This popped into my inbox this morning from Digital Journal:
Under the headline appeared the following:
Crystal Lake, IL (PRWEB) May 31, 2014
DataBid.com is currently reporting on the McHenry County College Architectural/Space Utilization Services due June 19, 2014, 4:00 p.m.
Click here for complete details on the Crystal Lake, IL DataBid Project.
As of 5/31/2014 Bids Due:
June 19, 2014, 4:00 p.m. – Attn: Robert Tenuta,
The Commons and cafeteria are the most recent renovations to McHenry County College.
This additional information appeared on another page:
Project Class – Professional Consultant Services
Industry – Educational
Trade – College/University
Construction Type – Addition/RenovationDetail of Services
McHenry County College (MCC) is requesting proposals for Architectural/Space Utilization Services for construction, renovation, determining spacing needs, and/or remodeling projects.
The specifications can be found here.
I found the following interesting:
Scope of Services
McHenry County College (MCC) is requesting a proposal for architectural/space utilization services for programming to assess the solution(s) which will accommodate the space needs of the College.
The programming phase shall assist the College with determining the program and space needs. Current space utilization must be confirmed, and future requirements for each area must be determined. The successful proposer will work collaboratively with the College faculty, staff, and Board to determine total project requirements and budget.
The services will also include conceptual drawings/design for the space based on the results of the programming phase. The conceptual designs shall include the following option(s):
New building
Renovation of existing space
Building addition(s)/building up on existing structure(s)
= = = = =
As usual, the college made it difficult to copy what is on its web site to another web site so that people may search it on the internet.
= = = = =
This comment from Steve Willson appeared almost as soon as I put up the article. It’s relevant so I’ll post it below.
We KNOW — despite the administration’s best efforts to hide the information, that classrooms at MCC are used, on average, less than half of each school day.
We KNOW, because of Tom Wilbeck’s insistence on statistics, that MCC’s classrooms are NEVER used at full capacity.
We KNOW, because Tom Wilbeck demanded the information — three times — that 30% of MCC’s regular teacher-in-the-classroom classes have nine or fewer students, many with just two or three students.
We also know some work needs to done to upgrade some of the facilities. The chemistry labs, for example, look like something out of a 1960s high school.
But do we have to keep hiring consultants over and over?
Especially when we all know their job is to reach whatever conclusion the administration instructed them to find.
P.S. Average class size at MCC has fallen from 22 to 17.
A little quick division: (22/17)-1 = 29%.
In other words, just getting back to an average class size of 22 would be like increasing capacity by 29%.
We KNOW — despite the administration’s best efforts to hide the information, that classrooms at MCC are used, on average, less than half of each school day.
We KNOW, because of Tom Wilbeck’s insistence on statistics, that MCC’s classrooms are NEVER used at full capacity.
We KNOW, because Tom Wilbeck demanded the information — three times — that 30% of MCC’s regular teacher-in-the-classroom classes have nine or fewer students, many with just two or three students.
We also know some work needs to done to upgrade some of the facilities. The chemistry labs, for example, look like something out of a 1960s high school.
But do we have to keep hiring consultants over and over?
Especially when we all know their job is to reach whatever conclusion the administration instructed them to find.
P.S. Average class size at MCC has fallen from 22 to 17.
A little quick division: (22/17)-1 = 29%.
In other words, just getting back to an average class size of 22 would be like increasing capacity by 29%.
My first reaction is to try to estimate costs per household in McHenry County asked to bear the cost burden of such budget expenditure actions (consultant fees, build outs, etcetera).
Then I ask, what benefit is each household in the County receiving from these incurred costs, in return for their involuntary contribution to these costs?
Then: what is the probability that spending this money in this way(money which will redistribute taxpayers’ money otherwise spent by personal choice, perhaps with the effect of stimulating local economy)will have the ‘desired’ effect promised by those championing this expenditure?
Personally, I would be mortified to be a voting member (with the power to authorize spending of Other People’s Money) of any Board and not know the answer to such questions.
Steve Wilson, have you walked by the Chemistry labs?
They look a lot more updated than the Biology labs.
I think you need to rethink that example before you post.
I walked over to the labs, during my break while at GardenFest.
The chem labs seem tight, but much newer than other labs.
Brent, thank you, I stand corrected.
I have not actually visited the labs myself, but I have spoken with several of the board members.
They are the ones who told me the labs needed to be updated, and I thought they were talking about the chemistry labs, but I’m sure you’re right — it’s the biology labs.
One of my key points is that the new board members, Tom Wilbeck and Chris Jenner (and Ron Parrish, too), are not automatically “anti” spending, they just want — indeed DEMAND — evidence that any of the taxpayers’ money they spend leads to real, well-paying jobs for students.
They don’t see the evidence to support increasing classroom space, but they recognize that some of the facilities are dated and need to be upgraded.
I appreciate the interest, energy and efforts of Steve Willson and Trustees Wilbeck, Jenner and Parrish.
As a minor point, Mr. Willson’s example is not quite accurate.
He wrote, “P.S. Average class size at MCC has fallen from 22 to 17. A little quick division: (22/17)-1 = 29%.”
The drop is actually 22.7% (22-17=5; 5/22= 22.7%).
If class size increased from 17 to 22, that would be a 29% increase.
I do believe MCC is on the right track with looking at health care related jobs.
However, I do share many concerns about enrollment.
The college needs to pick occupations that are growing and the courses that support them.
I find it upsetting that they spent a ton of money on the cooking/catering program without looking at health care first.
I really do not understand how this board operates at times.
They really need to have a list of priorities before they just add programs.
Finally, I don’t believe class size is the be all end all when looking at the college.
I believe that guy who oversees the Academic side of the college had a good quote in the last video.
That not all classes are the same.
There is a lot that goes into averages.
I remember bunting in baseball to move runners around.
It went against my average, but it helped my team win games.
Gus, I apologize for not making myself clear.
Many years ago, long before MCC began to complain about insufficient capacity, average class size was 22. It has now fallen to 17. You are correct, that is a 23% decrease.
My point was that IF MCC could just get average class size back to 22, where it was several years ago — and long before ANYONE at MCC was complaining about not having enough space — THAT would be equivalent to a 29% increase in capacity. Kind of like increasing shifts at a factory from 2 to 3 is a 50% increase. So my math was correct, but obviously my words were not clear.
You know what they say, Gus.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those who are good with words, and those who are good with numbers.
Brent, you make a good point. Average class size is not the be-all and end-all.
But a 23% drop in average class size is strong evidence in my mind that there is NO shortage of space. Knowing that number, I’d want to see STRONG evidence of a need for an increase in classroom space. Wouldn’t you?
(P.S. Less than two weeks ago, President Vicky Smith told the board that average class size was 21.9, a materially false statement.)
But, to return to your main point, while I think a 23% decrease in average class size is strong evidence, one should dig deeper.
That’s exactly what Trustee Wilbeck did: he dug deeper. He demanded numbers on every single class. He had to ask three times before he got the data, and even then it was not exactly user friendly. That should tell you something.
And it turned out that 30% of MCC’s classes have nine students or fewer. Thirty percent! This number doesn’t include Internet classes, independent study, internships, or any other stuff like that. It only includes plain old teacher-in-front-of-students-in-a-classroom. Many classes have just two or three students!
Point three: enrollment has gone from growing to flat to decreasing.
Point four: the number of 3rd graders is 20% lower than the number of high school seniors — in other words, the pool from which MCC draws 75% of its students WILL fall by 20% in the next ten years.
So, Brent, you make a good point — the average is a good place to start, but it is not the be-all and end-all. But there is substantial other evidence that MCC does NOT need to increase classroom space.
Still, I want to make sure I have not missed something important, Brent. I consider comments such as yours useful, a challenge to make me re-think the issue, and an opportunity to collaborate with people who think.
So, Brent, please tell me if you would consider all the evidence presented above sufficient to prove the point. And, if not, please tell me what evidence you would consider sufficient. If you show me anything major that I have missed, I promise you I will investigate it and report back.
Fair enough?
It is an endemic attitude unique to this county that while assessed value of taxable property is going down, there still must be budget increases.
While class sizes are going down, there still must be increases to capacity size.
How does a taxpaying citizen, paying 3.67% of home value annually (and rising on a parabolic rate curve), get through the indoctrinated mentality of those empowered to spend money which isn’t there?
Thanks, Steve. The three Trustees and you are right on the money and watching out for the taxpayers (who ought to do a better job of watching out for themselves).
MCC holds classes for 2-3-4 students?
Wow!
Any responsible school would cancel those classes for low enrollment, not pay a faculty member $40,-50,-60,000/year (or more) to keep those 2-3-4 students awake for a quarter.
Why does the MCC President even allow that?
I am posting to clarify information on the labs at MCC.
In 2010, one of the two chemistry labs at MCC was remodeled.
The main purpose of this was to move the physics lab from it’s own lab space into shared space with one of the chemistry labs.
This was done to free up more biology lab space.
The remaining chemistry lab still resembles a high school chem lab out of the 1960’s.
Although the new combined shared chemistry and physics lab space is much nicer than the older labs, I personally have never seen a combined chem/physics lab outside of MCC.
The equipment and space needs are generally different.
The department did the best it could at the time to accommodate the needs of all science students at a minimum of cost.
It is my opinion that all the science labs at MCC are deficient when compared to other local community colleges.
In fact, my son’s high school lab facilities are better than most of those at the college.
I taught physics courses as an adjunct at MCC for five years between 2009 and 2014 so my opinion may be a bit biased.
However, I urge anyone to go an view the lab spaces at MCC as well as those at other community colleges before passing judgement on whether or not they need renovation.
If the college is going to support STEM fields, they need the proper facilities to do so.
If faced with such a rationale-based request for money for such a well defined project (chem lab remodel), you would not hear this level of cynical outrage and despair from taxpayers footing the bill.
What happens is: a huge, vaguely described ‘improvement project’ is concocted in closed door sessions, and any who dare to question the specifics or the costs are attacked with ad hominem slurs and straw man mischaracterizations of the objections.
But no matter how much some ‘improvement’ is ‘needed’ or desired, there are practical impacts of wresting that money by force from taxpayers…and those profound effects on people in the community should be addressed by anyone with intellectual integrity, before spending decisions are made.
Our property taxes are 3.67% of home value. (If yours is slightly lower, lucky you, you’re not in District 200).
AT what percentage of home rate tax does the ‘event horizon’ occur? (Studying far away galaxy by comparison, Detroit was labeled ‘in crisis’ when property tax rates exceeded 3%).