What Is the Real Cost of Closing Mildred Dean

I was curious if the planning committee, the school board, or any other involved party, has ever stated, with statistical evidence what the real cost savings will be in closing Mildred Dean? In the plan that I understand, most all the teachers will be moved toother schools, and the administration staff will have jobs too. So, if the real cost savings the Duke Energy & Cin Bell bills each month?

The kids' cost should be close to the same - you still have to feed them, get them school materials, bus them, etc. So, I was curious about the real cost savings. It was my understanding that they really dont spend any money on the maintenance of the MD building.

How much money will this move save the Newport Schools?

The Central office reported in would save about $500,000 per year. But never really backed that number up with anything??

Wow - $500K....that's a pretty big number when your district only has a $50K reserve of funds.

Wondering wrote:

Wow -$500K....that's a pretty big number when your district only has a $50K reserve of funds.

That's $500,000 that NIS doesn't have to spend each year.

If they eliminated 20 of the unnecessary jobs from the central office they could save $2,000,000 a year.

Hmmm....close a high performing school and save $500,000 or eliminate unnecessary positions (friends/family of Brandt) from the central office and save $2,000,000?

Seems like a no brainer....eliminate central office staff and save 4 times more money.

Unfortunately, Brandt and the current board will never really do what is in the best interest of the students and the entire district.

Closing Mildred Dean will not save that much money. They will be losing the per pupil money the state gives them on all the kids that will leave the district. Many MD families are refusing to send there children to 4th St., as are some AD Owens parents. The only parents not complaining are those from 4th St. whose children will be "moving up", to a nicer building.

$500,000 is a drop in the bucket compared to the 8.25 million that they have flushed down the toilet since Mr. Brandt took over.

What they save on closing mildred dean will not cover the projected cost of getting 4th street up to codes--750 thousand dollars. So what is the point, just because they can I guess.

Closing Mildred Dean will only satisfy the parents of the under achieving schools. Closing Mildred Dean will infact lose money for the school district. Several parents talked about moving their children out of the district if this happens. There is no way in this world tou can tell me heating MD is anywhere close to heating FS. It too is full of windows, plastered walls, and no central air. It will cost atleast 2 million to bring FS up to standards. Tear it down and make it a parking lot, the make $60,000 off parking now, just imagine another $60,000 on top of that, and I definately agree, fire Brandt's friends and their families, and save another 2 mil. That's $2,120,000 extra a year. No one mentions the budget didn't take a hit until Brandt showed up. Where did all this money go? FS and ADO perform under par still, no schools have had upgrades in years??????????

Federal Score Keeper wrote:

Closing Mildred Dean will only satisfy the parents of the under achieving schools. Closing Mildred Dean will infact lose money for the school district. Several parents talked about moving their children out of the district if this happens. There is no way in this world tou can tell me heating MD is anywhere close to heating FS. It too is full of windows, plastered walls, and no central air. It will cost atleast 2 million to bring FS up to standards. Tear it down and make it a parking lot, the make $60,000 off parking now, just imagine another $60,000 on top of that, and I definately agree, fire Brandt's friends and their families, and save another 2 mil. That's $2,120,000 extra a year. No one mentions the budget didn't take a hit until Brandt showed up. Where did all this money go? FS and ADO perform under par still, no schools have had upgrades in years??????????

Ever wonder what wasn't paid for so the money could accumulate in the bank? I think we're seeing what wasn't taken care of - the multimillion dollar needs of the buildings in the district.

Federal Score Keeper wrote:

Closing Mildred Dean will only satisfy the parents of the under achieving schools. Closing Mildred Dean will infact lose money for the school district. Several parents talked about moving their children out of the district if this happens. There is no way in this world tou can tell me heating MD is anywhere close to heating FS. It too is full of windows, plastered walls, and no central air. It will cost atleast 2 million to bring FS up to standards. Tear it down and make it a parking lot, the make $60,000 off parking now, just imagine another $60,000 on top of that, and I definately agree, fire Brandt's friends and their families, and save another 2 mil. That's $2,120,000 extra a year. No one mentions the budget didn't take a hit until Brandt showed up. Where did all this money go? FS and ADO perform under par still, no schools have had upgrades in years??????????

Exactly!
Your first sentence says it all.

ADO was actually upgraded in the 90's.
4th St has had some upgrades too.
MD has had NO upgrades in years. Yet, they outperform everyone else.

It's not the buildings, it is the children that make the school. And there will be less children merging into ADO if this god awful decision goes through. But just a fact: ADO already has the talented program there yet all those children cannot raise test scores. One reason being is MD parents never considered sending their children from MD there. Every letter I recieved for my 2 so far went into the trash. I will never send my child to a school on the watch list. NEVER!

Fed up wrote:

<quoted text>
Exactly!
Your first sentence says it all.
ADO was actually upgraded in the 90's.
4th St has had some upgrades too.
MD has had NO upgrades in years. Yet, they outperform everyone else.

Actually is was in 2002 that they upgraded AD Owens.

Tell me again why Brandt is still our superintendent and making these decisions? He lives in Ohio and shouldn't be here anyways. That's probably where the school dollars are going. Paying for him to fight to get to live in Ohio while being a superintendent in KY. Sad when you supertintendent don't even want to live in the same state and support his school district with his personal tax dollars.

I asked a MD teacher what she thought that they would do with the property that MD sits on if the school closes down. She said that St Luke has wanted the property for years, which makes sense.
But then she said that St Luke now has some 'reservations' about acquiring the property because it sits in Newport's city limits and the hospital,of course, sits in Ft Thomas and uses a different zip code, and that zoning may be an issue. Has anyone else heard of any future plans for that property should the school no longer exist?

chip-n-dale man dancing establishment probably

Npt Parent wrote:

Tell me again why Brandt is still our superintendent and making these decisions? He lives in Ohio and shouldn't be here anyways. That's probably where the school dollars are going. Paying for him to fight to get to live in Ohio while being a superintendent in KY. Sad when you supertintendent don't even want to live in the same state and support his school district with his personal tax dollars.

Most of our teachers don't support our district with their "personal tax dollars" either.

Jonathon Turner wrote:

I asked a MD teacher what she thought that they would do with the property that MD sits on if the school closes down. She said that St Luke has wanted the property for years, which makes sense.
But then she said that St Luke now has some 'reservations' about acquiring the property because it sits in Newport's city limits and the hospital,of course, sits in Ft Thomas and uses a different zip code, and that zoning may be an issue. Has anyone else heard of any future plans for that property should the school no longer exist?

Considering they already purchased a part of that property doesn't seem they're too concerned.

731xxx wrote:

<quoted text>
Most of our teachers don't support our district with their "personal tax dollars" either.

The law doesn't say the teachers have to, but it does say the superintendent does.

cougar wrote:

<quoted text>
Considering they already purchased a part of that property doesn't seem they're too concerned.

How do u know this?