|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 6, 2019 22:29:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 6, 2019 22:41:06 GMT -6
A big reason I chose Lovejoy over Prosper was their School Boards mismanagement of bond money. They just struck me as big spenders. The passed a bond that was way too big without any detail as to what would be purchased. They overbuilt expecting to immediately to have Frisco like growth even though the toll road hadn't reached Prosper. And they got their S&P rating lowered... Now they have a 6A high school with some of the nicest facilities in the state and they don't have the money to repeat those facilities 6-8 times... The claimed they were staying all 5A (4A at the time) high schools, but their actions didn't match their words. Their FAQ has been "updated" multiple times over the years. In the end, I see them being more like Plano ISD than Frisco ISD. I can easily see 3 6A high schools with comparable facilities. The current high school is huge and on a plot of land the size of Allen High School. No way would I vote to give them more money considering how they have mismanaged the budget they already had... I cannot blame you there. I don't like when ISDs pull the old "give us money, then we will figure it out" approach either. But don't forget that the Town of Prosper proper had not planned well either, as their 2004 comprehensive plan wasn't very comprehensive. Prosper's 2012 comprehensive plan called for 69K people, but by January 2013 the DMN had a story saying 75-80K. Whereas lots were mainly at least an acre (largely due to lack of city sewage services), that has obviously now changed. And that doesn't even take into account Prosper ISD's territories in Frisco, McKinney, Celina, etc. The Town has only 27 square miles of land, but the ISD covers 59 square miles. Compared to Allen's 29 square miles, PISD could not possibly have only one high school, despite that being the general consensus of outsiders at the time. As you mention, 3 might work at ~20 square miles per school, but then compared to Allen ISD's 7000 HS population at build-out, those schools would each have 4800 students. Get up to 4 HS and ~15 square miles each, and you have around 3500 students per school, which sounds more like it. 6 HS would put the enrollments around 2400, while 8 HS would put them around 1780. While PISD still maintains "6-8 HS at build-out," I feel that 4-6 HS seems more reasonable, but it would still be costly. Could fewer schools allow for each HS to have the same amenities as Prosper High? Possibly, and remember that PHS and RHHS both have 2500 classroom capacities, so 6 schools could be it. The current bond planning committee has not been public, which I find strange (the presentation was at the board meeting, and that video has yet to be posted). I will always vote NO for any bond that doesn't have spending clearly defined, so hopefully for these voters sakes this one will not seem sneaky. On the bond website, building capacity at Prosper HS is listed at 2800, which I am guessing is core capacity. PISD is projecting 9753 HS students for 2028, which would require 3 HS. If the bond passes, HS #3 and HS #4 will be built by then. Using the Allen example given above, 5 HS would each have a population of around 2850, so that could possibly work. But my thought is that they get to 6 HS and stay there. |
|
|
|
Post by leopard4life on Mar 7, 2019 8:55:08 GMT -6
I cannot blame you there. I don't like when ISDs pull the old "give us money, then we will figure it out" approach either. But don't forget that the Town of Prosper proper had not planned well either, as their 2004 comprehensive plan wasn't very comprehensive. Prosper's 2012 comprehensive plan called for 69K people, but by January 2013 the DMN had a story saying 75-80K. Whereas lots were mainly at least an acre (largely due to lack of city sewage services), that has obviously now changed. And that doesn't even take into account Prosper ISD's territories in Frisco, McKinney, Celina, etc. The Town has only 27 square miles of land, but the ISD covers 59 square miles. Compared to Allen's 29 square miles, PISD could not possibly have only one high school, despite that being the general consensus of outsiders at the time. As you mention, 3 might work at ~20 square miles per school, but then compared to Allen ISD's 7000 HS population at build-out, those schools would each have 4800 students. Get up to 4 HS and ~15 square miles each, and you have around 3500 students per school, which sounds more like it. 6 HS would put the enrollments around 2400, while 8 HS would put them around 1780. While PISD still maintains "6-8 HS at build-out," I feel that 4-6 HS seems more reasonable, but it would still be costly. Could fewer schools allow for each HS to have the same amenities as Prosper High? Possibly, and remember that PHS and RHHS both have 2500 classroom capacities, so 6 schools could be it. The current bond planning committee has not been public, which I find strange (the presentation was at the board meeting, and that video has yet to be posted). I will always vote NO for any bond that doesn't have spending clearly defined, so hopefully for these voters sakes this one will not seem sneaky. On the bond website, building capacity at Prosper HS is listed at 2800, which I am guessing is core capacity. PISD is projecting 9753 HS students for 2028, which would require 3 HS. If the bond passes, HS #3 and HS #4 will be built by then. Using the Allen example given above, 5 HS would each have a population of around 2850, so that could possibly work. But my thought is that they get to 6 HS and stay there. So much for the ever-changing FAQ... www.prosper-isd.net/FAQWhen will High School #2 be built? HS #2 (Rock Hill HS) is currently under construction and will open by August 2020. The long-term plan is for PISD to have approximately eight 5A high schools at build-out, but residential zoning will ultimately drive that number. Unless they are planning for 2800+ to be the new cut off for 5A, all their campuses will be 6A. I can see them opening Campus 2 in 5A for at least a 2-year cycle, or rezoning so Campus 2 and 3 stay 5A as long a possible. Also, it will be difficult to have 5-6 schools sharing one stadium/natatorium... |
|
|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 7, 2019 14:35:54 GMT -6
On the bond website, building capacity at Prosper HS is listed at 2800, which I am guessing is core capacity. PISD is projecting 9753 HS students for 2028, which would require 3 HS. If the bond passes, HS #3 and HS #4 will be built by then. Using the Allen example given above, 5 HS would each have a population of around 2850, so that could possibly work. But my thought is that they get to 6 HS and stay there. So much for the ever-changing FAQ... www.prosper-isd.net/FAQWhen will High School #2 be built? HS #2 (Rock Hill HS) is currently under construction and will open by August 2020. The long-term plan is for PISD to have approximately eight 5A high schools at build-out, but residential zoning will ultimately drive that number. Unless they are planning for 2800+ to be the new cut off for 5A, all their campuses will be 6A. I can see them opening Campus 2 in 5A for at least a 2-year cycle, or rezoning so Campus 2 and 3 stay 5A as long a possible. Also, it will be difficult to have 5-6 schools sharing one stadium/natatorium... My estimate, using Allen as an example, for 8 schools would have each with an enrollment of around 1800. HS #2 will open in 2020, HS #3 in 2022, and HS #4 in 2024, or at least that is the idea. That should provide some stability as they will have seats for 10,000 HS students, but are projected to have fewer than that in 2028. Should allow them to get to and remain 5A afterward. They should plan a 2nd stadium, but could make only one work if they keep enrollments balanced. Ideally, you would want no more than 4 schools per stadium. They are already planning a 2nd natatorium... |
|
|
|
Post by leopard4life on Mar 7, 2019 15:37:59 GMT -6
So much for the ever-changing FAQ... www.prosper-isd.net/FAQWhen will High School #2 be built? HS #2 (Rock Hill HS) is currently under construction and will open by August 2020. The long-term plan is for PISD to have approximately eight 5A high schools at build-out, but residential zoning will ultimately drive that number. Unless they are planning for 2800+ to be the new cut off for 5A, all their campuses will be 6A. I can see them opening Campus 2 in 5A for at least a 2-year cycle, or rezoning so Campus 2 and 3 stay 5A as long a possible. Also, it will be difficult to have 5-6 schools sharing one stadium/natatorium... My estimate, using Allen as an example, for 8 schools would have each with an enrollment of around 1800. HS #2 will open in 2020, HS #3 in 2022, and HS #4 in 2024, or at least that is the idea. That should provide some stability as they will have seats for 10,000 HS students, but are projected to have fewer than that in 2028. Should allow them to get to and remain 5A afterward. They should plan a 2nd stadium, but could make only one work if they keep enrollments balanced. Ideally, you would want no more than 4 schools per stadium. They are already planning a 2nd natatorium... Allen ISD is 29 square miles and Prosper ISD is 58 square miles. Prosper does however have homes zoned for Acreage that Allen doesn't. I can easily see them ending up around the same size, but think Prosper will have a slightly higher student population. Another factor is that Allen is completely full. Allen has a lot of apartments and shotgun houses being built. Also, if they are planning on staying 5A, then why is the current high school so big? I believe you mentioned the current high school have core facilities for 2800. Why build it that big if they planned on it being 5A? |
|
|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 7, 2019 15:57:25 GMT -6
My estimate, using Allen as an example, for 8 schools would have each with an enrollment of around 1800. HS #2 will open in 2020, HS #3 in 2022, and HS #4 in 2024, or at least that is the idea. That should provide some stability as they will have seats for 10,000 HS students, but are projected to have fewer than that in 2028. Should allow them to get to and remain 5A afterward. They should plan a 2nd stadium, but could make only one work if they keep enrollments balanced. Ideally, you would want no more than 4 schools per stadium. They are already planning a 2nd natatorium... Allen ISD is 29 square miles and Prosper ISD is 58 square miles. Prosper does however have homes zoned for Acreage that Allen doesn't. I can easily see them ending up around the same size, but think Prosper will have a slightly higher student population. Another factor is that Allen is completely full. Allen has a lot of apartments and shotgun houses being built. Also, if they are planning on staying 5A, then why is the current high school so big? I believe you mentioned the current high school have core facilities for 2800. Why build it that big if they planned on it being 5A? I see inconsistencies with their capacity. It used to be 2500 and now is 2800. Perhaps that is functional vs core capacity... I used Allen ISD’s HS population of 7000 compared to 29 square miles to set up proportions to find an estimate for PISD. My estimate has PISD with just over 14000 HS students at build out. 5 HS would have 2800 each, 6 would have around 2350 (which could eventually be in the 5A range). 7 would have around 2000 each, and 8 HS would each have around 1800. If all schools are built the same, then PISD might not need 8 HS. 6 sounds like the best option. |
|
|
|
Post by leopard4life on Mar 7, 2019 16:03:12 GMT -6
Allen ISD is 29 square miles and Prosper ISD is 58 square miles. Prosper does however have homes zoned for Acreage that Allen doesn't. I can easily see them ending up around the same size, but think Prosper will have a slightly higher student population. Another factor is that Allen is completely full. Allen has a lot of apartments and shotgun houses being built. Also, if they are planning on staying 5A, then why is the current high school so big? I believe you mentioned the current high school have core facilities for 2800. Why build it that big if they planned on it being 5A? I see inconsistencies with their capacity. It used to be 2500 and now is 2800. Perhaps that is functional vs core capacity... I used Allen ISD’s HS population of 7000 compared to 29 square miles to set up proportions to find an estimate for PISD. My estimate has PISD with just over 14000 HS students at build out. 5 HS would have 2800 each, 6 would have around 2350 (which could eventually be in the 5A range). 7 would have around 2000 each, and 8 HS would each have around 1800. If all schools are built the same, then PISD might not need 8 HS. 6 sounds like the best option. I downloaded Prospers FAQ on 5.23.17 and this is what it said back then: 8. When will High School #2 be built? Obviously, student growth will drive this along with the ability to sell bonds. Today, we are projecting that high school #2 will not open until 2020. The long-term plan is for PISD to have 6+ 5A high schools at build out. The only reason I downloaded it was because it originally said 4-5 5A campuses then went to 5-6, then 5-7 and now it says 6+. It will be interesting to see how big they build the next two high schools. |
|
|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 7, 2019 16:52:21 GMT -6
I see inconsistencies with their capacity. It used to be 2500 and now is 2800. Perhaps that is functional vs core capacity... I used Allen ISD’s HS population of 7000 compared to 29 square miles to set up proportions to find an estimate for PISD. My estimate has PISD with just over 14000 HS students at build out. 5 HS would have 2800 each, 6 would have around 2350 (which could eventually be in the 5A range). 7 would have around 2000 each, and 8 HS would each have around 1800. If all schools are built the same, then PISD might not need 8 HS. 6 sounds like the best option. I downloaded Prospers FAQ on 5.23.17 and this is what it said back then: 8. When will High School #2 be built? Obviously, student growth will drive this along with the ability to sell bonds. Today, we are projecting that high school #2 will not open until 2020. The long-term plan is for PISD to have 6+ 5A high schools at build out. The only reason I downloaded it was because it originally said 4-5 5A campuses then went to 5-6, then 5-7 and now it says 6+. It will be interesting to see how big they build the next two high schools. It did say 6-8 5A campuses for a while. Now they are saying they expect 8. Looks like an ever-changing thing. |
|
|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 14, 2019 17:02:41 GMT -6
Wichita Falls ISD is currently on the last leg of forums to decide what model it will move to going forward. A long-range planning team is in place: "The secondary group will: 1.) develop options for a 1-high school model with options on grade configuration and will also consider options for the remaining secondary facilities. 2.) develop options for a 2-high school model with options for locations and two middle schools feeding into each high school. High schools must be economically and ethnically similar." I don't think the 1-HS model will fly, but if it does, looks like they'll shy away from 9-12 in one building. www.wfisd.net/domain/4513 |
|
|
|
Post by leopard4life on Mar 14, 2019 17:25:31 GMT -6
Wichita Falls ISD is currently on the last leg of forums to decide what model it will move to going forward. A long-range planning team is in place: "The secondary group will: 1.) develop options for a 1-high school model with options on grade configuration and will also consider options for the remaining secondary facilities. 2.) develop options for a 2-high school model with options for locations and two middle schools feeding into each high school. High schools must be economically and ethnically similar." I don't think the 1-HS model will fly, but if it does, looks like they'll shy away from 9-12 in one building. www.wfisd.net/domain/4513I agree that the 1-HS model probably won't fly, but I don't think it will stop them from trying. I won't be shocked at all if they go with a 9-10 and 11-12 model. There are some powerful voices that want to be relevant in football... |
|
|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 14, 2019 19:35:20 GMT -6
Wichita Falls ISD is currently on the last leg of forums to decide what model it will move to going forward. A long-range planning team is in place: "The secondary group will: 1.) develop options for a 1-high school model with options on grade configuration and will also consider options for the remaining secondary facilities. 2.) develop options for a 2-high school model with options for locations and two middle schools feeding into each high school. High schools must be economically and ethnically similar." I don't think the 1-HS model will fly, but if it does, looks like they'll shy away from 9-12 in one building. www.wfisd.net/domain/4513I agree that the 1-HS model probably won't fly, but I don't think it will stop them from trying. I won't be shocked at all if they go with a 9-10 and 11-12 model. There are some powerful voices that want to be relevant in football... Rider and Hirschi are both relevant. Essentially dividing up Old High's students to those programs shouldn't hurt. But I do see your point - just don't think the community will want that. |
|
|
|
Post by leopard4life on Mar 14, 2019 19:39:16 GMT -6
I agree that the 1-HS model probably won't fly, but I don't think it will stop them from trying. I won't be shocked at all if they go with a 9-10 and 11-12 model. There are some powerful voices that want to be relevant in football... Rider and Hirschi are both relevant. Essentially dividing up Old High's students to those programs shouldn't hurt. But I do see your point - just don't think the community will want that. The few people I know out that way always make the same comment - "If we didn't split our students between multiple high schools we would have more talent than Allen" |
|
|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 14, 2019 21:08:10 GMT -6
Rider and Hirschi are both relevant. Essentially dividing up Old High's students to those programs shouldn't hurt. But I do see your point - just don't think the community will want that. The few people I know out that way always make the same comment - "If we didn't split our students between multiple high schools we would have more talent than Allen" 😂That says enough right there. |
|
|
|
Post by leopard4life on Mar 15, 2019 9:50:42 GMT -6
The few people I know out that way always make the same comment - "If we didn't split our students between multiple high schools we would have more talent than Allen" 😂That says enough right there. I hear similar grumblings from Denton ISD, but those voices have zero power. A few out in WF have a lot of pull. |
|
|
|
Post by rtxc1 on Mar 15, 2019 12:26:39 GMT -6
😂That says enough right there. I hear similar grumblings from Denton ISD, but those voices have zero power. A few out in WF have a lot of pull. Denton ISD could realistically be the top power in the state with only one (or even 2) HS. It is also a much larger district than WFISD. We will see how this plays out, as it doesn't appear that very many community members who have come out are prepared to leave their HS behind. Could be a recipe for a mega HS. |
|
