Metea Valley school construction is waste of money for all tax payers. There is no need to construct new high school any more with the Nequa valley school have enough capacity to accomodate.

Reduce the taxes instead and give tax payers their money back..!!!!

I repeat halt the metea valley school construction plans..Instead funnel that money to make Nequa valley school more effective in terms of latest technology and quality education.

Ashbury Resident:

NN and NC are in a different school district (203). Different taxes, different school board, etc. IPSD is NOT just a Naperville school district, despite you wanting it to be.

If you are going to mention 203 schools, then why not mention Bolingbrook HS, since part of 204 is in Bolingbrook. Or East Aurora, since part of 204 is in Aurora?

There are TWO high schools in our district now. 2 + 1 = 3, not 5. My addition skills are just fine.

Maybe we need a school just for you to learn geography.

I think it is truly embarrassing that we have a SB president that will stop at nothing to pursue his agenda of building Metea on the BB parcel.

I love how he blames the voters for the increased costs because they rejected the original referendums due to lack of boundary information. If he had it his way, he would have forced the taxpayers to pay the increased land cost if the quick take action had been approved.

He clearly has an agenda, as seen with the new motion filed to try to force this BB parcel to work despite the fact that continuing this fight will cost more legal fees. He does not have the best interest of 204 taxpayers in mind at all.

Who voted for this guy anyway?? Is there such a thing as impeaching a school board member?

A southern HS will add more increased traffic to Rt 59 than the BB area will. Most of the feeding schools already drive by the BB location on Ogden to get to WV and some 59 traffic will be eliminated due to making other areas walkers. One or two areas will now need to use Rt 59 unless they utilize Commons Drive more from the North or use Eola. They will be going opposite of of the congestion with the exception of one area.

A South location pulls everyone down Rt 59 unless they change the boundaries, which some Southern Location people claimed would not happen.

We will know in due time.

Anon,

Waubonsie is a wonderful school, and yes, I've been there many times.
I do not see anyone making negative comments about WVHS on this site? Why bring it up?
This issue is not about WVHS or socio/economic diversity in any of our schools. At least not to me. It's about fiscal responsibility plain and simple.
The land at BB is too expensive (double what had been budgeted for). If there is another alternative that is reasonably less expensive, it should be given the most serious consideration.

In all likelihood, Metea will not be ready by 2009. In fact, if we rush to build by 2009 we may actually be increasing the cost of construction.

Anon that is a nice factual deflection. How about we talk about the current failed strategy that has led to large construction cost increases(while waiting for a failed strategy), a small possibility of a 2009 open date, and not to even bring up the 17 million in new land costs. Or we can talk about the money we have spent on legal fees and consultants. Or we can talk about putting a high school in the middle of a fast growing commercial district. I assume you have noticed all the new stores going into the 75th and 59 area. Or we can talk about adding increased high school traffic to route 59. At the same time, we are facing the loss of Pace service.

School boundaries will be worked out another day. This is not it. Although it was really comforting to see a quote from a board of education member saying they really did not want to review new options since it would bring boundaries in play. If you are wondering why a few community members are frustrated, it would be a lack of information and quotes like the one above that show a clear and present bias to a predetermined end.

The SB will be asking for an extension from BB trust lawyers / court in order to have more time in reviewing their options.

I don't appreciate some parents saying negative things about Waubonsie Valley. People just go on hearsay. Walk into the school. Does a little diversity (both racial and economic) scare you?

Why are we all wasting our time waiting and speculating on whether or not the district will overspend on BB?

Of course they will. They have already told us that despite the jury verdict coming in higher than expected, "we can afford it."

Why bother looking into alternative, more fiscally reasonable sites if "we can afford it"?

It's BB at all costs, always has been.

Mike

I think you can refer to Go204's comments to get a general understanding of the current process. My understanding is there was no public comment on the land issue.

What happen at the Mon. night Board Meeting? I was unable to attend and I have not found any information on the details.

I think that as long as the Board can show how it's being paid for; sticking to their promise to the taxpayers of delivering a school at least as equal as the others in terms of facilities, deliver it on budget and stick to their promise of not coming back to the taxpayers for more money, then they have done their job. It will open when it opens and it will be located where it's located.

I think the cancellation of the Thursday and Saturday meetings is part of the master plan to string along the residents up until the very last minute so that the Board can purchase BB without any chance for public comment or feedback. I really hope not but I have a feeling that it is the same mentality for the Board--BB at all costs. If this is the case, the Board had better be prepared to walk the public through all of the due diligence that was done on looking at alternatives. Cowering behind any non-disclosure agreements in an attempt to cover up their "BB at all costs" mentality will be unacceptable.

Maybe something has been decided based on these agenda items in tonights board meeting.
(http://www.ipsd.org/Uploads/Board_agenda_102207_jb.pdf)

C. Purchase Recommendation – Mass Grading for Metea Valley High School
(This item recommends that the Board of Education rejects all bids
received for Bid Package #01 for mass grading for the Metea Valley High
School Project.
(Policy # 460.08)

D. Purchase Recommendation – Phase B of Construction Bids for Metea
Valley High School
(This item recommends that the Board of Education cancel the
Construction bids that were to be received at 1:00 PM on
October 23, 2007 for the MVHS Project.
(Policy #460.08)

It seems responsible to cancel meetings if it's known ahead of time that there is no new information or not enough new information to further churn away towards a decision. That way, money is not wasted holding a meeting, using the lights and paying a custodial crew to be there when nothing will be accomplished. Complain about money being wasted then complain about a money saving step.

Some just like to complain, period.

Tell me something useful please or maybe one small fact. I have waited a few posts for it. That was a nice little story but is has nothing to do with the current situation. It’s a district not a not REIT.

Oh and did you notice the school board cancelled is Thursday meeting and its Saturday meeting and will spend one hour talking about the situation on Monday in executive session. Oh then they take a news deflection break and pat themselves on the back for naming of the DEC after Howie Crouse. It’s now the 21st the progess is mind blowing.

For Ashbury resident - although we know how much you seem to want to be - you are not part of 203 - those 2 high schools have nothing to do with the 3rd high school for 204. If they are on your tax bill you have a different issue.

As far as doughboy, how many times are you going to repeat the nonsense that the number of students is decreasing - the numbers given to you by Napervillian are filed with the state. If you want to insinuate someone doctored those numbers - bring a law suit of shut up ! You are embarassing yourself.

As for size of the high school - you realize that WV and NV are two of the largest in the state already - correct ? Even with 3 high schools our smallest school will be 500 students more than the largest in 203.

As for losing the programs - did we lose them when we opened Neuqua BEFORE you were here ? We heard the same BS from some people then, and today we have a second HS to be proud of. We are in need of a 3rd -

Brad204,

RE: 'money we might waste on dirt'

This is perhaps the most naive comment I have read in a long time.

You forget, the number one thing in real estate is location.

I would venture a guess that you too paid more for your dirt where your house sits than the retail cost of premium top soil. 1 acre of premium top soil at $25 per cubic yard would cost you under $11K. Did you pay more or less than that per acre for your dirt on your property? Better yet, find us land in the district at $11K / acre.

If you didn't buy it for the dirt, but instead bought it for a location to place your house then perhaps, just maybe, the school district is not really buying 'dirt' either. Instead, they are buying a location to place a needed high school that the voters told them to build.

DB,

Here is a pdf the compares by school 2006 to 2007 enrollment. http://www.ipsd.org/Documents/0708/EnrollmentStats07.pdf

Remeber I am still trying come up to speed on all this being new and all, but from what I can tell the third high school was based on current enrollment figures not projected growth. I say that to point out a fact not so much to defend it.

2006 - 2007
Elementry is down -183 -1.4%
Middle School is up 143 2.1%
High School is up 268 3.3%

Of course since I only have one year of data I can't tell if the rate is increasing or decreasing.

Of course my favorite number is 17 million. The money we might waste on dirt in order to stay the course. Another one is 8 million the amount of money wasted since we had to wait for this particular piece of land. Had we gone else where we would not have to wait to get started and pay more in construciton costs. Another favorite number is the estimated legal and lobby costs of 4 million. Future instersting numbers will be the referendum numbers when the school board tries to fund this new POS oh I mean Metea Vally High School. Unless of course someone figures out a way to save some money. Unlikely since all we can do is fight border wars.

DB,

Your claim went from 'The school population as a whole is decreasing' to now 'not growing at anywhere near the rate predicted' ... but still growing (grew by 188)

Please explain the back-peddle/flip-flop. Are you making claims before checking your data?

Dear Napervillian,

I trust you, but I do not trust the school district. You know, figures never lie, but liars figure.

Anyway, please provide your exact source so that I may double check.

I know you can't believe what you read on the Internet, but I had seen the reduction numbers from more than one source and sources that seemed to be have no axe to grind.

There has got to be one source that is the final word, and agreeable to all.

To restate the obvious, the annual increase has diminished from 937 in the period 2003 to 2004 to 188 in the period 2006 to 2007. Based on these simple numbers it would seem that what the school district told us during the last two referendums is not coming true. Our student population is not growing at anywhere near the rate they had predicted.

Again, why build something that is not needed other than to help feather someone’s nest.

I am responding to Dough Boy's post.

You state "The school population as a whole is decreasing"

Here are the numbers as released by the district and as stated in the newspapers.

District Totals
2007 28,825
2006 28,637
2005 28,213
2004 27,444
2003 26,507

Dear Napervillian,

You are so wrong it is unbelievable! The school population as a whole is decreasing, in less than ten years a third high school will be empty. Right now we have a bubble passing through the system whereby the six, seventh and eight grades a very large. But soon, they will pass and are current facilities will be more than adequate.

The reality is the school board has the money and they are going to spend it. The third high school is going to be built, regardless of whether or not it is needed. The new question is where, and given the hutzbah of the school board and their belief in a land fairy, we are now faced with a school being built which will in no way, shape or form, fulfill the promises (i.e. future lies) that the school board made during the referendum process.

So my question to you Napervillian, is what’s in it for you? When the new school is built will your home value go up? Will your child’s education dramatically increase for the positive? Will the company you either own or work for benefit hugely by all of the money that will be spent? Will you care whether or not my child’s education experience will be enhanced? What’s in it for you and others of your stripe?

My other question for you is more rhetorical than real, but goes to the question of school size allegedly determining (by some) the quality of your child’s education. If your child attended a school that was, say 2,000 students, would you want your child to also attend a small college because a small setting is best, or would you want your child to attend the best college or university he/she can, regardless of the size of that institution? As a graduate of a 2,000-student high school and interested observer, and graduate of two very large institutions, I saw no detriment to my colleges being very large. In fact, there were many benefits, due to their sizes and budgets.

I think something that is lost in all of our postings here and at other places and at all of the meetings and arguments that have been had, regarding this entire matter, are the absolute benefits our schools and kids have enjoyed because the schools are the size that they are. A very large number of the amenities we enjoy and take for granted are only at these schools due to their size. A school of half their size would lose many things (like multiply teams per level in sports and large, no-cut teams). Our incredible music programs will also suffer, due to a new lack of funds created by a new, huge overhead, necessitated by having the new school and all of the corresponding infrastructure.

I will never understand the logic of sending a kid to a small high school only to then send that same kid to an enormous university, where’s the logic?

We need the school. We are tired of the drama. Buy Brach/Brodie and get it built.

AR,

Some are unaware that D203 is a completely different entity than D204.

D203 has North and Central
D204 has WVHS and NVHS

They do not share students nor do they share budget resources. Look at your property tax bill.

This boundary "relook" really gripes me. I voted yes based on my neighborhood being with the new high school. I would have voted no in a flash otherwise. It is quite clear the school district sold the high school referendum by showing everyone the revised boundaries.

If the Brach property will not be bought by the district, put annexes on the two current high schools and forget the third high school.

new204,

Yes a 5th as in Naperville North, Naperville Central, Waubansie and Nequa.....One more would make 5.....Maybe we do need another school...for you to learn addition!

Ashbury Resident:

A 5th high school? I thought we were having enough trouble dealing with a 3rd. ;)

Fasteddie has it wrong. The high schools are not overcrowded and the enrollment in the district is actually DECLINING the past few years. Its time to stop the madness and end any discussions around building a 5th high school!

fasteddie,

Your username is very appropriate given your quick ability to place blame at the thousands of residents that voted "no" both times around.

Frankly, I am fed up with the blame game and sense of entitlement from people such as you.

Be sure to thank the jokers who killed the first referendum - like "bob 204" above. These idiots put their heads in the sand like ostriches - The numbers don't lie - there are something like 9000 kids in grade 3-7. These morons' refusal to face facts and pay a few more $$ has caused this delay. The overruns are a direct result of these guys.

These guys are "penny wise" and "pound foolish." Afraid to spend a little money to have high schools that are not overcrowded, they have ended up costing all of the taxpayers a lot more, by screwing up all of the plans. Those jerks should be booed wherever they go.

Dough Boy,

Boundaries were not listed in the wording of the referendum put before the voters so any astute voter should know that the boundaries may change at any given time. Your analogy of the builder versus the district is a big stretch given that you would enter into a formal, signed contract on all of the home specifications before you give a builder your money. The taxpayers did not enter into a formal binding contract with the district on boundaries. We were given the School Board's "word" on boundaries just like we were given their "word" that the BB 55 acres would not cost more than $257,000 per acre, hence no need to look at alternative land options before the jury verdict. You decide on whether you can rely on their "word". As for me, I don't place any faith in it.

Would you give a builder your money and then ask them what type of house they are going to build for you and where they are going to build it?

My personal opinion is the boundary drawing to a certain extent was used in the same way voter redistricting is used to ensure a particular party wins an election. The boundaries were designed to ensure the referendum would get passed. I think the promise of a brand new high school swayed some or the promise of being placed in a high school that has a perceived higher quality. Of course none of us know now what this third high school will be given the cost over runs. I also think this will not be the first time in history a consulting firm was hired to give a predetermined answer back to the people paying for the consulting work. This number was then used in the referendum. But this all transpired before I bought my home in Naperville. I picked my location based on all this old past drama.

So for me trying to get somewhere with changing the school’s location to save money (among other things), I get trapped into a boundary debate. A school board member was quoted in the Herald not to long ago saying we really do not want to revisit other ideas because boundaries would come into play. (yes, it’s a paraphrase but I believe it captures the spirit of the comment.) That tells me that this issue is pretty much closed and the executive sessions are nothing more than theater. I think that single comment may have been the comment that has incensed me the most.

Based on how little information was shared and how short the public session of the meeting was last night I am not sure that other than laying on the floor and banging your hands and feet you could actually get your idea across. If that makes me a second grader so be it. Although, I did learn that the district is pulling most/all of its public comment information exclusively from the comments provided via the District 204 website. So if you want your opinion read, I guess that is the way to go. I have used it and I will have to say to my surprise the board did reply personally.

I also think the school cost issue has a short time frame. By my watch we only have a hand full of days before the board is going to make its final decision. Boundaries do not get set via a referendum. They can change and be changed at any time. So locking the two issues together is not helpful. The costs of construction need full and clear attention now. For those who feel like the boundaries need to be changed, they can start working on getting new people in place for the 2009 campaign.

DB,

There can be agreement. It would be stupid to give a builder a blankcheck.

Boundaries WILL be re-done once the new site is selected.

One would hope that if we have to go through the boundary process again, those that acted like 4th graders 2 years ago will at least act like 6th graders this time around.

It's more than time to get beyond this rut in the road and move forward for a change.

Dear cheermom1411 and Brad 204,

The boundaries needed to be exposed before the referendum. As painful as it was/is we need to know everything before voting. I would hope that the voters would not just simply agree for the sake of putting this all behind us. For all we know (and don’t know due to all of closed door meetings) a different location could be worse than the Brach-Brodie property.

Why would you not want to know where the boundaries are before giving the board the ability to spend your money?

Would you give a builder your money and then ask them what type of house they are going to build for you and where they are going to build it?

Please explain your logic?

The board should build a sophomore building on the Neuqua grounds directly south of the library. Doing so will alleviate the overcrouding problems at the main campus and will be more economical in the long run. The district is hell bent on spending boat loads of money and exposing taxpayers to an unnecessary and costly burden.

Completely agree cheermom. Putting the two issues together has not been a winning combination.

A potential double digit million dollar savings would make it worth the while.

The district should have waited until after the referendum to draw boundaries. They only stirred the pot to pass the referendum.