APS: Think the "no move" campaign is going to work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Buck site is most optimal for bus parking. Period.

Don't forget police impound lots! Yay.

Those functions have to go somewhere. It’s zoned light industrial. It’s centrally located.

so important for police impound lots to be centrally located in the county ... so wise
as for locating schools in central locations, meh we don't care about that.

I was on the BLPC for the Education Center - the former school board building adjacent to WL that will provide seats for an additional 500+ HS students. One of our charges was that the building had to be designed in such a way that it could accommodate ES students should the SB decided to convert it to an ES down the road. No way will the SB be thinking about putting 3 ES within 2 blocks of each other (ASFS, Buck Property, Ed Center).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

To me, the biggest flaw in that survey, and one that was pointed out, is that it doesn't differentiate between those who drive at 8:40am, or those who are doing extended day. If kids near the school in theory are walkable, or further from the school could bus, but don't because instead their parents have to work and drop them at school before 8am, as a non-statistician to me there's different weighting in terms of what info you can glean from that.

I know this is anecdote and not data, but in our family and others we know, the mode of transport is totally reliant on the parents' work schedules. WAH day for mom or dad, the kid is walked or bussed respectively. Headed to the office? Kid is at ED.

Maybe it doesn't matter, but I feel like it might have been useful for them to also understand when that child was arriving or departing school.

Why do kids need a ride to/from extended day if they are in the walkzone?

I'm PP and am assuming you're kidding, but just in case I'll spell it out. We live a 10min walk from school. To walk kids, sign them into extended day and then walk home only to drive past that school again a few minutes later is a colossal waste of time and hugely inefficient.

[Anonymous]

When is that going to open?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When is that going to open?

meaning the Ed Center next to W&L

[Anonymous]

Staff is doubling down on Proposal 1. They were respectful about the community created maps and explained why each one wouldn’t work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Staff is doubling down on Proposal 1. They were respectful about the community created maps and explained why each one wouldn’t work.

The move is happening. It’s all over but the crying. People at the affected schools need to start focusing on the next phase of this operation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

To me, the biggest flaw in that survey, and one that was pointed out, is that it doesn't differentiate between those who drive at 8:40am, or those who are doing extended day. If kids near the school in theory are walkable, or further from the school could bus, but don't because instead their parents have to work and drop them at school before 8am, as a non-statistician to me there's different weighting in terms of what info you can glean from that.

I know this is anecdote and not data, but in our family and others we know, the mode of transport is totally reliant on the parents' work schedules. WAH day for mom or dad, the kid is walked or bussed respectively. Headed to the office? Kid is at ED.

Maybe it doesn't matter, but I feel like it might have been useful for them to also understand when that child was arriving or departing school.

Why do kids need a ride to/from extended day if they are in the walkzone?

I'm PP and am assuming you're kidding, but just in case I'll spell it out. We live a 10min walk from school. To walk kids, sign them into extended day and then walk home only to drive past that school again a few minutes later is a colossal waste of time and hugely inefficient.

DP here. I guess it's an issue of walkers not walking because they have to be signed-in to extended day, whereas they do not have to be signed-in if they are arriving for school. Similarly, signing-out at the end of the day. Either way, parents aren't going to walk their kids to extended day or to school on their way to work. So the behaviors and use of public transit v. walking doesn't change.But if kids of a certain age are allowed to walk to school on their own, why can't they walk to extended day on their own?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Staff is doubling down on Proposal 1. They were respectful about the community created maps and explained why each one wouldn’t work.

The move is happening. It’s all over but the crying. People at the affected schools need to start focusing on the next phase of this operation.

The move makes sense. There are no arguments against the move that actually hold up under close examination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When is that going to open?

meaning the Ed Center next to W&L

Fall of 2021 I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Buck site is most optimal for bus parking. Period.

Don't forget police impound lots! Yay.

Those functions have to go somewhere. It’s zoned light industrial. It’s centrally located.

so important for police impound lots to be centrally located in the county ... so wise
as for locating schools in central locations, meh we don't care about that.

I was on the BLPC for the Education Center - the former school board building adjacent to WL that will provide seats for an additional 500+ HS students. One of our charges was that the building had to be designed in such a way that it could accommodate ES students should the SB decided to convert it to an ES down the road. No way will the SB be thinking about putting 3 ES within 2 blocks of each other (ASFS, Buck Property, Ed Center).

nope but a K-8 Immersion academy would make sense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Staff is doubling down on Proposal 1. They were respectful about the community created maps and explained why each one wouldn’t work.

The move is happening. It’s all over but the crying. People at the affected schools need to start focusing on the next phase of this operation.

They are doubling down b/c its the only feasible option. The other options put most of the county in much worse shape for a very long time.

[Anonymous]

I can’t imagine the SB rejecting Proposal 1 at this point. Staff has publicly reviewed the community maps, addressed questions, and seems to have no doubt that the proposal is the best course of action. The interim superintendent recommends it, and it has community support (obviously not unanimous).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Buck site is most optimal for bus parking. Period.

Don't forget police impound lots! Yay.

Those functions have to go somewhere. It’s zoned light industrial. It’s centrally located.

so important for police impound lots to be centrally located in the county ... so wise
as for locating schools in central locations, meh we don't care about that.

I was on the BLPC for the Education Center - the former school board building adjacent to WL that will provide seats for an additional 500+ HS students. One of our charges was that the building had to be designed in such a way that it could accommodate ES students should the SB decided to convert it to an ES down the road. No way will the SB be thinking about putting 3 ES within 2 blocks of each other (ASFS, Buck Property, Ed Center).

nope but a K-8 Immersion academy would make sense

K-8 Immersion in that location would be great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Staff is doubling down on Proposal 1. They were respectful about the community created maps and explained why each one wouldn’t work.

The move is happening. It’s all over but the crying. People at the affected schools need to start focusing on the next phase of this operation.

The move makes sense. There are no arguments against the move that actually hold up under close examination.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Staff is doubling down on Proposal 1. They were respectful about the community created maps and explained why each one wouldn’t work.

The move is happening. It’s all over but the crying. People at the affected schools need to start focusing on the next phase of this operation.

They are doubling down b/c its the only feasible option. The other options put most of the county in much worse shape for a very long time.

I don’t understand how those people could generate boundaries for McKinley and ashlawn that extend so far to the east (along with other glaring problems) and present that as preferable to proposal 1. And speaking of doubling down, they attempt to gaslight others on AEM by exclaiming how much better those maps are than proposal one. Maybe, if the only criteria is that your children not be moved...