Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Other charters thought the building needed repairs. My guess is that SSMA decided that they weren't necessary and was willing to pay the full asking price without asking for repairs or renovations.
I guess that makes sense. I'm not one who needs beautiful facilities if the teachers/policies/staff are solid, but I know building aesthetics means a lot to others.
Anonymous wrote:
NP here, now considering SS based on the new proposed location. Has SS Admin indicated that the school will relocate to the new location by the start of the 2016/17 school year? Has administration said anything about renovations? I understand from the previous tenant that the building needs a new boiler/HVAC system, so a fundamental repair, not aesthetic.
At this point, I don't know a single family who attends SS (they all sought other options based on location/frustration with previous move). For current families, are you still satisfied with the classroom experience? Any particular pros/cons on what happens outside of the classroom?
Thanks in advance.
This needed to be factored in to the cost. It wasn't. So a very bad deal.
Anonymous wrote:NP here, now considering SS based on the new proposed location. Has SS Admin indicated that the school will relocate to the new location by the start of the 2016/17 school year? Has administration said anything about renovations? I understand from the previous tenant that the building needs a new boiler/HVAC system, so a fundamental repair, not aesthetic.
At this point, I don't know a single family who attends SS (they all sought other options based on location/frustration with previous move). For current families, are you still satisfied with the classroom experience? Any particular pros/cons on what happens outside of the classroom?
Thanks in advance.
Anonymous wrote:Other charters thought the building needed repairs. My guess is that SSMA decided that they weren't necessary and was willing to pay the full asking price without asking for repairs or renovations.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this location holds and they produce a 10 year lease I would be willing go back to the school. I really loved our time there, but their temp location was unworkable at the time so we moved to a DCPS that is great, but not necessarily for my child.
If they have to increase enrollment to pay for it, it could be bumpy for a year or two (see MV). It could be not the same school you left. So I'd lottery for it but be careful about switching unless you are at an IB school you can go back to.
It moved up on our list, but I'm cautious. Explaining how they will afford a building so many other charters couldn't afford would go a long way to reassuring me.
And wait till it goes through too (nothing till the ink is on the paper).
I hope it works.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this location holds and they produce a 10 year lease I would be willing go back to the school. I really loved our time there, but their temp location was unworkable at the time so we moved to a DCPS that is great, but not necessarily for my child.
If they have to increase enrollment to pay for it, it could be bumpy for a year or two (see MV). It could be not the same school you left. So I'd lottery for it but be careful about switching unless you are at an IB school you can go back to.
It moved up on our list, but I'm cautious. Explaining how they will afford a building so many other charters couldn't afford would go a long way to reassuring me.
And wait till it goes through too (nothing till the ink is on the paper).
I hope it works.
Anonymous wrote:Other charters thought the building needed repairs. My guess is that SSMA decided that they weren't necessary and was willing to pay the full asking price without asking for repairs or renovations.
Anonymous wrote:If this location holds and they produce a 10 year lease I would be willing go back to the school. I really loved our time there, but their temp location was unworkable at the time so we moved to a DCPS that is great, but not necessarily for my child.