". Maybe we should look into better builders, as there are many buildings and homes in town that are over 40 years old and are not falling apart.

0

EudoraBoss 6 years, 10 months ago

greenman says: "And anyone who thinks that putting kids on a bus everyday and transporting them to Laws Field is safer than walking out of a building and across some grass to practice probably shouldn't be helping make decisions about kids and schools."

Maybe you should ask Theresa Abel for the archives from the stories when the high school bond was passed. We TRIED to tell the board that this was not safe then, this is EXACTLY what the school board told us, that it WAS NOT an issue. Now that they want a new stadium, it suddenly becomes and issue.

Just like the 40 year old buildings that are "falling apart". Maybe we should look into better builders, as there are many buildings and homes in town that are over 40 years old and are not falling apart.

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

So you were against the bond issues in the '90's, too? Imagine that. I guess I'm not understanding you - do you feel it's safer or not?
Run four or five hundred kids a day through your home for 7 or 8 hours a day for 40 years and they might not be in as good shape.
I'm trying to understand your anger about the past and your inability to trust anyone that seems to wield some power over your life - but living in the past is not going to solve the problems we have now. Learning from the past and moving into the future having taken those lessons to heart is what the district is trying to do now.
You can't win fighting ghosts.

0

DOUGHBOY 6 years, 10 months ago

The safety of kids getting to practice has always been an issue for our district! The kids drove or walked to practice when the schools were all on the old side of town-if you haven't noticed we are no longer a community that sets between Church Street and Winchester Road. I remember watching the high school students flying through the parking lots at Nottingham in the early 90s trying to get to practice before the high school was put south of town. It has always been an issue. The stadium is not suiting our growing district's needs-building a locker room facility/more restrooms along with adding seating, widening the track and all of the other needs-there is no room in that space to do all that needs to be done, along with adding parking and adding more modulars to Nottingham. There is just no room for it and you apparently do not set in the traffic at the middle school and high school in the morning or at the end of the day if you are proposing taking the traffic at Nottingham and adding it to the drop off and dismissal traffic south of the highway.

0

EudoraBoss 6 years, 10 months ago

Sorry DOUGHBOY, but before the high school was south of town, the football kids walked across the street for practice at Kerr field. The track kids ran to the track down Elm street, we were NOT allowed to drive to the field. For games the football team was bussed from the high school to Laws field. In the early 90's, the district told us that they would bus all of the kids across the highway and that it was NOT a safety issue.

0

DOUGHBOY 6 years, 10 months ago

Really eudoraboss I can't figure out what your issue is-you jumped all over dbmskr last week about the kids who choose to walk to school and now you want to build another school out there and then you post about adding on and then you post about lies from the board and yotta yotta. One of the news channels reported most of the morning on last Sunday that it was day light savings time-doesn't mean I'll quit watching that channel because they lied all morning and we were almost late to church. The predictions for our football team were that we'd be in the state finals this year-doesn't mean I think they lied to me since we are not. They'll go back to the drawing board and plan for next year! That's exactly what the district has done from their previous plans-that is good planning-learn from the past and plan for the future!

0

Thankyou 6 years, 10 months ago

I personally appreciate all of the pro and con comments regarding this bond. I am still deciding what my vote will be and will probally go with my gut feeling the day of. I know we can all agree that we ALL want what we each think is best for the kids and I admire the passion involved. I would ask each of you to take a minute to visit www.invisiblechildren.com and perhaps humble yourselves by what we are privileged to have in the great U.S.A. Thank you for your time and for all of your inputs on this bond it has been helpful.

0

blessedeudoran 6 years, 10 months ago

Thankyou-Thanks for the link-it is a humble reminder of how blessed we are to live where we do and that the main issue we have to deal with in this town is educating our students. I've been on the fence for a long time about this issue and I think my mind is made up. I've been watching this forum checking out the information provided by the district and feel that this plan is well thought out and will take our district into the future and take care of the needs of my grandchildren and their children. I have liked Mr. Kobza's vision and I don't feel that he would harm the future of his own children nor any other child in this district. He wants above par education, programs, teachers, and standards for our district. He has planned responsibly for our district in the 5 or so years that he has been here and I feel that knowing his kids have many more years to go before they are all out of school that he will continue to strive for the best school system within miles of Eudora!

I've been dismayed at the negativity of many towards those that volunteer their time to serve on boards, commissions, and organizations. These men and women devote hours from their own families to serve our community-they should be thanked not drug through the mud. Some are worried about us old folks in town-don't speak for all of us, because the old folks I had tea with this morning are voting yes on Tuesday.

There used to be a day when people were respectful and tried to see the good in everyone. We know the sun will rise tomorrow, but if it doesn't know that you spent this last beautiful day happy, positive, and backing a good plan for the future of our town's children and their future children.

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

Apparently the home didn't mean enough to the owner to not sell the land. You can't possibly blame the school district for the individual who sold the home and property to them, can you? (that was a rhetorical question, obviously, in your opinion, all of the evil that is in the world is because the school district is attempting to plan for the future in a positive way and attempting to make that plan affordable for the people).

A no vote is an expensive vote, now and later.

Vote YES for our kids and Eudora's future.

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

Blessedeudoran, thanks for putting things in perspective. Lots of people have lots wrapped up in this issue and sometimes we get too close to it to see the big picture. Public boards, volunteers and local public officials have some of the hardest jobs around. You are right, they should be given our full support or we should step up and do the job ourselves.

0

lmatt 6 years, 10 months ago

Again, my question has been overlooked. The house was commented on, but not the class sizes.

0

greenman 6 years, 10 months ago

In the elementary it's number of students at a grade level divided by the number of classroom teachers. For instance, 150 third graders, 5 third grade teachers, 30 per classroom. In k-2 you would like to see the classrooms be less than 15 if possible (can YOU imagine teaching 15 five year olds to do ANYTHING?) Grades 3-5 less than 20 if possible and 6-8 less than 25 if possible. At the high school level it varies depending on grade level, course difficulty and student interest. However, a lot of considerations go into deciding who is in which class; number of special need kids, title kids, is there an aid available, etc.). The numbers I posted are MINIMUM standards. Generally speaking, especially at the elementary level, the lower the number of kids, the better the learning environment. Now, the numbers posted earlier about student-teacher ratios are basically just the number of kids in a building divided by the total certified staff (includes administrators, counselors, special education teachers, speech teachers, social workers, etc.) and have very little to do with the actual number of kids in a classroom with a teacher. I can imagine that some of you will say - well then let's get rid of all those "extra" cerified educators and get more teachers. Probably would have been a good solution 20 or 30 years ago, now, however, the schools have taken on so much more of a role in the daily lives of the kids in the way of social services and taking care of special needs and it takes a lot of personnel to fill those needs. As government agencies have cut these services, the need hasn't went away, the provider has just become the school. If you haven't been in a school on a regular basis the past 20 or 30 - or even 10 years, you might not realize all of the peripheral services that schools do provide. It makes sense for them to provide the services because short of their families the schools understand and can best serve the students needs. I know this is long, but, like most of the issues surrounding this bond, there is no simple "sound byte" answer.

0

DOUGHBOY 6 years, 10 months ago

lmatt-dbmskr posted some links on the forum titled "Is this number right?" describing the research for reducing class sizes. Student to teacher ratio is figured by adding all the students in a building and dividing that number by all of the certified teachers in that building-including PE, Music, Reading, Special ed teachers, etc. Class size is dividing the number of kids per grade level by the number of classroom teachers in that grade level. Dbmskr posted that the smallest sizes were at the kindergarten level and the highest were in the 5th grade level with 22-23 students per class.

0

Sign in to comment