I am fairly new to the Janesville/Milton area and my two children will both be entering the Milton School District in the next 5 years. I also don't have a lot of extra income to throw at a new High School but after reading the posts it sounds like it is necessary. I have seen other outdated schools and it simply doesn't work. Science is especially difficult to teach a 1960's set-up.
I would be will to spend the $100-$200 PER YEAR - that is less than $20/month (one pizza delivery per month) I can come up with to ensure my children have a quality education.
It is unfortuate that our system of education asks tax payers to pay more but it does.
I believe we all need to find away to budget so Milton can continue to provide a quality education. If we don't, more will leave and that wouldn't be good for this district.

Janesvillecomments-

It's an interesting concept, but apparently they did not express an interest in the project. Perhaps they were not aware of it. If you believe that this contractor can do the work better, for less, then maybe you should put a bug in their ear.

rocky...you can't compare the time spent walking to a shop class to walking in PE. The time walking to Woods class is time away from learning woodworking. Walking IS part of PE. I bet the teachers love your comment about longer days! Can you say Overtime Pay! What ever happened with the case of the drugs found in the teachers area anyways?

Woody - of course it will take longer to traverse the distance, but these are HS kids who don't wear coats most of the time, anyway! Seriously, though, I do think that the passing times would need to be adjusted to allow for the bigger campus. This would lengthen the school day, but not shorten contact minutes between teachers and students. All classes are important. Tech ed, core curriculum, arts, business, Family and Consumer, PE/Health - makes no difference. BTW - from what I've seen driving around, PE regularly makes the trek from the current HS to Schilberg Park in fair weather... this trip would be shorter!

With GM gone, and the supposed highly increasing amount of students that were going to start moving here gone, I dont see a need for a WHOLE new high school. Renovating? yes, Milton High School could definetly use some upgrades. But overall a whole new school seems rediculous especially with these economic times.

If they are going to build a new facility, they should look at Monolithic Domes.
http://static.monolithic.com/gallery/sch...

Monolithic domes are fireproof, cost half as much to heat/cool as a conventional structure, and can double as emergency tornado shelters for the community.
.
The shell of the dome is self-supporting, so if the school district needs to change the interior of the dome years or decades later, it is cheaper to do than with a conventional building having interior structural walls.

Look at the plans rocky...the new school would be much much further away than what the shop buildings are now. The kids making the outside walk would need extra time to get their coats on and to make the trip. That time would take away from their education time, but maybe you don't care about kids learning a trade. This new school is a want, not a need.

OK so whats the new final total cost?
Anyone who knows the basic philosophy of negotiations is you always ask for more than you really need.
So when you bargain some of what you wanted away you still get alot of what you entended in the first place.
Oh and when you ask for money always tug at the emotional heart strings of people by saying, "it's for the children".

Woody...are you paying attention? Adding on to the existing school is not an option. The numerous additions already have created a very difficult building to maintain. Engineers have already said "no".

---

Why would the new school need new shop facilities? It will be a 2-minute walk between buildings - hardly more than it is now. The new school also lacks a new auditorium...another duplication that wasn't needed. Aren't you concerned about the drama kids having to walk?

Have you seen the new school design? We don't need a country club. They don't even have the shop classes in the new design. What are the kids going to do, walk back to to old class rooms? We don't need another school. Add on.

Woody,

The Milton School District already spends $1100 per student less than the average Wisconsin school district, according to the Great Schools website. How does this make the school board big spenders?

"I don't think we need a new high school, period," he said. (Fred Hookham) You get my vote Fred. It's time these big spenders learn the word NO!

I don't get it. Why are we doing any improvements or making any financial decision with the shape of the Rock County economy? It just seems irresponsible.

I'm with Fred. The district is nutz if they think a new H.S. will fly. The old H.S. building is sound. It could be updated and remodeled with some careful planning and not just looking at what it will take to get by for now. Lets look at the next 10-20 years and come up with a solution. Kitchen cost should be seriously studied as meals are bought prepared. The grounds are there for further additions, use them.

With all due respect to "newempire" , I think he is missing the point. The HS can continue to house the existing students and programs if enrollment remains level, but the driving force behind the project is overcrowding at the Middle School and Northside - neither of which is alleviated by flat enrollments. We could build new Elementary/Middle Schools, but that would not address many of the concerns that arise about the current High School. While many of the facilities, such as science labs and gym space, are just fine for a Middle School, the fact is that they are sub-standard for a 21st century high school. Great teachers have kept Milton from falling behind so far...but eventually the problems will catch up. In today's economy, especially, Milton needs to be able to compete for student enrollment, and a state of the art building would help with that process.

----

Can the current HS be renovated? To an extent, yes. Additions are pretty much out of the question...the space has been over expanded already. The millions required for renovation, however, do nothing to address the overcrowding at the elementary/middle school levels. Some renovations, such as a pool overhaul, will cost as much as, if not more than, new construction. Renovation won't build a field house. Many issues would remain.

---

I certainly understand the objection to the high price tag in tough economic times, and I applaud the Milton Board for looking at ways to reduce costs. I would implore them, however, to be careful about cutting so much that the building doesn't meet the needs of the community in 20 years.... It seems like the cuts being discussed are the correct ones.

hiredgun, I agree with you that some buildings are more cost efficient to replace, but this building isn't in that sort of predicament. The cost to add on and renovate would surely be less than an entire new school. I base that on nothing but common sense and I think you'd agree. There was a debate while I was at school in Milton over whether to build new or add more classrooms with an addition. That addition added many classrooms for history and languages classes which had previously been pinched for space.

hiredgun - Milton students deserve less than "the best" when there's no money for pay for it. Maybe I deserve a 50" HDTV, but I can't afford it either.
The fact of the matter is that even if a new high school is absolutely needed, the voters have to approve it. The voters have to be convinced that this is worth upping their property taxes a couple of hundred dollars a year. And that is going to be an awfully tough sell in this economy, or even a year from now. Personally, I can't afford it, even though I have a decent job and I'm not saddled with credit card debt or a ridiculous house payment. I've voted for school improvements in the past, but I could never support this one unless things radically change.

Perhaps the Milton School district should consider other means of dealing with over crowding by a second shift for students, a calendar year school term, a 4 day school week to reduce transportation costs. I dont know if any of them will work. But have they been considered?

Badgerlvr

Why do Milton students deserve less than the best?

newempire

You point out two important factors to consider.
First, the current building is not the result of a single, all inclusive project, but the end result of decades of additions, repairs, and rennovations. It would be interesting to see how much has been invested in the current high school over the past 44 years and adjust those figures for inflation. Does anyone know if this has been done?
Second, the current economic situation is such that such a cost at this time would be irresponsible without an effort to see if the cost cannot be reduced. I understand that the school board is doing this.
But I disagree with your statement that there is nothing wrong with the current building that cannot be repaired, rennovated, or added onto. On what data do you base this statement? At some point in a building's useful life, it becomes more cost effective to replace it rather than to repair it. Are we there yet with MHS?

asbman,

You need to update to the 21st century. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which keeps a cost of living calculator, the $30,000 spent on the greehouse in 1965 now equates to $205,333. So the $216,000 is not much out of line.

I'm running as a write-in candidate for Milton Council and I realize that this is more the domain of the School Board, but at some point there have to be more voices like Mike Pierce on this matter. There is nothing wrong with MHS's current building that cannot be fixed, renovated, repaired, upgraded, or added onto for less than the $76.6M we're talking about. I understand the desire to build new, but even if enrollment was still growing at the previous rate this would be a completely irresponsible waste of taxpayer resources. It's exactly these types of projects and representatives like Mr. Leong and others that are the problem in Milton given the current economic climate. Now is a time to look at what we need NOW and take care of that. Then, when things are clearer and the economic situation is more stable we can begin to look at these big solutions to longer term problems such as overcrowding in the high school. I do tend to err on the side of fiscal conservatism, but I also understand that physical building needs change and adaptations must be made. I have to laugh, however, when people refer to the school having been "built in 1965". I suppose that's true, but far more than half of the school (at least) is either 1990's additions or remodels. Of the "old" sections there are still two gyms that could be remodeled (especially the Green Gym) into additional space for athletics and it's not as if the current building is landlocked. An addition could certainly be added somewhere to house special education and other new programs without a home. I have lots of thoughts on this, but those are a few.

If you want a Cadillac...you'll get a Cadillac. If you want a Yugo...you'll get a Yugo. Any chance we could find a good Buick or Chevrolet in this budget?

Greenhouse $216,000? You must be kidding. Are we trying to build a new K and W Greenery. The current facility which is one of the better ones in the state for a high school only cost $30,000.00 to build all of which I believe was donated by the community. Let's get real. Where are these numbers coming from?