Big GDS news

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Under the previous administration, when Harriet Tregoning ran the Office of Planning, it was pretty much open season for whatever a developer or big project sponsor wanted. However, Tregoning was shown the door and the pendulum seems to be swinging back a bit. I would expect GDS to get much of what it wants, but not everything.

I take it you didn't look at the big bucks behind Murial Bowser's campaign. Many of them are behind this GDS program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand the GDS obsession with Sidwell and the idea that this campus changes its competitive position. Even after the construction, several other schools will rommier, greener campuses. STA, NCS, Beauvoir, Sidwell, Field, St. pat's, Maret. Each of these schools has more room per student than GDS

Please cite examples of the obsession

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand the GDS obsession with Sidwell and the idea that this campus changes its competitive position. Even after the construction, several other schools will rommier, greener campuses. STA, NCS, Beauvoir, Sidwell, Field, St. pat's, Maret. Each of these schools has more room per student than GDS

Please cite examples of the obsession

You scan through this thread yourself but the two major themes are, possibly I guess from one poster, is that GDS will have a competitive advantage over Sidwell with a consolidated campus and, oddly, if it weren't for the campus the First family would be attending GDS now.

[Anonymous]

Within the GDS community, the discussion is about revenue and convenience -- not Sidwell. In that respect, DCUM is its own little world whose connection to real life is somewhat mysterious.

On one level, I wish GDS were thinking more comparatively -- not obsessing over Sidwell, but looking, in a systematic way, at what kinds of facilities other schools (here and elsewhere) provide for their students at each level, and how big a campus it takes to run an attractive PreK-12 program at a single site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Under the previous administration, when Harriet Tregoning ran the Office of Planning, it was pretty much open season for whatever a developer or big project sponsor wanted. However, Tregoning was shown the door and the pendulum seems to be swinging back a bit. I would expect GDS to get much of what it wants, but not everything.

I take it you didn't look at the big bucks behind Murial Bowser's campaign. Many of them are behind this GDS program.

That doesn't say much about their judgment!

[Anonymous]

You don't have to live in DC to contribute to a DC mayoral campaign. You just have to want something from DC government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Under the previous administration, when Harriet Tregoning ran the Office of Planning, it was pretty much open season for whatever a developer or big project sponsor wanted. However, Tregoning was shown the door and the pendulum seems to be swinging back a bit. I would expect GDS to get much of what it wants, but not everything.

I take it you didn't look at the big bucks behind Murial Bowser's campaign. Many of them are behind this GDS program.

"Machers and shakers"....

[Anonymous]

JPDS just announced a $20 million gift. GDS is larger and has a bigger parent and alumni network, so it expect that they will be successful in raising the money to build out the Wisconsin campus project.

[Anonymous]

how much money is needed to still be raised for Wisconsin Ave. campus project?

[Anonymous]

$50 million?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:how much money is needed to still be raised for Wisconsin Ave. campus project?

$40 - 70 million for construction. And that amount won't be offset by the sale of the MacArthur campus, which is unlikely to cover the $40 million already spent for land acquisition (financed by debt). Judging from the last publicly available 990, prior to that purchase, GDs had about $29 million in outstanding bond debt (from the 2005 HS renovations, I'd guess).

There's a big difference between spending a $20 million gift (money pledged by 2 donors) to add a new middle school and trying to raise 3-5x that much to rebuild programs and facilities you already have on a smaller footprint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how much money is needed to still be raised for Wisconsin Ave. campus project?

$40 - 70 million for construction. And that amount won't be offset by the sale of the MacArthur campus, which is unlikely to cover the $40 million already spent for land acquisition (financed by debt). Judging from the last publicly available 990, prior to that purchase, GDs had about $29 million in outstanding bond debt (from the 2005 HS renovations, I'd guess).

There's a big difference between spending a $20 million gift (money pledged by 2 donors) to add a new middle school and trying to raise 3-5x that much to rebuild programs and facilities you already have on a smaller footprint.

I meant rebuild (on a smaller footprint) programs and facilities the school already has. I can't really see "Honey, I Shrunk the Campus" being a project people are eager to pour money into. But we shall see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how much money is needed to still be raised for Wisconsin Ave. campus project?

$40 - 70 million for construction. And that amount won't be offset by the sale of the MacArthur campus, which is unlikely to cover the $40 million already spent for land acquisition (financed by debt). Judging from the last publicly available 990, prior to that purchase, GDs had about $29 million in outstanding bond debt (from the 2005 HS renovations, I'd guess).

There's a big difference between spending a $20 million gift (money pledged by 2 donors) to add a new middle school and trying to raise 3-5x that much to rebuild programs and facilities you already have on a smaller footprint.

I meant rebuild (on a smaller footprint) programs and facilities the school already has. I can't really see "Honey, I Shrunk the Campus" being a project people are eager to pour money into. But we shall see.

I'm sure that the board of trustees knows what it is doing. They were elected to guide the school. Some of them could run real estate circles around Donald Trump. Let's let GDS run the play.

[Anonymous]

GDS has Soviet-style elections. One candidate per position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand the GDS obsession with Sidwell and the idea that this campus changes its competitive position. Even after the construction, several other schools will rommier, greener campuses. STA, NCS, Beauvoir, Sidwell, Field, St. pat's, Maret. Each of these schools has more room per student than GDS

Please cite examples of the obsession

You scan through this thread yourself but the two major themes are, possibly I guess from one poster, is that GDS will have a competitive advantage over Sidwell with a consolidated campus and, oddly, if it weren't for the campus the First family would be attending GDS now.

I should've used facts. Posts in a thread are not facts. Who knows who've made them.