School Board meeting

**thb** · October 26th, 2007, 10:58 PM

Lee has about 800 students. If Wise County went with two schools they hould have about 1050 each.

**swvacsas** · October 26th, 2007, 11:28 PM

The figures discussed at the school board meeting would indicate that a tax increase would be mandated regardless of any option. Three schools would result in a prodigious tax increase. You cannot derive enough savings to cover the cost of the bonds. Supposed operational savings are one of the main arguments proponents of consolidation have been touting- if any savings are to be used towards construction you have exactly the same budget- with no reduction in expenditures. Many of the people boosting consolidation want to add a plethora of new courses. How do they propose to pay for course additions if construction costs absorb the savings? There is only one way- a tax increase. It must be borne in mind that the three school option omits costs of about $10 million per school- for ancillary facilities. A very substantial tax increase will occur if a three school option is chosen- it cannot be avoided.

**imported_ndn10** · October 27th, 2007, 12:06 AM

thanks for that nice round estimate thb! [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif[/img]

consolidate into 3 school, they will still be single a. call em wise county west east and central. done deal

**NotSoSilentBob** · October 27th, 2007, 12:10 AM

Nothing wrong with a tax increase. Wise Co's taxes are already lower than those of neighboring counties (except the BS personal property).

**plantsman** · October 27th, 2007, 12:36 AM

Give Ronnie Shortt and his ilk afew more years, and Wise's taxes will surpass all the neighboring counties!

The_Sage · October 27th, 2007, 01:12 AM

I agree with you Boney,,, you must have witnessed "ACTION" in real life...

October 27th, 2007, 06:39 AM

Wanna see them choke? Just remind them that by going to 1, 2, 3- however many at LEAST half of the board are gonna loose that easy 70 grand and I bet they gag on it. Appy and Pound(funny isn't it , Appy and Pound together, but Wise and BSG aren't split) will elect their's , so a couple of the " consolidate now" are screwed. Oh yeah, BSG has one of those "When you die it is over, you are dead" guys running. An Atheist. Want him taking care of the kids? If we must make hard choices, then let the board lead the way. A 50% pay cut should be about right. If the towns must make the choices, why shouldn't the board? At least to 52 grand, a thousand a week is PLENTY for what they do. What about a time sheet for their hours worked? And I'm so tried of hearing about what one member's husband says. So his company can keep their contracts? Most are rich, they say they are there for the kids, work for free. You want new schools, get rid of the dinosaurs. They wanted consolidation 25 years ago.

**imported_ut1** · October 27th, 2007, 11:12 AM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sportsman</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: boney</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: retiredteach</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I believe that three schools is the way to go. It may be 4 or 5 years before this will happen though. In the meantime, a lot of decisions will need to be made. Not sure if the present board can make them. </div></div>

Why is that? </div></div>

Seems like from the figures they quoted at the meeting, 3 new schools could be built with no tax increase, and the savings each year from staff reduction and decreased maintenance costs would be sufficient to pay the debt service. If that's the case, the decision may be a no-brainer financially. </div></div>

Staff couldn't be reduced by much of a margin if they maintained the preferred teacher-student ratio. I would think that would apply to offices such as guidance also. The savings there would be minimal, I would think. The biggest savings would probably come from the reduced need for Principals, Ass't. Principals, etc. The new schools would have to be larger, so the maintenance staff required would be about the same, just changing locations. Maintenance savings would be a no brainer, as its much cheaper to maintain a new building than an old one.

I've never been a fan of consolidation, as the sense of community prevelant in small schools would be forever lost. (I've seen that happen in Scott Co.) To me, there are some things more important than money.

October 27th, 2007, 11:43 AM

Not in Wise County. We must pay the biddies on the board twice as much as a good teacher . We are gonna close them all and build one, I've been waiting for the chance to use the "they are there for an eddykation" phrase. Enrollment will drop by half in the next 15 years as the mines work out- there just isn't that much coal left.