To the editor:
I thank you for informing the public and readers of Patch.
Also: Dick Hoy and Priscilla Schreiber, I personally thank you both for NOT SUPPORTING board member Jim Stieringer’s thoughtful, however ill-conceived, 12th HS Resolution.
I propose that our collective thoughts be directed to something resembling the below for consideration. Any of your own thoughts or comments?
Below is a resolution outline proposed as a framework and basis for GUHSD board future consideration, with modifications as needed for a board majority consensus, then approval.
A Resolution in the Grossmont Union High School District
Pursuant to the summary statements and language contained in the passed 2004 Proposition H and 2008 passed Proposition U calling for the construction of a 12th new GUHSD high school campus serving the communities of greater Alpine and Blssom Valley, and
Whereas, Alpine 12th high school has met the bond’s enrollment trigger.
Whereas, Both Props. H and U called for building a 12th high school.
Whereas, Granite Hill High School is impacted and over utilized.
Whereas, approximately 600 Alpine students are causing overcrowding and safety concerns at GHHS.
Whereas, GUHSD needs [added revenues and new students commensurate] revenues of a 12th high school as predicted by [GUHSD consultant] professional demographer Vince O'Hara.
Whereas, the district Boundary Committee demonstrated a viable option for student realignment in “HS12 Modified” recommendation.
Whereas, it is probable that the AUSD unification effort would fail if the GUHSD honored its 12th high school bonded promise.
Whereas, a 12th new high school for 800 to 1,200 students would enhance the education quality for all of the GUHSD student bodies.
Whereas, construction costs are at historic lows.
Whereas, all of the GUHSD and East San Diego County would benefit if new HS12 construction were commenced ASAP.
Whereas, a regional economic stimulus would likely ensue if HS12 construction commenced.
Be it resolved, that the Governing Board of the GUHSD require that the superintendent submit plans to the Division of the State Architect (DSA), and upon approved plans being returned, immediately seek 12th high school campus site preparation, grading and construction bids, and reward the necessary lease-leaseback contracts and commence construction ASAP for an 800- to 1,200-student capacity 12th new high school.
Bill Weaver
Alpine
It would prevent 600 + Alpine area students from Unifying out of the GUHSD (600 x $6,000 ADA per student = a loss of $3.6 million) which just might save the GUHSD from financial disaster which it is flirting with! This "Resolution outline" is only viable if (and only if) the $65,000,000 funding balance (minus the land at ~$20,000,000) of bonds remains available. The Approximate amount remaining of $45,000,000 in "Escrow", was promised by the GUHSD Superintendent, and approved by the Governing Board by a 5-0 vote, which was recorded via a Bd. Resolution that stated this was to be reserved in an escrow. As a matter of disclosure of facts, let's ask the GUHSD Administration, "show us our reserved escrow $45,000,000 reserved for the 12th high school." Where is our funding "Escrow" to be available when needed to complete the 12th high school as stipulated by resolution, and 5-0 decree by the GUHSD Board? Time for an Audit? The Prop H and U Citizens Bond Oversight Committee (CBOC) has as their mandate of their Prop H & U, 55% vote passes Proposition 39 which created a CBOC to safeguard our Bond funds. "CBOC, where today, is the $45,000,000 reserve for the 12th HS Project?"