New JC superintendent named December 19, 2014
Is Jackson not in Missouri? If the Wall Street Cheat Sheet article can't even get it's #5 city's location correct, how accurate could the other data be?
Anyway, here's to being cheap!
I'm very happy to hear that Rod's a man of integrity. It wasn't a personal attack. It's an effort to understand an apparent contradiction. I commend anyone who stands up for what they believe. That doesn't mean I have to believe it, however.
"He warned the board [that] he doesn’t believe voters can be persuaded to accept a single high school. "
...maybe because he's actively persuading voters to reject it?
I think "Citizens for 2 Public High Schools" is a euphemism. These guys want to kill the idea of improving JC's HS system all together, and are feigning support for an idea the community already said it would not fund. (The community rejected paying for 2 schools in that recent survey, and we've been rejecting it for more than 2 decades. Dan and Rod know this. ) Where were Dan and Rod during the year-long community driven research phase? Those committees came up with 3 possibilites. The two campus option was there. The single campus with 7 separate academy buildings (with about 400 kids each) won out hands down.
I'm pretty sure Dan's kid(s) (one at least) goes to Helias. This guy either has alterier motives or is seriously mistaken. He said on KOMU that the new school will be 3500 kids (...more like 2,670...the guy should read the NewsTrib...). If he really wants schools of 800 students or under (like Helias), he should be all for the Academies concept. Each academy would average around 400 kids, all to themselves, within their own Academy building. Perfect. The 7 Academies wont, however, function in two high schools of 1300 kids. Less popular -yet essential- academies would have just 100 students or so... that's 25 kids per GRADE! A single, spacious campus with 7 high school academy buildings is closer to the path Dan has chosen for his child at Helias. Why shouldn't public school kids get that opportunity as well?
In a STL Post op-ed, Rod said - in support of building the Keystone Pipeline - "We should listen to experts." Education experts say that high schools of 300-800 are the ideal size. We have the potential to realize this ideal, but the numbers (of students) only work on a single campus. Our Board has listend to the experts. So, why the change or heart, Rod?
[mid-way down: stltoday.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letters-to-the-editor-november/article_2a1d3f4c-448e-5f64-9685-7c2ad9c50ca5.html]
Both men may have reasonable explanations for what appear to me to be contradictions with the "2 public high school" position they've suddenly taken. I'd like to hear them.
haha! We've gone from "The Snow-day Nazi", Richard Pimberton ("No snow day for you!"), to just a straight up Nazi?
[I know you weren't quite suggesting that.]
I feel that the board needs to tighten the leash a bit sometimes... Elected Board members should drive decisions more than an appointed administrator.
...board members don't care about children? Seriously? Most of the board is made of former teachers or spouses of teachers. I don't think people go into teaching for the money. (especially in this district.)
I understand the conspiracy logic that there's a group of elites that think they know what's best for the city, and try to push it onto the general population. (annexation, Transform JC, etc.)
But explain how that's the case here? I don't see it that way in this instance...
First, Marie is one of 4 non-Chamber members on the Board. See profiles at jcps.k12.mo.us . (And she was first appointed by many of the very board members people're suggesting get voted/thrown out.)
More importantly, the main thing that survey said was that the public doesn't want to pay for two high schools. Sure, we like the idea of improving education, but don't want to foot the bill. The Board seems to have heard this point loud and clear.
Hence, they've found an innovative way to boost education, keep costs down, and deliver a new high school to the public. The board is working hard to save us money. Look, the budget that the Board has passed over the past few years has voluntarily rolled back the levy... rather than asking for more $ and being told no, the Board is listening to voters and doing what they can to keep costs down. So, instead of paying $5.40 a year like Columbia property owners do, we pay just $3.67 in JC. (the JCPS budget is online)
haha! nice one, rob!
Linn and Lincoln have agreed to purchase all of the current HS buildings.
And a $20mil grant may come from the Fed.
This is the first (and only) well-planed, good idea to come from JC leaders in a long time.
Twenty-first century facilities with minimal tax burden is much better than having to pay for two industrial-style HS buildings. The more you know, the more you'll like it:
check out the site at newjchs.us
Because of football? Thats's an idea from the past.
Look at the Board. It's mainly teachers, spouses of teachers, and others that have made education their number one priority.
Agreed! 6-8...called "Academies".
Last login: Sunday, June 23, 2013
Copyright © 2014, CMNI.
All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Central Missouri Newspapers Inc.
Material from the Associated Press is Copyright © 2010, Associated
Press and may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall
not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or
redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP
materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for
personal and noncommercial use. The AP will not be held liable for any
delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the
transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages
arising from any of the foregoing. All rights reserved.
© 2014 News Tribune Publishing.