Indian Prairie School District 204 today announced that it is recommending Metea Valley High School be built on 87 acres east of Eola Road, south of Interstate 88 in the far northwest corner of the district. What's your reaction to this development?
The district says on its Web site that it can buy the 87 acres for $16.5 million from St. John AME Church and Midwest Generation. The district says the third high school and a new middle school will open in August 2009. And the district says the cost of building the third high school will not exceed the referendum amount approved by voters.
This is incredible news! As a Naperville North side resident, I went through the ridiculous boundary mess, watching the process unfold, displacing middle schools, etc.
I don't know how anyone can argue with this location. Look at the map they provided.
One school on the southern side.
One school in the middle.
Now, one school on the northern side.
At $191K per acre to boot. Great decision.
Fair to ALL of Naperville kids!
Not to be rude but does your map contain district population distribution.. Just curious.. Or are we doing as the crow flies analysis?
To be honest at this point I am glad they made a decision. Now let’s get boundaries done soon so we can just all move on.
But who does not think that we are going to face at least a year or two of stalled building in part because of lawsuits that will be filed against the district? The district is not the only group who can file lame lawsuits... My guess is someone will here to. Say the headlines with me, “Resident files injunction against district. Metea Timeline in Doubt” or “Brach Brodie files multimillion dollar lawsuit against 204. Metea Timeline in Doubt”
The last time we thought something was a done deal we found out the hard way it was not.
Bad location! Macom and Hamman are better location than this one.
Well, that is great for Naperville North residents but what about the residents in the middle and south? We also went thru the ridiculous boundry mess and we will probably have to go thru it again. How is this fair to ALL of Naperville kids? And I believe that the owners of the Brach-Brodie will not let D204 just walk away that easily. If you think this is over, its probably not. I hope for the sake of ALL Naperville kids that the boundries remain as they are in order to avoid a repeat of the last redistricting.
Just remember 204 is not a "Naperville" school district. 204 covers parts of other suburbs including the eastern section of Aurora. As for the boundaries, let's continue to focus on academic equity and numbers for fairness to all the 204 students.
Hmmm....sounds like White Eagle may be redistricted to WVHS? (if bounderies were to make sense)
This is the best option. Let's get the boundaries done and get past all of the anger and start focusing on the kids again
Just when you thought the SB couldn't do anything more stupid, they top themselves. This recommendation by the administration is great cover for this egotistical, arrogant and simply communist, school board. Now they can say, "Well, we asked our people and this is what they recommended, we are only following their recommendation, we really didn't want it".
Tell me JH, what's in this decision for you? Is it a higher property value, a new job for your company, a political position for you somewhere in the district administration?
And Brad204, normally I agree with approximately 85% of what you write, but do you really find happiness in the SB's decision for the sake of making a decision? Or do you think we should "just move on" and everybody will forget about the last two years of struggle? Is this how you live your life, compromise, compromise, compromise? Have you no bedrock principles?
This decision is strictly to aggravate, annoy and cajole the people in the southern end of the district to begin to beg for the BB property instead of this stupid location. There is no good reason to put this school in this location other than to benefit the new superintendent, as his home appears to be located nearby, and the fact that the majority of the SB are residents of this northern area.
Less than 20% of the student population lives anywhere near the area, so why in God's name would you build a school there? Just for starters your transportation costs will be incredible; and you'll have safety issues by having to cross railroad tracks of a railroad whose daily traffic will be increasing.
So tell me JH and Brad204, what are the benefits? There are none.
But Brad204 I do agree with you wholeheartedly with one thing you stated. This will just be the beginning of lawsuits and headlines and a protracted building timeline. Many people who voted for the third high school did so specifically because they were led to believe by our SB that the BB property would be the location for Metzger's and Clark's monument to themselves. Now that that has changed, many former allies will be the biggest opponents.
It will be interesting to see who opposes this plan. Those of us on the South side were constantly told how D204 was catering to us. Brookdale subdivision representatives went so far as to question why they have to keep paying for the South Siders. Now that the "Northerners" will be getting a new school I'm sure they will be all for it! Ironic isn't it?
Let's not forget about the Brach-Brodie party. Do you really think that they will just walk away? They could have the district in court for years on top of the lawsuit(s) that will probably be filed from the White Eagle Homeowners association. D204 handled this poorly from the beginning and here we are again going thru the same process. If we think the first time around was bad, wait until this time (and no, I do not live in White Eagle or Tall Grass).
They should rename SD204 to the Aurora School System. It does seem that White Eagle and Tall Grass look to be headed to WVHS.
Ah, Dough Boy nice to see you again :) It is so boring without being eviscerated from time to time. I think you are right to call me out on my comment. My comment was unclear and a bit sarcastic. I am glad to have the SB's current decision so we can move from the current state of limbo to the next.
It will get interesting now because I do believe that 85% of voting public has no idea what has been going on. Most think the school is still going on BB and opening in 2009. I mean that is what the 204 web site said right?? Now, people are going to hopefully wake up and see what a complete mess has been made. My point here is this is long from over.
I imagine when the folks of White Eagle, Tall Grass, and Tamarack and other sub divisions west of 59 realize they are going to join Ashwood Park as the newest members of WVHS there will be uproar. (If they draw boundaries East/West that is. Or if they do them North/South I imagine White Eagle will still go to WVHS.)
And please everyone save me all the community comparison drama that was in the last thread. I am fine with diversity, blah, blah.. Heck I am diversity in my own way... Gangs do not follow city boarders, blah, blah..
As I stated along time ago, the concept of equal facilities between WVHS and NVHS is total lie. Ask anyone in IT or facilities and they will tell you there is absolutely no parity between the two schools. Been there have volunteered my time in both. I have seen it for my own eyes. No one will convince me otherwise.
How do you like me now? :)
I have a son in HS and another 8th grade. The 8th grader will likely be disrupted, so be it. We need a third high school, so hats off to the SB for finally making a decision that solves the over crowding problem.
This is only going to add to the nightmare that is traffic on Eola road in the mornings. I hope the can work with the county and the cities (is this thing in Naperville or Aurora?) to figure out what to do about the traffic issue.
Now to see how much more the building (excluding land) is going cost than what Oswego spent on Oswego East.
DoughBoy,
There is nothing "in it for me" besides hopefully, a more reasonable boundary setup for ALL subdivisions. It's attitudes like yours that really get the process messed up.
Your post is hilarious. Less than 20% of the students live "anywhere near" the area? Again, look at the map provided by the district. There are many feeder schools close by this new property. You think it makes sense to have all 3 High Schools at or below 75th street?
Perhaps since you live in close proximity.
It will be intereting to see the boundries. I agree that logic would have White Eagle go to WV ut I am sure they will fight. It seemed that Tall Grass did not fight as hard as White Eagle last time and they moved away from NV.
Looking at the current student numbers you can see a pattern where the North and far Eastern Middle (May Watts and Owen) sections go to MV. The Middle (including White Eagle) and southwest (Ashwood) go to WV and the south east goes to NV.
Not sure how the lines will work out but I agree that White eagle will be the sqweeky wheel.
Brad204,
Can you expand on this:
'As I stated along time ago, the concept of equal facilities between WVHS and NVHS is total lie. Ask anyone in IT or facilities and they will tell you there is absolutely no parity between the two schools. Been there have volunteered my time in both. I have seen it for my own eyes. No one will convince me otherwise.'
Starting to look like I'll need to find out more about WV...
Living in Century Trace, going to WV is double the distance to NV.
I never go around WV, mostly up 59 to commuter station, making NV very easy to fit into my schedule.
Thanks....
The district's estimate of 250K an acre for Brach/Brodie was never correct. Everyone knew that was lowballed to keep the estimate of the referendum as low as possible. I remember that CFO said it would be 500K an acre or more. Now the district is budgeting $146,340,000 for this supposed $124.6 million high school (both ridiculous amounts of money). The district purposely lied about the price in order to try and pass the referendum since it failed in 2005. CFO warned the boundary exercise was a charade and the district could later change the boundaries. CFO said there were better options to handle the bubble of students since enrollment had peaked. In the last 2 years, elementary school enrollment has dropped by 284 students. You have to wonder, if there is such an overcrowding issue, why hasn't the district added any portable classrooms in the 2 years since the referendum passed?
The reason...extra classroom space isn't needed and neither is a $146,3000,000 empty 3rd high school.
The district can not be trusted and I hate to admit it but CFO was right.
I will NEVER help to pass a district 204 referendum again.
What was the final cost of Oswego East? I know it was pretty cheap and it is a really nice school. Specifically their pool and Commons area are top notch.
I believe Oswego East came in at 65 million.
Oswego also has a brand new Junior High in Plainfield and brand new grade school in Oswego ready to open next fall, that they want to shutter and not open next year because enrollment is much less than previously expected. I believe the grade school was built for 750 students, if opened next year only 145 would attend.
Oswego East needed a new school.
District 204 is almost completely built out and enrollment is declining; we don't need another high school and closing WVHS gold campus to find students, any students to help fill the $146,340,000 empty 3rd high school is a joke.
It is Peterson Elementary school all over again.
They had only 40 students to attend a school that holds 850.
They had to close Wheatland to try and find some kids to go to the empty school. Peterson still sits half empty and unused. Meanwhile, schools like May Watts and Brookdale have tons of empty classrooms.
Do you think Jeanette Clark will finally learn how to count and do trend analaysis in those college course she is taking?
$225 million (principal and interest) too late for the taxpayers...
Kudos to the district for taking the time to use our $124M wisely. I've read the details a few times to make sure I'm not missing anything. Why didn't we look at this site in the first place?
Especially with the placement of the school, the boundaries have got to make sense.
Good job!
What's important here is that when it comes to boundaries we all act civilized. Because no matter what the magazines say about Naperville, when word gets out that their is turmoil, mud slinging and name calling it makes us all look uncivilized. Lets show people that we can come to the table and agree in a respectful manner and not like a bunch of spoiled brats.
In no way would we tolerate a room filled with children acting the way adults did last year. Please lets not let that happen again.
And remember SD 204 is not a "Naperville" district. It is Indian Prairie School District 204 which feeds into Aurora, Bolingbrook, Plainfield & Naperville.
Hope everybody likes going to school right next to a MAJOR high voltage subatation...
The Oswego East High school cost $70M for a school to hold 24oo students on 102 acres. See the link
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:sajjTqc5_6sJ:midwest.construction.com/features/archive/0401_cover.asp+Oswego+East+construction+cost&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us
Despite my opinion that I do not think a third high school is needed, placement on the north side of Naperville makes sense if the boundaries are drawn to reflect this division of North, Central and South..
Ultimately, it should mean those neighborhoods south of 87th attend Nequa. Those north to NY attend Wabounsie and then everything north of NY attends Metea...period. Let the map speak for itself.
If you live in White Eagle you should have realized that this HS was in your backyard...YOU should go there.
The South neighborhoods should go to Nequa. Think about how it will affect those children if they attend one middle school and then are separated from their friends and go to another high school. It is not logical and no lawyer can argue that.
Dough Boy wrote; "and you'll have safety issues by having to cross railroad tracks of a railroad whose daily traffic will be increasing."
What safety issue? As long as the buses and parents don't stop on the tracks or go around the gates that isn't an issue.
Anonymous wrote; "Hope everybody likes going to school right next to a MAJOR high voltage subatation..."
More junk science.
Pleases, if you don't have any valid reasons the school shouldn't be built on the site chosen, leave the rhetoric and baseless scare tactics out of it.
Dough Boy wrote; "and you'll have safety issues by having to cross railroad tracks of a railroad whose daily traffic will be increasing."
What safety issue? As long as the buses and parents don't stop on the tracks or go around the gates that isn't an issue.
Anonymous wrote; "Hope everybody likes going to school right next to a MAJOR high voltage subatation..."
More junk science.
Please people, if you don't have any valid reasons the school shouldn't be built on the site chosen, leave the rhetoric and baseless scare tactics out of it.
You cannont compare what it will cost to build this HS vs. Oswego East. It would be like trying to compare building the same size house 4 years later. We all know that prices have gone up from everything from milk to lumber because of the high fuel prices.
It's basic economics. Just like every households budget has changed with gas prices over $3 a gallon.
Correct me if I'm wrong but what stand would any of us have on trying to sue the SB as far as boundaries go. Boundaries are not set in stone and districts can change them as need be. And don't cry over the RR tracks. Buses do it all the time. Even the buses from the preschool go over RR tracks.
As I have already sent this same comment to the 204 SB I'd like to say "finally the SB has waken up!"
I am located in the central part of the district. Under the Brach-Brody boundaries my kids would go to WV. Under the new proposed boundaries my kids will still likely go to WV. (I am therefore, inpartial!)
It seems that the SB has finally come-up with a solution that makes sense financially & geographically! Even though though the largest population growth is in the south the new location makes sense because it can serve the majority of the upper portion of the residence thus alleviating overcrowding at both WV & NV. All parts of the district will now be able to travel a reasonable distance to their local high schools. This district includes property even north of I-88. It did not seem to make sense to bus everyone to 1 of 3 schools all located in the southern half of the district.
The location of each of the 3 schools now makes sense!
Food for thought... If the district already owns 25 acres by the Brach-Brody land would it not make sense to sell that property at the price the Courts put on it ($564,000 per acre)? That would bring the district $14,100,000. At $191,000 per acre at the Eola location they can buy 75 of the 86+ acres using the revenues from that land sale of property they already own (hence, has already been paid for.) That provides 88% of the land needed for the Eola site vs.31% of the land near the Brach-Brody property! Sounds like the right business decision to me!
Can we expect to see some of these saving in the overall cost of the project? That still remains to be seen.
A lot of good food for thought so far. Now that we've had a few hours to digest the news, I would first want to commend the school board for finally moving forward by negotiating the purchase of an alternate site. I hear what brad204 is saying, though, and I share his concerns that this may not be the end of the matter. I'll breathe easier once the school opens its doors and there is no outstanding litigation to be resolved.
In my opinion, the big questions at this point are:
What will be the boundaries for all three high schools, and how much public input will there be in that decision this time around?
What will become of the 25 acres the district owns at Brach-Brodie?
How much will the legal fight over the remaining BB acreage end up costing the district?
How are both Metea Valley High School and a new middle school going to open by August 2009?
Note, I was never a supporter of the referendum and fought against it myself. And I also think the school still isn't needed.
But for the first time, I think the board did at least something that wasn't totally upside down. I think the location makes sense, and I believe other posters indicating there are a lot of feeder schools nearby are correct; there are.
This will redistribute the school population northward. If you are in the central part of town and don't care for WV, then I suppose that's life in the big city. Best to pursue the school board about ensuring parity at the schools which someone else has already commented on.
As for the Brach estate, I thought there had been comments elsewhere (long ago) that they are eligible for damages because of the legal hell the school district put them through. This comes at a cost, which coincidentally is just about the value of the 16 acres that the school board had already purchased years ago. So once again millions wasted. Not stellar fiduciary responsibility.
The question I would ask any board member is why the heck this proposal wasn't on the table and seriously considered from the beginning. The school would be built by now if they had been realistic, and we could have saved tens of millions of dollars instead of pursuing the Brach-Brodie boondoggle.
Good luck everyone in 204 (of which I am one, but I live in the shadow of NV).
Now that the SB has again divided the district...will be extremely difficult to pass the necessary referendum that is going to be needed to operate MV.
MV will be lucky to open by 2011...
I think it is rather funny or ignorant (can not decide which) that people believe we will get $564,000/acre from selling the 25 acres we have at BB to someone.
Find a buyer at that price. Until then, one can not count *ANY* of that money for anything because it is just sitting there with no buyer for an indefinite amount of time. BB supposedly does not even want to buy it back at $250,000/acre. That should tell you something right there.
The court only set 'our' price for the condemnation lawsuit. It did not set a 'market' price for the land. That only gets determined when there is a willing seller and a willing buyer.
There is so much other 'garbage' being posted in this blog already that it's not even worth the time to slice/dice it and set the information correct.
I do what to ratchet my rhetoric down a bit. Maybe I have had some time to think about it and spend some time swimming some laps pondering it. Maybe a north, central (err central but a tad west), and southern school make sense. That is not really how the population falls so there is a bit of a hole there.
Right now my sub-division is absolutely not in a “continuous boundary”. It is more like a hopscotch mess. So if they unify the boundaries so all my neighboring sub-divisions go to the same place and the kids are not being split as they go from elementary, and then split again to middle school, and oh yeah split again when they go to high school it will not be so bad. I have plenty of time to push my agenda to get any parity issues worked out.
I am still hot and angry about what I perceive to be a complete manipulation of the facts to get us where we are currently. I wish someone (for instance) Dr. D just had the guts to come forward and say “I believe” this is the best solution for the district. Instead they are hiding behind amateur hour analysis.
Honestly, the sparse bullet points about the pros and cons for each parcel are insulting and well inconsistent. Hello, the AME site needs remediation just like that Macom site needs. Oh and gosh did anyone notice they did testing at only the AME site? Whatever. I am sick to death of this side show of lame facts. And the financial analysis that includes costs savings (not using modular buildings) as revenue sources. Err, hmm again whatever.
The 2009 date is a joke. That seems to be the fact that holds up the whole AME selection. One labor strike, material shortage, injunction/lawsuit, act of nature, etc can derail that. Let’s say the land is remediated and ready to go for an initial grade in March. (Please that is being generous) That gives us basically 16 months to get the initial components of the school ready to go. Oh, and inspected with an occupancy permit. That is total horse manure. There is no way. Absolutely no way that school will be ready for occupancy on time. Let me say it again, “No Way”. And keep in mind that is not a fished school either so whatever kids are lucky enough to go to class in a construction zone should really enjoy it. And has been said by so many the school is a 30 year commitment. Does it really matter what year it opened?
So, yes I am hot because I feel like once again we are being lied to and the facts are being manipulated. Just be honest Dr. Dash/SB about why you are doing this. You have a gut feeling this is the best way to go. Stand by the decision and for gosh sakes do not act surprised or to over worked when the entire community comes a knocking and wants some real answers. I hear Dr. Dash’s behavior at the PTA meeting tonight was hostile and angry when questioned. There is a lot more where that came from.
And please, do not once again lead us down a path with false facts and act surprised when it does not work out… I did notice you are going to open the school without the operational referendum. I think is a masterful way to ensure it opens. But unless you want to shut it down a year later we should all find a common ground so the referendum does not become a tool for showing you ultimately who is boss.
"Food for thought... If the district already owns 25 acres by the Brach-Brody land would it not make sense to sell that property at the price the Courts put on it ($564,000 per acre)?"
Anonymous, I believe one of the stipulations when 204 bought the 25 acres from BB was if they don't build a school it must be sold back to BB at the price that 204 paid for it.
"What will become of the 55 acres the district owns at Brach-Brodie?"
Ted, isn't it 25 acres?
NOTE from Ted: Yes, you're right. Thanks, RJ, I fixed.
2009? Hello, people. Does anybody get that they are rushing to open that thing before enrollment declines by a couple hundred AGAIN and it become even more apparant that it wasn't needed in the first place!!! So they'll rush to open and cut corners and the qualilty will suck and they'll end up tearing it down in 30 years.
In my view, this is excellent news. The people who wanted the SB to choose a different site will find other reasons not to be happy.
It's a good thing there are so many lawyers in South Naperville because according to the comments already posted, there will be a lot of suing going on. Why should BB sue SD204? They didn't want to negotiate. Now, they can keep their land. Or, since the courts established the opening bid for their land, they can sell for a higher price and allow it to be used for commercial purposes.
If the Brodie Brach estate stipulates that the property is now worth twice it was assessed for by the Naperville township in 2006 lets make sure that the Naperville Township Assessor re assesses the property for 2008 at the new market value of the property which should be double the amount,and double the taxes that this parcel is now paying,, how is that for a payback for winning the court case .
Aside from the inevitable civil war which is about to erupt due to the boundary movements, and aside from the very valid debate as to whether the student population of the future will justify having the third school, and aside from the very valid observations that the SB has manipulated the pros/cons of each site to cast a good light on the site they've now chosen, I have one additional question:
Is it prudent to make a decision now based on the (dubious) ability to deliver the (partially complete) building in 2009? Is "building at site X wouldn't be ready until 2010" really a reason to not pursue site X? Aren't we making a decision regarding a massive amount of taxpayer money which will impact Naperville, Aurora, and the surrounding communities (props to all non-Napervillians!) for the next 50+ years? Is 2009 versus 2010 the end-all be all? Especially when 2009 gets you a hastily rushed partially completed building, if you're lucky?
In my opinion, delivering the building in 2009 serves one purpose: to keep further egg off the collective faces of the SB. They proposed a referendum to build a school at Brach-Brodie for delivery in 2009. They've already crashed and burned on the first half of that proposal. They're just trying to not crash and burn on the second half, even if it means that they have to Jedi-mind-trick us into thinking that the Eola location is the best site notwithstanding their obsession with the 2009 delivery.
To me, the best criteria for determining which kids feed into which high schools is to set the lines so that the average travel time to/from school per kid is minimized. To me, if the lines are drawn any other way then there is pandering going on. To me this is the best way of acknowledging your population centers and doing the right thing with that information. Is it really going to be equitable to ask a kid in Tamarack (where I do NOT live!) to travel more than 5 miles to WV when NV is less than 3 miles away? Is that equitable? Obviously in my scenario some kids would have to travel an "above average" number of miles but, at least the solution would be transparent to the community and I think completely defensible.
So in summary: (1) Are being given the straight dope on a 2009 delivery date, and do we (i.e. the community, not the SB) CARE if it is 2009? and (2) Are we going to get the straight, non-politicized, dope on the boundary lines?
Just a hunch: Nope. And Nope.
They must think I'm a dope.
Who cares if the White Eagle people whine about going to an Aurora school? They are, after all, living in Aurora.
Nick, I believe the land you wanted 204 to steal would be taxed at the unimproved land rate, not an imagined punish the land owners for what they might sell their property for rate.
Brad204 wrote :
> Anonymous, I believe one of the stipulations when 204 bought the
> 25 acres from BB was if they don't build a school it must be sold
> back to BB at the price that 204 paid for it.
Brad - I believe you are correct. So they sell the land back for 5 or 6 million, then pay the 5 to 6 million in legal fees, and the money they spent to buy the original 25 acres goes down a rat hole.
As I stated, not exactly stellar fiduciary responsibility.
I think a lot of good comments on the choice have been posted regarding issues with the site; it will be interesting to see if this is in fact a "done deal". In either case, it looks like the question of BB is probably settled though. The new school, if it ever gets built, won't be at BB.
BigMike,
I think they closed down Wheatland and moved the kids to Peterson to keep the ggg off their face in that case too...
Seems like they are in a hurry to get something done instead of worring about getting it right...
With the great potential for litigation, the 2009 timeframe may well be dream under any scenario.
Without any boundaries being proposed for the Eola site it is hard to evaluate it. Seems like they have a good idea about them givin the comments on transportation times being the same as BB.
As both an employee and graduate of D204 I am glad to see that a location has finally been recommended by school board. A forum such as this is a breeding ground for opinion misrepresented as fact. I have only one comment to make. To Aurora Resident, Taxpayer and Mother with regards to her statement about “MAJOR high voltage substation…” The Midwest Generation substation was shut down nearly 7 years ago. So I implore those reading this and any other forum to double check for facts before railing on something.
Clearly the rush to open looks higly questionable as does the need for the school altogether. If ES enrollment declinded the last 2 years in a row and they have not added any portables in 2 years, where is the problem?
If they need a little more MS space, get a couple portable classrooms for a few years.
I drove by Glenbrook North recently (Silver Star winner in US News Best HS in America) and they had a couple portable classrooms in use.
These small issues are solved so easily by other school districts and they rank higher than 204.
http://tinyurl.com/2l6dkl
I need to make a correction to my previous comment...I guess that is a bit of Karma coming back to bite certain parts. It is not that the station had been closed 7 years ago, the use has been decreased and will be removed.
Thom,
There is a peaker plant to the east that is slated for removal, then there is the substation just north/north-east of the property which I believe will remain in place, will it not? I think that substation is what people are referring to.
Thom another correction...
"I am glad to see that a location has finally been recommended by school board."
Actually, it has been recommended by the administration and not the School Board. Although based on the fact Dr. D basically silenced Alka from answering a question at the PTA last night I am not sure who is in control of who. The members of the board will approve, change, or reject the recommendation.
Anon 9:00AM, I did in fact say that about the BB land. I left out a small fact. Sorry for that. I do not believe BB has to buy the land back. They, BB, can force the district to sell it to the trust (for the purchase price) if the district plans on selling it. The district can not force BB to buy it if BB does not want it back. I assume that was done to ensure the district does not profit from the sale of the land. Seems reasonable stipulation since BB probably thought it was giving that district a deal on the price.
So, the land transaction is far from a done deal until the closing is finished and checks are cashed. I might be treading out of my depth but I believe that is how it works. If it is not please someone correct me.
I am leaving my when, where, and what slogan behind and switching to... Land Price Promise of 2006 = AME Site 2009 School Open Promise of 2008 :) Not as catchy but I think both promises are equal on the fact both require factors to fall into place that are beyond the admin's/sb's control.
I was not a supporter of the referendum and have since lost respect for and trust in the SB. Despite these facts, can we act rationally and with maturity? Our children are listening and watching us.
There are some pretty ignorant people in this district. Not all residents of White Eagle, Tall Grass, Tamarack and who ever else was mentioned are going to fight going to WVHS. Sure, there will be some. You know what, we just want what everyone else wants, a good education for our children. It matters not which high school we go to and my children just want to go to high school with their friends. So before you go bad mouthing subdivisions, why don't you get to know some of the people who live in them. We may surprise you and turn out to be normal, down to Earth people. Try it, you might actually like it.
Hello everyone - I'd like to clear up any confusion on these threads "EagleDude" is not "EagleDad". I'm the genuine EagleDad (always have been) and not the same as EagleDude (it is a nice nickname choice though).
Anyways I'd like to invite everyone who is interested in an ongoing discussion of the issues and challenges District 204 is facing to participate on this discussion board which has been going on for 2 years. It is sometimes referred to as the "ProBoards"
http://ipsd204.proboards76.com
It's been running for over 2 years and has hundreds of your fellow community residents participating in healthy debate.
All are welcome
EagleDad (not EagleDude)
What happens if the referendum (for the funds to operate the HS) fails?
Then what?
I generally with Brad's posts, but I have to question the school board claim that an operating referendum won't be needed because of improved financial projections. What projections? If a new school is opened, there will be real operating costs. Is the school board saying that they are already collecting those taxes? If so, why? Of course, there's also the magic investment that has generated $13 million in interest on $65 million in bond proceeds. how are we supposed to believe anything we are told?
I think the reality is that a 2009 referendum would be on the ballot in the early spring of 2009 and the school won't be open yet -- and the timing is too close to the outrage over the current fiasco. I think it unlikely that a 2009 referendum would pass. If they wait until 2010, the new school will be open. They'll have an extra year to send out puff news releases about what a great job they do and everyone will be happy.
If the White Eagle and Tall Grass people wanted a Naperville school district, then they should have bought a home there. SD204 serves only part of Naperville. Get over yourselves and focus on the kids and their education! SD204 offers great teachers/curriculum at all the schools.
GetOvertheJones': please stop your routine WE and TG bashing. SD204 serves kids from Naperville, Aurora, Plainfield, Bollingbrook, etc, and by the way, I live in TG and my mailing address has Naperville in it. I can criticize or support SB for their recommendation as a tax-paying resident. I was against referendum, but live with the result and am ready to move on. Now this boundary issue comes up again, and even before we have serious study and dialog on the options, you already started mud sling and name calling, shame on you.
The new location certainly seems to make sense based on the map. Personally, I was disappointed that a North side location was chosen, as the Brach-Bodie site is much closer to home. I can't argue with the logic, though, or the price, so I support the district's decision.
I do have one request of the district - please do not open up the boundary issue for public commentary. I have lived in Naperville for more than 20 years and have taken great pride in sharing our beautiful and progressive (I thought) city with friends and relatives from other places. I was shocked and appalled, though, with the outrageous and bigoted behavior so many residents displayed during the boundary discussions of 2 years ago. That's ugliness I don't care to see again. So district - make the executive decisions, using sound judgment. Avoid the temptation to pander to elitist prejudices.
I am not happy that the school is not being built at BB. However, I am glad that yet another government entity wasn't allowed to steal private property for less than it is worth. We should all be glad of the win for private property owner's rights.
Also, with the north-side location of MV, I hope the boundary decision is not just north/middle/south. It would be much more beneficial to the district, and homeowners, to split north/southwest/southeast. All of the schools would have a similar mix of students, making all of them more equal in reputation, rather than the current feeling of elitism towards NV.
If the boundaries do come out this way, I hope White Eagle and Tall Grass focus on making their school the best it can be, rather than complaining and possibly holding up the process.
By the way, my kids would switch from WV to NV in the above scenario. I am excited about WV's future and wouldn't mind staying there. I just think the scenario above would be best for all of the kids in the district.
Actually, this is wonderful news. Now GET ON IT 204! Do it soon.
As I resident of Brookdale (N-W city) I have felt like the red headed orphan since Naperville, the park district, and distrrict 204 continually propose spending my taxes on South side ammenities. This is a welcomed development. Please 204, refrain from the tripe you professed in the last boundary fiasco, namely that "although Brookdale is farthest from Wabonsie the close relation between Brookdale parents and this school makes it worthwhile to bus our kids farther than anyone else". Nobody is buying that garbage. The only better thing would be to forget the school all together since we will never need the space.
I think everyone will find out that a North site was one the SD should have been going for all along. In the end it will be just fine. There a plenty of students in the North end to fill the school.
Yes WE will most likely go to WVHS again, Maybe even TallGrass.
I do feel some pain for the May Watts area as they most likely are going north. Should not be that bad, as they already go north to Hill MS.
If you don't like it....there are many homes for sale in Stonebridge, Butterfield and Ginger Woods.
Wake up!We do not need another high school in 204! A updated analysis of projected population trends needs to be done in light of the current real estate market. Demand for district 204 housing is not what it was and will likely never return to the same level during its hot period of several years ago. The future tax burden and mothballed facilities will only drag on future real estate values for the area.
Enough about this 3rd high school, this has been talked about for 4 years and in all that time we never saw the flood of students District 204 claimed.
I want to know 2 things:
when will my taxes go up again?
when can we start to talk about the 4th and 5th high schools?
Here we go again. I agree and applaud those who are keeping there comments mature and focused. The rush to judgement and venom against TG and WE is quite alarming. I am a Tall Grass resident with a 4th and 6th grader who will be impacted by the boundary change. Everyone I speak to in TG has the same attitude- that we are in it together and wherever the boundaries are set, so be it. We've told our kids that the building is not important, its the teachers and students who are and they should stop listening to the bashing of WVHS. I know plenty of kids who go there and love it. The label that WVHS as a 'bad' school is ridiculous. It's a building and the student body will be altered as will all of the schools so why are we bashing a building?
Sure, having my kids go to the school closest to us that will soon have a cross walk over 59 to walk to would be most desirable (construction IS underway) but it has nothing to do with anything except convenience. I for one will not go crying to the board. It's a wasted effort. PLEASE STOP MAKING KIDS FEEL BAD ABOUT WVHS. This is hurting our kids (all of our kids) so get over it already. THIS is the opinion of an actual TG resident and not those who want to label and prejudge us. And you know who you are.
Dear Active 204 Dad,
Since you are so "excited about WV's future and wouldn't mind staying there" why not trade your potential new slot at NV for staying at WV?
I mean, come on, either put up or shut up!
If WV is as good as all of the people who will be LEAVING it say it is, then why not ask the SB to allow you to trade with someone who wants to stay at NV? Seems simply to me.
When I bought my home less than a mile from the front door of NV, it never occurred to me that some day a communistic SB would truck my kids to WV or any other school. And to those who say it's a "school district" and not a school, please, get your collective heads out of your collective you know what!. No sane, educated, astute homebuyer with kids, buys a home just anywhere. They scope out the school and area which will be the best fit for their kids and budget. And if they are fortunate enough to be able to afford a better school than you or me, well then TOO DAMN BAD!
If I had wanted my kids to go to WV I would have bought a house less than a mile from that front door.
So how about it, are your willing to put your kids future and your home equity up for trade so that you can stay at WV?
Wait, what's that you say? Oh, I didn't think so.
And, by the way, your comment "If the boundaries do come out this way, I hope White Eagle and Tall Grass focus on making their school the best it can be, rather than complaining and possibly holding up the process," really shows what a phony YOU ARE! Give me a break!
You were probably crying and yelling just as loud as everyone else to get your way (or you should have been), the last time around. I hope that the good people of White Eagle and Tall Grass, who were stupid enough to believe the SB's lies during the last two go arounds, will finally now wake up and fight with everything they have through the courts, media and whatever else they have at their disposal.
Finally, to Brad 204, your stock has risen to its former heights!
If I wanted my kids to go to WV instead of NV I would have bought a house that was zoned into WV and saved myself at least $50,000.
Don't call me a whiner. I'm just speaking the truth. You know it and I know it.
DB did you take your meds today because you are sounding like one crazy lunatic. You are not any more important than the rest of us. You need to find something else to take up all your free time.
Dear NormalTG,
I'm not sure who you are talking to, maybe your imaginary friend, but of the folks I talk to who live in Tall Grass couldn't disagree with you more.
Your comment,"PLEASE STOP MAKING KIDS FEEL BAD ABOUT WVHS" would be laughable if it weren't for its idiotic nature. People are trying to give their kids the best (I hope) possible school and lifestyle than can. Are you really seriously saying that WV is just as good as NV? Please stop, you're making me laugh again.
I have experienced both schools firsthand, and there is simply no comparison. NV is many times better than anything WV has to offer. Sorry, but those are the facts.
If you are so sure that it's the people in the school and not the school's location or reputation that is what really matters, then why not offer to buy one of your neighbor's homes for the value it had before the referendums?
I mean, if, as you say, WV is just as good as NV, then you would be willing to put your money where your mouth is and buy your neighbor's house for a FMV of say, three years ago, and then try to sell it today (at today's depressed price) telling the prospective buyers that their kids will be bused to WV. I mean, everything is the same, right?
Just ask the poor folks in Ashwood who built their homes thinking their kids were going to NV, but are now going to be bused hundreds of miles to WV. Do you think their home values have gone up? What does your imaginary friend have to say about that?
The time has come finally for the people to be heard and this school board to be put in its rightful place, as a group charged to do the bidding of the taxpayers, and not the other way around. Too much money has been spent, too many ulcers created and too many hard feelings been suffered for this mess to be cleared up now that "the SB has made a decision". If you are dumb enough to be happy just because they SB finally made a decision, (an incredibly bad one at that) than maybe you should have all of your future voting privileges revoked for the crime of public stupidity.
DB if you are as smart as you think you are you would of realized that you moved into an area that was one of the fastest growing in the country. And with that brings change. Some for the good and some not. And when it comes to school boundaries nothing is set in stone.
I thought Naperville was a town where everyone was educated. Well sir, your bring this town down with your out of control blogs.
Is this the best thing for me and my kids no. But I will tell my children that at times disppointments are a part of life and you better get used to it so when you grow up you don't sound like DB.
And please don't wine about distance from school. How many residents drive all over town or western suburbs for soccer games, etc. That doesn't seem to bother you. But you will complain because they have to for school.
Give me a break!
Hundred's of miles away. Wow, didn't realize that MV was out of state now. DB you need to find a new hobby. I live in the WV area right now and I can tell you that those kids are just as important as any kid at NV. What's upsetting about this whole thing is that the kids are acting more like adults than the adults are.
The kids hear what is being said about them and they read it all too. They know their school and will let all this negative stuff roll off because they are smart enough to know that people like you are not worth yesterday's newspaper.
Why in God's name they let you post is beyond me. It's one thing to attack an adult but to go and attack innocent kids who have no control over the situation is wrong.
Let me guess you were the one who was least likely to succeed in HS and still can't get over it so your now picking on teenagers.
GET A LIFE
DB is DB. If you have not noticed he is a bit inflammatory by now.. welcome to the party :) He represents a view point that does exist.
I find it a bit amazing how a lot of the posts (okay filter out the subdivision bashing. I am with all of you I do want this to be civilized but I do want to be heard as well.) are very okay with the new plan. At a high level, I can see people feel good about possibly ending this and people see light to a fair and equitable set of borders. (Well until they get announced :) ) So we are just all going to show-up and slap the district on the back and say good job can’t wait to see the new school..
Put all the boundary emotion aside. Everyone saying, “right on” feels good about the districts timeframe, its analysis, and its ability to deliver. I would not let your happiness about a shorter commute blind you.
These are the same people who just wasted three years and I do not know pick a number 5 or 7 million on legal costs. The same people who were wrong about every fact they have put forth. The same people who got the state legislature involved!?! The same people who say the school is on budget at 140M. Wasn’t that supposed to be 124M? The same people who just went and negotiated with just one site. (Yeah, its pretty obvious form the analysis that no one really talked with the other owners)
Someone mentioned before that the SB will have to eat their previous site selection report when they are voting. That is a pretty good visual. But that was back when the peaker plant was an environmental concern. Now its just a simple remediation issue.
If I was a member of the school board I might just want to get it close to right this time. Elections for JS, JC, BG, and CV are due in 2009. MM, CB, and AT were able to side step back lash since all this drama happened after the election. These four will come up for a vote in the eye of the storm. Good luck to you.. Choose well and wisely.
Dough Boy,
Your rantings are exactly what we do not need in D204. You make it sound like you are entitled to this and that just because you bought your house in a certain area. It's your elitist attitude makes me sick.
You are giving the good folk in the south Naper area a bad rep.
Sorry Doughboy, but I too have experienced both schools first hand, and you are right the aren't anywhere near the same. NV is an elitist institution with a entitlement chip on their shoulder. WV is a diverse school which is saddled with the lowest scoring elementary schools in the district by our wonderful school board, is located in an older building, but still manages to churn out some pretty amazing accomplishments. Sorry but marble halls and a newer building don't make a school. Seriously, get over yourself. If you cared so much about the schools, perhaps you should have moved to 203 - their scores are consistently higher than 204. And by the way - I live in Stonebridge and I'm fairly certain that my house cost just as much if not more than yours.
Dear Anonymous,
As a matter of fact I did take my medication today, not that it is any of your business! You should read me when I am really mad!
Nice try on the leftist, liberal trick, to attack the speaker when the the truth comes out. Some people might fall for it, but I suspect most won't.
I would not expect someone as liberal and ignorant as yourself to understand much of what I say, but the people who are most affected know full well that I am dead on with the truth, in spite of your vicious attacks.
Why don't you and the rest of your liberal, Communist brethren all join hands and start a rousing chorus of kumbaya!
The vast majority of comments I've read are not evaluating the proces that got 204 where they are today. The 1st referendum was voted down because the SB did not provide boundary information. The 2nd referendum passed because the SB provided boundary information. I believe the SB should be forced to hold another referendum based on the new boundaries.I for one purchased a home believing my children would go to the new school, now that appears to be in significant doubt.
If anyone on this blog is attacking it's you. I'm just defending the students of WV that you insulted. If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Your blog shouldn't have been posted given that you attacked the students of WV.
Oh by the way why do you think everyone is a leftist liberal. Well guess what your wrong.
I feel sorry for your wife and kids.
Anonymous wrote; "Hope everybody likes going to school right next to a MAJOR high voltage subatation..."
More junk science.
What junk science are you refering to.. EMF form the 345KV transmission lines to the North and East of the school.. Or the PCB's that have been used for about sixty years at the substation. Or the millions of gallons of fuel oil that were delivered to the peaker site (remember when the creek was on fire??) or maybe the hundreds of gallons of TCE used to clean everything... Remember NIKE park???
It seems to us that Dough Boy is upset because he promoted the 3rd HS because he was greedy and thought he would personally benefit but in the end he did not; many of us made the same mistake. We had no real idea if the 3rd high school was needed but greed blinded our judgement.
In reading these posts we were surprised to find out that in the last 2 years IPSD 204 elementary school enrollment has declinded by 284 students; that is something the district never tells you. The talk about enrollment peaking appears to be true.
It is embarrassing when you are made out to be a sucker but that is what happened.
Our apologizes to seniors and other who will be unnecessarily taxed out of their homes due to the skyrocketing property taxes which are sure to be just around the corner.
Please forgive our ignorance and greed.
Thank you! to the school board for keeping your contract with the taxpayers of the district. Your fiscal responsibility should be applauded.
As I see it, the only thing legally binding from the referendum was how much money could be spent to build the new school. The fact that the board is doing their best to make sure they deliver the new high school on time and under budget is commendible.
I am excited to get the school built to relieve the over crowding at our current high schools. The site selected should meet the needs and could potentially have many benefits that Brach Brodie did not. I picked this up form another site and the statements make sense.
Why AME is the best location for the new HS
1. Fiscal responsibility – The only thing legally binding in the referendum was the amount of money that the district had available to spend on a new school. The SB has committed to living by their contract with the community and for this I applaud them.
2. Balance – A new location will allow the SB to appropriately balance the district across several parameters that were identified during the last referendum. First there could be a better balance in achievement. The district is best served by having three strong schools as apposed to two strong schools and one weak school. It will help balance perception. WVHS and MVHS will both have an equal mix of Naperville and Aurora, thereby eliminating the perception that one school is necessarily better because of where the kids are from. (this, by the way, is a total myth)
3. A strong WVHS – the district is better served by a strong WVHS. A strong school that was the first in the district represents a commitment to tradition and excellence. This prevents the image that we are just discarding the old for the new.
4. Location – 65% of the district population currently lives south of 75th street. We currently have two schools located south of 75th street to serve that population. It makes more sense to build a school in the north to serve the remaining 35% rather than to build a third HS in the southern half of the district.
5. Contiguous boundaries – rather than gerrymandering the boundaries to achieve some balance, attendance areas will be in contiguous blocks allowing children to attend HS with their neighbors.
Just think what would happen if the amount of energy fighting this deal was positively directed to fixing the shortfalls in WV to bring up to the same standards. I live in the WV area and think the SB should make the boundary decisions based on two things -- geography and equalizing the demographics of the schools. Going back to the public for input would be a huge nightmare. WV has been a red headed step child due to all of the bashing from the south. We are wasting money on legal fees for past mistakes and some of the folks in the south are talking about new legal action against the SB. Let's not waste more money. Lets focus on getting all 3 schools up to the highest standards regardless of location or age of the building.
People feel they are entitled to certain things based on where they live in the district. I do know that the folks in Aurora pay higher taxes than those in Naperville. Should they be more or less important? All areas of the district should be treated equally. The decisions should not be based on emotions but rather to good business decisions and getting all 3 schools up at the NV level.
Please, folks. Let's focus on what we can do to improve all the schools. Everyone in the district is equally entitled to a quality 204 education regardless of race, home value, social status, etc.
If anyone wants to be selective then I recommend going to a private school. I hear Benet is pretty good!
To mariacallous,
For an old opera singer, you must be pretty blind too. WV as nice as NV, stop it, I'm beginning to hurt from laughing too hard. Say, I've got some DaVinci paintings I'd like to talk to you about! And if WV is so good, why don't you give up your slot in the new high school and keep sending your kids to WV instead? What, I can't hear you, you say you don't really want to send them to WV?
As for diversity, take a look at NV, seems like there are kids there from all parts of the world. They all seem to get along and excell together. But then, in order to see this you would have to talk off your rose colored glasses.
And, regarding the cost of your mansion, I have no idea what you paid for your home, but I do remember going through Stonebridge when we were house hunting and thinking, where's the there, there?
To Anonymous,
Oh, the little children feelings are hurt, boo hoo. I could care less. No one gave a damn about what I felt or people who agree with me felt when this whole thing started.
I never wanted to know anything about a school district or school board. I just wanted to send my kids to a good school. Now I know what a bunch of losers the school board is, as well as all of their brown noser supporters. And, by the way, do you kids watch the news, are they watching the presidential campaigns? Uh oh, better make sure they don't see any of that either.
And finally, To bubbagump,
And I quote, "You make it sound like you are entitled to this and that just because you bought your house in a certain area. It's your elitist attitude makes me sick". Well bubba, why don't you find your way back to the swamps of Mississippi were you slithered in from. It's brown noser dopes like you that make me sick.
As for being entitled to something, well I'll just say that I have worked hard all my life to be able to afford a house in an area that was less than a mile from the front door of the school I wanted my kids to attend, so to answer your idiotic question, I have purchased (with my lifelong efforts),along with my neighbors, the right to attend the school nearest to me. Period. Unlike the carpetbaggers who seem to drop in for all parts of the U.S., I was familiar with the midwest and did some extensive research to decide where to buy my home. Now, morons like yourself want to take that away on a whim so that YOUR lot in life and personal finances improve? Not just no, hell no! Not without a fight!
So get used to it folks, the opening salvos have just been fired and they will continue to rain upon us until the day the front doors of the school open.
BAD site. Although it looks neat on a map to spread out the school the fact remains that there is not an even distribution of students in our district. Why not build the school where the growth is occurring so that we're not moving so many kids around? I don't see the need for a mad rush for 2009. Hamman seems like a very creative option and so what if it takes an addl year to open? Metea at the Eola site will only be partially finished if its even possible to open in '09 so my vote is wait and do Hamman in '10.
This is our only chance to get it right so why not work with the community rather than push us aside? I am disappointed and expected better from our new Superintendant.
Congrats 204 on a great location and a great price. I'm excited to see a third high school come into our district and happy to see a school located in the north portion of the district. I see by the postings that some people still aren't convinced that a third school is needed, and no matter what studies I cite, or what first hand experience I give, I'm sure I won't change anyone's mind. But the numbers of our neighboring school districts are interesting...
Unit District 86 Wheaton Warrenville 13,597 total students 2 High Schools: Wheaton Warrenville South High School 2,434
Wheaton Warrenville North High School 2,200
Unit District Naperville 203 18,449 total students 2 High Schools: Naperville North 3,065 Naperville Central 3,124
Plainfield Unit District 25,957 total students 3 high schools
And finally
Indian Prairie School District 204 28,087, and just our two high schools, Neuqua 4,172
WVHS 3,600
We could compare the area high school districts and we'd find that once again, our numbers are significantly higher per school than any of the Downers Grove, Glenbard, West Chicago, or even Hinsdale. (see the interactive state report card for 2007 at http://iirc.niu.edu/SearchMain.aspx?result=no for more details)
Thank you, School Board members, for your dedicated volunteer hours and your effort to make the best decisions for the students of District 204.
Let's be proud of our actions and words as our students are listening and learning.
Help me here a little. What is this world we are in where north, south, east and west are changing, and neighborhoods are physically moving around. Is this the twilight district?
Wow.
The tone that this thread has taken makes me very glad that my family made the decision to choose to live in District 203 when we moved here 16 years ago.
Yes, our buildings are older. Yes, our facilities need repair. Yes, they're overcrowded. And yes, we've had our share of disagreements regarding tax hikes and expansion plans.
But the discourse has always been respectful. And the name-calling, class warfare and venom have been absent.
As for Dough Boy: Brad says that his is a viewpoint that does exist. That's true. And we are all the worse for it. I feel for his kids.
I hope the busses start a 4am to get kids to the new school. With traffic on Eola as bad as it is now just think of how bad it is going to be when you add thousands of kids trying to get to school by 7am
By virtually any measure except the one where people say "WV is more like the real world, blah blah blah...", NV is a more desirable school than WV. Full stop. That is the nature of this discussion. If somebody buys a house that feeds into NV (and pays a premium for doing so), because they want the best education for their kids, and then that house gets zoned into WV, they absolutely positively have the right to be annoyed at whatever organization imposed that change on them, just the same as they would have the right to be annoyed if Naperville took them off of Lake Michigan drinking water and replaced it with just-as-adequate but not as good tasting well water. Stop criticizing them for doing something completely normal.
Assuming the lines get drawn the way the conventional wisdom thinks they're going to get drawn, then the residents of the southwest subdivisions have been served up a bait-and-switch. If they really wanted their kids to go to WV then they would have bought a house somewhere that fed into WV. It's a hose job and they have the right to be angry.
Sorry doughboy but I do prefer that my kids ( I currently have one at WVHS and a middle schooler) would stay at WVHS. I'm disappointed that I took the bait in your little troll rants. I won't do that again. Oh and don't bother responding, because we all know that you live near NVHS and you did research and you worked hard for your money, etc. I think we get the picture.
IPSD DAD,
You said in your reasonings of why AME is a great site:
2. Balance – A new location will allow the SB to appropriately balance the district across several parameters that were identified during the last referendum. First there could be a better balance in achievement...
Then said:
5. Contiguous boundaries – rather than gerrymandering the boundaries to achieve some balance, attendance areas will be in contiguous blocks allowing children to attend HS with their neighbors.
How can one appropriately balance across several parameters that were identified to be important to achieve balance then not gerrymander to achieve some balance?
You have everyone confused by this post.
This was the district's stance towards the AME plot just a couple years ago. Dont believe me? Go to: http://www.ipsd.org/documents/204LandWP.pdf
What the heck??????
-------------------------
"The northeast parts of the site are immediately adjacent to two high energy electrical switching substations. That means relatively high electromagnetic radiation would be
present at that location. The original location of the Patterson Elementary school in sight of electrical power lines caused uproar over the possibility that electromagnetic radiation
might create health issues for the students, and the site was moved to its current location.
While the Patterson site created the possibility of exposure to electromagnetic radiation, the Eola/Molitor site is somewhere between a probability and a certainty for exposure to
such radiation. Although the scientists studying the question of whether such exposures do or do not create health concerns continue to disagree, the Board sees no advantage in
constructing a third high school in such a location if there is any possibility of abandonment for health reasons."
IPSD Dad has a good post. He's trying to get the point across that the new boundaries will have to make more sense than the last mess. With the AME site, it forces the new boundaries to be more sensible.
Text from 204's website (http://www.ipsd.org/documents/204LandWP.pdf) regarding their analysis of AME a couple of years ago:
"The northeast parts of the site are immediately adjacent to two high energy electrical switching substations. That means relatively high electromagnetic radiation would be present at that location. The original location of the Patterson Elementary school in sight of electrical power lines caused uproar over the possibility that electromagnetic radiation might create health issues for the students, and the site was moved to its current location.
While the Patterson site created the possibility of exposure to electromagnetic radiation, the Eola/Molitor site is somewhere between a probability and a certainty for exposure to such radiation. Although the scientists studying the question of whether such exposures do or do not create health concerns continue to disagree, the Board sees no advantage in
constructing a third high school in such a location if there is any possibility of abandonment for health reasons."
------------------------------
Are they referring to the peaker situation (which has supposedly been remedied) or are they referring to lines which will remain in place after the school is built? If the latter, then WHAT THE HECK? Long live the Metea Valley Glowing Goliaths!
Some folks may say there is a lot of angst in 204 over the new HS, but try to understand how the homeowners have been misled a number of times resulting in a trust being broken. I saw some recent emails on the subject, and I see some critically key areas of contention. I am new to this so this is a view based on learnings over the last 2 years (blogs, emails, articles, studies, pro people, con people, etc.). Also, let's not stereotype whole neighborhoods - that is bigoted behaviour also.
Location-Location-Location. I think the major part of the one blogger's complaint is that a premium was paid to live next to the best school they could find. Now that premium may be lost. I saw in one email that the premium could be $100,000 - $200,000. Obviously, any person including those who think this person is evil because he lives in a nice home, would be upset if they lost 20% of their equity value in their home right? Although some people will make this about other issues, most people simply want to preserve what they paid for - location. Being the closest to the school they want to attend. The financial hit becomes very real when someone has to move to a new job location - $100,000 hit right now as opposed to over many years time. It's real. Remember this because people move and things happen - some day the people who disagree will move next to a good school then get the carpet pulled out from under them. I know people who have been on both ends - it hurts.
New HS location - Now the YES voters have been shocked by the new location of the school mainly because they voted YES based on the assumption that the school would be built at the BB site. Boom - loyalty blasted into oblivion. The reality here is that the location in a declining student area, near an I-88 interchange, and far from the current population center right around NVHS in the SW that is moving further SW based on projected new development. This will result in escalating transportation costs as the declining students in the NW "need to be" backfilled from the SW via bus. Oh, and another strike vs trust - that NW site was once dissed as an option due to it being a radioactive hazardous site among other things. In 2006 we were voting for a new HS at the BB property based on officials' assurances that the location, that boundaries would not be changed. All was re-inforced by the media - "to be contructed on 80 acres of the BB property" in one newspaper, though the referendum wording did not say that exactly, only that funds would be used to buy land and build a school. Shame on those who thought BB was the final location.
The process of gaining YES vote - From what I hear some people felt run over by a VOTE YES "machine" (sounds funny) that included a massive campaign to promote the new HS and the need for it. YES voters were thrilled. The campaign was successful. However, some of the techniques raised eyebrows even among the YES folks - like hiring a consultant that specializes in getting defeated referendums passed on the 2nd try using surveys, a divide and conquer strategy pitting neighborhood vs neighborhood, etc. Also, studies were showing HS student projections well over 12,000 at one point (I hear officials actually felt the results were too over the top to be believed and should be revised down, but not too far - you get the drift). Another issue involved a NO vote website that was hacked by the opposition and shut down. "Is this America?" was another comment. Another example was continuous boundary discussions with little criteria other than doing whatever was needed to get the YES vote. If one genuinely feels the need for a district, they genuinely do whatever is needed to assure passage - for the better good. I have no problem with that, but some actions can come back to haunt in funny ways - to actually hurt the district.
Need for 3rd HS - the City of Naperville already had projected a future decline in HS enrollment in year 2000. In fact one expert in the area told me that the HS seniors have been dropping for some time by 50 per year. That may pop up for a few years but then accelerate in decline. I read a fact something like - over 40,000 households declining in students cannot be offset by even high growth from a couple thousand new units planned. Such information was actually used by officials to justify not building a 3rd HS(a "white elephant" was one official's comment), but was used to justify the GOLD campuses(new Freshmen centers near each HS. Readers thus should also keep the capacity of 4 buildings (2 HS and @ Freshman centers) is greater than 2 buildings like in other districts. The future projections only went down since 2000, not up. So if there is a bubble, then money gets wasted on bricks, not good teachers and programs. Also, there are other larger HSs that are wildly successful. Economies of scale does allow more $ to be spent on good teachers and programs rather than brick and mortar - not a bad thing. That said, in 2004-2006 officials reversed the message to suit a new goal - building a new HS they did not need in 2000. The rationale still befuttles people, but apparently not enough people - those NO folks were silenced enough. The YES campaign was successful. The net result - people thought a new HS is needed, and they voted YES - the YES voters own their decision.
WVHS may become the best academic school some day depending on how the neighborhoods get allocated. That's what I see - distrust to the point of not believing anything said at some point. It is just a matter of how long that takes to reach the tipping point for some residents. There are many many more examples, so no need to name call, etc. I hope I am wrong because the results of tipping against will be very serious and costly.
Hey Folks,
I stayed quiet on this thread and did not say a word.
On the last District 204 you chose to make me the punching bag for some crazy reason over one SENTENCE!
Well to prove my point I said nothing and will say nothing.
Look at yourselves raving at each and don't blame McFarland in the future.
I am going back to focus on the Ponds of H. West, the new 75th St. thread and the reincarnation of Napergate all over again. The dialogue there is much more civilized and coherent.
I wish you all the luck in the District 204 world but next time don't make me your punching bag for your internal feelings of hatred towards each other!
You guys can punch each other all you want! I am out of the ring and I am not interested in even being your referee. Sorry!
I think many of you are incorrect in concluding that parents on the south side of Naperville think that WV is an inferior school (or is on the other side of the tracks). I have nothing against WV and if the school was located at 95th street with the same faculty and facilities...no problem. Most of the folks I have spoken to in TG would also have an issue if we are re-zoned into Naperville Central or Naperville North (which have better test scores and are both rated as better schools than NV) due to the distance from our community.
Our home is less than one mile from NV, and it simply does not make sense that our children are going to have a 20 minute or more bus commute when NV is less than a 2 minute drive (and less than a 10 minute walk with the new bridge over 59 that is being built) from TG. (I would love for one of the envirenmental groups to do a study of the impact that the possible zoning options has on fuel consumption, energy costs and pollution).
If TG and Tamarack are rezoned to WV to placate the White Eagle folks (who have an Aurora address and are clealry geographically aligned with WV) that would be a political shame.
Yes, there will be lawsuits (as an attorney I can guarantee this) that will cost our communities even more tax payer money that could be used towards our children (if my memory serves me correct, the second referendum was voted on AFTER the school board released the last redistricting information, and many folks (especially those in White Eagle) would have voted differently based on whatever the new re-zoning ends up being.
I do not think it is irrelevent (or that I should feel guilty) to note that when we bought our house, the biggest factor we had (with 4 children) was the proximity to NV (and yes, the quality of the school and the fact that it was within walking distance was why we moved so close to it, and why we were willing to pay the premium purchase price and 16K in property taxes per year).
I think that the school district owes the community another referendum, which I expect would result in no new school being built and instead, investing in adding to the current schools to address the cyclical spike in attendance expected for a few years. I believe this will be the eventual outcome of the lawsuits to come anyway, so it would be in the community's best interests (and the Board's fiduciary obligations) for the Board to re-present another referendum before it commits to purchasing new land (and ending up exposing our community to millions and millions of additional exposure).
considering this from the district's own analysis of the AME property
"The northeast parts of the site are immediately adjacent to two high energy electrical switching substations. That means relatively high electromagnetic radiation would be present at that location. The original location of the Patterson Elementary school in sight of electrical power lines caused uproar over the possibility that electromagnetic radiation might create health issues for the students, and the site was moved to its current location.
While the Patterson site created the possibility of exposure to electromagnetic radiation, the Eola/Molitor site is somewhere between a probability and a certainty for exposure to such radiation. Although the scientists studying the question of whether such exposures do or do not create health concerns continue to disagree, the Board sees no advantage in
constructing a third high school in such a location if there is any possibility of abandonment for health reasons."
Can someone please explain to me why on Earth anyone would want their children to attend a school on this site?
Has the district/School Board lost their minds?
Goodness after reading how hazardous the district seems to think the Eola Molitor site is, you'd think there would be a major fight to either stay at WVHS.
I'd never send my child to this hazardous site. How can you trust the site is safe after reading how dangerous the district thought is was as recent as 2005?
Mr. Potter -- actually the school board has not voted yet so we can't confirm that they've lost their minds. We'll find out soon enough. The district HAS clearly lost their minds.
School Board: Please don't fall into line with the District's snow job regarding environmental/radiation concerns at the AME site. The question of whether Dr. Dash's Geiger Counter Dude's analysis is sufficient to quell these concerns is something that the public wants (and deserves a chance to) discuss more thoroughly in an open forum. I don't think that we should BE TOLD that there are no radiation concerns by the district and its chosen vendor. This is a big enough issue that we need INDEPENDENT advice!
I agree with TA from TG. The referendum, whether explicitly or implicitly, was a referendum to build a school at location X, with Y boundaries, for Z cost. We are now being offered a school at location A, with B boundaries, and C cost.
WE NEED TO RE-VOTE.
They haven't lost their minds. The electric substations will be gone.
TA from TG
You being a lawyer could hopefully answer this question for me. What basis does anyone have on sueing the SB. Other than the school is not going on the BB site. Even that seems to be a long shot since we didn't own all the land to begin with. We new when we voted Yes that it could possibly be taken away from us given the legal hurdles. As far as boundary lines, schools have the right to change those as they see fit not only for budget purposes but also demographics.
Please tell me if I were to want to sue (trust me I'm not interested just curious) on what grounds?
Goodness after reading how hazardous the district seems to think the Eola Molitor site is, you'd think there would be a major fight to either stay at WVHS.
I'd never send my child to this hazardous site. How can you trust the site is safe after reading how dangerous the district thought is was as recent as 2005?
Good Info on Boundaries
My biggest concern with the criteria used to evaluate the sites is the rush to get the school opened in 2009. It reads to me that “it is more important that we avoid inconveniencing the first class of MVHS than all subsequent classes.” We should be selecting a site based on what makes sense for our district’s long-term interests. The study suggests that there are hurdles with the MACOM and HAMMAN sites that would affect timing of the project, but that we should be able to build the school at these sites within budget. Given the population distribution within D204 (which I studied exhaustively during the original boundary discussions), these sites appear to be superior to the Eola Road site. I challenge the Board to consider: if “schedule” was taken off of the table as a guiding principle, which site truly makes the most sense for our community?
My opinion, given the facts, is that the MACOM and HAMMAN sites are the preferred sites.
I guess I'm confused about the thoughts on White Eagle?? The way I see it, they are going to WVHS regardless what happens. If they some how "lawyer up" and fight the new sight, delaying it's start, aren't they the first likely candidates to head back to WVHS when NVHS starts bursting at the seams. Then they'll just be at an overcrowded school with the "have nots"
Loved the comment about Tall Grass and White Eagle needing diversity training before they come to WV. May be an education for the parents when the kids come home saying life's not so bad on the other side of the tracks and they may even see how fortunate they are in comparsion to others.
Bloggers,
I'm concerned about the tone of some of the comments about Tallgrass and White Eagle possibly being redistricted to Waubonsie.
I've allowed comments because I feel this is a legitimate issue worthy of exploring. As I've said before on other threads, I personally think Waubonsie is a top-notch school, I have relatives who have graduated from Waubonsie and gone on to college, and other relatives attended and graduated from Neuqua once it opened--also a very good school. I just want to be clear I have no personal bias regarding Waubonsie or Neuqua one way or the other--I consider both to be excellent schools.
However, I do believe others in the community have a negative bias toward Waubonsie, and I feel one way to debunk this notion is by discussing it in a forum like this. Diversity, security and quality of education seem to be some of the common themes that come up in regards to any perceived differences that may exist between Waubonsie and Neuqua.
So let's talk about these matters in a civilized way. Keep your points focused on the issues, and try to be respectful of others' opinions. Personal attacks on individuals will not be tolerated.
I cant believe how childish all of you sound!!!!! "If I dont get my way I am going to atake my ball and go home"! Give me a break! No matter what school sight the SB would have picked there is going to be opposition. No matter what boundries the SB picks there is going to be opposition! I have had children go threw both NVHS and WVHS and I can tell you from experience WVHS was a better experience. The staff and educational environment proved to be a place where my child could excel. When my other child went threw NVHS, it was nothing but a headache. I cant believe I saw parents walking in to pt conferences with lawyers. Comparing the buildings is like comparing apples and oranges. You are talking about a building that is at least 35 yrs old vs one that is 7 yrs old. A building does not create a school its the people inside that matter. True Neuqua has better facilities, but it is not a better school.
I LOVE DISTRICT 203!!
Hi JWH - Look up in the sky, there are power lines everywhere....
Are they referring to the peaker situation (which has supposedly been remedied) or are they referring to lines which will remain in place after the school is built? If the latter, then WHAT THE HECK? Long live the Metea Valley Glowing Goliaths!
I do not believe that there were even any ground samples taken from the MAKKOM and HAMON sites, but in what appears as a rush to clean up the embarassment of the BB land experience, the Board's position on obvious potential envirenmental problems with the EOLA site (due to its prior use) is that the Seller is assuming liability in case there is a future environmental problem with the site????
Is this any consolation to students and faculty who may be harmed by "envirenmental problems". Also, do we really think that the Seller will have the financial ability to absorb relocating a 160 million dollar school if there are "envirenmental problems that arise in the future?"
Perhaps the EOLA site is the easiest to purchase for a 2009 school year, but are all considerations really being considered?
FYI - where the building will be put is currently farmland, just like what most of the area is built upon....Just like BB/Macom/Hamman parcels. The area where the perceived Environmental Hazard is in the NE corner, an area slated for open space/retention. Those power lines left are no closer than the ones that go by NVHS now. Also I have not heard of any problems from the residential neighborhood just south of AME (Cambridge Chase)due to the Power lines.
Testing has been done and the area is clean, but to be safe they are doing more testing too.
I live in the Butterfield/Marmion/Big Woods area and am more than happy to send my kids there. Also was very happy with WVHS and am sorry to have to leave it.
The rush to build in 2009 seems to be the overriding concern.
Problem is there is still a chance (good?) that we won't make it at the Eola site.
They've dropped the ball so many times already, what's one more time gonna matter...
Ultimately, no matter where each of us ends up at the end of this process, the only question worth answering is what is best for our own children. Not our property values, but our childern. If you don't like your designated high school, you are free to vote with your feet.
Moving is an option.
Another (often overlooked) option is private high schools. This area is blessed with a range of excellent private schools at various price points: Aurora Christian, Wheaton Academy, Marmion, Benet, St. Francis, Aurora Central Catholic and Rosary are just the ones I can name off the top of my head. These are all excellent schools, each offering a quality education and opportinities for extra cirricular activities some kids cannot get at larger schools.
My two oldest attended grade school and middle school in District 204 and are now in private high schools for reasons that have nothing to do with boundry disputes or a third high school. My youngest tells me that he is going to WVHS no matter what. I plan to send him there.
Three final thoughts. First, parents at private high schools do not complain about the commute. They value the opportunity their kids are getting and they do what it takes to get them to school. Second, money is not the issue. Many of these schools have scholarships for kids who need them, and almost anyone who can afford to live in Naperville can afford private school tuition. It may be a sacrifice, but it's not cost prohibitive for most people. Third, The Aurora Central Catholic Varsity Boys's basketball team is currently 17-1. Their only loss was to WVHS, a school 10 times its size. Go Chargers!
Perhaps the EOLA site is the easiest to purchase for a 2009 school year, but are all considerations really being considered?" – Anonymous 2:22
A 2009 open date is just not true. I know we are all divided but I just wish that one fact could be taken out of the equation. From second hand sources, (I know not that reliable) the board is saying the general feedback is positive. Of course it is because people read the handouts with a non-critical eye and said, “Yes, that sounds great.”
And absolutely no offense to your paper Ted but I just about fall over on my driveway this morning when I read the editorial in the Naper Sun. An excerpt:
“But for the good of the students of the district, and with the proposition that the new high school might still open in the fall of 2009, the district has arrived at what seems to be a reasonable solution and is finally on the way to turning Metea Valley High School into reality.”
How about some investigation into some of the issues about environmental remediation and time lines? Good lord that was a quick rubber stamp.
I had one child attend WVHS and three others attend NVHS. WVHS was by far a much better experience for my child. Two of my children who attended NVHS chose to graduate early because they wanted to get out of that environment as quickly as possible. Better facilities do not equal a better high school experience!
They haven't lost their minds. The electric substations will be gone
That would a HUGE SURPRISE to ComEd... I think you might just check with them.....
Thanks Ted for getting people back on track. There is no room for bigotry, bias, etc.
That said perception IS reality for some, but perceptions can be changed except in the most extreme cases. Again, the current WVHS is a top school in the area, with some additional benefits in less crowding and maybe as a result, a more engaged staff. Unfortunately, most people assumed there were no issues until the media, realtors, and a few crazed bloggers made it an issue.
Depending on how neighborhoods get allocated to WVHS, the reality could very well be WVHS gets the best academic performance - who knows really? Hell, tests do not say it all and even with the tests a couple percentage points are meaningless when other districts have schools performing at 40-60 percentiles - a serious problem in those districts. Both WVHS and NVHS consistently run in the 80s overall.
I would think the vast majority of parents hate to give up a school their kids can and will walk to, for a 5-6 mile bus ride made longer by train traffic if the CN acquisition of EJ&E tracks. Also, parents get less involved the farther they have to travel. Location is the key.
The major issue now is the recession and re-evaluation of all projects. Financial considerations must take center stage. The bond refinance situation, the demographic projections of student population, and a long-term focus are needed. In other words, should we build a new school?
Just for the record all the residents in White Eagle have a Naperville address and more than half of those residents are full residents of the city Naperville,IL (just like in TG). Please refer to a map for futher questions.
Shame on this school board. Two years ago, these boundaries divided our community pitting neighbor against neighbor. The lines were drawn, everything calmed down, and wounds healed.
Had D204 chosen the Macom site, the boundaries for MVHS could have stayed exactly the same, with the exception of swapping Longwood for Peterson. There would be no great uproar, no lawsuits, no fighting. We could have built our school, moved on in, and put all of this behind us.
But no. For a little over a million dollars difference (after our school board has wasted 10 fighting a lawsuit no one thought they would win) and six months time (after our school board has wasted two years fighting that lawsuit no one thought they would win), we're going to bring up this nastiness all over again? This is insane.
School board members and Dr. D., we feel betrayed and bewildered that you would make this illogical choice. We were all set!!!! We were fine!!!! How could you do this to the community?
Does anyone remember that before Neuqua opened every child went to Waubonsie Valley. Now we have two schools we have become a community of "haves" and "have nots". If you truly think that you are a "have" and are better off at NV, then you have never been inside WV. If you call Waubonsie Valley a "poor" school then you have never been inside a poor school. If you think Waubonsie Valley has less school pride or spirit then NV then you were not at last weeks basketball game. It does not take a white eagel business person to figure out that buying more property at half the cost is a smart business decision. As a business person you make choices for the good of the group not for the individuals. Get over your arrogance and attitude and move on.
NOTE from Ted Slowik, host:
Good point. I remember when it was a one-high-school district, and I recall before renovations in the early 1990s Waubonsie was a fairly modest building. And I remember how, after Neuqua opened, Jesse Jackson came to Naperville to point out the desparities between haves and have-nots. And I commend District 204 and Neuqua Valley students for how, to this day, they have a partnership with a less-privileged Chicago high school, reminding me that Neuqua students are indeed exposed to culturally diverse situations.
I want to preface this by saying I was skeptical from the beginning whether or not the 75th St. location was the best choice for Dist. 204 and my vote reflected this. From the data the school board supplied prior to the referendum, it appeared to me the projected growth in the district was from the southern sections of the district. I wish I could find that data again. Any suggestions? As I continue to be skeptical of the school board's choices, I am wondering if they had anyone perform an analysis of what environmental hazards exist at the new Eola Rd. site and what hazards Reliant Energy's plant pose to our children - over and beyond the EMF question.
Anonymous wrote "Just for the record all the residents in White Eagle have a Naperville address and more than half of those residents are full residents of the city Naperville,IL (just like in TG). Please refer to a map for futher questions."
And White Eagle residents get a water bill from Naperville or Aurora? I recall an incident when White Eagle residents got their water shut off by Aurora's mayor because they wanted a Naperville address so badly.
Now as to WV v. the proposed high school. Anybody who can look at the statistics of the current four "Naperville" high schools in 203 ands 204 can see that WV performs the most poorly. Why would any parent want to send their children there. I passed by the school at the end of the school day a few months ago and what I saw was a bunch of scary looking gangbanger types.
Some main thoughts from various emails/blogs/comments:
1. Under the current recessionary impact on key assumptions of the new high school project - like flat property appreciation where 5%, 5%, 4.5%, 4% and 3% were required from 2006-2009 for tax rates not to increase as one example - what is the financial impact of the current environment now that the original project has missed deadlines? (I saw one calculation that showed $1 in property tax today must go to $1.18 to make up the gap from the zero property appreciation). In this tough financial environment, does it seem prudent to review all assumptions and performance against assumptions - including the bond refinancing, the sources/uses of funds, the new tax needs, the operating costs, the demographics, etc. of this project? How can we even consider paying another $10 million just to get back on schedule -- who is responsible for the BB and the AME negotiations?
2. Is it legal to spend $146+ million or more for this project without another referendum? The only things that have changed from the referendum are the price, the site and the bounderies per the other blogger above - well yes, everything has changed! Total costs for capital, financing and operations could exceed $350 million - yes, look at the bonds and the real operating costs. Will those costs run 3 times the original projection given inflation? This is before the impact of inflation, flat property appreciation, the recession, etc. Why can't we vote on a new referendum?
3. Why can "found" money of $20+ million from "developers’ fees, bond interest"... be earmarked for the new HS. Also saw where another six figure income is coming from Sudexho via using Wheatland School as a storage depot. Is using funds from one activity for buildings legal? Where exactly is this money coming from? Can an audit be requested due to the large amount of funds suddenly appearing? Why would this money not be put towards district-wide air conditioning, operating costs, to ease overcrowding in the SW, or better yet, returned to homeowners via reduced property tax rates or in cash ...for examples?
Other questions seen in emails, etc. to consider. Sorry the list is long, but there seems to be a lot of them today. Can anyone answer/comment on the following please(?):
** Why not build the school in the area of most projected growth? Backfilling declining students at the new HS via busing students in from the SW seems impracticle and high risk from a safety standpoint? Student population is growing in the SW and shrinking in the NW. The district’s own high school student population analysis said the population center was near NVHS, and moving further SW in the future from Ashwood Creek, Ashwood Park, Mandalay, etc. developments. Is spreading HSs evenly throughout a district while ignoring growth and decline trends very wise? (Most schools in the SW area already have roughly 50% more students per school than the northern schools).
** The impact on passing future Operating Referendums if this construction process is not done in a proper, legal, constructive manner? Example, expensive lawsuits by residents, ISPD 204, contractors, etc. -- things always get missed and the BB property fiasco is a perfect example.
** If state reimbursement for necessary bussing drops when/if the state disagrees with assumptions of the district re student busing.
** Impact of possible Canadian National(CN) purchase of the EJ&E tracks which cut through the middle of the school district in north-south direction. The projected train traffic will increase from 5.5 to 23.5 trains per day causing significant wait time at crossings, and a possible need for a new bridge to assure the safety of our children ($10 to 20 million cost for new bridge?). Plus additional transportation risks/costs.
** School is not just the classroom learning experience - does distance from high school impact participation if after school sports, club, activities esp in this time of 2 working parents? We think so.
** Why SW homes pay highest tax $ to build, finance and operate new HS but do not attend it. Usually homeowners pay a premium to build new homes, but get the school buildings to house the new students - seems strange that 204 does the complete opposite.
** Counting money not spent on specific projects as revenue or funding for this HS seems to go against basic economic/financial/accounting principles.
** Why district counts $6.4 million from a resale of BB property as savings when that may not happen.
** Why district is not getting market value for the 25 acres at BB owned and now unused.
** Why district has to pay $5 million in legal costs for the BB lawyer fees (not just our own legal fees) and another $2.5 million for damages (?)
** Why did we purchased 25 acres at BB property to begin with - what was the rationale?
** Destruction of market value and tax revenue in the SW area of the district where new, more expensive homes were built, property acquired/improved, or would be built at a premium due to close proximity to a school (NVHS). How will these premiums be returned to the home owners and/or builders. Given the current real estate crisis, are we not inviting lawsuits from homeowners, developers and builders?
** Property taxes have been increased over 10% almost the last couple years when inflation has run under 4% annually. Where is the rationale for these massive increases when companies are held to 2% or no cost increases over same period? How are we going to get costs under control?
** The district budget is running over $250 million per year, but we keep hearing how we have the lowest costs per student. However, given we are one of the largest districts in the state, should we not have even better economies of scale -- an even lower cost per student by $ thousands rather than $ hundreds.
** How the current bond refinance situation looks versus the original plan had we done nothing (and paid off debt as originally scheduled). What is it in an environment when debt costs are rapidly rising and how is it impacting the original project economics looking forward?
** Understanding that the strange method of state funding appears to allow the district to make money on all day K, but under the current economy, and given the planned hiring of 61 new teachers and associate training and benefits, is all-day K really a cost effective pursuit for the district. Can we see the analysis?
** The number of property foreclosures in the district, the likely reduction in tax basis, and any financial impact/action plan of the district to address. We need to see the district has accounted for this situation in financial plans.
** The process for removing School Board members and the Superintendent - not that we want this today, but just in case the situation deteriorates further. The SB is a voluntary position, so we need to keep in mind the good intentions of the SB members. However, if their actions really do destroy home values and pocket books, then we need to be prepared to accept resignations or else take legal steps to removal.
** The process for obtaining a restraining order to stop this project if it comes to that.
The schools are full, but the district should realise that there isn't much more room for additional families to live in. I speak as a graduate year 2007. Would it be nice to have smaller classes, yes. However to compensate for that teachers make themselves available by staying later, and handing out their personal phone numbers school emails. I hated the crowds, but is a nuisance that people driving during rush hour every day encounter justification for spending such a ridiculous amount of money on a whole new facility that has less than a year and a half to be built to meet the deadline?
Jack:
White Eagle subdivision is split between Aurora and Naperville. Roughly, the part of White Eagle that is in Dupage County is in Aurora therefore gets its water bill from the City of Aurora. The southern part of White Eagle is in Will County and the City of Naperville. Hope that helps.
Onto your last statement, I drove by Neuqua Valley a few months ago and saw a bunch of kids driving BMWs, Lexus and Mercedes. I really didn't think anything of it except maybe they got to take their parents car that day. Point being, there are kids that may look at certain way and be nothing like the stereotype a person applies to them.
WARNING: To all on this thread and Ted touched on this earlier. You're free to discuss anything you want about the new HS....environmental concerns, the need for it, tax dollars etc. until the cows come home. We welcome the discourse. But I am getting sick to my stomach over the disparagement of the kids - especially the Waubonsie kids. Is it coming from Neuqua supporters - I have no idea, nor do I care. But kids are kids and references to their ethnicity, alleged affinity to crime (ridiculous) will no longer be tolerated. I'll shut the thread down if you people don't knock it off. Leave the kids out of it! And people crow about the "diverrsity" of Naperville. Those posting blogs of the above nature should be ashamed of themselves. Remember, final warning!
As a parent who was actually looking forward to having their child attend Wauonsie Valley (awesome school - some of you should actually go inside it sometime), I feel the need to send a message: to all those parents who came to the "boundary meetings" 2 years ago and were so concerned about their kids being bused over the "dangerous" railroad tracks (but were more than happy to have kids from other neighborhoods travel over them), and to those same parents that played the "diversity card" when they were discussing how the kids that weren't from their neighborhood would enjoy their experience at Waubonsie, and finally to those parents who felt that splitting the kids from Hill Middle School into different high schools would be an "opportunity to meet new kids and make new friends" - to all of you I offer one word: karma.
I came across this site as an outsider (I live in Hinsdale, and my kids attended Hinsdale South). I cannot believe the divide among everyone on this blog. From what I have read in the papers and on this blog it seems to me that the more affluent subdivisions in that area are in an uproar because they didn't get what they felt was coming to them, a brand new, sparkling new school. It all seems really petty to me. Hinsdale Central/South need as many renovations as WV needs. People make a school, not tne materials and finishes.......
Wow, this is getting goofy...all our schools are great! I watch the honor roll postings in the Sun, and guess what, NV has no more then WVHS. I am a Brookdaler and I have neighbors that had 3 kids in WVHS and all offered scholarships at great colleges for scolastic acheivements, yes WVHS. We have great schools in 204. All of them. In Brookdale, our main concern was...don't split up our middle schoolers. The kids did talk about it. Even kids slotted for the orig. new school were hoping it wouldn't open. The were making friends they didn't to lose. I would be happy with any of our High schools, just don't split them up as you originally did-only one group not going to the new school. We are one of the top in the nation, stop fighting about which one.
Thanks, Anonymous | January 17, 2008 08:41 PM. Those are interesting issues to discuss rather than the same old, same old sub-division bashing. Wish I had some answers...
Prudence in this case is a virtue and the school board needs to be responsible for making the best decision in light of the most current information. Demographic and economic trends are telling us to slow down before we take this plunge.
The new superintendent cannot possibly have as much at stake here as we all do. That is a fact. Nothing personal, but the board is using him to clean up their mess. I hope ( pray even) for some leadership on that board to reject the site at this time based on the need for more detailed demographic and economic projections.
In this case more trust will be lost in railroading a school that raises serious questions about safety of the site, location in respect to student density, demographic projections on enrollments, and the economic situations of taxpayers in light of a possible shrinking economy and a clear real estate decline.
The district does have two quality schools, WVHS & NVSH. Would building a third diminish the quality of those schools if finances are so tight and feelings so aggravated. The reputation of District 204 is at stake here. Frankly, I voted for the last two referendums and was proud not to be stingy, but agree with earlier comments about now feeling burned, resentful, and scared. I honestly don't know if we can afford it.
Thanks for stepping in Jim. It's about time someone stuck up for the kids and block the negativity and hateful blogs. Yes, you all should be ashamed of yourselves, you know who you are. If you are all so intelligent and know what's best for all, you wouldn't have to go on the attack like you did. You wouldn't act like that in a meeting at work and you shouldn't do it here.
And know DB this is not another bleeding heart liberal. That seems to be your tag for everyone who has the decency to stick up for those who are wrongfully attacked. In this case the kids.
You know, I once had a lot of pride in being a Naperville resident.
After reading this blog, my pride is rapidly turning to shame. Rarely have I seen such a display of pique and selfishness.
As many bloggers have said, all of these schools are top-notch. If people are really concerned about the hazards of travel and their kids being exposed to new experiences, they should think about home-schooling.
Jim, thanks for trying to keep this discussion on an even keel.
Good luck, 204.
Actually, Jim I think shutting the blog down would be rather symbolic of how I feel about our communication with the Dist 204 since the summer. Not that I do not feel confident my random comments submitted through survey monkey (the site for responses) are being read.. yeah, sure…
With a short timer as a superintendent and what looks 3 three of the 4 incumbents due for election in 2009 looking to step down (yeah its just rumor but its out there), I am sorry if I do not feel like we are having this mess just dropped on us and railroaded through. If that makes people a little annoyed and their comments get heated.. Well, that is sort of what this process has done. I am not defending it at all but as I said before these opinions exist and this closed door and need to know only information sharing is breeding it.
I am also a bit surprised people take those posting so seriously. This is an Anonymous discussion board. For all we know, one person is having an argument with themselves. Or someone who just wants to stir things up. That is one of the downfalls of user supplied content and why Web 2.0 philosophies are hitting upon rough time. (Ooops, sorry got a bit geeky there) I can spoof my IP Address too… Shrug it off people and let’s discuss the facts.
Yes, In White Eagle I pay the City of Naperville every month for my water and electric service. I have a Naperville Library card and yes I pay the city of Naperville taxes. I guess that sumes it up I am a resident of Naperville.
Brad204 - I'm impressed.
Dear Mr. Lynch,
Simply question, is this blog subject to freedom of speech or not?
I dont know about the wealthy white eagle or the tall grasses. But,Whats so difficult about the boundaries : Look at the 204 map - Liberty and 87th street.
The Sun's editorial on this topic surprised me - it's the most balanced column they've ever written in regards to the third high school.
If you've ever been inside WVHS, you know it's more than adequate. Much of the criticism of it must come from people who've never been inside or talked to any of the staff.
The first referendum failed. In the aftermath, many people indicated that they voted no because they didn't know what the new school boundaries would be. They said if they knew which school their children would attend, they might be inclined to vote for a referenum. So, the SB came up with new school boundaries. The referendum passed. And since then, maybe people are criticizing that boundaries were drawn. You can't have it every way.
Mr. Lynch,
I'm waiting.
Is this blog covered by free speech (and thus we are all allowed to write what we want, within certain legal constraints) or is it not, thus eliminating the free speech concept?
You have posted two other comments since I wrote, what is your answer?
This blog has become a house organ for the SB and its supporters. Most people who feel as I do have either stopped subscribing to your paper edition or never log on anymore, based on discussions that I have had with people in my area.
If you can threaten people writing to this blog, then you will lose any semblance of fairness and impartiality.
Mr. Lynch, what is your answer?
Kevin, you hit the nail on the head. The first referendum did not pass and (at least in significant part), the public indicated it would not vote in the blind (without seeing the boundries).
Boundries were subsequently provided and based on this information, the second referendum passed.
Obviously, with the EOLA site, the boundries provided will not work (and new boundries will need to be drafted).
I think it is clearly questionable at best as to whether the public still supports a third school based on the how this has been managed over the past year (millions and millions of our dollars flushed down the toilet). It also desrves to make informed decisions based on the how the new boundries will be drawn.
Our community was in a good place, and if the Board went forward with either of the 2 alternative sites to EOLA, I think we would continue to have a unified community (Boy could this be simple).
The District and SB has an opportunity to restore credibility and honesty (and avoid the millions and millions of dollars of lawsuits) by presenting a third referendum (with the cuurent facts before the voters). They also has the opportunity to further divide the community by replacing its judgement for the will of the voters (and hiding behind the passage of the 2nd referendum which THEY KNOW may have been very different under the current facts).
Let's face it, the SB members that were there pushing for BB should resign. How can they justify staying a board member. They did this, not others.... they had knowledge that the property's price was NOT A DONE DEAL.
Dough Boy: Sorry for the delay...I don't have the luxury to blog all day. To answer your question, I'll just trot out the old saw: Does freedom of speech allow someone to yell fire in a pulic theater? No. I just want to keep this forum as civil as possible. But make no mistake....if people keep attacking kids in an inflammatory and racist tone I'll shut down this thread faster than you can blog.
Curious here. Has anyone heard anything about D204 using 95th or 87th as possible boundaries for Neuqua?
DB,
Go down below and click on 'Terms of Use'
Under: 4. Content You Submit to the Web Site
You acknowledge and agree that Company will not have any obligation to review, monitor, display, accept or exploit any User Content and Company may, in its sole discretion, delete, move, re-format, edit, alter, distort, remove or refuse to exploit User Content without notice or liability.
So, Jim is being generous. He could have jsut said, "No" :) I do subscribe to the Naperville Sun and enjoy flipping through it each morning.
Anyway, back to the topic at hand. For those that are on board with AME site, do you believe it will partially open in Fall of 2009? Does the date really matter? Just curious about how much the date promise is impacting people's perception.
I don't see my first comment posted and I implore that you post this. I am shocked and dismayed at the nasty tone of the postings toward tall grass and white eagle. I'm tired of hearing us collectively labeled. It boarders on unstable. Why is there so much hate? How do you think this impacts the kids? this is so unhealthy? I and many many of my neighbors just want our kids to go to school that is nearest our home, but we understand the need and desire of the school board to want to balance out the schools in terms of academic achivement and demographics. Remember one of the SB's objectives was that the underperforming schools not be routed all to one schoo. They intend and will split them among the three schools. So it really does not matter what BUILDING your children are assigned to. The student body will be similar. So no one should all that concerned about what BUILDING the kids are assigned to. The one closest to your home would be nice and I am sure the SB is considering that but the boundaries have to be drawn somewhere. I for one am hopeful that the boundaries are less cut up than they were in the original plans for the 75th st. site as this SW corner of Naperville was routed to 3 different schools. Whereever we go, I'd personally like it to be together be it NVHS or WVHS. Its laughable that people are afraid of WVHS. They are deluding themselves if they don't think NVHS has issues too. Its not some homogenous gene pool of do gooders wearing abercrombie spending all of their free time doing charity work. Be real. There's bad eggs everywhere. Ask any freshman at NVHS gold campus. You will be shocked at what is 'available' to them. And I am not talking about programs.
So to all the TG/WE bashers. STOP.It's hurtful to the entire community and makes us all look bad. To the TG/WE residents who might be freaking out. STOP. YOu are obssessing about a BUILDING. Relax. And to you all, stop the divisiveness. Keep the comments to what makes a sound economic and logistical decision. Irrational comments about WVHS are freaking out our children. We are talking about a suburban high school and you make these kids think it's in the bad lands and that they'll be jumped when they are waiting for the bus- Please please stop this!
DB:
You do understand that we are in a recession and that real estate values nationwide have taken a beating? I don't believe residents of Stonebridge have had any issues selling their homes while assigned to WVHS.
I do agree that were were misled in voting Yes based on the past boundaries. No one expected this latest turn.
I do agree that if the other possible sites had been chosen there would be no angst in the community right now.
I do agree that the the SB should take this angst into consideration. The SB should seriously consider the costs of future lawsuits.
I do agree that having my kids go the school nearest us is ideal. But if it ends up that its WVHS, we will survive.
I don't agree with the bashing of WVHS. It is simply hurtful.
I don't agree with labelling the student body of WVHS. Seriously, talk to actual students at NVHS. You might be surprised what your hear.
My point is that boundaries will be drawn somewhere. I was warned by savvy Naperville residents of the risk of redistricting west of 59 6 years so I guess there was some point of failure in your research.
Do you know that 20% for the 6th grade students from Tall Grass are gifted? And Fry and White Eagle some of the highest performing schools in the state? Surely that will bode well for whichever school is lucky enough to get them.
So if the student body of WVHS shifts, there will be no material depreciation in home values. But keep up your rants and it will be a self fulfilling prophecy.
If the SB/District goes agead as now suggested, it is a complete injustice to the 204 citizens in South Naperville.
Simple community economics is that newer developments command higher home prices (and as a result, contribute higher property tax contributions) due to the fact that they require (and directly benefit from) new infrastructure...like new schools... to accomodate growing populations. The costs of building these new schools is appropriately proportioned so that those benefiting from the new facilities pay an appropriate premium in their property taxes (they pay for these benefits).
If I recall correctly, the SB campaigned that it would not have to issue new bonds to build a new school due to the huge influx of property taxes from the new homes in South Naperville (and due to the fact the these homes are collectively above the median home values in the northern sections of 204 due to the economics set forth above). However, it now appears as if the SB and District would like to take the premiums paid by South Naperville 204 residents to build a new school for North Naperville 204 (which has not paid the same increased property tax levels over the past 10 years).
I hope that the entire district is ready for the new economics to follow...Declining home values in South Naperville, declining property tax revenue, an exodus of young families from South Naperville, no new development growth in the only area available for growth...South Naperville... (congrats Plainfield and Oswego) and less money to maintain the 204 school system.
Instead of spending money on campaign managers and consultants to pass the referendum on the second pass, how about the SB and district investing is some good economic counsel? I don't have the Brooklyn Bridge to sell you, but how about a 4 bedroom home in South Naperville for 20% under the Buying price (and 20% off the current property tax bill)?
To Mr. Lynch and the readers of this blog,
If you are a student or parent of a student reading this and have been offended by my writings, I am truly sorry and sincerely apologize to all of you. It was never my intent, no matter what you may wish to believe, to hurt in any way the students, faculty or parents of WVHS students. Having thoroughly reviewed what I have written, I feel disgusted and will never publish again.
I wish to offer my sincerest apology to all affected by my comments, for my anger and venom regarding all of my posts. I let my worst fears and feelings get the better of me. My tone was definitely wrong and I will refrain from saying anything in the future. I do not expect your forgiveness, as my self-inflicted, feelings of guilt and true remorse has been more than I can bear. As much as I would like to “un-ring” the bell and retract all that I have written, I know that I cannot. I am just a person who has finally seen the error of their ways.
What I was referring to all along was the comparison of the physical structures of the two schools. Never was I referring to the people in them.
Based on the vociferous defense of the people at WVHS and those who are connected with it, those who have defended them have demonstrated a true and well deserved pride that should be the envy of any school.
Dough Boy: Your heartfelt apology is accepted. Everyone gets carried away now and then and uses words they wish they hadn't. It takes a lot of courage to say what you did in an open forum. We still want to hear from you so - in good faith - it's not necessary to banish yourself from this thread or any other on this spirited and lively platform for community discourse that we've aptly titled "Naperville Potluck."
Okay, does not really seem like anyone wants to discuss the 2009 timeline. I would not either. Who wants their name associated to that promise when it comes out mid summer that there is no way on earth AME+MVHS can be ready by 2009. We all know that there are no construction contracts or real estimates for the cost of construction? Right?!? And of course the 2009 date was the primary rational for the selection.
Let’s move towards funding as an interesting topic. (Because I do not know about you guys I am so over sub-division basing) Late last summer my biggest issue was all the mystery funds that were starting to show up to make the legal process and the BB land affordable at any price. Mark talked about proceeds from the sale of bonds, money from land exchanges, and interest. All this time the magic budget number being 124 Million. The mantra was the boundaries can change; the location can change but gosh darn it we are going to stick to that number. Oh wait that number is now 140 Million. We are on budget. That extra money is coming from other revenue sources. What?!? That is the money we just need today. Because who every really ever goes over budget building something. It never happens.
So, we have not done this in awhile. Let’s run the numbers:
Of that 140M, ~6.4 is from the sale of the current BB 25 archers. Oh wait; there is no sales contract for that land yet. We are counting it as money in the bank.
The other large check is coming from something I did not understand until I read (http://ipsd204.proboards76.com/index.cgi?board=newhighschool&action=display&thread=1200688939). In a nut shell, we ask a bond agent for 124M in bonds. He comes back and says sure no problem and if you take a higher interest rate we will give you even more money. That is how the district can make 8.2 million dollars appear out of thin air. Legal absolutely. Bold face lie that the school was only funded by 124M, absolutely.
In summary…
The school is no longer on budget. The school it is 16 Million over budget. That is 16M we could use for other things and is not directly ear marked for construction. (Want some A/C??) That is before we have land or any signed construction contracts. There is no way that school will be ready in 2009 or only cost 140M. Can we just stop for a second and look at little the facts rationally? I want the truth before we start. I do not want the truth from a new board and a new superintendent who have no accountability. (Because by the time this is done that is what we will have new board and Dr. D will walk away with is full pension.)
One last fun fact…
Dr. D. said yesterday (Saturday, January 19th) at the Naperville Homeowner's Federation meeting that he has received continuous land negotiation deals even as recent as Friday, January 18. Yes, he mentioned that he received a memo yesterday with a price drop from a seller that started at $221K/acre, then $209/acre now down to $155k/acre. Can't imagine why he would throw that kind of information out there in front of the group but trust that he did. So, the game I believe is still a foot and I would applaud the district to continue the analysis/negotiations till they are actually complete. Having the school district directly negotiate with one land owner and put our CRACK team of lawyers on the other negotiations was bad faith effort to say the least.
Did we vote YES because we need a new high school; because we want 3 smaller high schools and not be packed into two? Or did we vote ONLY if WE get a high school built near us to accomodate perceived house values?
Truly sorry Brach Brody did not work out. Maybe a SB who is VOLUNTEER was just as blindsided? We work with the information we have on hand; when we get new information, we make new decisions.
They got new information, they made a new decision. Let's just start building. And get back to the business of educating children.
Why is everyone so 'afraid' of WVHS? I, too, have spent volunteer time in both - and find them both quality schools. My son is graduating WVHS and had a terrific experience (esp. since Jim Schmid took over!) We found that it was never the "diversity" kids who were ever a problem, but those few goofy, annoying kids we all have in every subdivision whose parents don't supervise them that were the worst trouble!
Got to spend time with W/E folks during the last Referendum and feel they are getting a raw deal. Wonderful folks - very open and friendly and willing to go to WVHS. I think the misbehaving few is reflecting on the greater population of GOOD FOLKS!!! Love White Eagle!
Eola Resident,
From my understanding, this is the Administration's recommendation. The school board can still do anything else they want. They can say Thank You, but no. They can also vote to set the direction based upon that recommendation.
The math used in the Adminstration's recommendation as well as the counter claims to the prior site report make me believe that something is not on the up and up with this.
We need a high school, yes. We also need to have the proper information before making that ultimate decision regarding location because I personally do not like what I am hearing about this specific site or a few others that were considered that somehow did not make it into the negatives portion of this most recent site selection report. I also don't like how this seems to be ripping the district apart again. I was hoping we were done with that 2 years ago.
DB: I am incredibly impressed with your apology. It shows strength of character.
Brad204- you have made excellent points. If deals are still being presented, why would the SB put out the recommendation for Eola when other deals are still negotiable? This just doesn't sit well.
To anonymous who thinks only those who pay big tax $ should go to the new school is crazy. What about all those who have been paying into this district before you got here and helped build ALL the schools. Many of these people are still paying the high tax dollars and don't even have kids in school. So should they not pay at all?
And because you pay higher taxes you should have first dibs on the roads and if your house should start on fire the FD should do all it can to save it. But for someone who pays less in taxes should only have part of his home saved. What about the libraries. Should they not be able to visit it as often as they want because they don't pay as much as you do?
The bottom line is YOU chose to build a big home knowing what the tax $ would be and you should of done your homework to see what the rate increase has been in taxes in this area. Maybe if you did that you would of thought twice.
Tired, I agree. As the population of South Naperville grows (which is occuring south of 95th street) the City should add any additional fire stations needed to support this population growth somewhere near Route 88 (8 miles north of the growth).
As I read all of these postings I realize that everyone has feelings about what should be done. This all seems to have gotten out of hand, maybe starting with all of the open sessions that we were allowed to speak at, looking back they should have not allowed that. It was the first time I realized how some people in Naperville felt. Just like everyone writing, I want what is best for my children and the children of 204. I am concerned about the boundaries as my youngest will be in 9th grade when the third high school opens. I am not concerned about where or what side of the tracks, I am concerned that she stays with her sibling and the friends she has made in middle school. I do not want to have two at two different high schools, because my older one will be a junior at that time. But what ever happens, will happen and we will deal with it positively.
I have to say I am for a third high school, and always have been. I think even with three, our schools are too big. But we will never have small high schools in 204 that is a fact. It is unfortunate because I have a child at the nv gold campus and it is packed. Passing periods are wall to wall kids and teachers moving around.
With that said, I am for a third high school, I have voted yes on every referendum in the past 14 years. I am NOT for getting it in this manner. The community voted no, the board gave us a piece of property with boundaries we voted yes. The property is gone. Now we need to take some time and re think things. I hope the SB is reading these postings and will do just that tomorrow night. Let the community be a part by posting it on another ballot, and not rush into something. If this is the best spot for our children lets see the boundaries and go back to the voting booths and voice our opinions’, not in gyms or at school board meetings where it gets us too heated to recognize each other, lets go back and take things slow, who wants a new high school that was rushed into?
PS How about some air for the elementary schools!!!
Many residents of TG have reasoned that they should stay at NV. Assuming Ames is the final location for MV, the 40% threshold at NV is met with the following elementary schools: Builta, Clow, Graham, Kendall, Patterson, Springbrook, and Welch. Adding Fry to that mix, puts the emrollment distribution way out of whack. What I would like someone to comment on is whether you are saying you want a larger NV (above schools plus Fry), or are you saying Fry would replace one (or two) of the above schools. If it is the latter, please explain in a logical, non-emotional way, why you think that would be justified.
I hear your voice, but am trying to understand exactly what it is you want. I don't see the logic in moving any of the other schools out of NV if it is only to make room for Fry.
Perhaps when anonymous purchased his home, he/she made an INFORMED decision to accept the price paid in reliance on the Board's announced redistricting (and defined boundries). Or perhaps they made a reasonable assumption that by moving one mile away from NV, they would not be redistricted to a high school that could be 20-30 minutes away (depending on traffic).
I think it is unfair to conclude that those who oppose what is happening are being driven by their not wanting to mix with the "have nots" or the "kids from the other side of the street" (this is Naperville and East Aurora, not Hell's Kitchen, and we know that the kids at WV are as bright and talented as any of our students).
The opposition is about the value of convenience, safety and community involvement that is associated with going to your local school(and not being redistricted to a school that is far from your home).
Obviously, the SB and District have the authority to redistrict based on the community's needs. There is also a risk that certain factors that one day positively contribute to a home's value can change. However, the SB and School District are heading towards creating an irreperable community divide (and a likely artificial redistribution of wealth (or in many cases redistributing wealth into debt) based on its actions.
My read is that the dialogue in the community has little to do with the good of the students, but everything to do with home values (the folks who will have their homes increase in value due to the unexpected redistricting of the redistricting of the revote of the defeat of the first referendum) love what is going on, and the ones who live South of 95 and who will see a decline in their values are understandably upset).
So what next....
I have heard of at least two planned lawsuits depending on what happens over the next days/weeks/months (and expect there will be many more). Maybe they will result in things changing or maybe they will result in more of our tax money being wasted (either way, a shame).
I also know that there will be a lot of activity to make sure that the referendum that will need to passed to fund the third school is defeated. Many people now feel that we do not need a third school in the first place, and that there has been some underhanded activities to impose the will of the SB. I would not discount this as a possibility in that, although we may end up with an empty building near Route 88, it is cheaper than operating a full building that is not needed in the first place.
The third possibility is that the District and SB go the honest route (knowing that things, including the growth rate due to the economy, the location of the planned third school and the new redistricting that will be needed have changed over the last two years) and represent another referendum (let the will of the community speak). This may be the most unlikely to occur in that I think we all know what the result would be...
As a TG resident who would prefer to stay at NV, agree that if the school is built on the Ames site, it most likely will not make sense for Fry to go to NV. However, based on the population growth in Naperville (South of 95th Street), hard to see how the site next to Route 88 makes sense (if we do not rush towards this Fall 2009 target, seems like an alternate site near the population growth can be secured).
To the anonymous poster above that has already figured what the boundary map will look like, I have a question.
One problem I have with your assumption is that leaving Builta, Clow, Graham, Kendall, Patterson, Springbrook, and Welch at Neuqua leaves only 3850 kids at build out. NVHS needs more kids pulled out or WVHS and or MVHS will be too crowded.
What do you think could/should happen?
Based on everyone's comments, the people in WE and TG don't want to move for a number of reasons, some valid, some invalid. Folks on this message board are quoting a decrease in the projected number of students entering schools in 204. Based on this, and other factors presented, the direction the SB should consider taking is to add another 1000 seats on to Neuqua. The costs associated with this approach will be dramatically lower than what we're facing today, the WE and TG folks can stay at NV, and the student body population at WV will stay relatively consistent with where it is today as this approach adds capacity where folks say it's most needed. It doesn't appear that the folks in the south end of the district mind attending a 5,000+ seat HS as long as they can stay at NV. I don't mind that kind of investment as the benefits to WV are certainly more substantial than in any of th4e other scenarios presented to us.
Everybody wins -- OK, not everybody since NV will beat WV at football every year, but that's something I can easily live with given the smaller student body footprint at WV.
As I read all of these posts, I wonder why we need a high school on the far north end of the district where there is no new growth, why the high school would cost well over a hundred million when other "good" districts seem to be able to build high schools for tens of millions less and why a high school should be built at all when the enrollemnt seems to be dropping. I think all of this should be resubmitted to the voters.
I am wondering if the school board is throwing out this new site with the threat of boundary changes in order to distract us from the fact that the school is already significantly over budget?
It reminds me of the fact that boundaries were chosen before the referendum in order to distract the vote from "Do we really need a third high school?" to "Where will my child go to high school?"
How could we have passed a referendum to spend 124.7M on a school and it now costs over 140M and we haven't even started? Why are we diverting operating income into the 3rd high school fund? Why is the district accepting an uncompetitive interest rate in order to pour another 8M+ into the project? That just costs us all more in the long run. Even if it is legal it seems dishonest to not be up front about it.
If NV is any indication, $146M+ is just the beginning of what this project will end up costing us. Can we just slow down and review the finances for a minute? Why was all of this new information dumped on us with only a week to process it before the school board votes on the final decision?
And I totally agree on the 2009 date. I don't think there's any way that can be accomplished at this point, so why is it suddenly the driving force behind the decision?
I have supported the district in the past, but the way this has been handled makes me think they are trying to cover something up. More honesty, please!
Maybe the population south of 95th street isn't growing as much as you think. Ashwood looks like a partial ghost town. With the housing market in its current state south 204 has almost reached its peak
The K number is low because of the projected private/daycare facilities. They all show up for first grade making numbers rise.
Look how big that 2nd grade class is going to be, and in two high schools?
I am all for the third, just not the way it is being handled at this point.
http://www.ipsd.org/Documents/0708/EnrollmentStats07.pdf
September 30, 2007 INDIAN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT
2007-08 2006-07
Grade Level Total Total Difference
Grade K 1842 1988 (146)
Grade 1 2210 2358 (148)
Grade 2 2369 2259 110
Grade 3 2267 2324 (57)
Grade 4 2332 2213 119
Grade 5 2225 2292 (67)
Grade 6 2307 2330 (23)
Grade 7 2358 2383 (25)
Grade 8 2362 2170 192
Grade 9 2145 2139 6
Grade 10 2085 2086 (1)
Grade 11 2064 1916 148
Grade 12* 1871 1769 102
Grade 13 17 4 13
Phoenix 21 26 (5)
Grad Academy 35 48 (13)
TOTAL 28510 28305 205
The people who live in Tall Grass and go to Fry should stay at NV. They are building a bridge which means it could be a walking school. No additional cost for busing kids to and from. The SB said if you were a walking school you should remain at that school.
If TG and WE are going to be sent to WV, then Welch should be sent there too, since they all go to Scullen. It makes sense to send Peterson to NV, with the rest of their middle school, Crone
Some of Welch is currently in walking distance to NVHS.
Vermont posted numbers of K through 12 and it appears there are about 150 more students in each lower grade as the upper grades. That is , compare second grade to eleventh grade and you'll find roughly 150 more students in second grade. That's nice. So for this we need a 140 million dollar high school? What's wrong with small annexes being built on the present two high schools for a few million dollars. This new high seems like the biggest boondoggle and waste of taxpayer dollars this side of the Mississippi River.
I'm curious what people think about where Peterson students will go to high school. We go to Peterson, but we live east of 59 right on the same land as NVHS. Will they split Peterson?
I think the point is that the high schools are ALREADY crowded. The NV gold campus has roughly 1200 students. That is one class, should the high schools have over 4000 in them? Does that provide the best for our children?
It is my understanding that the SB no longer needs the operating referendum. There will be no resounding NO vote coming. SB already has its "blank check" from the last referendum.
tired 2
some of Tall Grass is within walking distance to Neuqua.
If Peterson remains at WV, then any Peterson students east of 59 should be sent to NV...Maybe they will change your elementary school.
I am tired of reading posts that try to say there are practically no students on the North side of D204. Why put the school on the North side towards 88? Because there are a lot of students up there commuting South to WV right now!
Sure, there is going to be more new growth on the South side, yes, but there are plenty of students between all of the schools to fill a new MV, with reasonable boundaries, leaving WV and NV for the Southern sections.
Any way I look at it, this new site makes the most sense.
I wonder if welch and WE will continue to go to scullen? who is going to fill the new middle school.
Naperville Lawyer,
Thanks for helping me interpret what I am reading in the ads. He does discuss the Appellant Verdict in other ads. You can only put so much in one section of an ad. So he discussed the District and Appellant verdicts in many different ads as space permitted. The Naperville Sun pages were 50% larger at the time but there was simply to much information in that unanimous AC ruling to put in his ads
The entire verdict was against the city with one exception! The only item he was found guilty was a technicality of sorts that he never denied and stipulated to very early on. I guess the manager of the store went to the bank to get some coin for the store and stopped at Jewel to pick up limes and lemons at a slow time. He left an experienced clerk by himself for an hour and a half as the Naperville Sun Sarah Koci correctly reported in the Sunday edition. Being under surveillance and selective enforcement, the Naperville Police were able to nail him immediately for this petty violation! According to the Appellant Court no one else was ever nailed for such a petty violation which in their opinion bordered on selective enforcement. Thus they refused to penalize him for this infraction DESPITE his "pleading of guilt."
AS FAR AS WHAT ELSE WAS NOT PERMITTED IN THE HEARING YOU PROPERLY COINED THE KANGAROO COURT:
His petition of 3340 supporters as detailed in Napergate XXXIX was not permitted to be entered into the record of the Kangaroo Court or the Illinois Liquor Control Commission, the latter only being allowed to review what Naperville allowed into the record. So basically we have a higher Commission reviewing only what a Kangaroo Court provided!
Irene Bahr, the former Chief Counsel of the Illinois Liquor Control Commission, for the entire State of Illinois, who was his attorney for this phase of the case, drafted this petition for him. In it she asked Naperville Residents who knew this man was a strict operator, cards and confiscates IDs, to come forward and sign this petition that would be entered as a court record. He ran one of his powerful Napergate Ads and asked residents to come to his store and sign this petition. In response to that ad in the Sun which had 22,000 circulation at the time, 3340 residents came to his store within 10 days to sign the petition from every corner of Naperville. An average of 334 petition signers per day!
The City of Naperville was rushing the local proceedings so he only ran one Napergate ad regarding this petition and could not follow it up with another one to add to that total. All the signees were required to give their full name, address, and phone number in order for the courts to be able to authenticate the long petition.
The Kangaroo Court refused to allow this petition into evidence as well as all the other evidence Mr. Naperville Lawyer pointed out. It either got entered into evidence at the District Level or Appellant Level. The Appellant Court was astonished and repeatedly described his program as exemplary and commended him many many times in their 25 page ruling.
While I have not yet found or read all his Napergate Ads, but I also believe(not verified yet) that the Kangaroo Court did not allow into evidence his Kylix Trophy which he earned for coming in 1st place in the USA at the National Finals held in Las Vegas. He beat out 500 contestants form all 50 states for that Trophy!
I think Naperville knew the only chance they had of winning this case was not to allow him to enter his powerful evidence. I have no clue why they would not give him a fair trial or even the semblance of a fair trial. My guess is they again underestimated his abilities to battle and miscalculated how it would eventually blow up in their face.
In many of his ads that were not coined Napergate, he ran coupons along the entire outer border of the large full page and right inside the border he did his editorializing. The confusion between the Naperville Sun stating there were 44 Napergate ads and the Napergatians saying there was over a 100, were these full page ads that were half liquor and half commentary. Those he did not call Napergate but were just as effective. Most of his ads were run 2 or 3 times. One powerful full page Napergate ad he actually ran 4 times! He also ran a sequence of ads before the Napergate Series. I will tell you about those later in another blog! They were also very powerful!
The ads blasted numerous city officials with razor sharp words that were not kind and bordered on slander and libel....but somehow he never crossed the thin line! He once mentioned that his attorneys reviewed his ads for slander and libel and challenged anyone to sue him for libel or slander, after the accusation was made to him. No one ever came forward and sued him! He apparently was advised carefully by his attorneys how far he could take his attacks. Plus his ads were also reviewed by Sun Attorneys locally and in Copley Headquarters in California. Copley was the previous owner of the Sun that was Pro-Establishment. They did not even bother sending a reporter to this historic and unusual trial.
The Napergate ads went thru 6 legal reviews before being published, so the odds of 6 attorneys missing a slanderous or libelous word was 0 to none. This frustrated William Brestal who did want to sue him and settled instead for a hollering match with Napergate Man in the hallways outside of City Hall.
Moderator,
Please delete my post on this thread. I posted on the wrong thread because I was reading this post and forgot to switch back to Napergate when writing. Sorry!
I believe I copied, pasted and hopefully successfully posted in the right thread!
Ameena...
Amneena - it doesn't realy matter. I wpuldn't worry about it.
To the folks that think we no longer need an operating referendum - they are talking about postponing the Operating Referendum for one year until 2010. So saying that the operating referendum is no longer needed in 2009 is technically correct but very misleading.
Do they really think they can mislead us and then expect people not to be upset when 2010 rolls around and "We need to pass the Operating Referendum or else....."
Everyone is up in arms about splitting schools up. Part of the plan of the SB is to redo boundaries at the elementary and middle school level as well. I am sure they will take into consideration when reworking everything.
By the way, why is it OK to split up Hill Middle School but not OK to do so on the South side where, God Forbid, someone might need to go to WV located in AURORA!
Well for me there is not much more to say. I know that might be a shocker. No one said democracy was a clean process. Hopefully all of this content and the discussions tonight will help flesh oUt a good solution. For or against, I look forward to breaking in a new blog with ALL of you ;)
Peterson Parent, Dr. Dash already said that no elementary schools will be split. You're most likely on your way to WVHS no matter where you live. There is no more Wheatland and the old boundaries seem to no longer apply. Dash said at the Naperville Homeowner's Association (Sunday Naperville Sun p.5) that there would be no changing of boundaries (and I have to assume elementary schools were what he was addressing here) until after Metea Valley opens.
Great location!.
Finally, a site that makes sense. The district will have a north, central and south HS. Now the HS can be easily mapped per geographic location.
Great job by the board. I hope they stick to their plan and tune out all the load chatter. The reason their was a fiasco last year was that the board tried to please everyone. Do what is right and move on. The loud people do not mean that they are right.
Also,
All this talk about whether we need the new HS or not is irrelevant.
"Folks on this message board are quoting a decrease in the projected number of students entering schools in 204. Based on this, and other factors presented, the direction the SB should consider taking is to add another 1000 seats on to Neuqua."
That train has left the station guys. So I have no idea why there is a debate here whether we need a new HS? Don't waste your energy with this question.
There will be a third HS. Done.
The sight has been picked. Will be done.
The only thing left to debate is the map.
The bottom line is the community will not be getting what they voted for. Reality - so it is now time to make a best decision. Lets move the process along. Process, not "lets do something now". Since all affected parties have been very patient and wanting to hear all sides, I expect the same from the Board and Admin. Time will show it is never prudent to rush in to a decision with such a huge financial and community impact, period. Meeting a self imposed deadline with an incorrect course of action will not fix the negative perception. No matter if you are for or against the "recommended" site, no one can agree that an organized, well thought out, cohesive, thorough process is or was being followed. I challenge anyone to debate me on this. With the BB deal all but dead, it will be even more devastating to the District, long term, if the constituents are not given "all" the facts, whether they be old or recently discovered, good or bad, negative or positive and allowed to digest them, and challenge them if necessary on their own. As the Boards pre-referendum survey has already told them, this is why the first referendum did not pass. I dare them to send in the consultants now to take our pulse again. Incomplete information-here we go again. We will all be faced with long term repercussions. If the community is not offered detailed information, I wouldn't expect that any future referendums will get the nod, now matter how badly they may be needed and they will be needed. (You will notice I have not asked for any boundary information or test scores which should come after the discovery of information is provided below)
I would ask that detailed (not bulleted) information be available from D204 on the following:
* Costs, "all" costs - including construction, land remediation / improvement, bonds, Brach Brodie litigation fees, etc. Also republish the land comparison spreadsheet removing Brach Brodie)
* Enrollment/population trends as they exist today, similarities - deltas from previously published reports
* Safety - Environ report / test results for all considered properties if applicable
* Outstanding issues with Park District land swap as I understand this is something they have previously done. Did Board ask AME to "donate" property - if not why
* What is Naperville position on approving other properties
* Traffic impact study for all considered properties
* Travel impact study for all considered properties
* Transportation costs
At this time, I would ask the Board to review their own goals they have established for themselves:
Goal 3: Increase the public's awareness and support of the district through improved communications efforts
V. Provide timely information to the community about major topics being discussed by the board, such as the superintendent search and issues related to the development of the third school- I think everyone would agree for or against the tidbits of info and sporadic emails have not supported this
Goal 4: Accomplish Board-oriented objectives
IV. Promote greater harmony in our district by encouraging increased opportunities for interaction among its stakeholders - this can not be achieved using Executive Sessions
I would also ask that Superintendent Daeschner remember his own statement when he first came on board " I believe we all learn from each other, and I welcome everyone's input." What is the lesson we are supposed to be learning here?
We are ready and willing Mr. Superintendent if your offer still stands, but at a venue / forum that will let all of D204 hear the facts - and if someone, anyone is unclear or would like additional information, we would hope the District would provide that information. I don't think that is expecting too much. I think we should start by picking one of the high school gyms, auditoriums with enough room for tonights Board meeting.
When all is said and done, I will tell my Middle Schooler (1- Grade School, 1-Middle School, 1-High School, Dist 204 - 20 years) he and his friends may or may not attend the school they originally thought, but we will make the best of it. What will be hard to explain is the same democratic process they used for the new school colors and name, did not apply when the community at large was not offered the same privilege and follow suit.
Great site selection!!
We can now look forward to dropping off our schoolchildren near high tension wires and power substations, while we walk along roads with big gas pipes underneath.
Makes sense to me. If the EMF doesn't get ya, the gas explosion should! I guess when the kids are glowing green, they'll have an easier time finding their way home in the dark. Awesome.
Of course, we probably shouldn't short shrift the benefits of having a former peaker plant putting out jet fuel emissions for many years and the environmental remediation that's necessary so that the kids don't come down with some awful form of cancer. Say what? Remediation's not free? That'll make the per acre cost go up? Gee, how much more expensive does that make the site?
But, I'm happy for all you northsiders! You got your school. Safety and health? Who cares???? Woot, I get to go to a close school!
HRD
Are you referring to the voters of the 06 referendum as the "loud" people? I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Or, are you talking to the folks that have been stuck with the most crowded elementary schools, middle schools and high schools for the last few years? Many in the most crowded schools in the district were passionate and LOUD for the need for more space. Is that what you mean?
Where do the loud people live? I heard some really loud people during the boundary fight over BB. In fact, I saw a sea of Orange shirted people that were as loud as anyone. Is that what you are referring to?
To TWH:
I happen to live on the South side, probably close to you and your comments were completely ridiculous, its almost embarrassing.
Anonymous - that was posted by Stinks and not by me. The way it reads it would appear that the poster name is above the message but it is right below. i do agree that some of the post was uncalled for
I was at the meeting last night and was disappointed by the rhetoric of some of the supporters of the Eola site and some of the SB members regarding the SW part of the district.
I didn't hear one person from the SW corridor get up and say they didn't want their child to attend WVHS. But you would think we were all wearing shirts that said that from the emotional comments made by some speakers as well as SB members.
I can't help but think that this rhetoric serves some purpuse to others.
What I do hear from my neck of the woods is that people want to attend the closest school (that some of them could walk to) and that they have pride in the school their children already attend. Somehow this is translated into having a hatred toward WVHS and I am tired of that spin job. Do some people feel that way - maybe. But I believe they are in the minority.
I am curious if Bruce Glawe is using this rhetoric to lump certain areas he would rather "take with him" to WVHS when it would make more logistical sense for them to remain at NVHS.
Since Dr. D referred to horizontal lines when discussing the distribution of students in the district, can Bruce Glawe only accomplish his goals by making an area outcasts? If he drums up enough hatred for certain areas can he make a case for boundaries that he would like to see?
These loud people look forward to the new school at the now officially approved AME site!!
The SB has voted, and the land purchase has been approved. What's the next move for those who oppose the Eola site?
Over the past week, I have read and heard threats of legal action. Frankly, I don't see a legal basis for a claim. A sense of injustice and of having been hoodwinked is one thing, a good faith cause of action is another.
So I'm curious; could someone out there with actual legal training explain to me what causes of action exist to block the SB from moving forward?
Well, for me. The vote is complete. The board selected and MVHS will be at the Midwest Generation/AME site. I do not advocate any further legal action. If something comes up on environmental then I would think we would all get behind changing the site.
You always have a couple of choices when major change happens. You can adapt or you can choose to rail against it. I will choose to adapt.
Will I still watch the costs and the date of this project? Yes. Am I happy the BB at all costs did not happen. Darn Right! That was sort of my original post a long time ago.
Do I think there is a lot of hard work ahead as far as boundaries and trying to work out travel times? Absolutely! I hope the Watts area fears about travel times can be worked out.
And finally, I think we can all agree that we want to watch the costs of this project and the timing. I do not really feel either was adequately covered last night. But they are going to re-assemble the finance committee and that is a good enough place to start.
As for me, I need to move on to trying to see what we can do to stop this rail road purchase. I think the quadrupling of train traffic running through our district and by our schools is something we can all get behind. Right? :)
My reason for the original posting above was to get real/accurate information from the Adm / Board and it doesn't appear that will happen. Major disappointment. Having previous coaching commitments did not allow me to attend last night, but I heard of the comments by one of the Board members about the subject of folks drafting derogatory emails of North vs. South, WV vs. NV, etc. I think better judgment can be used when bringing this subject up as it will not mitigate but provoke more ill feelings. This will not improve community spirit or perception. The attitude that some, not all folks may have toward others not in the same neighborhoods is reiterated/reinforced and exploited again and again by the Board, just stop. One can not ignore some inherent rivalries though - eg: NVHS vs. WVHS Football game. Should we eliminate the game? Of course not, in spirit it works, but this is not what I am talking about.
If the Board uses its own goals they created for themselves as a guideline, and not reserve the option of Executive session and special agendas when they are "deciding whats best for the whole district community" many ill directed perceptions could be diminished to a lonely few. By hoarding and keeping important information away from the very people that voted them in to office creates a very antagonistic attitude that should be directed at the Board and not our fellow community members. The healing process sought by JC after the referendum approval was rhetoric to "bridge the divide that exists in our district so the healing process can begin" and isn't worth the paper it was printed on. Their disregard for our input / opinion for Plan B - MV - will only perpetuate ill thoughts.
14,000 votes for / 10,000 votes against - where would the votes fall today with less information than we had before ? One can not dispute the need, but one should challenge the way we will get there. Keeping data, costs, reports, facts/figures, trends, and any other pertinent factors that have been used to form the conclusion for the "best" site needs to be shared with all voters - for or against. We can think for ourselves.
Someone please tell me what the SB has done to reduce, or eliminate the negative sentiment they continue to promote ?Seems to me like much of the same. SB wrongly convinced themselves the first referendum would pass, were wrongly convinced the Brach Brodie was a lock, how many more times can we afford them to be wrong? When I say Dist 204 is in damage control, I really mean it and that means everyone.
Does anyone know if any legal actions has been taken?
I voted against the referendum. I told everyone that would listen this is what would happen. Now 5 million will be spent on legal fees. Almost exactly what I said 2 years ago. That’s five mil that the kids of 204 should have benefited from. Next up there will be at least another 2.5 to 5 mil wasted on getting the Eola site going. Its like no one in the district cares about education, especially the people running the board.
Hi, I live on the South end, I just want to say that lets just get over all over this and move forward. Accept change, it will all work out in the end.
Agreed. Any lawsuits at this point would be frivolous, and, hopefully stopped before having any further delays on the school.
Safe to plan on having the preliminary injuntions and lawsuits from the White Eagle HOA and a number of individual homeowners (based on a lack of proper envirenmental studies, due process grounds and fraudulant inducement by the Board in regards to how the referendum was passed in the first place) will be filed a shortly before the scheduled closing on the property (by the end of February). Perhaps unlikely to ultimately prevail, but should stall for quite some time.
For all the people that say let's just move on I'm sure their benefiting from having the school up north. How about the families who will have to have their kids travel a much farther distance when the current high school is so close. And house values will GO DOWN. Who's going to buy into a neighborhood when their kids will be bussed alot farther.
So you think your house value will go down as a result of a BUS ROUTE??? I'm sure it has nothing to do with the housing market in general. Try and file a lawsuit on that.
Stop with the house values going down. First of all house values are currently down acrosse the nations...read that papers. Secondly, your home will not be worth less because you have to travel to school A, B or C.
However, your home value will do down when people learn the schools are over crowded. Worse yet, a community fighting over a placement of building that is sitting idle because of a goofy lawsuit.
The value of my house did not go down 8 years ago when NV opened up and my area still fed into WV. House values continued to rise just as they did in the areas to where NV pulls from. Homes were selling in days or weeks. Unfortunately that is not the case now because of our economy not because of a high school.
You did
As a southsider... I say move on. Yes, my kids might have to commute farther, but I'll accept the boundary decision and make the best of it.
Regarding litigation, I really hope that WE and TG don't take such action. Both communities have struggled to overcome negative perceptions in the past. Taking legal action will only further hurt these communities.
I think the environmental concerns with this site are legitimate.
It is only fair that the district let us see the original environmental report that the district paid for as well as the "revised" report that they now refer to. As well as the results of the advanced testing that has not been completed yet.
Midwest Gen has admitted to fuel spills on the site.
I would hope that now that we know the school will be closer to the power lines / switching station due to the Midwest Gen purchase, the EMF readings will be re-taken.
I was at the SB meeting on Tuesday; I want to say it was alot calmer than I anticipated. With the size and the complexity of this district, there is no one answer that fits all.
I, as a Northsider, apologize to my fellow Southsiders for allowing a few outspoken folks paint my perception of all. The people I know personally in the south are TERRIFIC people.
And I know the dirty secret no one talks about - there have been Northsiders who have been as nasty as any about WVHS. We were our own worst enemies in the past! I see an improvement, but I'm sure there are still people up here who bash it.
You are entitled to feel sad that you can't go to a school that is stones throw away, TG. You are entitled to feel sad to be pulled out of your current high school, WE. It was silly of me to wear a bright orange shirt (which I assure you was more for solidarity and support than to offend anyone). I feel bad for May Watts who may have a long commute. I understand that.
Maybe we should all start being understanding of one another and not deny people the right to their own vision. And not feel threatened by it.
I am a WVHS parents today, a Metea parent down the road. WVHS is a terrific school and I'm excited because I know the residents they put in it will be as proud as we were and be a wonderful addition to the school! And for that I'm thankful!
I am a long time White Eagle Resident and know several people on our homeowners' board. There are no plans to file any type of suit in my knowledge. Most residents here are adjusting quite well to the idea of attending WVHS. It is actually preferable to me than was starting up a new school when the boundaries had WE at Brach Brody property site.
I am happy that the board is moving forward with their plans and look forward to a time when the anomosities in this district are gone and healed.
Good wishes to all and especially to our kids.
To the blogger that stated that all the people suggesting that we "just move on" must be benefiting from the Northern HS location - Wrong! I support the new location even though a central or southern location would have meant a shorter commute for the teenagers (including my own) in this neighborhood (ooh - and possibly higher property values).
I have to be reasonable, though. I don't know how you can look at the 204 map and call the new site location unfair. To tell you the truth, I never before realized how far some of those student (northside) were being bussed to Waubonsie. I can't foresee any boundary decisions that would have south-siders bussed anywhere near the distance some of the northern neighborhoods have been experiencing.
CB
What the heck is going on on this board? Why is there a rush to slam WE and TG?
Where are the moderators of this board. As they should have, they have come out against defamatory comments about Waubonsie Valley. However, there have been some highly inflammatory/defamatory comments on this blog directed at WE and TG residents that have gone uncensored. Why have the moderators allowed that type of blog to go unchecked?
Moderators where are you? Why do you allow such hateful stuff on this blog?
Comments such as "WE and TG parents need diversity training" have been allowed to remain on this board too long.
I guess one can conclude the Sun is in agreement with that statement as they have not spoken out against it.
Note from Ted, host:
Mr. Potter, both the moderator and me have stepped in on this thread, removed posts, urged commenters to keep the dialogue civil and respectful and I have offered my own opinion a few times that both WVHS and NVHS are excellent schools.
I don't interpret all the comments the same way you do. As I've said before, I believe there is value in exploring the concepts of prejudice, cultural diversity and equality as they relate to D204 schools. I believe by entertaining discussion about these issues in an adult, civilized manner we provide a service by helping to dispel myths if they exist, or by identifying actual negative attitudes that some may hold.
True, not all the discussion is as respectful as we'd like, and if there is any particular comment you find offensive e-mail me at tslowik@scn1.com or call me at 630-416-5255 or post a comment here and we will consider removing it.
That was our reason for allowing the post from the person who expressed the opinion about diversity training: it's evidence of ignorance and hate exhibited by some in the community. But ignoring such sentiment doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or make it go away. Maybe by confronting it we can. But since you find the post objectionable it has been removed.
I am not encouraging any suits be filed by anyone, but it is ironic that the same folks that supported the Board, also supported the Board in trying to force Brach Brodie to see it D204's way or they will see them in court. I had heard that D204 indicated to BB that if they didn’t sell the original 25 acres there was a condemnation suit in the wings. Yet some of those same people claiming "just move on" and are strongly against using the judicial system available to all if need be.
The comment that "Ridiculous" makes is in fact ridiculous. Just go to any new subdivisions in some of our surrounding communities and right smack on the marquis signs entering them is "Naperville School District" - "District 204 Schools". Certainly anyone you may know from Real Estate will concur. So don’t tell us it doesn’t make a difference when you know it can. Just ask the devoplers.
You also contradict yourself by stating that " However, your home value will do down when people learn the schools are over crowded." I really hope you are no jockeying for the "if we dont build the 3rd High School, real estate will suffer" spin. It hasnt so far, has it ?
There are in fact possible legal grounds that could be filed against the District to stop the purchase of the EOLA land (in my opinion, the action that would have the most likely chance getting a court order to stop the purchase is based on some very technical details of the referendum amount approved vs. the amount that should reasonably be expected to be needed---and the ability to use bond interest and other revenue sources to supplement the referendum amount). This would require challenging the legality of Illinois state laws which allows this practice of adding other funds on top of the approved referendum amounts (but this practice has been found illegal in other states).
However, if the Board approved logical boundaries based on travel times/proximately to each school as opposed to how many people are wearing orange/yellow or blue shirts, I think the emotions will die down and we should be able to move forward as a community....
You would be surprised at what reasons people use to not move to an area. I just took a Vice-President out to look at homes who is relocating from another state. He is fine to move to Naperville. He loves Dist. 204 and he is looking in the possible Waubonsee boundaries. He knows the schools are overcrowded and he knows both existing schools are great and the third will be as well. However, other people in his company have told him that they are choosing cities other than Naperville because of all of the fighting that is going on within the community and the tension between the community and the school board. I am glad to read on this blog that people will accept whereever they are put. We were just beginning to heal from two years ago and now the band-aid has been ripped off. Let's show everyone inside and outside of Naperville that we are a great community ready to move on. Then people will continue to want to move here!
Thank you Mustang6 for your empathetic comments about TG/WE and for recognizing that individuals and neighborhoods may want things for their children that are different than what some are accusing them of wanting. I am tired of the comments that refer to the SW neighborhoods as being all about not wanting to go to school with people of other backgrounds or to the school that needs upgrading. I don't think that is it.
I moved to TG 8 years ago from another Naperville neighborhood (which was/is NVHS under any scenario). One of the primary reasons for choosing TG was that the elementary and middle schools were within walking distance, as well as having the high school very close (1 mile) - could see out my back door before the build-out. This is one of the features that made the TG neighborhood very desirable to me, and I never thought there would be a reason that would not have my kids go to their closest schools; it defied all logic (to me). I can see how other neighborhoods may have been at risk for boundary change (example Brighton Ridge) because they were not near to any particular HS or were being bussed very far. Had I thought that my neighborhood would go to WVHS, I would have not moved,- not because WVHS is a lesser school (I think it is a fine school) but because I want my kids to go to the closest schools, and chasing kids back and forth to WVHS was something I don't have the time for. Like someone else inferred, put existing WVHS on the corner of 103rd and 248th, and I am sure TG would love to go there.
I used to walk 1.5 miles to my schools as a kid, but today our kids are a bit lazier and often, even want rides to Scullen (.4 miles from my house!) if it is too cold or rainy. As a working mom, even if I drive my kids to their school, I need their schools (and friend's houses)to be easy to get to, walkable if possible. I have to commute east to I-55 and having a school west and north is very inconvenient and would affect my children's abilities to participate in extra-curricular programs or early morning activities. I don't care what race, or economic status the school population is, or what the school test scores are, since all the Naperville schools are above average. Schools don't make the kids, the kids make the school. Actually, I'd prefer to have some economic diversity so that my kids can start experiencing the real world outside of Scullen and stop begging me for the Hollister/Abercrombie clothes, gas scooters, Xbox 360 computer games and their BMW first car, so that they can fit in with everyone else. But the location of the school is key. I have spoken to many TG parents who just want to go to the school that is out their back door. Granted not everyone has that luxury (schools out your back door), but you must have known that when you bought your house, right?
Smaller high schools would be nice. Regardless of whether the population is dropping, mega high schools are not a great experience for kids trying to make athletic teams, being in school plays, and having academic success for college entrance(excellent students being in the 70%-tile of their class!)The North site is fine with me (except maybe a little lopsided on where the population is), but again we enter a boundary dispute that potentially stands to defy geographic logic, try to do things in the interest of test score balancing (aka "economic diversity"), and I would ask that our school board leaders have same critieria for everyone (walking neighborhoods go to their closest schools and not splitting middle schools.)
Since there is so much distrust between the North and the South of #204 I would like to share my experience. I have lived in White Eagle for going on nine years. One of my kids who is now in 7th grade has emotional difficulties and was placed in a special class. This class moved yearly from school to school. So the schools my daughter attended were-
Kindergarten- White Eagle
1st grade-Wheatland
2nd grade-Brooks
3rd grade-Brooks
4th grade-Gombert
5th grade-White Eagle
So we have been involved with schools on both sides of the district. While many of these emotional critics have never set foot in the schools they supposedly dislike we have firsthand knowlege of both sides. And I can tell you that I would be happy to have my kids attend any school in #204. They would get a great edcuation where ever they attend. That is the real #204 and not the rumors that people like to believe.
I am a resident of Tall Grass. I was informed by my realtor 3 years ago that the high school boundaries could be changed at any time to alleviate over crowding or in the event that a new high school is built. I appreciated his honesty and therefore am not surprised to be facing the possible change of high schools. I wish more realtors were as candid with their clients, but many of my neighbors were told their grade school kids would definitely be going to NV, even as recently as last fall when we were slated to go to MV. So I do understand their frustrations about possibly attending a different high school.
According to my mapquest assessment, TG and WE and part of Stillwater are the closest southern schools to WV. So to me it seems most logical that instead of pulling a more southeastern school out of Neuqua and giving them a very long commute to WV, they would pull out the southwestern schools. Does anyone see a different logical reassignment of current NV feeders?
To the Host Ted:
It was right to remove the post that said TG and WE parents need diversity training. But no one should have to call or email you to request this - you aren't allowing other offensive comments - why would you even consider allowing this?
Further, I disagree with your statment that "it's evidence of ignorance and hate exhibited by some in the community." It is?
Evidence? Are you saying that because someone says this that it means TG and WE residents need such training? Where is the "evidence" that anyone from TG or WE did anything? Just because someone says it's so?
Quite grankly Ted, I don't know what's worse. Someone who exhibits intolerance or someone who accuses someone of exibiting intolerance without evidence or basis because they have some sort of agenda.
Ted, perhaps you need an education about our district. I attended meetings during the last 2 referendums and the last boundary process where I witnessed some truly awful behavior that was directed at the Southern part of the district. It looked like alot of jealousy and sour grapes to me. Furthermore, I witnessed many residents of the WVHS attendance area clamoring to get out. Why is that?
I also watched our SB stir up alot of illwill between the northern and southern sections of our district. And I wonder why?
Ted, maybe your paper could spend some time investigating why the SW part of our district is labeled as the villains by our school board. What's the real story behind that? Are they using this to justify something that otherwise doesn't make sense?
Now we're hearing the SB talk about a "new" WVHS. Well, what was wrong with the old one?
If we get distracted by throwing around basesless charges of intolerance, perhaps it distracts us from what's really going on.
Why build a school in the north part of the district where the growth is not? At BB, the new school would have been comprised of students from both high schools. Now, all the MVHS students will most likely come from the WVHS attendance area. Students from the south will shift from their current high school to take their place.
I believe this is probably a very unusual arrangement. It's probably the opposite of what happens in other districts - the new schools are built where the growth is.
I will also be curious to see how the boundaries play out regarding where each SB member lives.
Will ANY SB member's neighborhood remain in the WVHS attendance area?
Ted, I think there are some real stories here worth pursuing and discussing. Follow the money, Ted. It's always about the money. But focusing on baseless accusations of intolerance distracts us from what I believe are the real issues here.
Response from Ted, host:
midnight rambler,
You missed my point entirely. I was saying the person who made the comment was ignorant.
I know the district very well, thank you. As a construction worker 10 to 20 years ago I built homes in White Eagle and Tall Grass. Maybe I worked on your house.
I can't explain why you or anyone else feels "villified." Initially allowing the post in no way indicated we agree with the commenter's opinion.
If you're as familiar with the district as you say, perhaps you care to articulate why it is that WVHS is perceived as inferior to NVHS. Because that's one of the attitudes that manifested itself during the boundary disputes before the referendum.
You might benefit from trying to see things from a point of view other than your own.
Hello, Ted, host:
Thanks for the repsonse. It looks like I misunderstood your position regarding the inflammatory remark about TG/WE. I'm glad we've straightened that out. Because it's certainly an offensive remark and doesn't represent the many fine people I know in this part of the district.
You too might benefit from seeing things from a different point of view. May I ask if you reside (currently or in the past)in District 204? And if so, what portion of the district?
Regarding the image of WVHS, I must say Ted, that the attitude that WVHS is somehow inferior seems to me to come from the very people who currently reside in the WVHS attendance area. And I just don't understand that. They want to create a "new" WVHS. What was wrong with the old one?
It seemed clear to me during the boundary debate that people who attended NVHS wanted to remain and people who attended WVHS wanted out. Can someone please explain this? There were disparaging remarks made about WVHS - but many came from their own attendance area. Can you explain why no one acknowledges this?
Furthermore, there was alot of discussion from WVHS people about how they weren't going to build another Taj Mahal for South Naperville. I do think they went overboard in some areas when they built the school- but shouldn't we all get over that? The district can't now go tear NVHS down so others feel better, and afterall - those were district decisions - not ones any resident affected.
Maybe this is what the discord really is - but somehow it all gets twisted around into something it's not.
Thank you Ted, host. Any insight you could provide would be appreciated. Because I am mystified. And I will be very interested in seeing where the SB member's neighborhoods end up in the boundaries.
Response from Ted, host:
No, I do not reside in D204 and never have. I've lived in Joliet since 1991.
Now we're getting somewhere. All I meant by the point of view remark is, I wonder how some WVHS parents felt during the boundary debates, when disparaging attitudes about their school were expressed. Were they hurt by such attitudes? If so, did those hurt feelings manifest themselves as some of that "villainous" sentiment toward the southern part of the district you mentioned in your earlier post?
I try to put myself in the shoes of Waubonsie parents. For example, if someone were to say to me Naperville is a nicer town in which to live than Joliet, I would understand their point of view. But I like where I live, I take pride in where I live, and I might just shrug off a comment if someone were to say Naperville was better than Joliet. But who knows, if I heard persistent remarks like that I might get riled and start saying things in defense of Joliet. I might even get passionate about it and choose the wrong words, and the next thing you know you've got an inflammatory situation on your hands.
I think it's important as D204 heads into another round of boundary debates that a decision must be made, and not everyone will like the result. It's understandable if some people become passionate during the debate over boundaries, but emotions should never trump reason.
Ted,
Thanks for the response. I'd like to say, be careful about buying the spin. The thing is, during the boundary debate, we seemed to hear alot of negative sentiment about WVHS from the very people who lived in the WVHS attendance area. In addition, trust me that there was alot of negativity directed towards the people who reside in South Naperville. I can't figure it out - some sort of class envy? Everyone here isn't "rich". Contrary to what one person said, I do not see kids driving BMW's. You know if you built some of these houses - they aren't mansions. We aren't the Rockefellers. And sadly, I think our school board causes much of this rancor.
It seemed clear during the last boundary debate that the NVHS people just wanted to remain at their school, but the WVHS wanted to leave their school. In all the speeches given regarding boundaries, I never heard one person say they wanted to stay at WVHS. Why?
Why is it necessary to have a "new" WVHS? What is wrong with the old one?
Somehow saying you want to remain at our school (NVHS) is translated as we don't like WVHS. I don't get that. Because you see, Ted, we like where we live too. We like the school our kids attend and we certainly wouldn't want to be redistricted for any political purpose. Change is fine and all that - as long as it is reasonable and makes sense. If it's to accomplish some other goal - then it's really not O.K.
Now the district is building a school that will be made up (it looks like) entirely from kids from WVHS. It does not appear to me that any student from the NVHS attendance area will attend MVHS. This is a very different scenario from what was presented during the referendum. Do you think that's right? The center of population in the district is south of Montgomery Rd. And the majority of the development left is in the southern part of the district. And yet it appears from what we're hearing that MVHS will not be a mixture of students from both high schools.
NVHS students will shift over (some traveling 6 miles or farther) to take their place when they live 1 mile from NVHS. They will be moving to a school that is their biggest rival and some will move as 10th graders after attending one year at NVHS. That's just all a little weird. Some will play sports against WVHS one year and then against NVHS the next. Strange.
So I'm curious after attending last week's SB meeting and listening to board members refer to the SW part of the district in a negative way, if all this talk is meant to distract us from what is really a very unusual proposition. Is the negativity toward the SW being used to justify an unjustifiable set of boundaries? Is instigating a debate between the north and south parts of the district meant to distract us from other issues such as the financial ramifications of this proposal or the enviornmental concerns about the site? Something seems "off" to me.
It certainly appeared during the last boundary debate that our SB was the instigator in the divide in our district. That is very shameful. I don't think people will tolerate that again - because we have caught on to their game.
Thanks, Ted.
Note from Ted, host:
I was left with the impression that the school board regrets having conducted the last boundary debates in the manner it did. Tried to please everyone, and learned that's not possible. I don't think they'll seek out or allow as much public input this time around.
Sadly, I have to agree with midnight rambler. The school board seems fixated on a "new" WVHS - it was mentioned several times at the meeting. What is wrong with the old WVHS? As someone currently in the WVHS attendance area I find it rather offensive.
Ted, you ask WHY people think one school is superior to the other. People make judgements about schools all the time by looking at ACT scores. Period. It's why some people think 203 is superior to 204. It's why people look at the Illinois School Report Cards. It's why some people say Naperville Central is better than Naperville North.
As long as I am happy with WVHS, why do I care what other people think? This "old" and "new" WV talk just seems like a big waste of time and it's just a distraction to getting Metea opened on the "new" budget of 142 M instead of the "old" budget of 124M.
Response from Ted:
I think test scores are part of it, but I think facilities play a role in the haves vs. have-nots debate. Look at D203--how are they getting people in Naperville North's attendance area to give a hoot about a referendum largely about rebuilding Naperville Central? By promising a pool and other upgrades to Naperville North. Valley View School District did the same thing when it passed a referendum for a new Bolingbrook High School by including major renovations to Romeoville High School. The debate is hardly unique to IPSD204.
One more point. The fixation on test scores in my opinion is an unfortunate result of NCLB. It all comes down to percentage points on a test and that's what we've been trained to use as the criteria of which school is better or worse.
Newsweek tried to start to change this thinking by publishing a more comprehensive ranking that takes into account opportunities for students to excel. This thinking has not gained traction because the only thing we see in the news over and over is NCLB information or test score rankings. The college entrance officials know that WV is an excellent school. Personally, I don't really care what anyone else thinks.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/39380
Neuqua #607
Naperville North #1101
Waubonsie #1202
Naperville Central did not make the top 1300.
Midnight rambler -
I live in the WVHS area - it is untrue that people who live in the WVHS area are "clamoring" to get out of it. It is also not true that WVHS residents made disparaging remarks about the high school during the last round of boundary talks. The only people upset about the boundaries last time, appeared to be some residents of the Brookdale area who didn't want their middle school to be sent to different high schools. The only statement that you make that I can be in agreement with is the school board calling WVHS "new". That is an insult to all of the former and current students of the school. The school board should have known better.
Mariacallous,
I was at those meetings and I did not see one adult (we'll leave all the kids out of this) who stood up and stated that they wanted their area to remain in the WVHS attendance area. What do you think that says to others in attendance?
Why does saying you would like to remain at NVHS translate into a negative bias against WVHS?
I think blaming the Southern parts of the district for any negative perception of WVHS is a convenient ploy used to hide something else.
How many SB members neighborhoods will be in the WVHS attendance area after the boundaries are finalized? It looks like Bruce Glawe's might be (White Eagle - currently NVHS). But how about the others (Stephens, Vickers, Metzger, Bradshaw, Tyle and Clark) Everyone of them besides Tyle (who is currently NVHS) presently resides in the WVHS attendance area.
How will it look and what will the obvious message be if none of the SB members neighborhoods (except maybe Glawe's)attend WVHS? I think there is a real solid chance of this outcome, Mariacallous.
It's looking like to me these fine board members are building their neighborhoods a shiny new school - After passing a referendum that was based on a completely different marketing job.
And I'm just curious: What percentage of the tax revenue for this district comes from the southern half of the district?
I wonder if this whole plan will fly...
midnight rambler -
I was at that same meeting and I saw a Watts speaker and a Cowlishaw speaker specifically ask for their area to remain at WVHS. I think most people in those areas want to stay at WVHS, including me.
Dear Sad,
I'm talking about the boundary debate last year. I know that Watts and Cowlishaw speakers were at the meeting last week and that you would like to remain at WVHS due to your commute.
However, I believe that there are areas in the south that would have just as long (even longer I think) commutes to WVHS as you would have to MVHS. But anyway, I feel your pain.
I'm speaking to the crazy stuff that occured last time that seems to (erroneously) be utilized to blame the Southern part of the district for something.
I mean, I guess they have to paint us as something, right? They need something to obscure the fact that our kids voted on the colors and mascots of a school they will never go to!
Midnight rambler - Depending on how the boundaries play out, but here is where I think the SB members will end up.
Metzger and Vickers both are in WVHS and will probably stay - they are ( I think) considered walkers from their neighborhoods.
Bradshaw and Clark both live in Brookdale - they go to WVHS now but will surely end up at MVHS
Glawe - Currently at NVHS - will most likely end up at WVHS
Stephens - Currently at WVHS - could go to any of the 3 - He is in Brighton Ridge - they could easily be bussed to any school, but I think they are likely to end up at WVHS.
Tyle - currently at NVHS will probably stay there.
So 4 of the 7 will probably end up at WVHS - 2 at MVHS and 1 at NVHS. That doesn't seem like a mass exodus to me....
Mariacallous,
Here's how I see it (based on what I'm hearing):
WVHS:
Glawe
maybe either Metzger or Vickers - but not both
MVHS:
Bradshaw
Clark
either Metzger or Vickers - could even be both
NVHS:
Tyle
Stephens?!
I don't think Metzger and Vickers neighborhoods will both attend WVHS because in order to fill up the north location, some walkers from WVHS will have to be moved.
If Stephens neighborhood goes into NVHS, then something really looks fishy. All the board members taking "care" of their neighborhoods while fixing the "albatross" (Metzger's term for WVHS) by sending kids from more than 6 miles away to WVHS.
I wouldn't mind being moved if it was logical. I mind very much being moved for some politcal or social engineering agenda.
midnight - Thanks for the clarification. A few students will be on the bus less, but many students will have a terrible commute. I hope they can find a middle ground, but with the lack of students in the north, that seems impossible. I hope your areas is treated fairly.
mariacallous - I hope you are wrong with your boundary predictions. If Steck (Metzger)stays at WV, that means Owen (Stephens) will have a 10 mile commute north. That is by far worse than any school has today. Are there even any students currently on the fringes of the district that have that bad a commute?
I have always thought this site was bad for the district from a transportation and an environmental hazard perspective. At least it's cheap, I guess. My understanding is the contaminated ground closest to the switching station is $100K/acre.
Midnight Rambler,
I agree. This school board does not represent the entire district. They seem to be simply out for their own areas.
What a shame for the kids of 204.
Judy Garland, (I loved your movies BTW),
I must agree that one board member was obviously out for their own area when she wore an orange 'Option 6' shirt during the boundary meetings two years ago. (similar to the shirt that many other individuals from her neighborhood were wearing at the meeting that evening)
That was in extremely poor taste and showed that she was definitely not looking to serve the ENTIRE district , but rather her own neck of the woods. Very unprofessional and not the type of behavior expected in an elected official.
Lilly and Judy Garland
I agree with both of you.
Jeannette is probably pretty happy right now. She got exactly what she wants for "her people".
I think the rest of the board is selfishly motivated as well.
Judy Garland,
Can you click your heels?!
I'm wondering about Bruce Glawe. I'm concerned that he is not capable of being fair and objective based on his behavior at the last SB meeting.
I'm wondering if it would be best for him to recuse himself in the upcoming boundary vote?
Sincerely,
Glenda (the "good" witch)
For the school board, I think there's too much ego and an over inflated sense of being on some personal crusade to bring righteousness to the district that has tossed everyone's common sense out the window.
I find it pretty gutsy for the district to take people's votes and use them for something other than intended. We all voted for the new school referendum knowing what the boundries were. We all voted according to those boundries. NOW the district is changing the boundries without letting us vote on this new location along with new boundries. How is the democratic?
The district needs to do another vote with the boundries stated as they were before to see is this is where we all want our money spent!! As someone stated earlier about lawsuits - Yup - I'm pretty sure many people will agree with me on the fact that we should get what we paid for!!
You can't sell someone a popsicle and say -"Sorry - we're all out of popsicles - Here's a hamburger"
Forget the burger!! We want what we agreed on!!!!!
I find it pretty gutsy for the district to take people's votes and use them for something other than intended. We all voted for the new school referendum knowing what the boundries were. We all voted according to those boundries. NOW the district is changing the boundries without letting us vote on this new location along with new boundries. How is the democratic?
The district needs to do another vote with the boundries stated as they were before to see is this is where we all want our money spent!! As someone stated earlier about lawsuits - Yup - I'm pretty sure many people will agree with me on the fact that we should get what we paid for!!
You can't sell someone a popsicle and say -"Sorry - we're all out of popsicles - Here's a hamburger"
Forget the burger!! We want what we agreed on!!!!!
Just let it go!
To Anonymous:
NO!
Just a quick question to Family of 4. Did you vote for a 3d HS within SD 204 which serves several communities or did you vote for a school based on boundaries. If you did the latter, which sounds like you did, you did not vote properly. Everyone knows that a SB can and will change boundaries when need be based on several factors. Now that BB is out of reach, yes, new boundaries have to be laid out.
When I voted YES I voted for a 3rd school not boundaries. You should of red the ballot correctly. Nothing was mentioned about boundaries. Therefore the SB did nothing wrong.
Yep, he's just mad it's not in his backyard anymore.