I was a member of the last public committee mandated by time period to review and update the plan.

That committee was quietly dis-banded without notice, mostly due to constant lack of a quorum and not a lot of agreement to change much of anything. It was headed by Mr.K, with a couple of cameos by Mr.A. Don't remember reading about or any mention of reducing population or a 28,000 figure. I probably still have a copy of the plan.

 

We had a nice, diverse group who never bothered to attend or be excused, and when the cronies tried to run a 6-member meeting to approve "changes"(by declaring everyone not present removed from the board--thereby establishing the 6 present members as a quorum), a few quickly objected to the method and propriety of the action.

 

Never held another meeting, and never received any notice of the committee being dissolved.

 

True story

 

Acclaro: The timing is not our idea.  It is dictated by the state.  They have a pot of money that they are sharing with school districts to upgrade their facilities subject to a sliding scale requirement that the local district pay a percentage of the costs through local property taxes. When the money from the state is gone, it is gone, and there may not be another offer of capital funds for 100 years.  The state 1 week ago called our number, said there is $40 million for Middletown City Schools, provided we pass a bond levy and follow all of their rules and regulations and standards for building and rehabbing. The problems with the Vail building go well beyond the lack of air conditioning (which is a serious problem). It is literally falling apart.  Your unsupported assertions to the contrary, the state conducted a detailed study of renovating to their standards or build new, and determined the costs to be approximately the same. Your comments about old university buildings do not fit with what I have seen on many college campuses in the last several years. At every single one I've been at, they are gutting old buildings leaving nothing old but the facade, and constructing new ones from scratch.

 

Vet: I can't explain any better than I already have why this property will be good for the high school site, without drawing a map, which I can't do on here.  I think anyone who has been to the high school at drop off/pick up or when thre is an event, will agree that traffic flow is very cramped. The drive next to 4500 Manchester is signed as one-way entrance only, but people use it as an exit all the time.

 

Neil Barille: Wildwood CC is indeed hurting. But it is not for sale, and from everything I have heard, those old guys will hang on to their golf course even though it is killing them financially.

 

SpiderJohn: A bond levy will be on the November ballot, for 3.95 mills plus a .26 permanent improvement levy (permanent improvement levy will generate dollars they may only be used for capital maintenance and is required before the state will kick in its $40 million). So, the community will decide. And, the community has been asked for their input dozens of times throughout this 10 year Master Plan process. A majority who participated in the many forums, meetings and surveys support a new middle school and a renovated high school. We will see if a majority of voters agrees.

If it is true that the city master plan is to reduce the population by 50% then I agree that it makes no sense to build a new middle school as all of the students will fit into the existing high school.  However, I can't find anywhere in the master plan the objective of reducing the population.  On the contrary what I read points to the objective of growth.  Please show me where in the master plan that the objective is to reduce the population.  Regarding the school office move to city hall, the administration's and board's objective, as reported, was three fold.  1. reduce cost 2. provided a safer area for district employees to work.  3. potentially improve communications between city and school district personnel.

 

The last I looked Cinci State was at least a mile from Vail and served a completely different clientele than Vail.  There is a huge difference between 20 - 30 year olds and 11 - 13 year olds.  Plus I don't see what the location of Cinci State and the Mayor's dream, which may or may not actually happen, for downtown has to do with a Middle School.  Downtown is a wasteland and may or may not turn around.

 

The last report I saw on student projections was that it would remain fairly steady for the next 5 - 10 years.  Regarding rehab cost versus build new cost, the paper reported that the architectural firm determined that the cost of each was about the same.  You'd have to look at his report to see the details.  One thing to keep in mind that a rehabbed building must be brought up to the same standards as a new building you can't pick and choose what to do.

 

 

 

I agree that no one wants to move to a city with poor roads and other infrastructure.  Concurrent who wants to move to a city with a poor middle school in a lousy area of the city?  Think of it as school infrastructure.  I believe that it's a necessary pre-condition to getting more people to consider moving to Middletown.  Of course there is much more that the schools district must do .. such as getting the academic performance up...but the infrastructure is one of the ingredients.

 

Universities do have 100 - 200 year old buildings.  But they have been modified and rehabilitated many times over the years.  Why would you want to spend that kind of money on Middletown's Middle School when you can't change the location and would spend about as much rehabilitating as building new?  That would be a waste of money.