I make a difference
The Great gym controversey
I have had one person tell me they would not vote for the bond if the gym was not included. I have many MANY district residents tell me they will not vote for the bond because it includes a 4th Gym. I personally do not believe this is a necessary item. since we already have 3 gyms we need to invest in improvements we do not have or that should have a high priority such as efficient heating, cooling, lighting, and additional insulation to reduce operating costs. Instead adding more specialized space will greatly increase operating cost with a benefit to relatively few students.
Adding to controversy is the proposed use of a metal building for the gym. Many residents are not in favor of this alternative. They feel that the best use of tax dollars is to build with the highest quality construction so the facility will last longer and therefore give a better return on investment. Something that troubles me on this, Curtis Johnson the architect with DLR group adamately opposed the use of a pre-engineered metal building for a gym. He said we would not be happy with it, he would show us others that were poor quality, and the cost difference would not justify considering this option, and he would not consider using a metal building for this project.
After further discussion he agreed to bring estimates for both conventional and pre engineered construction to the next meeting so patrons could see the slight savings in initial cost was not worth considering. The next meeting we were shown a budget sheet and floor plan for a metal gym, with metal panels on the junior high addition instead of all brick /block construction. The comparison to conventional construction was never done. Suddenly the type of construction our professional architect previously told us he would not consider doing was all he could or would do. At this point I felt Curtis Johnson switched to a sales mode, just hoping to make a sales commission weather or not it was the best choice for long term durability. From this point on no other options were even considered.
Not every one is in favor of this gym that attended meetings and gave input. the following are quoted from reports in area newspapers
from news reports
Raymond Central continues planning for bond issue (Waverly News Thursday, July 31, 2008 )
"The last bond didn't pass because of a couple of deal breakers, one of them being a new gym," Bob Walla said.
"I agree with Bob, it is a deal breaker," Mark Rezac said.
==========
and from the survey results:
Waverly news, Thursday, May 22, 2008
Sixty-nine percent of the 300 people surveyed said they would vote against a $24.5 million bond issue to tear the existing building down and build a new one, which would increase taxes by $357 per $100,000 of property valuation.
A similar question was asked whether they would vote for a $17 million bond issue to renovate the building, add classrooms and a new gym that would increase taxes by $229 per $100,000 of property valuation. Fifty percent said they would be against it, while 40 percent would be for it. The remaining percentage was people who did not know.
The third dollar amount asked about was a $14.5 million bond issue that would renovate the building and add classrooms, but would not add a new gym. It would add $190 in taxes for every $100,000 of property valuation. Forty-nine percent said they would vote for it, while 41 percent would be against it. The remaining 10 percent did not know. "As you can see by these figures, people had opinions," Derrick said. "There weren't a lot of don't knows."
=======================
Waverly news Wednesday, May 28, 2008
"The survey showed that 49 percent of the 300 people surveyed would vote for a $14.5 million bond issue.[without the gym] The majority of the people said they would vote against the other dollar amounts included in the survey that were $24.5 million and $17 million.
The survey also showed 45 percent of the people thought renovating classrooms was the most important. A new gym, which was proposed with the bond issue that failed last September, only received 2 percent, while items such as updating technology and an auditorium received more support at 8 percent and 6 percent, respectively. "I was surprised that very few people thought we needed a second gym," Grimes said. "I thought that might have been a higher priority." Grimes was surprised because the survey conducted by Research Associates showed 80 percent of the people thought the community was more interested in athletics than the arts"
=======================
To sum it up here, the gym is a deal breaker.
the highest support from the community is a plan that does NOT include a gym
only 2% from the survey would vote for it
WHY is it still in the plan?
3 strikes and you are out
Adding to controversy is the proposed use of a metal building for the gym. Many residents are not in favor of this alternative. They feel that the best use of tax dollars is to build with the highest quality construction so the facility will last longer and therefore give a better return on investment. Something that troubles me on this, Curtis Johnson the architect with DLR group adamately opposed the use of a pre-engineered metal building for a gym. He said we would not be happy with it, he would show us others that were poor quality, and the cost difference would not justify considering this option, and he would not consider using a metal building for this project.
After further discussion he agreed to bring estimates for both conventional and pre engineered construction to the next meeting so patrons could see the slight savings in initial cost was not worth considering. The next meeting we were shown a budget sheet and floor plan for a metal gym, with metal panels on the junior high addition instead of all brick /block construction. The comparison to conventional construction was never done. Suddenly the type of construction our professional architect previously told us he would not consider doing was all he could or would do. At this point I felt Curtis Johnson switched to a sales mode, just hoping to make a sales commission weather or not it was the best choice for long term durability. From this point on no other options were even considered.
Not every one is in favor of this gym that attended meetings and gave input. the following are quoted from reports in area newspapers
from news reports
Raymond Central continues planning for bond issue (Waverly News Thursday, July 31, 2008 )
"The last bond didn't pass because of a couple of deal breakers, one of them being a new gym," Bob Walla said.
"I agree with Bob, it is a deal breaker," Mark Rezac said.
==========
and from the survey results:
Waverly news, Thursday, May 22, 2008
Sixty-nine percent of the 300 people surveyed said they would vote against a $24.5 million bond issue to tear the existing building down and build a new one, which would increase taxes by $357 per $100,000 of property valuation.
A similar question was asked whether they would vote for a $17 million bond issue to renovate the building, add classrooms and a new gym that would increase taxes by $229 per $100,000 of property valuation. Fifty percent said they would be against it, while 40 percent would be for it. The remaining percentage was people who did not know.
The third dollar amount asked about was a $14.5 million bond issue that would renovate the building and add classrooms, but would not add a new gym. It would add $190 in taxes for every $100,000 of property valuation. Forty-nine percent said they would vote for it, while 41 percent would be against it. The remaining 10 percent did not know. "As you can see by these figures, people had opinions," Derrick said. "There weren't a lot of don't knows."
=======================
Waverly news Wednesday, May 28, 2008
"The survey showed that 49 percent of the 300 people surveyed would vote for a $14.5 million bond issue.[without the gym] The majority of the people said they would vote against the other dollar amounts included in the survey that were $24.5 million and $17 million.
The survey also showed 45 percent of the people thought renovating classrooms was the most important. A new gym, which was proposed with the bond issue that failed last September, only received 2 percent, while items such as updating technology and an auditorium received more support at 8 percent and 6 percent, respectively. "I was surprised that very few people thought we needed a second gym," Grimes said. "I thought that might have been a higher priority." Grimes was surprised because the survey conducted by Research Associates showed 80 percent of the people thought the community was more interested in athletics than the arts"
=======================
To sum it up here, the gym is a deal breaker.
the highest support from the community is a plan that does NOT include a gym
only 2% from the survey would vote for it
WHY is it still in the plan?
3 strikes and you are out
Views: 23
Comment
About
© 2025 Created by Eldon McFarling.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Raymond Central: we can do it to add comments!
Join Raymond Central: we can do it