I’m a strong believer in the value of local schools that are within walking distance, even though I also agree with Tom Hayden’s diagnosis of the corruption involved in this particular project. Some money apparently has been lost, but we should build a needed local school in the fifth Ward without bankrupting D65 if we can.
I’m a strong believer in the value of local schools that are within walking distance, even though I also agree with Tom Hayden’s diagnosis of the corruption involved in this particular project. Some money apparently has been lost, but we should build a needed local school in the fifth Ward without bankrupting D65 if we can.
So, it makes sense to saddle this city with debt that can only be repaid through higher taxes to create a walkable school for some kids when there are already several walkable schools they could walk to? And then to create two new schools’ worth of kids who need bussing because their schools will be shut down? Orrington has been on this Board’s chopping block for sure. Willard is up there, too. There is zero way we have walkable schools for everyone unless we kept Foster and Noyes around just in case or the maps are redrawn. Even then, some kids will need bussing due to distance or danger. The problem today is we are stuck doing something the voters would never have voted for and we don’t have the money to pay for it. Plain and simple. We do not have an extra $40+M laying around and the buildings they sell won’t come near that. Nothing else matters but the fact they have saddled us with debt and we are already in deficit and we already have basic and major school repairs to make and we have a negotiation upcoming and no super and a bloated JEH. Let’s not talk about even larger gaps, lowered test scores, lowered enrollment and teachers and principals fleeing the district. I’m sick of hearing about walkable schools when the district is absolutely on fire. The high mortgage interest rates are the only thing keeping scores more residents from escaping. At my block party this summer, out of 18 sf homes (there is an apartment building as well but not counting), 5 wanted to sell and move because of the belief the city and schools were making it harder to live here financially. Two were old empty nesters and three were families with elementary school kids. One block out of how many? This town needs a turnaround back to a sensible city. I can’t wait until the next mayoral election and to also finally get rid of Biz and the rest of those village idiots. Maybe Omar should stay. I don’t have a principle opposition to a new school for anyone! I have an opposition to my already higher taxes getting even higher as these aholes continuously talk about affordable housing.
I agree with most of what you say. The taxpayers have been ripped off of millions of dollars by grifter Horton and his supporters and fellow grifters on the board of education. According to Hayden’s analysis much of the money is gone and into the hands of the griftors and their friends. Worse, the money already set aside for building a new school cannot easily be recovered. Of course, we should try to limit new school expenditures to the money already dedicated to that purpose. No more.
On the other hand, bussing is not only expensive, but costs students precious time and flexibility before and after school (Not least of which is loss of sleep). Bussing adds nothing to the neighborhoods bussed kids live in: No playgrounds, no convenient structures available for neighborhood social interactions, and no possibility for teachers and administrators to make use of facilities after hours with children who require bussing.
If you live in a rural area bussing might make some sense. But a dense city like Evanston-Skokie, doesn’t need a large fraction of grade and middle school kids losing time and sleep on traffic congesting, pollution generating school busses.
Honest question... how much time is spent on these busses? Evanston isn’t that big, so Im not imaging that much different than some kids have to walk to school, but am I way off? Are there some gratuitous routes some kids have to endure?
The question is how many stops does a school-bus make in a trip. Each stop takes a lot of time. Just loading a school-bus after school takes a lot of time. I tried bussing my three kids for a while and compared it to driving them directly to two different far-away schools. The busses arrived a half hour or more before I left and took a comparable amount of time bringing them home. IMO a half hour of extra sleep and a comparable amount of after school freedom was valuable enough to make the sacrifice of driving them.
Of course not everyone can afford the time to give their kids another hour each school day. If the kids live nearby and walk to school, the trip is good exercise and relatively quick as well.
It’s not ideal but it does not create adverse outcomes. But agreed in principle. Middle schoolers are not bussed except KA and BR and Chute from 60203. I would argue the 60203 commute to Chute is more detrimental to those families. But the grift? Agreed 100%.
I’m a strong believer in the value of local schools that are within walking distance, even though I also agree with Tom Hayden’s diagnosis of the corruption involved in this particular project. Some money apparently has been lost, but we should build a needed local school in the fifth Ward without bankrupting D65 if we can.
So, it makes sense to saddle this city with debt that can only be repaid through higher taxes to create a walkable school for some kids when there are already several walkable schools they could walk to? And then to create two new schools’ worth of kids who need bussing because their schools will be shut down? Orrington has been on this Board’s chopping block for sure. Willard is up there, too. There is zero way we have walkable schools for everyone unless we kept Foster and Noyes around just in case or the maps are redrawn. Even then, some kids will need bussing due to distance or danger. The problem today is we are stuck doing something the voters would never have voted for and we don’t have the money to pay for it. Plain and simple. We do not have an extra $40+M laying around and the buildings they sell won’t come near that. Nothing else matters but the fact they have saddled us with debt and we are already in deficit and we already have basic and major school repairs to make and we have a negotiation upcoming and no super and a bloated JEH. Let’s not talk about even larger gaps, lowered test scores, lowered enrollment and teachers and principals fleeing the district. I’m sick of hearing about walkable schools when the district is absolutely on fire. The high mortgage interest rates are the only thing keeping scores more residents from escaping. At my block party this summer, out of 18 sf homes (there is an apartment building as well but not counting), 5 wanted to sell and move because of the belief the city and schools were making it harder to live here financially. Two were old empty nesters and three were families with elementary school kids. One block out of how many? This town needs a turnaround back to a sensible city. I can’t wait until the next mayoral election and to also finally get rid of Biz and the rest of those village idiots. Maybe Omar should stay. I don’t have a principle opposition to a new school for anyone! I have an opposition to my already higher taxes getting even higher as these aholes continuously talk about affordable housing.
I agree with most of what you say. The taxpayers have been ripped off of millions of dollars by grifter Horton and his supporters and fellow grifters on the board of education. According to Hayden’s analysis much of the money is gone and into the hands of the griftors and their friends. Worse, the money already set aside for building a new school cannot easily be recovered. Of course, we should try to limit new school expenditures to the money already dedicated to that purpose. No more.
On the other hand, bussing is not only expensive, but costs students precious time and flexibility before and after school (Not least of which is loss of sleep). Bussing adds nothing to the neighborhoods bussed kids live in: No playgrounds, no convenient structures available for neighborhood social interactions, and no possibility for teachers and administrators to make use of facilities after hours with children who require bussing.
If you live in a rural area bussing might make some sense. But a dense city like Evanston-Skokie, doesn’t need a large fraction of grade and middle school kids losing time and sleep on traffic congesting, pollution generating school busses.
Honest question... how much time is spent on these busses? Evanston isn’t that big, so Im not imaging that much different than some kids have to walk to school, but am I way off? Are there some gratuitous routes some kids have to endure?
The question is how many stops does a school-bus make in a trip. Each stop takes a lot of time. Just loading a school-bus after school takes a lot of time. I tried bussing my three kids for a while and compared it to driving them directly to two different far-away schools. The busses arrived a half hour or more before I left and took a comparable amount of time bringing them home. IMO a half hour of extra sleep and a comparable amount of after school freedom was valuable enough to make the sacrifice of driving them.
Of course not everyone can afford the time to give their kids another hour each school day. If the kids live nearby and walk to school, the trip is good exercise and relatively quick as well.
It’s not ideal but it does not create adverse outcomes. But agreed in principle. Middle schoolers are not bussed except KA and BR and Chute from 60203. I would argue the 60203 commute to Chute is more detrimental to those families. But the grift? Agreed 100%.