Teachers’ Union Responds  |   Home  |   Pretending to Care

Tear Down Badger?

It’s a good question.

The citizen group tasked with providing the West Bend School District advice on facility planning questioned Thursday whether the portion of the Badger Middle School scheduled for demolition could be salvaged to alleviate building space needs.

   Committee members are exploring the possibility not because they believe it is really a viable option, said Citizens Facilities Advisory Committee cochairman Randall Stark, but because they “want to be able to rule it out with confidence.”

   “It is more of a confirmation exercise,” he said.

   Committee members Kraig Sadownikow and Randy Marquardt said community members were asking why a school building was being demolished at a time when the district is short on facility space.

   Superintendent Pat Herdrich said that the Badger Middle School referendum question voters approved addressed handicapped accessibility issues at the building, not growth. The district was twice cited by the Office of Civil Rights because the structure, now slated for demolition, did not meet present-day standards.

   Contractors Bill Pennoyer, senior project manager of VJS Construction Services, and Robert Vajgrt, principal architect of Eppstein Uhen, said to keep the building at this point in the process would present a host of obstacles, including site, mechanical, drainage, traffic flow and parking problems. Preserving the building would also result in the elimination of the relocated football field and track.

Yes, the building isn’t up to code, but does that mean it’s useless?  It’s served the community for decades.  Could it be of use for a few more years as the district deals with space issues?  Could it serve as offices or space for extracurricular activities?  Anything?  It’s worth a look.

Posted by Owen at 0719 hrs
Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

1. Turn it into a book repository. Don’t plan on having any presidential motorcades use that stretch of South Main street.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 0838 hrs
   
   
   

2. It cannot be used for students until millions are put into it through remodeling and updating.  This was clearly stated in the referendum information and the article.  The way we were addressing the Office of Civil rights violations was to get rid of the building and all of its violations.  In addition it would really make a mess out of the site design that we are in the middle of developing.

   Also, it was spelled out in the referendum language that the building would be torn down.  If the building is not torn down it will violate the language of the referendum.  That is a violation of law.

   Randy Stark is correct.  A complete plan needs to be formulated.  The CFAC 2 committee is doing what they were charged to do and they are doing a good job.

   That being said there may be a legal means to keep the building.  it needs to be investigated.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 0923 hrs
   
   
   

3. That being said there may be a legal means to keep the building.  it needs to be investigated.

   Elaborate, please, Kris.

   Posted by GAMazy on March 05, 2010 at 1012 hrs
   
   
   

4. you have to ask a lawyer that specializes in that area if such a thing can be done.  How hard is that to figure out?

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1026 hrs
   
   
   

5. I meant more along the lines of your thoughts about that particular action.  It seemed unclear.  How hard is that to figure out?

   Posted by GAMazy on March 05, 2010 at 1050 hrs
   
   
   

6. I am siding with Kris on this one.
   Being this far along building the new school everything would need to stop and go back to design stage. Storm water, traffic flow, emergency exiting, more design fees, more management fees, and who is to say the state and local would approve anyways. The heating, cooling, electrical all looks to be in process, the added square footage would mean new sizing and engineering scrapping everything thats new in place.

   The initial problem with Badger was all the added additions flung on over the years, we now have a fresh from scratch start on a modern facility, stick with the plan as designed, do we want to start hodge podging before we even finish the new one? After all the reason we are spending 28 million is to correct this type of construction.
   But hey never hurts to run the numbers.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1110 hrs
   
   
   

7. Why not use it to generate Revenue?
   I’d propose leasing it to more Tattoo or Fast food places!
   Wouldn’t it make a great old Mall?

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1117 hrs
   
   
   

8. Don’t buy any green bananas.  Crusher and I agree.

   Ginny,

   If that is what you meant, why didn’t you just say that?

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1137 hrs
   
   
   

9. Hartford had an old school building north of their downtown - pretty much the same issues with condition & handicap access, etc.  I think they used it awhile for city recreation activities, and some agency offices (Red Cross or ?).  The community did not want the school torn down for sentimental reasons.  There was a city department that wanted to convert it to apartments for seniors, and invested a lot of time & effort in studying the feasibility of doing that, but eventually they had to tear it down and build a new apartment complex on the site.

   I think they had a school east of the downtown that had to be torn down too.

   I once attended a presentation about ADA requirements (about 10-15 years ago - maybe things have changed) - one thing that was stressed was the whole building has to be compliant, if there is public access.  My take on that was, if the old part of Badger is used in a public way (as an extension to the newer parts), it will need to be brought up to codes.  The example that was given was a nursing home that had added a sunroom at the end of the hallway that required several steps to get up.  Adding a ramp was not feasible, and despite the facility having a majority of residents that could handle the stairs, they had to close off that room because it had to be accessible to everyone.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1231 hrs
   
   
   

10. If space is a problem instead of bricks and mortar why not look at expanding virtual education? Out of district enrollment could also rise providing revenue.
    If 10%-20 % of students go this direction there is no space issue, maybe some re-shuffling but thats minor compared to buildings.
    Less salaries, less transportation, less maintanance, it all makes sense. For you traditional type check out the Mcgiver Institute they have a great article, it cant be ignored any longer.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1341 hrs
    
    
    

11. Just shut down all of the schools and be done with it. They’re not teaching these kids anything of value anyway, just filling their little pudding brains with enviro-propaganda, and anti-Americanism, so why bother.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1715 hrs
    
    
    

12. I love when people bitch about what is/isn’t being taught in schools when most (I’m guessing) haven’t seen the inside of a classroom since the last day of High School.  Or the day they dropped out.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1803 hrs
    
    
    

13. Pope,

    I do and have seen the product of what is taught in the local high schools.  Scott, while somewhat acerbic, is close to the truth.  When these West Bend students have shown up at the University, they are not educated, they are not able to learn, and they have strong entitlement issues.  Hearing the comments of the students on exams, you learn that the main issue is with how their supposedly worth $100,000 teachers have prepared them.  You do not need more, better, bigger schools.  West Bend needs to understand what and what is not education.  When they understand that, they will cease to think that they are getting a great deal on a great product.

    Tad

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010 at 1826 hrs
    
    
    

14. Scott and Tad

    Respectfully-all # of my daughters attended our local public schools.

    I’m fortunate to have been able to send them anywhere to school (no brag-just fact)

    I chose the schools because they have what a child would need to be successful.

    Not all of them were fully engaged in high school,but all were given a terrific platform and when the learning bug kicked in,all 3 became unmitigated success’s

    The educational value we get is probably unsurpassed in wisconsin at the public school level for the $

    and how do I know that?

    Because I’m not an idiot.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 06, 2010 at 0852 hrs
    
    
    

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.