I guess my point was...why such the low turnout at the NSFOC meeting on 3/25? I can maybe understand if people were afraid to come because they thought people were actually tracking license plate numbers. That's what the comment was in reference to about the rumor before the meeting.

For the record there we no people tracking license plate numbers. In fact there were 2 of Naperville's Finest right next to the parking lot for at the first 1/2 hour of the meeting. I have also yet to see a list of license plate numbers posted any where or any one claiming they were doing that.

Another propaganda tactic the NSFOC is using to try and win this battle in the media. Mr. Collins and the NSFOC's trademark!!!

To whatajoke:

How could there be rumors of people tracking license plates at the NSFOC meeting BEFORE the meeting? Of course reports were AFTER the meeting. It was a nice try in continuing the non-sensible things that anti-NFSOC people say.

To Jas and nosuchthingasneutral:

Jas - What I have a problem with is the NSFOC concern about the kids in the "north" when that isn't their motive at all. Have you read their lawsuit? I'm happy if my kids attend WVHS or MVHS either way I'm happy, but I also believe we need a 3rd HS no matter where it is. The reason for my disgust is that the NSFOC is hiding behing the environmental concerns because it plays better in the media to have an emotional arguement when this isn't and never has been their true intent. I trust the results that our school board finds. I trust their consultanst that did the studies. I trust the IL EPA. I also see the power lines and peaker plant on daily basis and realize that they are hundreds of yards away and the school will be built on farm land. Yes farmland, they same thing that MV was supposed to be built on at BB. I also have a problem with the NSFOC stating that they will never be happy with the Phase II studies or the remediation plans once the school board releases them. This was mentioned at the NSFOC meeting on 3/25. They will never be happy because their intent is to delay and stall and constantly create doubt to ensure that the school will be built on the BB property. I'm sorry Jas but the NSFOc is petty and selfish and I don't feel we should award those the complain the loudest and that file a lawsuit against all of us in the IPSD because we're afraid of them.

Nosuchthingasneutral - Sorry I don't buy your arguement that people are too busy. They weren't busy to attend the school board meeting. They weren't busy when they attended the WE clubhouse. Fact is, the NSFOC membership is a couple of dozen parents who are unhappy of the prospect their kids might have to attend WVHS. For that they should be ashamed. WVHS is an amazing school and regardless how this turns out I would be happy for my kids to attend WVHS or MVHS. I'm also glad my kids will never have to attend NVHS because I have seen how overcrowded it is. I also no how overcrowded our middle schools and elementary schools are in the north and we all voted for a 3rd high school for THAT reason.

By the way there were no rumors of people tracking license plate numbers before the NSFOC meeting on 3/25. That rumor started after the meeting. I know of 15 people that attended that meeting who are not supporters of the NSFOC and their license plate numbers were not tracked or reported any where. Please, if you know of someone that was tracking license plate numbers and did post them some where let me know. It was a nice try at making your opposition look bad, but sorry I'm not buying it.

The NSFOCfraud tried to get people to show their support at the meeting in which the Eola/Molitor land was annexed by teh City of Aurora. Even dressed in white to show their solidarity (I guess orange wasn't available this time). Do you know how many people the press reported showing up? Less than 2 dozen. Sounds like the NSFOCfraud people are the ones having attendance issues.

To those obsessing about low attendance at NSFOC -
Did you ever go to a PTA meeting or a Homeowners Association Meeting? What per cent of the total population of those groups actually go the meetings? 10%? 15%? Doesn't mean they don't support the cause. People are busy at night, staying home with small children, generally apathetic (it will get taken care of without me) or maybe watching "can't miss" TV.

Plus some are afraid that the anti-lawsuit people will take down their license plate numbers, and say nasty things about them on these blogs.

for the NSFOC's money on March 29, 2008 10:26 PM

I am trying to figure out why you are so against having a SAFE SCHOOL. Can you explain please?

Do you think it is okay to move forward without knowing what is going on?

Do you think it is okay to have contaminated land remediated while your child attends the school?

Please, stop the pettiness and think about your child.

Thanks.

Also you might add an attorney that showed up for a meeting for the NSFOC over an hour late. Guess it also shows what confidence he has in the lawsuit.

Oh, on another note of the 90 people in attendence on 3/25 at the NSFOC meeting I think I'm up to about 15 people of the 90 that are not supporters. The list of NSFOC supporters keeps getting smaller and smaller along with their funds. Maybe a few of the NSFOC members/TG residents should put thier house up to fund their organization. If you believe in your lawsuit and cause so much, and protecting the kids of the "north" put up your house. Any volunteers? I didn't think so. You and everyone else knows why you're trying to fight this it's about you not getting your way. Good luck with that arguement in court cause Mr. Collins doesn't have much more to go on.

Suzie you should know by now that you only hear from people who are upset about something. Those of us who are happy about the 3rd HS, no matter where it's built, don't need to form a group and take their neighbors money. By the way what has NSFOC gotten for their money thus far. An attorney whose office can't spell the name of the HS that his defendants are fighting to stay at. And how long has he lived in the Naperville Community.

Suzie:

It is apparent that the NSFOC put you in charge of the blog propaganda campaign!

Since a bolg can be considered communication (i.e. taking) please note I am happy with the EOLA site! That is one person you now know that is happy. Second, perhaps you should ask outside the north side of TG and the south side of TG.

Psst..How do you know how many supportors there are in NSFOC? There are a lot of people who agree with the suit but have not signed up. I have spoken with many people in the North and South, I am yet to hear someone happy about the Eola site. The only people I can see are the small amount of people on this blog, which certainly is not the majority of people in the district.

By Diogenes on March 27, 2008 11:48 PM
My friend : By my lawsuit didn't cost as much as their lawsuit....it's all good

"Your posting is ironic. Are you about to blame NSFOC for the cost of your personal computer? Will you blame NSFOC for the electricity to run your computer, because if not for this silly organization you would have no need to be blogging?"

Diogenes,

Why YES, come to think of it, I would like to blame the nsfoc(or silly organization as you put it) for these associated costs. I think it is high time I contacted Mr. Collins for my due representation. We would like to settle for reduced fees in order to save you all additional court costs.You do not need to thank me,it's the least I can do.Please visit my new website www.WANSA.com (we are not safe anywhere).

How I See It on March 28, 2008 4:02 PM

"SO LET'S RECALCULATE THIS SHALL WE:

If one believes that the NSFOC is made up of mostly TG and WE residents then....

NSFOC has cost ALL OF US IN THE IPSD: $5,000,000 - ???? (once you figure in their frivolous lawsuit)"

How I see it...........

Sorry I have to still disagree Mark Metzger and the rest of the board are to blame for what has transpired. How can you not see that? Still no one seems to have a good answer for the $20,000,000.00.

Are you not worried that the school board may just build a school on potentially contaminated land and not even test it? You should be.

The SB did not fight for TG and WE. They had their own agenda always had.

We need to elect people to the school board that are level headed and fair. Someone who really is looking out for the best interest of the children. Sorry, I don't see that with Mark Metzger and the rest of them.

How I see it...........

NSFOC cost the taxpayers: $0

psst...Suzie...when you don't put a name there is shows up as the name "anonymous". Just thoguht I'd let you know that, didn't sound like you were too aware. Oh, and by the way...there are almost as many foul mouthed "annoymous" writers. Difference is the NSFOC only has about 300 members vs. the rest of the IPSD.

The SB fought hard to get the BB property which they did because that is what they proposed to the district but made no promises as to that is what they would get going up against BB attorney's.

The SB fought hard for certain residents in TG and WE to get the property.

They didn't get the property and potentially have to pay damages probably no less then $5 million by trying to fight for that land that they promised the TG and WE neighborhoods.

The SB decided to build some where else and try and save money.

The same group which is TG and WE and run by a TG resident...and claims they have 300 people that have donated...mostly of which live in TG and WE DECIDE THEY ARE GOING TO FILE A LAWSUIT!!!

Yes the same group that the SB fought for and lost is now filing a lawsuit against not the school board against all of us in IPSD.

SO LET'S RECALCULATE THIS SHALL WE:

If one believes that the NSFOC is made up of mostly TG and WE residents then....

NSFOC has cost ALL OF US IN THE IPSD: $5,000,000 - ???? (once you figure in their frivolous lawsuit)

NSFOC is now making them accountable! by JAS

JAS,
I gotta disagree. Nsfoc is making the SB look GOOD. Nsfoc is a joke amongst the community.PLEEEASE stop making yourselves look ridiculous. I seriously am having empathy pains for you! I can't stand the thought of these people being exposed. It is not going to be pretty...anonymity is one thing but names takes it somewhere else. Just ask the SB members.

anonymous on March 28, 2008 11:39 AM
"I love how the NSFOC supporters throw around the $20 million number. I guess if you file a lawsuit you are entitled to 100% of what you are asking for. I'm sorry. My bad"

I guess if you believe what Dr. D said then it would be much less. I hope we are not slapped with $20,000,000.00 because it buys us what? Unfortunately nothing!

It does show us the school board made yet another costly mistake for the taxpayers. I think we should pat Mark Metzger on the back for that one.

NSFOC isn't costing the taxpayer $20,000,000.00, Mark Metzger did that all on his own.

Your right about the uninformed are the easiest to scam Mark Metzger and the board proved it to all of us. Because of their secret meetings and run away train.....NSFOC is now making them accountable!

I love how the NSFOC supporters throw around the $20 million number. I guess if you file a lawsuit you are entitled to 100% of what you are asking for. I'm sorry. My bad. The NSFOC filed a lawsuit asking for many things and honestly expects to get 100% there too. Of course these are the same fools that believe it will cost an extra $10 million to get Eola open by 2009 but it won't take the same $10 million to get BB open by the same date. The uninformed are the easiest to scam.

It looks to me that there is one person who hides behind anonymous that is contaminating this board. That person has made so many slanderous statements I don't think I can count. I am not sure if that person is even a adult or is just mentally unstable. Which is it? Or are you a person who is just having fun. Your posts are ridiculous and you are making the North neighborhoods look very bad.

What a horrific mess this administration and school board has created! They remind me of the band on the titanic playing away as the ship sunk. You can't ignore the parents any longer and your fraud has been exposed. Stop hiding information and act like leaders and COMMUNICATE. Put ALL the cards on the table and come clean. We all know this is a big mess and I think we all want it fixed. Involve us, don't shut us out.

We need Jesse Jackson to bring us together and bring some LOVE back into 204. Come Jesse Come.

If you don't think this selfish law suit isn't costing us all money - your sadly mistaken. Again - SHAME on the residents of TG and WE.

To: By my lawsuit didn't cost as much as their lawsuit....it's all good! on March 27, 2008 8:01 PM

The taxpayers that have given the NSFOC money did so because they decided they wanted to contribute. All taxpayers are paying for the BB lawsuit, which we won by the way. It could potentially cost the district over 20 million, and we will have nothing to show for it. Instead of having the North vs South 204 civil war, we should all be addressing the issues that affect all the district. Why is everyone okay with throwing away 20 million dollars? How much has the distict already spent trying to get the BB property? How much will we be spending on transportation? Adding more buses to cut ride times is not saving us money. Also, if the Eola property is purchased, we need to make sure the IEPA is involved. These are things that should be important to all in 204.

Stop blaming neighborhoods or groups on our current situation. Our current situation is because of the decisions of the SB.

My friend : By my lawsuit didn't cost as much as their lawsuit....it's all good
Your posting is ironic. Are you about to blame NSFOC for the cost of your personal computer? Will you blame NSFOC for the electricity to run your computer, because if not for this silly organization you would have no need to be blogging? How people spend thier "personal" money is their own business, not yours. Now, how the SB spends OUR money is each of our business. I wonder if you will decide for all of us what we should spend our PRIVATE money on and next, Mao, will you decide how we should spend our PRIVATE time? Please give a moments thought to what you are saying prior to writing on a blog in the future, since you are now wasting all our time with your inane dribble. I might sugguest that you turn off your computer, step away from the MTV and put your PEOPLE magazine away and pick up a book (maybe even one on the American Constitution) and drag your finger along each line trying to understand the concept. Pay very close attention to the first admendment it may help here. Now, what makes the United States so great is that you have the right to say whatever you would like here, however, you may want to consider the reading angle first. Sometimes, just because you have the right, (like wearing your pants up past your belly button) you should not exercise the right for fear of showing the world who you really might be.

Hello - The TG and WE residents are suing the district! That costs money. But what it's costing in opportunity cost is so much more than we'll ever be able to retrieve. You should stop the bleeding and figure out a way to adjust to lifes changes. It's a good lesson for all your children, unlike the lesson you're teaching them by suing; which is: If things don't go your way - sue. I wonder if any of your children will grow up to sue you one day - irreconsible differences. It has been done.

JAS

I am not making anything up. The Neighborhood Schools for our Children was incorporated on March 18. The file # is 66001547. The agent for NSFOC is National Registered Agents, Inc on W Adams in Chicago. Not making anything up. I just want toknow that since they have filed their incorporation papers, what is the structure of the coporation? I am curious as to why nobody from the NSFOC has posted this on the NSFOC website or answered my requests on the blogs. They expect people to donate money but REFUSE to assure anybody that their voices will be heard in any decisions in regard to the settlement or retraction of the lawsuit. What can I be making up? If I (or someone else) was to donate money I think it is only fair to know that I am not being scammed to support a selfish cause.

I cannot believe anybody would hand over money to any organization without knowing the structure of the organization. The state of illinois has very strict regulations on the structure of not-for-profit corporations. Since the NSFOC is now incorporated, the answers to my questions are readily available from the directors of the company. Yet they refuse to make this information public to their donors. I have to ask why not be honest and open? This should be front and center on their website.

Do the "members" (as the Naperville Sun called them) have voting rights? Or, can the board of directors settle/retract the lawsuit as they personally see fit (possibly benefit). Everybody considering donating should know this. Making this public should prevent the type of cases the States Attorney's Office investigates.

One last note...National Registered Agents, Inc should have informed the officers whether or not the donations are tax deductable. I find it amusing that the NSFOC cannot even share that information. They tell you to go and find out for yourself.

I may not be paying for this suit now but if it goes to court then I am. So we will just wait and see if this is going to cost me. At lease those who were oppose to BB and boundaries in '06 didn't sue to get their way. They sucked it up and moved on. At least they had respect for ALL taxpayers in 204. More than we can say NSFOC.

my lawsuit didn't cost as much as their lawsuit....it's all good! on March 27, 2008 8:01 PM

"NOT so fast my friend.How many taxpayers have given you money via paypal?"

Nice try, the difference here that you seem to dismiss is that the folks giving money to NSFOC have a choice to give or not to give and it is going for a lawsuit they believe in.

NSFOC wants Mark Metzger and his gang to slow down and look at everything and be accountable for their actions. They would not listen to the people, they have their own agenda. Remember it is not just about land that "maybe contaminated" it is also about the broken promise - negating a vote.

The school board needs to be held accountable for their actions. They marketed a property to get votes. The majority of the votes came from the south accepting MV at BB. Hardly any votes came from the north. It was absolutely a "Bait and Switch" per Mark Metzger's words. Now Mark Metzger is going to cost "ALL" taxpayers more money because of his inability to manage funds properly.

Again,

NSFOC's lawsuit: $0

Mark Metzger: $5,000,000.00 + $20,000,000.00

So how do you explain the $20,000,000.00 or is that okay that all the taxpayers have to pay it?

To anonymous on March 27, 2008 3:23 PM

I would recomend going to the NSFOC website and pull off thier FOIA letter and send it to them. They have a PO box listed or you could send it to thier Atty. I would think they have to give your this information.

Do you guys realize that you're bashing a board that has tried to give YOU everything. Tried to a fault with out exception. My god, you are really all just like spoiled children - you will always want more and never be satisfied. Do you also realize, if this doesn't go through - we probably won't get a 3rd high school AT ALL. Which I'm sure won't phase you right now, as this law suit is really about you getting the high school for yourselves - but hate to break it to you - you're kids are going to be in overcrowded, split shifts, lunch at 8:45am, etc - that's reality!

By Who cost the taxpayers money? on March 27, 2008 5:12 PM
All I have to say is this:

Mark Metzger and the board's Lawsuit cost taxpayers: $5,000,000.00

NSFOC's Lawsuit cost the taxpayers: $0

NOT so fast my friend.How many taxpayers have given you money via paypal?These pour souls are taxpayers and they are giving you money so that costed them something. What are they getting for their money? A defunct lawsuit? Propaganda brochures? Rental fees for the VFW? At least the SB was using the money to try and get the land that nsfoc is now suing us to purchase "or else". Do you see the irony?

These blogs are interesting and I can see why it can be addicting. Even peoples sarcams makes me laugh.

Anyway, just to set the record straight with all those saying NSFOC is costing the taxpayers money. It hasn't cost the taxpayers a dime. You know why? Because the SB has not responded to the lawsuit.

However, Mark Metzger HAS COST THE TAXPAYERS: $5,000,000.00 BY SUING BB!!

Mark Metzger said they would win the case. I believe he got his head handed to him.

So I ask, why is it okay for Mark Metzger to file lawsuits, tie up peoples property for 2 years and now he is potentially COSTING THE TAXPAYERS ANOTHER: $20,000,000.00!!

Yet, your not saying anything about it? You don't think the school board should be held accountable?

Secondly, as far as the NSFOC saying the land is contaminated. Well, sorry wrong again! They are saying "IT MAYBE CONTAMINATED." They list out what could be wrong with the property. They want to know why did the school board choose this when they could have chosen BB (WHICH THEY PUSHED ON THE VOTERS), or any other property for that matter. Why chose a potential hazard? Walk away and chose another property.

Mark Metzger and the board costs us the taxpayers:5 MILLION DOLLARS ON HIS LAWSUIT!!

NSFOC cost the taxpayers: $0

All I have to say is this:

Mark Metzger and the board's Lawsuit cost taxpayers: $5,000,000.00+

NSFOC's Lawsuit cost the taxpayers: $0

Oh yeah, what about that $20,000,000.00.......hmmmmmmmmmmm!! I don't think it was the NSFOC!!

All I have to say is this:

Mark Metzger and the board's Lawsuit cost taxpayers: $5,000,000.00

NSFOC's Lawsuit cost the taxpayers: $0

anonymous on March 27, 2008 3:23 PM
"FYI...on March 18, NSFOC became NSFOC Inc...don't you think"

__________

Wow!! Clearly we now know those against NSFOC are the ones making stuff up. Everyone is seeing right through your tactics.

If you had so many questions why didn't you attend the meeting?

Let's start talking about ths school board and their actions and misfed information. Do you want sick kids? Do you want to find out if the land is safe..................yep, the reports are not out yet. WHY??

anonymous on March 27, 2008 3:23 PM
"FYI...on March 18, NSFOC became NSFOC Inc...don't you think"

__________

Wow!! Clearly we now know those against NSFOC are the ones make stuff up. Everyone is seeing right through your tactics.

If you had so many questions why didn't you attend the meeting?

Let's start talking about ths school board and their actions and misfed information. Do you want sick kids? Do you want to find out if the land is safe..................yep, the reports are not out yet. WHY??

FYI...on March 18, NSFOC became NSFOC Inc...don't you think the donors are entitled to know the corporate structure? The IL Secretary of State office differentiates between voting and non voting members of not-for-profit corporations. You have your corporation papers...don't you think it is time to let the donors know that they are non-voting members and you can settle this anyway you wish...doesn't have to be done as you promote on your website.

FYI, since they have represented themselves to support a certain cause (boundaries are not listed)for the purpose of raising funds, if they settle because of new boundaries, the officers of the corporation will be subject to fraud charges. I hope the NSFOC sets aside enough money to pay their legal defense. Time to hang it up NSFOC...come clean or go home.

To: sickofnamecalling

Do you not recall the SB telling us as far back as 2005 and 2006 that split shifts were a possibility. Look at some of the middle and elementary schools already they are overcrowded. I don't know where you live but there is no decline of students and overcrowding in the areas I live. Sure numbers go down a bit in 2011 and 2012 but only at NV and only by a couple hundred students. WV will still be at maximum capacity and they aren't declining in enrollment for some time. The fact still is we're overcrowded and that is what the referendum was about.

Since you're obviously not happy at the 3rd high school being built at all do you want to chance it? I don't because I want my kids to have more opportunities no matter what school they are at. How would 2 overcrowded high schools look if/when you go to see your house? But I'm sure you could always tell the potential buyers, "yeah but enrollment will go down soon, maybe". I'm sorry but I'd rather give up some tax money each year so we don't have 2 mega high schools and our kids have more opportunities. I don't see how that is anything but unselfish for all the kids in the IPSD. One of the reasons you moved to this area was because of the schools, so why aren't you coughing up the money to support the schools, that's selfish.

The fraud people are sooooo desperate for their highschool site that they are now putting out scare tactics over split shifts. The enrollment numbers have been on the decline and are no where near the enrollment numbers when WV overcrowded before NV. Also the enrollment numbers at WV with TG/WE would not work. Nice try to scare people, but I think those in the district are too smart to fall for the split shift scare again.

I just love these rumors state the admin name so we can aks this question our selves.

Hinterlands,
You're right.Naperville is looking at some unexpected expenses this year. See newest blog topic. Ironically, guess who's representing that gentleman? Bingo! The one and same Mr. Collins from the infamous NSFOC committee.Busy guy.
You are also correct... the SB would not and could not build on unsafe ground for any of your stated reasons. Just don't tell this to the nsfoc supporters. They might stop sending their money via paypal option. Then again, there's always the payment plan!

MH, Brookdale voted NO to the 3rd HS. Now a turn around. Funny how that works. Then they also spend their time trashing the TG/WE folk.

Wow I'm so glad I live a few miles outside of this district and am watching from another town to see if you can peacefully work this out. I can only imagine what this is doing to your property values and your community. I used to envy Naperville and now the old "can't we just along" runs through my head. Maybe someone can help me out here but how long has this been going on? Did the citizens of the district request a referendum to build a third school? If so when? Did they approach Brach-brody and attempt to buy the land fairly or did they bring this problem on by tieing brach-brody up and keeping that land off the market thus forcing a law suit? Did they attempt to appease the gods by building a third school on the south end with the knowledge that these people would only be happy with a Naperville address? Were the tall grass people and the white eagle people only willing to move forward on their own terms? What's wrong with a school being built on the north end as I'm certain it will be insured and underwritten. Who would risk cancer clusters and law suits and most of all sick children? I'm certain the district would not move forward risking future law suits on enviromentally unsafe ground. They would be hard pressed to get coverage or bank funding to move forward on such a project I would think. I understand the city of Aurora has just annexed this property and the fire and police protection would be on the tax payers of Aurora taking some of the preasure off Naperville city tax payers. I understand you have a some unexpected expenses this year. I guess to an outsider this seems like a pretty petty arguement that is becomming a huge real estate sucking value problem for the people of Naperville. With the economy on the skids and tax dollar income dwindling I would work long and hard to make peace. I don't know who is to blame here but I can tell you're look pretty sorry as a place to live right now.

Did anyone else see this on the blogs??? I had NO IDEA this is what could happen!!! Blindsided - AGAIN!!! Oh well!!

EOLA FAILS = SPLIT SHIFTS, Trailers
« Thread Started on Today at 8:01pm »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I just talked to an 'Admin insider' about the hoopla over Midwest Gen getting bombarded with negativity from NSFOC site.

I asked 'what if" this site falls apart. She ... hesitated .. and said, "do you not know that Admin is working on a split shift schedule to start with NVHS?" She said obviously TG and/or WE still have to come out of NVHS and placed in WVHS.

I guess Plano or Plainfield just put one high school on split shifts and left the other one alone. I don't have those details.

She said they are also looking into the costs of trailers for NVHS.

I'm trying to just figure out how I feel about this...

Ok, I guess. If that's what we have to do. I guess that's what NSFOC wants - split shifts and trailers.

Hmmm... I would rather have a 3rd high school....

Brookdale voted no for the 3rd HS. Funny how things have changed. So now the BD folks are slamming the TG folks for not liking boundaries. Funny how you can't find those no voters in BD. They all seem to be saying yes now.

I can't believe so much is made of the IEPA on this matter. I really like the guy saying that the district said it would involve the IEPa after Phase I and II are completed. But he failed to mention that you can't do anything on or to the land until you own it. Gotta run...I am on my way to the car dealership to have mud flaps put on a car I don't own.

sickofnamecalling,

Please, Brookdale/Brooks residents will not "do anything to get their school". If anything, they are trying to help the School Board move forward to build a 3rd HS as we voted for in the first place. And the Eola site is the chosen location now. Deal with it.

I'll give you credit though, you are so smart that you apparently can determine the site is not safe by driving by it. Well done. We don't need independent testing I guess.

Also, I heard a nice turnout at the NSFOC meeting last night (NOT!!)

I have called the IEPA. They do not have record of the site or midwest Gen. As I am hearing they will not contact IEPA until after they close on the land. What the heck is up with that???

I suggest you make the call.

Panties in a bunch???Read the powerpoint presentation from the District (presented to the public on 1/15/08). Does not say Midwest Gen will work with IPEA after the District's Phase I and Phase II testing...

It says the District will test (Phase I and Phase II) under the supervision of IPEA...

This HAS NOT happened (what are they trying to hide?). If they have not figured this out, the public (except sabe Brookdale and parts of Stonebridge) are not going to allow this to happen anymore.

Nice try.

Dr. D...Sounds suspicious, I mean Goodnight!

Next?

to all of those who are claiming to have called the IEPA...the Herald reported last week that MidwestGen has stated they will work with the IEPA in remediation. If you did indeed call the IEPA, did you ask about Midwest Gen? Can they comment about private property? Midwest Gen did say "will" so maybe it has not happened yet. Don't get your panties in a bunch until you have the facts.

The settlement would be to personally benefit the owners of the NSFOC. as posted by anonymous at 11:46.....

Please don't forget Mr. Collins! He would benefit too!Too bad for all of the others that actually donated to the scam....

If you really think that our SB is taking the time to do due dillengence on this site then please call the IEPA. You will find out the the IEPA has no record of this site. If they did it would take 6-12 months to clear the land. The IEPA gets involved when the owner of the land requests it. Please look into this!!!!!

Stop listening to the Brooks/Brookdale people who will stop at anything to get this school. They truely believe this school will be their Neuqua. This site will increase transportaion costs and will drag down this district for years to come. This site is NOT safe period. Just drive by it and take a look.

to anonymous at at 9:39 am.

The lawsuit is being filed by a group of individuals who are hiding behind the shelter of a non for profit company they set up. The threat of a lawsuit of first issued by TG residents who spoke up at a school board meeting. If the residents of TG do not want to be associated as the NSFOC, go public with the ownership of the NSFOC.

So everybody knows. The attorney only works for the owners of the NSFOC and not the donors/supporters.

Why is that important? Because everyone must ask one would file a lawsuit they cannot win? To take the suit all the way through the courts would cost millions and they might raise 50 to 100k. The answer is that they are looking for a settlement. Why is this important? The settlement would be to personally benefit the owners of the NSFOC.

The uninformed are teh easiest to scam. Keep donating to the TG and WE fund.

To: Anonymous on March 26, 2008 12:48 AM

All of 204 is not being sued by TG, the district lawsuit was filed by NSFOC. The NSFOC is comprised by people from all over the district. I assume your statement is based on what you are reading on this blog. Anyone can write whatever they want on this blog. Be care what you believe.

A couple of weeks ago WE was taking all the heat for the lawsuit because the NSFOC held a meeting at the clubhouse in their neighborhood.

Please direct your anger at the NSFOC. Do not misdirect your statements at entire subdivisions.

I've been reading this board and see that Tim Waldorf has taken some slack for reporting the NSFOC's side. I want to commend Tim for giving balance to both sides. For far too long, the Sun's stories on D204 issues have been totally one sided, spoon fed by the School Board. After reading them, I would always wonder, "What's REALLY going on?"

So, hooray for Tim. He has not only reported the NSFOC's side, but he's also reported the school board's side. Every issue has two sides and he's doing a great job of capturing both. The reader can then decide where they stand.

To Waubonsie Rocks! on March 25, 2008 12:49 PM :

You mention "over-crowded schools" in your first paragraph and then say "Our SB needs to get off the 2009 date and open a full school in 2010 to benefit ALL kids in the district."

How does delaying to 2010 "benefit ALL kids"? Opening in 2009 moves students from "over-crowded" (your word) Neuqua and Waubonsie to Metea.

All of Naperville was not subjected to bait and switch. All of Naperville - district #204 more precisely - is being sued by TG or the NSFOC and we are not going to take this lying down. You are not gaining supporters with your twisted, lies and propoganda - you are only putting the rest of the district and beyond on the firm offensive.

Actions speak louder than words. The law suit filed by TG against all of us is what gave TG the tarnished reputation it now has. Bottom line...

By anonymous on March 25, 2008 4:49 PM
did Aurora just get compared to a third world country?

_______________________________

Where? Can you point it out?

did Aurora just get compared to a third world country?

I think a 3rd high school is not needed in D204 or at least a clear case has not been made on scientific and economic evaluation.

I think school district 204 and Dupage/Will county citizens should demand a more fiscal responsible government and school district. In the time of so much economic uncertainty, rising prices we should seriously look at how we can utilize our existing schools and available fund better. Our country and kids are facing a much larger problem.

In a recent local election politician argued on TV "You can fix any problem if you throw money at it." I wish we can fix the problem that is facing our nation by throwing money at it.

I suggest you read the report "Rising Above the gathering Storm". I think the school district and citizen should focus on the real problem. How to educate or kids better and safer, so that they would be a good citizen tomorrow.

I have been to several of these school district 204 meetings just to listen because no one (including myself) is interested in solving the real problem, who has time. The issue here is kids education, their mental state and health.

I am reading with amusement the pro and con arguments on this school site. I have better things to do but I am home due to a surgery. It is amusing, considering we are the most technologically advanced country, yet how people gets behind one or other side by their gut feeling. It has become a sound bite war while the issues are kids, their education and their health.

I am afraid to talk about myself and my background, I can only tell you with some authority that there is a lot of misinformation. One thing I also what to tell you that I am not directly effected by D204 school. As a US citizen we all are effected.

Some advice to both side.

To school board who is disparate to spend tax dollars to build this school, please look at the environmental clean up cost at other US sites. US Department of Energy is a good example. Also please look at what and how long it takes for wetland mitigation. You should ask US Army Core of Engineers.

Regarding PCB or other contamination being discussed. Please consider long term effect. It is your children you are talking about. No one will tell will with certainty that this will happen but what if. There exists enough data out there. US government in last 10 yrs have been cleaning up so many places with contamination with considerable cost. Why the government is so concerned (several law suites comes to mind) and you are not.

Please make an educated choice for your child. Read what has happened to kids in the 3rd world countries due to these contaminations.

There has been a lot of discussion about EMF and its effect. Here is the website maintained by US National Grid EMF http://www.emfs.info/default.asp. Judge for yourself.

To NSFOC who are looking for an electrical engineer to calculate EMF. You can ask a NVHS or WVHS AP Physics student they can do this as a class project. I can do this in back of my head but taking pain killers.

People who do not trust these calculations just drive your car underneath a high tension wire. Keep the radio playing. Do you want that effect of your kids brain regardless of what the national standard says.

So to the citizens of D204, do not fight with your guts, it is your children education and health.

And to the D204 management, do not pay with our tax dollars and mislead the public.

I live in Tall Grass and I happen to like my neighborhood, my neighbors, my house, and my kids' friends, too (hey, I even like the TG pool). I'm not an evil person just because I live here. Believe it or not, I do lots of normal things like teach RE, coach cheerleading, volunteer in the classroom, serve as a head room mom, and work at my kids' schools. I help deliver meals for others, help out at Feed My Starving Children as well as the food pantry. I served as a Girl Scout leader, was a former HOA Board Member, and many other volunteer opportunities. So when you're busy slamming an entire neighborhood, keep in mind that there are some like me that live in TG (or WE or other places) that are good people.

I don't like the situation that we're sitting in today regarding a 3rd HS. We need it, don't have it, and it doesn't appear that we're going to get it soon. That being said, I still think our SB should use some common-sense and wait to move ahead at Eola until we know for sure what the BB walk-away costs are. To move ahead at all-costs, is just simply wrong!

Show me the money...regardless of where anyone stands on this issue, I don't belive anyone wants the operating surplus spent on capital issues. With the declining property values, there will be a shortfall the next year or 2 and that money will be needed. Unless you know something we don't about the real estate market turning around.

I am concerned as well at how the school board/district has created this debacle. Much of the information that has been put out to residents has not been the entire truth. Parents and taxpayers deserve to be told the entire truth not just the spin the school board and district wants us to buy in to.

Here are some examples of information that the district has put out to residents that have been quite misleading.

1. Final cost of the Macom land- Not the final offer from Macom. The final cost per acre was substantially lower than what we were told. I know this as a fact. Find out for yourselves!

2. Park District was an obstacle to the Macom land- Not according to the PARK DISTRICT. They have come out publically to say they were interested in the swap yet 204 leaders did not contact them.

3. Utilities at Macom site would be 300-400k less on an annual basis at the Macom site.- This one baffles me. I was STUNNED that it was not listed as an advantage in the land comparison chart from 204. Why not list that as and advantage? Oh, I already know the answer to that one; money is no object to the 204 leaders.

4. Site Selection report stated that the Eola land was a "certainty" for radiactive exposure. Now, not true? Huh? Was it just more spin at the time?

5. Rt. 59 bridge information put out prior to boundary decision stated the neither the city nor park district would maintain the bridge. Not so according to BOTH the city and park district.

6. District 204 can afford the BB site, in fact they passed a resolution not to go out for more money from taxpayers and put 600k in escrow. And to boot, Mark Metzger calms residents fears by stating in the press, "don't worry, we can afford it." All this was said to encourage residents to support quick take by calling your local leaders.

7. District now states never, never, never will we use operating funds on Metea. Huh? Where has all the money the district spent on quicktake and legal fees come from? I didn't see that in the total figure for Metea the district put out to residents. I've asked the board multiple times how much quick take lobbyists cost. I've not gotten an answer.

Enough with the spin. Simply tell us the WHOLE truth not just what you want us to hear.

It is no surprise to me that some in this district have decided they can't take it anymore and have filed a lawsuit.

Isn't it possible that some of us just want to be told the WHOLE truth.

will Collins be there to answer questions tonight? He is the NSFOC environmental expert?

By NSFOC has my vote!! on March 25, 2008 12:42 PM
By NSFOC Please Explain on March 25, 2008 9:58 AM

I would suggest you come to tonight's meeting and ask your questions.....

I would suggest that unless I want to be associated with your misguided group that I NOT attend. But thanks anyway!

For all of you on the I hate TG train. Take a moment, step back and think before you post. I live in TG and I am not involved in the lawsuit. Your never-ending posts filled with anger should not be directed at entire neighborhoods. Some of you writing these awful messages might even know me. Would you say these thing to my face? Everyone in the district is frustrated with the entire 3rd high school situation, but stop adding to the problem. Exactly what do you hope to accomplish when you post such ignorant statements?

Think before you hit the submit button on your computer. Your messages speak volumes about our community.

By anonymous on March 25, 2008 1:06 PM
wabonsie rocks...I am firmly on the I hate TG train. This train is getting crowded and picking up steam. We are all being sued by the elitist snobs and do not appreciate it. The lawsuit will not fix the issues you raised. The lawsuit only makes the financial situation more difficult. How can anyone in the district support a cause that benefits so few and hurts the district as a whole? Hop on board the train or get off the tracks. This train is picking up steam fueled by the NSFOC.

________________________________________

First of all, it's correctly spelled Waubonsie. It is a great school. I'm excited my son will have a chance to attend.

I live in TG and don't appreciate your post. Your labeling of an entire area is simply wrong, rude and completely hateful.

I am not involved in the NSFOC organization (yet. I'm paying very close attention as I'm very concerned and angry with the leadership of district 204. It simply baffles me that the residents of district 204 are giving our current school board a "pass" on all that's occured. In my opinion, their arrogance and poor decision making has resulted in putting the district where we are today. It's time to hold them accountable. They are the elected leaders of the district and it's fair to criticize their actions regardless of the fact they are "volunteers". In my opinion, it's not fair to label an entire community with hateful stereotypes.

Let's let the courts decide whether or not the NSFOC argument has merit. In the meantime, I'd appreciate it if people such as yourself (Anonymous 1:19 pm) would be more respectful towards those you've never met.

And to add, anyone that posts an aerial view of someone's house with a red arrow and uses ugly language with a 10 year old needs to get some counseling.

It's one thing to disagree respectfully and yet another to behave in a threatening, low-like manner. Shame on those people that feel the need to crawl in the gutter in order to get their point across.

Where will the district get the money if the final BB settlement is >$20M if they've already bought the Eola site?

Is there state law about over-taxing residents and having >35% surplus in operating revenues?

If there is >$20M stashed somewhere to bail us out of BB why do we need a referrendum to fund air-conditioning schools?

Where have all of the fees spent so far on the condemnation suit, lobbyist and consultants been booked? Are these coming out of operations when Mark says...Never, Never, ever... only going to use the capital from the referrendum.

Lots of questions for the secret administration hiding from the community. Thank god for the papers and blogs. Otherwise this community would be totally in the dark.

Show me the $$.

will collins be there tonight to answer our questions?

By Anonymous on March 25, 2008 1:19 PM
To The names behind NSFOC...on March 25, 2008 12:46 PM

Why don't you use your name when you post?

Anonymous (cute:),
I'm not suing anybody...nobody cares!

To The names behind NSFOC...on March 25, 2008 12:46 PM

Why don't you use your name when you post?

wabonsie rocks...I am firmly on the I hate TG train. This train is getting crowded and picking up steam. We are all being sued by the elitist snobs and do not appreciate it. The lawsuit will not fix the issues you raised. The lawsuit only makes the financial situation more difficult. How can anyone in the district support a cause that benefits so few and hurts the district as a whole? Hop on board the train or get off the tracks. This train is picking up steam fueled by the NSFOC.

Why is everyone so quick to jump on the "I hate TG train"? How ridiculous to criticize an entire neighborhood with one brush stroke! Everyone's anger should be aimed at our incompetent SB. They are the ones that have put us in this mess. Two plus years after a referendum and what do we have to show for it? No definite land site, a possible $20M walk-away cost from BB,way over-crowded schools, a lawsuit from a neighborhood, and a flat-out mess.

Our SB needs to get off the 2009 date and open a full school in 2010 to benefit ALL kids in the district.

I think we have the right to know who SPECIFICALLY is suing us. Why hide if they truly believe in their cause? Anyone?

By NSFOC Please Explain on March 25, 2008 9:58 AM

I would suggest you come to tonight's meeting and ask your questions.

I wish the Sun would ask them if the Eola site was built but the TG kids were kept out of WVHS, would they drop the lawsuit?

This is what this is all about. Just read their website. They try to scare people with a list of questions, their attorney has undoubtably answered for them. Do they list the attorney's answers on their site? Hell NO! They can't raise money by being honest. They don't list the names of the owners of the corporation. Why are they hiding? This is not about keeping their kids at NVHS. Its about keeping their kids out of WVHS.

The elitest snobs and their sense of entitlement do not want to inform anybody of what is really going on. Their attorney only represents the owners of NSFOC and does not represent their supporters/donors. This is part of the ethics clause of membership of the Illinois Bar Association...to put their clients needs first. Sorry supporters/donors, you are not the attorney's clients.

The purpose of the NSFOC is to shield its owners from liablity while raising money to keep their kids out of WVHS. Everything else is a smoke screen.

To the members of NSFOC please explain something for me because I'm trying to understand. There are 4 items within your lawsuit that you are requesting of the Defendant (IPSD204) please explain.

(a) Order Defendant to purchase the Brach-Brodie property for the purpose of developing a high school site thereon.

If this is the only option of where to build a high school (according to NSFOC) why would you do this to yourselves? At the price that BB is requesting the IPSD does not have enough money to complete the school. If they did build the school at the BB property something would have to be cut like the swimming pool or the theatre or the football flield. Otherwise the IPSD would surely have to come back to the district and request more money and I highly doubt that referendum would pass and then we would have a 3rd high school that didn't meet the standards of NV or WV.

(b) Order Defendant to refrain from doing anything inconsistent with the purchase of the BB property, including the purchasing of the EM property or the construction of a school thereon.

Again, the IPSD did everything in their power to purchase the BB property and the price tag is too high. So is this just a stall tactic? So if it was being built on the BB property you wouldn't have a problem with them if they were currently building?

(c) In the even Defendant is unable to purchase the BB property, order it to return the money they have already collected from the March 21, 2006 Bond Referendum and cnjoin(sp?) it from further collccting(sp?) money from the taxpayers.

So if it can't be built on the BB property don't build it at all? But if they do build it there the money isn't there to complete it, correct? If they don't build it do you think this protects you from not attending WV? Our schools are already overcrowded would you not agree? Should we be known in the state that as the district that has 2 high schools that are overcrowded? How will that affect all of our home values? I urge you to look at the numbers of students and we are growing. Sure things start to decline in 2011 or 2012 but that is a couple of hundred students at NV. WV still remains constant on their attendance levels. Why should all the students suffer if the 3rd HS can't be built at the BB property? Remember this does not ensure that children of TG or WE will not attend WVHS at some point in the future.

(d) Aware Plaintiffs its attorney's fees and costs.

Then on top of it all you want to have the IPSD pay your attorny fees? How is this being fiscally responsible and caring about your school district. You claim that the school board has not been forthcoming with information and has not been fiscally responsible have your eyes been closed? Where were you the past 2 years when the IPSD board members were sharing everything on their website and in the papers and in our kids backpacks? They were forthcoming with all the information and in some cases let us know what their next plans were. They won every battle for the BB property except for the last and most important battle to aquire the land at a price that we could afford. Those board members don't get paid remember and they took time away from their familes to do everything in their power to get the BB property. At the last boundary meeting which lasted 5 hours they spent the last 45 minutes apologizing to the residents of TG. So for their being open and honest and fighting the battle as best as they could you decide to sue. Then you wonder why people in the district are mad at you?

I urge every member of the NSFOC to review the 4 points above and is this what you really wan to support? A 3rd high school only at the BB property and if it does get built it will be missing quite a few things such as a swimming pool or football field. If a 3rd high school does not get built are you willing for your kids to be in overcrowded high schools and our property values will surely be affected. Can you be sure you still won't have to attend WVHS? If this is what you are trying to avoid can you be sure this lawsuit protects you of that?

These are the tough questions for the NSFOC?? I wish the Sun would ask these questions.

We challenge the school board and administration to LISTEN to the parents of the district and come to a reasonable solution. We want the school board to SLOW DOWN, RE-THINK, AND RE-DO the new high school, the boundaries, their own criteria and fiscal responsibility. With no "bait and switch". With no "environmental hazards".

Finally, please note, we have applied for a Federal ID for non-profit status. If we are granted non-profit status, then donations will qualify for tax deductibility and company matching funds. We will inform you of the final outcome, but until then please note there is no guarantee of deductibility until the Feds have spoken.

Thank You all for caring for the health and safety of the district 204 children. We will not let you nor the children down and will do our heart-felt best to secure a favorable resolution to the current problems. We are the front-line volunteers, the boosters, the ones who sell the most and raise the most. We supported the district, and the district summarily dismissed us.

District 204 School Board needs to pay attention to: Safety. Fiscal Responsibility. Accountability.

It's about the kids.

Sincerely,

Neighborhood Schools For Our Children......taken from the NSFOC website.

Wow, these 200 people sold the most, raised the most and single handledly supported the district!By all means I think they DESERVE a "REDO". :)They are indeed the only ones concerned with safety(as evidenced by their truthful brochures their supporters paid for..I'm sure they are also using the money to conduct their own environmental testing:), fiscal responsibility(donate by paypal:),and accountability(this is all the volunteer school board's fault). Thank goodness we have these folks willing to take a stand for us 'peons' by suing themselves and all of us. This is proof "it's about the kids". They had NO choice but to sue us. They have helped all of us so much! Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!

All counts in the lawsuit are baseless. It is beyond shameful what the group filing the lawsuit is doing. Please don't try and pass this offf as if your doing something admirable that is helping the community. You are suing your neighbors who stand to gain (in your own words "a shiny new high school") and you want it for yourselves - bottom line. I was a member of GreenPeace and I am disgusted that your using these tactics for personal gain. There is something admirable about people who fight the fight for credible reasons and you are putting a black mark on those valuable causes. Without a doubt - you should all be truly ashamed of yourselves - and don't think you've fooled anyone - even yourselves.

NSFOC Now Accepts Online Donations On Payment PlanIn addition to one time donations, you can also choose weekly, monthly, or annual donations. See Donate!! in upper right hand column.
taken from NSFOC website :)......

Keep sending that money folks! You too can help keep our eighth graders stay at NV! Oh yeah, and don't forget we're sloooowing things down...again, this keeps our eighth graders directed at NV. BTW attorney fees don't grow on trees, people!!Your money will be WELL spent! By sending us money(notice the payment plan option:) you will be demonstrating your displeasure with our school board....we'll tie that in by directing your attention toward environmental concerns that the SB and IEPA were always extensively testing anyway (notice the school board meeting videos pre-NSFOC lawsuit filing).On a side note,we will not be discussing these same concerns in relation to any of our own neighborhoods, existing schools or district 204 properties. FOCUS people!

Remember, we have to play the legal game! It's all about strategy!It's for the(our) kids!!! Oh yeah, and don't forget all you "no" voters! You are an important part of our strategy. Notice the 3rd relief we request "build on BB or give everyone our money back"? This ones's for you BABY!!! Either way, guess who's eighth graders are staying at NV?! :)Last minute , addition...let's talk about more busing and railroad track safety again! There's ALWAYS another straw to grasp.....

I wonder if folks could get their money back if a suit was filed against NSFOC ,say for, soliciting $$$ under false pretenses????

To Thanks NSFOC you're making the SB look great on 3/24 at 1:21 PM--Ok, I think I see your problem with this. Here it is again:

". . . order it to return the money they have already collected from the March 21, 2006 Bond Referendum and enjoin it from further collecting money from the taxpayers."

This sentence refers to the March 21, 2006 Bond Referendum only. It is asking that the SD return what it has already collected from the 06 referendum and be prohibited from collecting anything more from us under this referendum; basically negating the 06 referendum altogether. It is not asking the court to prohibit the SD from ever collecting funds for another school through future referendums. Think about it--this doesn't sound logical or desirable, much less legal. Go back to the lawsuit and look at article 57 under Count III: Violation of Illinois School Code. It states, "Section 5/19 of the Illinois Code provides that school districts may borrow money for the purpose of . . . building or purchasing or improving school sites," etc. This lawsuit is not attempting to change the Illinois School Code to keep the SD from ever getting the money to build a third high school. It is about stopping an alternative purchase and invalidating the 06 referendum so voters can have another go at selecting the site and boundaries. Also, see my response to Anon on 3/24 at 6:11 AM above.

Look, I'm weary of rehashing this time and again. I would suggest that if this issue is that important to you, do what I did: Attend an NSFOC meeting and ask them these questions yourself. As long as you're respectful and not disruptive, they will take the time to answer your questions about the suit (try getting that kind of individualized attention from our SB). I attended an NSFOC meeting mostly out of curiousity; I just wanted to know what was going on. I decided I didn't agree with the lawsuit and am therefore not supporting it, but I do understand it. Believe it or not, it is possible to understand someone else's position without agreeing with it. I know this is a gray area that some folks have a hard time with, especially when an issue is as emotionally charged as this one. But take the time to educate yourself on this, and going to the source is the best way I know.

VFW. Tuesday night. 7pm. Be there.

TO: Anonymous on March 24, 2008 2:56 PM

We bought our house before Neuqua was built. We opened our check books and paid for Nequa with no personal gain - in fact this is what seperated north and south naperville - and it wasn't us in the north that did this seperating......It only makes sense that the third high school goes in the north; financially speaking as well as for balancing purposes.

***************
Yes, it was the SB that did the separating - by building a more expensive school than they needed to in NV, while not investing in simultaneous improvements at WV. Once again, poor judgment. Shame on them. Because they chose to do this, we - and others in the south - are being called elitist snobs. WE is still taking hits for events that happened 10 years ago! The difference with building the new school in the north now, specifically in the northwest corner (where the district population base is the sparsest), is that kids are going to have to be bused long distances to fill it - now, and even moreso in the future. When NV was built in the south, it was built to meet growing population needs, where the growth was occurring. They did not ask the north to get on buses for more time than they were already spending. No one wants to be far away from their school for many reasons - especially long drives in traffic that have increased five fold since NV was originally built. More north than south, ok, I get that. But the northwest corner on questionnable land, bad long-term decision for the entire district.

To: I'm Apparently to Dumb, great minds think alike (so we can't be dumb).

I've been asking that same question. Granger MS is a block or so away from the Eola RR yard...why isn't the NSFOC upset about that and making sure the children are safe there. My kids ES sits less than a 100 yards from a radio tower why isn't anyone from the NSFOC upset about that.

Please NSFOC are you really concerned for the safety of all students in every building in 204? If so, maybe your slick lawyer could hire Erin Brokovich to run tests to see if all of our school sites are free of any and all hazards including the NSFOC.

To I'm apparently too dumb to get it on March 24, 2008 4:48 PM

I agree, you are too dumb to get it (your words, not mine). The pipelines are 1700' from McCarty. Compared to 250' from Metea.

The pipeline is 1000' feet from Georgetown. Compared to 250' for Metea.

You should probably check your facts before you post next time.

Hey Naperville Sun,

Nice article today about how the poll regarding support for the NSFOC lawsuit.....didn't notice ANY mention about how Alka Tyle tried to pad those numbers. What kind of reporting are you doing? Are you in bed with the 204 School Board? Tell the truth!

I take full responsibility for my vote! I don’t hold anyone else accountable for my INTERPRETATION OF THE REFERENDUM!

Remember "Read my lips-no new taxes", we'll that didn't last too long, and the elder Bush broke his promise. And then lost the presidency, but he did not break the law.

If something has been put into law, it cannot change without a new vote. All the potential scenarios that were posed to all in D204 we just that, scenarios. Not laws. Boundaries and location included. Yes, the SB proposed those scenarios, but they were not formal by any means. The only legal backlash that the public can accomplish is to vote them out of office and at re-election time.

I take full responsibility for my vote! I don’t hold anyone else accountable for my INTERPRETATION OF THE REFERENDUM! I knew that the scenarios presented to me were just that and could potentially fall by the wayside.

To Family of 4

"I'm sure your parents would be ashamed. "

Actually, my father is a retired corporate attorney who practiced law for 30 years. In his retirement career he was elected mayor of a small town in the Midwest so he has a better-than-average sense of how politics works. I showed him the NSFOC suit. Based on his 30-year legal career and 8 years in public office he thinks all counts are baseless and that Vicker's public statements at the first referendum hearing will void the estoppal count.

My father is very proud of me and thinks people like you are idiots.

So there.

apparently too dumb to get it...because answering your questions do not scare people into sending them money. You aren't the one apparently too dumb since I doubt if you sent them a check.

Would someone from the NSFOC please explain to me why the pipeline running through the Eola site is dangerous to Metea but is not dangerous to McCarty, Georgetown, or Gombert? It's the exact same pipeline running past all 4 schools and the distances between the pipeline and buildings are roughly the same (well, except for Gombert I suppose). If it's really not safe for Metea, it stands to reason it's not safe for the elementary schools -- and something should be done about it, especially if your argument is that we should not build schools next to pipelines, right?

I've seen this question posted in one form or another and have yet to read a direct response.

Looking forward to hearing from you. Thanks.

family 4. You must feel as though you were promised that your particular children would attend the new school at the BB site. I am sorry but building a third HS is good for the entire district. The NSFOC lawsuit asks for the BB site or no site at all. With all due respect to you and your neighbors, that is self centered, selfish, and just plain wrong. I cannot support an organization that is structured to profit just a few families and hold the rest of the district hostage to thier lawsuit.

I agree with the anonymous poster who stated that the decisions of the few owners of the NSFOC will be the true result of the lawsuit. Most lawsuits are filed with the intention of reaching a settlement. It is obvious that that is the intention of the NSFOC owners. There is no case law supporting their suit and they do not have the money to take this all the way. Obviously their goal is to reach a settlement that benefits just the owners since there cannot be a settlement that will satisfy the views of all the blogging supporters. I hope the district waits them out until the elitists are out of money.

Say NO to Entitlement!

We have seen so many issues with the school leaders and board lying and deceiving the parents. I was hoping this lawsuit would happen. It's about time people came forward and made a big wave!! I'm so proud to hear of these people standing up for honesty. The board seems to be good at ignoring issues, shoving things under the carpet, not addressing issues, lying and even deleting posts on their webiste. I find this extremely unethical. Honestly I feel so sorry for the parents that are not standing up for their rights to be told the truth and then to not have their issues addressed. How do they expect to have any impact on making the world a better place? Those that say "politics is lies - get used to it" are simply laying down and rolling over to be taken advantage of. I say buck up and get some backbone!! Show your worth! Why do you want to be walked on? We CAN make a difference. Would you be upset if you were promised a trip to Cancun and given a hotdog? Would you say - "Well I guess I should have expected to be lied to" Well open your eyes - that is what is happening here. And to choose a site that was previously thrown out? How can you sleep at night if you support this? I really feel so sorry for those not strong willed enough to speak up. I wasn't brought up that way and doubt you were - I'm sure your parents would be ashamed. Where would our country be if we simply accepted things dished out to us that we felt were not right? I shudder to think! Open your eyes and lets get the board to do the right thing. If we can't get the property we voted on then let them offer another vote. How dare they take our money we gave them for a particular school on a paticular site and use it for something else!! Go NSFOC!!

We bought our house before Neuqua was built. We opened our check books and paid for Nequa with no personal gain - in fact this is what seperated north and south naperville - and it wasn't us in the north that did this seperating. WE was bacically built out at that time as well. They gained a lot with Neuqua being built on our expense - we did'nt sue! To those who claim the real estate will only stand to gain in the North - the same was true when Neuqua was built - the existing real estate only improved more homes/subdivisions went up. There was a post earlier stating their is not enough real estate to back fill Metae - there wasn't enough backfill to fill Neuqua at the time it was built. New subdivisions went up even TG around currently operating Electrical, railroad - everything their claiming about Eola. It only makes sense that the third high school goes in the north; financially speaking as well as for balancing purposes.

Thanks NSFOC you're making the SB look good!!:) on March 24, 2008 1:21 PM

YOU must be a school board member or related to one! Anyone with a statement like yours has got it all wrong.

I believe NSFOC is working hard to bring justice to the inappropriate conduct brought on by the school board. I personally would like to see them all resign! They have done a horrible job with the 3rd high school issue.

What gets me are the people on this blog that all they can do is go after subdivisions and not focus on the well being of the children who could be in danger.

Why wouldn't you want to hold a School Board accountable for their actions. They seem to be in a hurry just plowing ahead not even concerned with any potiental enviromental issues. The SB should wait until the BB is settled and indepth findings are done on the Eola site.

I will be voting against any incumbents in the upcoming election. I want someone who is fair and listens and doesn't have their own agenda. I wonder what sidekicks they are getting and from who?

By No Smoke Screen At All...Get It? on March 23, 2008 11:29 PM

You are just plain CUTE!! OMG! You really had us! LEGAL STRATEGY!? Why didn't we think of that sooner?! You're right "we" didn't get anybody.... YOU DID THAT ON YOUR OWN :)

Sorry to sane in 204 with my previous post..I intended to direct it to the post submitted by sick of 204 Liars (aka Mrs. Collins).

anonymous on March 23, 2008 11:59 PM
"I hate to shime in here but a few comments have to be made."

This is not about boundaries it is about constitutional rights. Negating a vote.

By Dollars and sense on March 24, 2008 2:36 AM
To Anon on 3/23 at 6:11 AM--"I said the lawsuit doesn't take into consideration whether the high school is NEEDED or not..."

Dollars and Sense,

Again, I find this very disturbing that they (NSFOC)didn't take it into account whether a third high school was needed or not when the 3rd relief requested states...

In the event Defendant is unable to purchase Brach-Brodie property (as was already determined due to exorbitant jury price set) order it to return the money they have already collected from the March 21, 2006 Bond Referendum and enjoin it from further collecting money from the taxpayers.

I guess they could build it out of happy wishes and fairy dust but it's more likely they would need the money from the referendum.
The fact that they are "willing" to jeopardize our district's 3rd high school over boundaries is absolutely shameful.This is blatant admission that they didn't vote for the 3rd school based on need like MOST of us....they voted YES(if in fact this was even the case?) because they liked how close it was to their house and their kids would get to go to a NEW school!
Oh, and don't forget what a new school can do to boost property values! People I can't believe you are not embarrassed by this! WOW!!!
No matter how many times you try to equate a meal at a diner or buying a shirt at Kohl's to our 2006 referendum vote it just doesn't apply.People please smarten up. Folks that can justify sacrificing a 3rd high school for their selfish motives is just plain pathetic and speaks volumes regarding their character.Sane in 204...sorry but that applies to Mr. Collins too. Either he got played by this group and their motives or he knew the motives and pushed full steam ahead, searching for anything they could use to prolong the process, right along with them. Either way he doesn't come out looking any better.
Make no mistake... this action if allowed to continue, will not be forgotten or forgiven.NSFOC makes the School Board look good.

My son while working at the Jewel 95/tr 59 noticed fliers being put on the parked cars. He brought one home, nice job as if the crap advertisement in the Sun wasn't enough. Same numbers plastered all over the parking lot do us all a favor-- save a tree and discontinue this practice. Well at least the meeting is at more of a blue collar location. Wonder if they will be serving up any captain & coke, I am better at asking hard hitting questions with a couple in me.

Has anybody noticed that the NSFOC is taking donations and not corporate owners (shareholders) to their organization?

Has anybody realized that this gives the NSFOC the right to settle the case for the settlement that they think benefits the precious few who actually own the group?

Has anybody realized that their attorney only represents the owners of the NSFOC and does not represnt the donors of the NSFOC?

Does anybody realize their attorney can mislead the donors of the NSFOC in order to protect the best interests of the owners of the NSFOC?

The NSFOC has already heard from their attorney that the environmental issues will be resolved but need to play the environmental card to keep the suckers donating money.

The uninformed are the easiest to scam.

Fools and their money are easily parted.

Big Mike, Nice analogy

To: By Sick of 204 Liars on March 23, 2008 1:01 AM

This has been the most educated response that I've heard to date.

By Sane in 204 on March 23, 2008 8:59 PM

Hate to break it to you but no one cares how big of a house you live in and why bring it up unless your insecure.

Regarding the NSFOC, and their filings my guess is that these are working folks and they were doing the best they can.

Also, enough with the WV school and not wanting kids to go there. It has to do with the SCHOOL BOARD! The SCHOOL BOARD mishandled everything by not being open with the public and then dismissing EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY NO MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE.

Go back to the school board and ask them to be open about what is happening.

Also MR. ANDREWS, my hat is off to you for being brave to stand up to the school board and ask questions unlike most of the folks on here blogging. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK............THERE ARE MANY STANDING BEHIND YOU IN YOUR COURT!! ME FOR ONE!!

PLEASE FIND OUT IF THE LAND IS SAFE I HAVE FRIENDS WHO WOULD BE SENDING KIDS TO THAT SCHOOL.

To Proud Merchant:

Please send the email and the flyer to NSFOC. They will be able to use it as exhibit A in their court hearing.

And also feel free to email it to any people who post that nonsense about "We voted on a referendum for a 3rd high school...NOT the location you bunch of sniveling brats!" What a crock.

Let me make an analogy. I walk into a diner. One of the items on the menu is "eggs". The waitress comes over and asks me what I want. I say, "I'm thinking eggs." She says "Oh yeah, our scrambled eggs are the best, you should get them!" I say, "OK, eggs it is." Then, 15 minutes later she brings me out two boiled eggs on a plate. I say "what's this?" She says "eggs, just like you ordered." I say "Wait a minute, you sold me on how good your scrambled eggs are!" She says "Sorry, scrambled eggs are unavailable today. All we can give you are boiled eggs." I say "but that's not what I chose!" She says, "Listen buddy, the menu says 'eggs', it doesn't say anything about 'scrambled eggs' anywhere. All you said is 'OK, eggs it is', so I brought you eggs. Here's your bill, have a nice day."

So, do I or do I not have grounds to complain? Have I been misled? Would I be justified in trying to send the boiled eggs back to the kitchen and order something else? Basically this analogy is EXACTLY what has happened in our school district.

BTW - I am not an NSFOC member, an NSFOC Fraud member, a board member masquerading under a secret pen name, an employee of the Naperville Sun, nor an attorney for Brach or Brodie. Thanks.

To Anon on 3/23 at 6:11 AM--I said the lawsuit doesn't take into consideration whether the high school is NEEDED or not. Let's say 100% of the district agrees we need a new high school, even the NSFOC agrees we need one. This would not change their lawsuit one bit. The lawsuit is about the school's location and how it was marketed to the voters. The lawsuit doesn't state "build on BB or not at all", it states "build on BB or return our money"; namely, scratch the 06 referendum. To the NSFOC, it's about preventing the immediate purchase of Eola so the voters can have input on selecting another school site and its boundaries like we did in '06. But I'm sure they acknowlege that since time and land are in short supply, the outcome of this could be no school at all. They're willing to take that chance.

To South Sider on 3/23 at 1:12 AM--Another night owl, welcome! My BK analogy was not based on a bait and switch situation. Since I don't think any bait and switch occurred, either by Metzger's definition or Webster's, the analogy wasn't written to explain one. It was written to illustrate how some people felt about having ordered one thing (BB) and then being forced to accept something else (Eola), and why they feel a lawsuit is justified.

to anonymous at 8:28

are you sure you drove past the Eola site? I drive past it every morning and every evening. You cannot see any of what you mentioned from Eola road. Nice try but I guess the other poster was right...the uninformed are the easiest scammed. What site were you looking at? The western boundary of Tall Grass?

FYI, your post says that nobody has discussed who will pay to clean up the sight. This has been discussed over and over. State and Federal law require all remediation to be done by Midwest Gen. This is not a secret. Friday's Daily Herald says that Midwest Gen has said they will pay for remediation. Awfully nice of them to say but the law requires them to do this anyway.

Say No to Entitlement.

To Proud Merchant on 3/23 at 9:13 PM--Thanks for clarifying what a true bait and switch is. I'm sure most of the people here realize the difference between this and a loss leader. True bait and switches were used in retail decades ago and we've had laws for quite some time prohibiting them. That's why when you go to a store to buy an item that has been advertised at a reduced price, they have to offer you a "rain check" if they run out, otherwise it could look like a b&s. People are using the term bait and switch here as it was used by Mark Metzger to promote the 06 referendum. I think this is part of the email you're referring to:

"So that leaves the question of why the Board isn’t likely to revisit boundaries. As painful and agonizing as the process was for
residents, I can assure you that it’s much worse for Board
Members. None of us will be in any hurry to do that again. That
means that the only way the boundaries are likely to change is if
the Board is willing to abandon one of the core tenets of this
school district – public involvement in the boundary process – and
simply decides to make the changes by itself. Frankly, if we were
going to do that, we would have done so in January rather than go
through the process we selected. And don’t forget that doing that
means that the majority which voted for the selected plan would
need to decide to undo that decision. Someone on the losing side
of a motion can’t move to reconsider.
Beyond the practical reality lies the idea of simple fairness. We
did the boundaries two years earlier than normal because the voters
told us that they needed to know the boundaries in order to
evaluate their votes. To change the boundaries after the vote
smacks of a bait and switch and is just simply unfair.... Do you want to believe those who stand up and are willing to be
accountable for their words and actions or those who sling mud
and spread lies from a perch of anonymity? I hope for the sake of
this community, our children and our property values we make the
right choice. My vote will be YES, and I encourage you to do so
as well.
Mark Metzger
mark_metzger@ipsd.org

I'm also sure the use of Kohl's and Macy's in the analogy was meant in a hypothetical way and is not a reflection on those stores at all.

Anyway, I think it would help if everyone took a minute to carefully read Mark Metzger's email. A lot of the things that folks are attacking each other about on this blog are mentioned in Mr. Metzger's email, most notably:

"That means that the only way the boundaries are likely to change is if the Board is willing to abandon one of the core tenets of this school district - public involvement in the boundary process - and simply decides to make the changes by itself." This is precisely what the SB has done. Most people feel betrayed not because they are "entitled" or "selfish", but because the school board has--in their own words--abandoned one of the core tenets of this school district.

How about:

"And don’t forget that doing that [the SB changing the boundaries on their own] means that the majority which voted for the selected plan would need to decide to undo that decision." Like 'em or hate 'em, this is what the NSFOC is doing. They voted for the referendum, and they are now attempting through legal channels to undo that decision because the selected plan cannot be accomplished. I'm fairly certain the NSFOC does not constitute the majority of the yes voters, but the SB could put this to rest if they would just put it before the voters to find out, and they obviously have no intention of doing that. That's why some people view the lawsuit as their only option.

And finally:

"I hope for the sake of this community, our children and our property values we make the right choice." Mention the words 'property values' on this blog and some folks go self-rightously berserk, virtuously claiming only the selfish and entitled would consider such a thing. Then they had better add Mr. Metzger and the rest of the board to that list, because they brought up property values a lot back in '06.

Something to sleep on . . .

Majorianthrax - 10:45 p.m.

....Yes TG Resident your subdivision has been the driving force in tearing apart #204 simply because you didn't want to go to WV. I am not saying it is you personally. But some of your neighbors are very much responsible for the anger and even hate that poisons this district.........

Thanks for your response, for being honest about your background and subdivision. While I'm sure there are residents here in TG who have not presented themselves, or their points, very well throughout this ordeal over the last few years, I think it's fair to say that it is only a few residents - some of whom may not even live here anymore. There are people like this to be found everywhere. These blogs are only half the proof. My request was only to ask that you stop making generalized comments that TG is poisoning the district, as if TG is soley to blame for this mess. I recall reading quite a few negative comments that have been made about WE and its efforts to attain Naperville mailing addresses and also to be included in the NV attendance area when NV was first built. Don't know where you fall in all of that, and it really doesn't matter to me. But, it seems that a lot of the guff that WE is taking now dates back to those events. Is it fair? Do you like being lumped in? Clearly you do not..........I don't blame you. But I really don't think TG is the main reason for most of the negativity being flung your way today.

Like you, I voted for the school. Turned out I voted for it based on false enrollment numbers provided by the SB and Admin. I also voted on it based on false information provided in terms of where it was to be located (BB) and, as it turns out, false information about where it would NOT be located (Eola). To me, the SB's actions over the last several months/years are every bit poison to this district - more so than any organization that is simply is trying to hold them accountable.

If you are happy about going to WV, that's great. If TG ends up going there, so be it. But think about what is going to happen when, as you suggest, WV is closed. Are you ready for the hike to MV? We (TG, WE, among others) are only the first in a long line of south to central/north backfill to keep Metea on the map. Oustide of all of the ridiculous potential hazards, which probably do not exist on other sites and are most likely somewhere between what the SB is telling us and the NFSOC/NFSOCfraud sites would like us to believe, this location is an ABSOLUTE OUTPOST. Have you driven to it? Please do! There is no long-term strategy apparent with this site once the student populations level off and start declining. It is not the right location because it offers such little flexibility. How ludicrous to think of having to bus even more kids so far, forever. How does that fit the SB's criteria? We seem to throw criteria out the window when it doesn't fit the SB's end game, don't we? Furthermore, if it is the long-term vision to eventually bag WV altogether, and not just a rumor, why is none of that vision being shared with the public? Why is the public not involved in creating the vision?

In the district in which I work, new schools have recently been built, new boundaries set. There were COMMITTEES set up - made up of constituents, teachers, admin., board members, etc. to establish criteria for boundaries and related issues that occur due to growth. EVERY decision was held up consistently against the 7-8 criteria (not 3!) that the committees established, and HARD DATA was presented by the Super/Admin. to establish how each decision met/did not meet the set criteria. Example, if there was to be a transportation savings, and there was one, it was presented in a hard dollar amount! There was none of this "we believe", "in our opinion", "we gave it our best" generalized B.S. that the SB has been feeding us for years now.

Like you, I don't think it's fair to the north siders to build yet another school in the deep south, even though that is the only place where growth can and will continue. That is why I think the SB chose BB, knowing from the get go that it was going to be more expensive. It was relatively in the middle - the best they could do. Hard for them to know if they can actually still deliver on this (they admitted they have a huge surplus of $91M, which is NOT standard operating procedure for school districts by the way...yet another issue people should be questioning) since they have basically stopped talking to the BB people. They exhibited poor judgment, got burned by BB lawyers and the jury, their egos got bruised, so now they're off to the next misadventure - Eola.

You clearly don't have to agree with me, but I hope at least I have somewhat changed your view by presenting some ideas on how all of this could have been and should have been handled much better by our "leaders". Please don't make TG the bad guy because some people who live here (and elsewhere) have asked for some accountability. I can assure you that no one wants or likes lawsuits - just answers that were not and are still not forthcoming.

Proud Merchant against Bait and Switch on March 23, 2008 9:13 PM

There may have been a case for you folks if the vote was passed and then they changed the boundaries with the full intent of doing so all along. 2 years and the SB doing everything they could to make the BB site work does not constitute "intential bait & switch". It is a decision of fiscal responsibility to walk away from a plan that the district cannot afford do to 3rd party actions. No one on the SB had anything but good intentions in trying to make the BB work. In fact, the members of the SB are not paid for their positions. The extra lengths they went to to try and make the BB site work were on their personal timeclocks of which they got paid nothing and were pulled away from their families.

It is so blatently clear that there was never the intention of trying to dupe anyone. BTW -- Just because a few neighborhoods felt the location of the site was the only reason they voted yes. To them I say that the other 97% of the district was doing it for the very reason--we needed a 3rd high school sue to overcrowding. Not personal gain.

If you folks truly wanted answers to the safety of the Eola site you wouldn't be out there creating false risks and trying to put the rest of the district into fear so they will support your cause. You would sit down, shut up, and listed to what the actual professional findings have thus far been. The people get paid to do the tests regardless of their conclusions and regardless of whether or not we purchase the land. They, the professionals, have nothing personally invested in the results.

Lastly, I find it humerous that the folks in TG can justify their pool being 35 yards from a operable power plant and think that their kids are at less risk, however, the School, about 5x the distance away from the Eolas plant (that no longer operates and is being dismantled.) You fail to leave out the important details like -- TG is actively operating while Eola is not generating any electricity nor with it ever again.

A woman posted last week that she was from TG and she was concerned about sending the kids to WV due to the gang influences, etc. Although I don't agree with the risks at WV (I am a WV parent) I must say I respect her honesty. She doesn't feel it necessary to hide behind a lawsuit that is nothing more than a smoke screen.

OK, let's just say for discussion purposes that all you negative bloggers are CORRECT! Ok? Your suspicions are dead on...This IS about boundaries...So What? Just say that "SOME" TG/WE DON'T want their kids to go to Waubonsie...it's too far, test scores aren't as high as Neuqua, it's Aurora, not Naperville, we want our kids to walk, whatever, etc. etc. etc. (all true, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion, you can't tell them what they should want or not want...by the way)...you are just RIGHT. Okay? Congrats. You are so right. So, be comfortable in that you GOT THEM. Okay? Now. Know that THEY want a change and are smart enough to know that THAT would never stand up in court. OK? So...um, what should we do? The environmental issue (a real one, by the way, just look into it) is a LEGAL STRATEGY FOLKS. Mess that up...and you get your way. So...you can stop with the "we see through the smoke screen" comments and the "we got you" comments...no one is trying to fool you. You did not figure anything out. Duh. It's a LEGAL STRATEGY!!! You may not agree with it, but you didn't "get" anyone. Quit thinking you are so smart, bloggers...No one was even trying to fool you. Get over it. It has nothing to do with you. Legal Strategy Succeeds? Boundaries Win. Legal Strategy Fails? Plan B. And...yes it's a self serving lawsuit. If no one serves you (i.e. your elected officials) you serve yourself. And, finally, if you think TG/WE folks are "wealthy"...then you don't know wealth...and you sound like a total bumpkin saying these folks are "haves" or whatever. Really, stop.

to: Proud Merchant against Bait and Switch on March 23, 2008 9:13 PM Who wrote: There is no "bait and switch" in retail. That would be very bad for any retail establishment.

____________________________________________________________

This is exactly why the government made "bait and switch" illegal. Perhaps you have never heard of it because you work for a reputable store, but I can assure you that it takes place, and is still taught in both the undergraduate and graduate level courses.

Again, I know what you guys are trying to say about bait and switch, but you really should just call it fraud, or fraud by deception. Your case seems less credible to people like me (Marketing majors) when you use the incorrect term. I would like to see the document you reference from Mark Metzger - could be that he is using it incorrectly as well.

In response to all these posts in regards to "Kohls or Macy's markets a 100% cotton shirt for sale for $20."

I just have to respond as I've worked in retail for 25 years. Ironically 20 of those years for Marshall Field's. There is no "bait and switch" in retail. That would be very bad for any retail establishment. Reputable retailers don't mislead customers. I would consider both Kohl's and Macy's in the reputable category as neither would be capable of such a misleading practice.

There is no "bait and switch" in retail (at least for those retailers interested in staying in business.) There is something, to my knowledge called a "loss leader". In an "loss leader" advertisement , the retailer advertises a product below cost in the hope of luring customers into the store. Once they are in the store, they will purchase more merchandise.

I think some are confusing the term "bait and switch" with a "loss leader". Trust me, major retailer chains such as Macy's and Kohl's don't make a practice of "bait and switch". In fact, most retailers would never practice the "bait and switch" deception on customers as THEY WOULD NEVER COME BACK into our stores. We like happy customers as that's what keeps them coming back.

As long as I've been in retail, I've never heard of "bait and switch" until I read an email from Mark Metzger talking to "bait and switch" in terms of BOUNDARIES.

I received an email forward from Mark Metzger the morning of the 2006 referendum vote. It was marked URGENT. In that email, Mark Metzger talked to bait and switch in terms of boundaries. It told me that I could trust that the district would NOT change boundaries.

I trusted his words and voted accordingly.

What a mistake.

If the Sun's editors would like a copy of that email (with headings and verification) as well as the flyer that prompted the Metzger email, I'd be glad to send. Just let me know on this blog where to send it to.

Mark Metzger defined "bait and switch" for me. As I've stated, I'd never heard of it before his email.

Ok, let's review a little time-table again to see if anything comes to light. Here are some notable pieces of information re: the lawsuit & timing.

Official Announcement of SB Plan to NOT build on BB Land due to cost: 10/26/2007
Land Recommendation made: 01/15/08.
Boundary Recommendation made: 02/12/08.
NSFOC.org registered: 19-Feb-2008 04:24:07 UTC

NSFOC, if you want to be taken seriously and not have everyone believe this is about your kids not going to WV, why wasn't your lawsuit filed right away after the 10/26/07 announcement?

OK, didn't do it then... how about right after the 1/15/08 new site announcement?

Why did you wait until it was confirmed that your kids would go to WV before all of your "concerns" were raised? Everyone can see right through your bogus lawsuit and see what the real issue is. NWVFOC -- No WV for our Children.

As for the comments supporting Mr. Collins. It's great that you are defending him but did you ever ask him why he would take on such a ridiculous lawsuit? I don't think he will be getting any good publicity from this. I question the integrity of an attorney wasting their time on such a suit and I also question his legal knowledge when he states in the lawsuit "Bait & Switch". I strongly recommend Mr. Collins get out his law books and look that one up. If he did he would not have agreed to put it in the lawsuit because it doesn't in anyway fit the legal definition. To file it as such is irresponsible and shows a lack of integrity.

Although I appreciate peoples dissapointments and frustrations I will say that I am disgusted with the NSFOC and their self-serving lawsuit. As a taxpayer of 204 I am one of the people the NSFOC is suing so a small

BTW-My home rivals TG and WE in price, size and quality. I don't feel any more entitled to special treatment than the folks living in a home worth 1/10th of the value my home. I am respectful of what is the good of the entire district even if it doesn't all work in my favor.

I think everyone should forget about the boundary issue. Boundaries will come and go as the population of 204 changes. I�m still surprised by the lack of concern about the environmental hazards that the Eola property possesses. Has anyone actually driven by the property? It looks like it is located in an industrial park. If it�s not the power lines, then it is the diesel fuel tanks. If it�s not the tanks, then it�s the high-pressure natural gas lines. If it�s not the gas lines, then it�s the railroad. Drive by the property for yourself and see.

Now my kids are firmly in the NVHS area. But after I drove by the site, I can�t blame people for being worried about the health hazards. I wouldn�t want my kids to go to school there, let alone participate in sporting events, as will happen as NVHS, WVHS, NNHS, and NCHS play various sports on the MVHS grounds.

What galls me even more is that the SB hasn�t released any environmental reports. The SB hasn�t even disclosed contracts with the current property owners on who is responsible to clean up the site or when they�ll get it cleaned up. The SB has only given their opinions, their beliefs, their estimates, but no real proof. If the SB was more open about the process and showed evidence that gives foundation to their statements, they could have nipped all of this in the bud��.

To Anonymous on March 21, 2008 8:44 PM

"It is a Democracy where people can stand up and question governmental officals WE ELECTED and WE ARE PAYING FOR WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS! How do you think laws are passed and policies changed? It is because someone stands up and says: This is not right, ordinary everyday individuals who we feel the government officals elected are not adequately doing their jobs. It is done everyday. God Bless America! "

How are those lawsuits against Congress going.

Question your leaders, yes. Challenge them to change laws, yes. Sue them? But suing them when you don't get what you want? Childish.

To Anonymous on March 21, 2008 10:25 PM

"The school board is an elected body yet are responsible to make GOOD decisions for the entire district. To say they are permitted to do "WHATEVER THEY WANT" is simply untrue. "

As an elected body, you elected them to represent you. That does not mean they have to make decisions you like or based on your sense of GOOD or BAD. You get the choice every few years to vote them out if you think they are making bad decisions.

To No Future Referendum on March 22, 2008 11:48 AM

"This will be a "fool me once" issue that comes back in spades."

As it should be. If your elected officials lie to you to get your votes, you can vote them out. You can vote down anything they bring to you to approve based on their lies. A lawsuit is not needed.

Missing the most fundamental point here of all. Why did District start condemnation process, represent it would and could (up to 600k per acre) afford any judgment that came back on BB, and create boundaries BEFORE the 2nd referendum....

Howie knows...the Board knows...

Dr. D decided he did not have to live up to the promises made by those before him (and no wonder he seems to have had lawsuits against the Districts he leads everywhere he goes).

Looks like the Dr. D and the folks up in Brookdale are about to have a real bad few months...

If the SB would have just handled this whole situation better (there's still time if your listening). They have fueled the public to turn on each other rather than toward the SB. The entitlement issue should be dropped squarely on the SB & NEW Sup. shoulders from the looks of it. They have flat out refused to answer questions and give key information to the public. What are they hiding and why are they in such a hurry? They are only making themselves "look" guilty by withholding. The waters need to be calmed and they are the only ones that can attempt that. They should AT LEAST TRY!!! The SB is the one that can open lines of communication and get this lawsuit dropped if they choose, but this looks to be a personal revenge of some kind. (why else would intelligent business people be handling the situation this way?) Something just isn't right with it all and that was WAY before any lawsuit.

As for the rest of the "mud slingers": labeling certain subdivisions is completely unfair and PREJUDICE to say the least. Most of the people around those areas are self-made and have sacrificed quite a bit, just like most of you! Just because someone is financially comfortable does NOT mean they do NOT have hardships in their life - WAKE UP PEOPLE. That's like saying that all poor people are terrible just because they live in an area you don't like. How small minded is that, really? There are always going to be a few "mud slingers" in EVERY neighborhood (look around you), but to condemn an entire area based on just a few is SHAMEFUL. Everyone is entitled to ask questions and demand answers. Everyone has a "story" and it's not up to any of us to past judgement on them (from either side). AND FOR GOD'S SAKE STOP the personal named attacks - aim it at the group, NOT Mr. Andrews. I feel for this man's family for the way he's been treated by his community for standing up and asking questions, but he is NOT the only one behind it all so please leave the personal attacks out and debate this issue on a more mature level. I hoped that the Sun's moderator would have higher standards for their blogs (equal to ALL sides).

By mark on March 22, 2008 10:04 AM
OK, let's keep it simple. Who would disagree with this:

1) Kohls or Macy's markets a 100% cotton shirt for sale for $20
2) You go in, buy the sweater, but the label doesn't say what material it is made out of
3) You then find out that the shirt is made of a different material, one that hurts your skin, and one you WOULD NOT have bought if you knew it was made of a different material then cotton.

Mark,
Thanks for keeping it so "simple".
Say there's a referendum for a third high school. They show the enrollments and compare these numbers to districts with less kids and MORE high schools. You decide to vote. The ballot reads do you want a third high school at a cost of $124,000,000 yes or no. You vote yes. The property the school board was hoping to obtain (after the referendum passes giving them the $ to buy a property)comes back much higher than anyone thought. This $124,000,000 voter approved bond will no longer cover the cost. The school board says too bad we will build on this property anyway and gouge you for the additional cost one way or the other. THIS is bait and switch .Not choosing to do it is fiscal resposibility.

By Sick of 204 Liars on March 23, 2008 1:01 AM .....
There, there Mrs. Collins. You know this comes with the territory. I actually have a list of bungled cases by Mr. Collins(one very similar to our 204 chaos/mess he helped to incite and then lost the case anyway) but he is the not the one we are debating currently.He knew very well what he was getting into($$$) but as evidence has shown repeatedly, egos sometimes cloud good judgement.

This too will pass. I'd just take that vacation while there's still 204 money coming in......

By Anonymous on March 23, 2008 2:44 PM
How about this...

Lawsuit would be dropped (no insistence on building at BB) if there is a new referendum????

You are too funny! You really are a piece of work. SURE let's have another referendum if you're willing to drop the lawsuit that has a snowball's chance (how nice of you to offer to withdraw the lawsuit against us:)! I'm SURE you would love yet another opportunity to foil this 3rd high school. You really need to stop thinking we are as dumb as you.
But hey, don't stop believin in yourself and your noble cause. It's gotten you really far and look at all of the friends you've made along the way!

To Anon on 3/23 at 6:25 AM--Well done! I knew I'd get a negative slam for that, and you didn't disappoint. Actually I'm flattered; I had no idea I have a fan who keeps track of my posts. I'd return the courtesy and look your posts up, except that you choose to use an anonymous handle. But we both understand that this way you don't have to be accountable for what you post, you can just log on, hurl a lot of crap at others, and hide.

Sorry you didn't appreciate the analogy. Like I said, it's really very simple, but obviously not simple enough for you.

How about this...

Lawsuit would be dropped (no insistence on building at BB) if there is a new referendum????

Probably would be dropped if new land selected that was not on land identified to be an envirenmental concern by the Board itself and that geographically located near the middle of the population center(per the Board's criteria throughout the entire 3 year ordeal until January of 08)

Eola is more expensive...but missing the point anyway. Forget "bait and switch". Stolen from Metzger who said it would be "tantamount" to bait and switch if the boundaries were changed", and admittedly most of what he says is wrong, so, for purposes of arguement, will accept your point.

How about...say whatever you need to to switch the no vote to yes (knew from the consultants needed to release boundaries and land to get the vote and Howie knew what the referendum was about (see quotes above).

suzy sunshine...you are victim of the propaganda machine known as NSFOC. They know that there was no "Bait and Switch" in the BB vs Eola deal. They just want to stall the proceeding so their kids get another year at NVHS...no matter the cost to the taxpayers of the district. Because they live at Tall Grass and Whine Eagle, they feel entitled.

What is it with everyone calling it "Bait and Switch" - as one person pointed out that Bait and Switch is a tactic in which those in control KNOW they are offering one thing and then switching TO SOMETHING MORE EXPENSIVE once you walk in the store. Eola isn't even more expensive.

This School Board clearly showed their intention and every desire ws to build on BB land - what part of that did you miss? When MM was spending hours and driving to Springfield and working with lawyers? Or was it when they kept it going for so many months? All the time and meetings and work the entire Board did to explore every avenue? Do you not realize that they were as devastated as us, if NOT MORE?!

Who here believed in their wildest that the price would come back as it did? Did we not think the jury was smokin' a crack pipe on the lawn to pull that out of their ???

No, I don't believe they did anything but pursue BB to the bitter end.

I'm sorry it didn't work out - but let's move on! And stop blaming a group of hard working volunteers.

Here is your right - vote them off and YOU RUN FOR THE JOB!

Brookdale did wear orange shirts (hey, I'm not from there and I wore one in support of my neighbors!) and protest over the boundaries. And they rallied against the 3rd high school because of the split middle school ...

Tall Grass at the Referendum meeting got absolutely UGLY over the idea of being removed from NVHS - it was not pretty.

And I support them both - they had disappointments and rallied as they worked thru this process.

Suing the District, hence, suing each and everyone of your neighbors is crossing the line!

AND by the way - all of us up and down Eola pretty much just opened our checkbooks to pay taxes first to build NVHS for you and then when it was to be on the BB site with nary a legal suit. We sent out kids to WVHS and were more than fine! We think its interesting you can't do the same ...

Oh right - it's about YOU! The majority doesn't count in your book.

juno on March 22, 2008 4:45 PM
to anon 3/22 12:50 pm

You really seem to enjoy foaming at the mouth about those terrible folks from the south side of Naperville. All of Naperville was treated to a bait and switch. And now it appears, at least according to the Herald, that the board is again going to delay releasing environmental studies of the Eola tract. Should it not be our duty as taxpayers and parents to know the condition of that land? Someone close to me recently went into remission from a life-threatening disease that was brought about by environmental contaminents. I just want the facts. I just want a full disclosure from the SB. But never mind me or my concerns. I'm just another south-sider.
_______________________________________

I agree with you. We need more information on the land.

By Run Forest Run... on March 22, 2008 2:07 PM
Agreed....

Thank God for Dr. Daescher and his willingness to move forward with doing what he thinks is best for the District. To those of you who continue to waste time challenging the direction the District is going, please, shut up.

Could you imagine what would happen if Dr. Daechner listened to what the people who disagree with him had to say?? We chose Dr. Daechner, and he knows better than the 204 teacher's union, the District PTA groups, the parents with special needs children, the jury in the BB case, the lawyers who say there is a case for damages due to the District walking away from the condemnation verdict, the folks from of Jefferson County who asked him to leave town, the parents who feel they have had their rights violated, etc.

Many parents feel they have not been wronged and does not a democracy mean that it is time for the rest to get in line (in that a majority feels they have not had THEIR rights violated, the rest have no right to care about their individual rights).

You can go to the polls and vote out the Board in the future. Until then, they have every right to spend your tax dollars as they see fit!

And I am tired of the whole constitution arguement. But for this document, the NSFOC would never have the right to challenge what is going on...nor would the judicial system serve as a checks and balance to challenge what the Board and District are doing.

In fact, it was the United States Supreme Court (elitists as well) that dare to step in and overturn Dr. Daechner's attempt to use race as a means of districting in Lville. Again, how dare they challenge Dr. Daeschner's authority (just a bunch of busybodies).

The press and that whole freedom of speech thing...a real problem as well. They seemed to have a big impact on Lville choosing not to extend Dr. Daechner's contract and running him out of town.

Again, thank you Dr. Daeschner (happy Easter...but do not even get me started on the whole Jesus thing).

I presently live 8.05 miles from Waubonsie and that is where my children HAPPILY attend. The array of AP classes and very experienced staff has been exceptional.
Why has this 8.05 mile distance always been okay for me --but TG people think it is not ok for them and it has suddenly become an issue? (And it won't even be that far for them?!)
Should I have filed a lawsuit years ago?
No, very silly.

BB property is not working out -- the board tried. (should have gave up that fight a long time ago -- money hungry and greedy landwoners. I would never do business with them!) Eola site seems to make more sense. Lets do the due diligence, remedy any safety concerns and move forward. ASAP. If you know of another site that costs the appropriate amount, is presently in our district and makes location sense, please say so.

And I say ASAP because I have a student at Granger MS and that school is seriously overcrowded! Our class sizes are huge and it is busting at the seams. We are anxious for the new middle school at the WVHS Gold site -- regardless on where Matea is located.

Lets do what is right for the entire 204 district -- not what is right just for me. Think about this NSFOC people. Think about someone besides yourself. Our highschools are very crowded. We voted for a third high school -- lets get it started.

THIS is what I have taught my children. We need to think about the greater good and not just our own pecuniary interests.

Be proud of D204 -- all of its schools are excellent -- and will continue to be so with our continued support. Lets put our money to good use -- not to break each other down.

"This fact might make it difficult for you to fit me into the neat little category you've labeled "selfish southsider", but if you try I'm sure you'll find a way to twist that into a negative as well."

Dollars and Sense,
We don't have to ...you've already done that with your own archives of posts. Also, sorry the BK "analogy" didn't work out for you.There's really no explaining when it doesn't apply whatsoever. Good luck with your agenda and justifying your actions to yourself. Say hi to your cohorts, Greg and Todd. Hope it works out for those eighth graders!

By Dollars and sense on March 22, 2008 9:17 PM
To Makes you Wonder on 3/22 at 10:49 AM--Nope. The lawsuit doesn't take into consideration whether the high school is needed or not. To the NSFOC, this is a totally separate issue.

How can it be a totally separate issue if their lawsuit states build on BB or DON'T build at all? That's a shame if the lawsuit seeks this but they didn't take it "into consideration" ? I see....

TO NAPERVILLE SCHOOLS FOR OUR CHILDREN,
The lawsuit, if you read between the lines, would insist that the district build on the bb property for a very good reason. The district screwed the people and cannot afford the bb land. They so arrogantly assumed that no one would ever say NO to them and that they could steal the land for a mere pittance of it's actual worth !
And who's paying for that arrogance? You and I buddy !
So if the district can't afford the bb land they can't build a 3rd high school, which for GOD"S sake, we don't need anyway !!!
They would be forced to return to us for another referendum vote. Would you be foolish enough to trust the board and district with your money again? Not I ! And now I'm hearing that Howie Crouse is still a paid consultant for 204. Give me a break, is there no end to this insanity ??? Get rid of the geezer, he was a jerk as a superintendent...I never thought we could do worse until Daeschner came on the scene.... I am so disgusted by this district I could vomit...on Daeschner !!!

There have been several "analogies" and comments regarding a Bait and Switch tactic used by the school board. Bait and Switch is a term predominantly applied to retail establishments and has to do with marketing and advertising. A store will advertise an item at a certain price, when the patron arrives they will find the item no longer available, but a higher priced item in its place. i.e. they lure ("bait") you to come to the store, and then switch you to a higher priced replacement.

In Mark's analogy: (mark on March 22, 2008 10:04 AM) The $20 shirt would be advertised, but when the patron arrived at the store it would be out of stock (or some reason given why it was not available). The replacement 100% cotton shirt would be similar, but priced at $30. The Lure, or "Bait" is the ad for the $20 shirt, while the "Switch" would be the replacement shirt at $30. The customer always has the option of buying or not buying - but the hope of the store is that since they are already there the person will simply buy the $30 shirt.

Dollars and Sense : (Dollars and sense on March 22, 2008 1:37 PM ) drew a similar analogy with hamburgers and chicken sandwiches. Again, to make your case better you should have said that Hamburgers were advertised for $0.99 and when the customer arrived they were no longer available, but a (Big Mac, 1/4 pounder) is available at $1.49. Again, the customer is lured "baited" to come and buy a $0.99 hamburger, and then switched to a $1.49 option. The customer is not required to buy the product, and they are certainly not made to purchase the product before they are told it is not available. The store simply says we don't have any burgers for $0.99 and if you want a burger you must pay $1.49.

On this blog, to draw an analogy using bait and switch the correlation must be made that the School board never intended to build a school on the BB land, but fully intended to lure the public into voting for the referendum, and then switch the location to the Eola sight.

The proof for this would have to be a referendum proposal that tied the $124 mm requested with specific and exact boundary locations. Call them what you will, but the school board never tied the boundaries into the referendum, they were mutually exclusive arrangements.

I know what you are trying to say, but it is not a bait and switch tactic. If you can prove it is Fraud then you have a case, which I belive may be the premise of the NSFOC lawsuit.

To all of you who insist that this lawsuit filed by NSFOC is self serving and frivalous, to all of you who slander Shawn Collins' good name and stellar reputation, to all of you who can't fathom for one second that there are people in the community who truly care about the health and safety of all children...shame on you. I am not a member of NSFOC. I am not a resident of TG or WE. This boundary issue will not affect my child. I am a 48 year old mom of 2. I have lived in Naperville all my life and have no plans of leaving. But you people have no idea of what you're talking about and you've lost all control of emotions. This suit was filed because Dr. Daeschner is insisting on speeding ahead at a reckless pace to break ground on a site that WAS INDEED disqualified in 2005 because of "probable and almost certain exposure to toxins and Radioactivity". When the board and the district superintendent refuse to return phone calls, answer questions,or listen to public concern the only choice left is to sue and due it fast! That's the only choice these people were given. It is not up to you or I to determine the reasons that motivated Todd Andrews to file suit, but I'll be one of the few reasonable people who will give him the benefit of the doubt. The District, specifically Daeschner are acting in an irresponsible manner. You can not begin construction of a high school that is on questionable property without waiting for EXPERTS hired not by the district, but authorized by a disinterested third party to investigate and determine safety. What's the big hurry, Daeschner?
Don't any of you people wonder? He's already , along with the board, arrogantly thrown away millions of taxpayers dollars on the Brach Brody debacle. Why would ANYONE in their right mind trust this man to do what is right for our children. Have you considered the possibilities down the line? What if this school is built, what if we start to see illness and God forbid cancer clusters? Don't think I'm being dramatic. Radiactivity and power lines have been linked to cancer. How are you people going to feel then? Just lucky that it doesn't affect you or shame and sorrow and remorse for having let Daeschner bully his way into a third school. And what about the cost to the district then? Do you think there wouldn't be more than a few lawsuits?
Finally, if ANY of you critics who condemn Shawn Collins actually knew the man and his record, you'd swallow those words. I know him personally. He is a self made man of integrity. He put himself through Benet Academy, Notre Dame and the Univ. of Chicago Law School. He has always been concerned for public safety. He successfully represented the people vs. Lockformer ( another cancer cluster site). In order to hire the experts he needed, he put his home and business on the line. He risked his entire livelyhood to defend people who had been poisoned by a large corporation. He won.
He continues to be a winner because he is a man of impeccable honesty.He was named the Person of the Year by the Daily Herald just a few years ago for his humanitarian efforts. Don't you dare call this man a shark or a Jackass or any other disgusting names. You don't know him, I do! And you may just need him one day if you let Daeschner get his way !
Wake up people, the District, the Board and most of all Daeschner are the bad guys here. They've proven they don't care about your kids or your money, just their egos.

starting to make sense. no one here (NSFOC supporter or detractor) can argue that the purpose of the lawsuit is to put the TG kids at the BB site or keep them at NV. If the district put TG at NV, there woul dnot be a lawsuit.

The environemntal issues will be handled. To someone else saying the Herald reported that the IEPA was not involved in phase I or II testing. The Herald said that the IEPA will be involved in the MidwestGen remediation.

Just say NO to Entitlement.

By Sick of baby boomer barnicles on March 22, 2008 6:14 PM
to howie lives on 3/22 4:36 pm

Howie is a PAID CONSULTANT to D204 ????!!???
--------------
Get a load of this one. Howie moved into our Brighton Ridge Subdivision last year after all those long years in Longwood. Actually lives a couple doors down from John Stephens. Pretty quaint, eh?

Okay, TG Resident here are the answers you requested.
1. I am a resident of WE and have been for the last ten years. When we first moved here TG was still mostly a field.

2. I voted for the new school.

3. Having children who are affected by the boundry changes I was not happy with BB being eliminated but I have no problem with my kids going to WV. It is a good school despite what TG thinks.

4. I don't believe that Eola is the best site but the North needs a carrot. Having two brand new state of the art high schools in the south (Macom) would be unfair to the North and really split the district in half particularly when the enrollment drops and WV is likely closed.

I am tired as a WE resident of being blamed for what is mostly TGs doings. As NFSOC Insider stated
"I espcially feel bad for most of the people in WE. Due to a lack of judgement by one WE resident who booked the clubhouse for the NSFOC meeting, WE has been given more blame for this lawsuit than they deserve.
The "organizers" of NSFOC are 100% TG residents. There are approx 10 of them. They have been plotting and scheming since the 2006 referendum to stay at NV. They have recruited a few WE leaders, but the core leadership group remains TG"

Yes TG Resident your subdivision has been the driving force in tearing apart #204 simply because you didn't want to go to WV. I am not saying it is you personally. But some of your neighbors are very much responsible for the anger and even hate that poisons this district.

starting to make sense.... on March 22, 2008 5:58 PM

Clearly you must be attending the wrong meetings if any, which is more the case. Stir the mud some more if it makes you feel better. But evidently you don't have a clue about what is going on. I suggest AA down the street.

To Makes you Wonder on 3/22 at 10:49 AM--Nope. The lawsuit doesn't take into consideration whether the high school is needed or not. To the NSFOC, this is a totally separate issue.

It is not fair. The new boundries will split up my middle school child from her friends when it is time to go to high school. I am sure that the pain will last a life time. I do not know how she will get over it. She had such an easy time last year when we moved into this subdivision. The move two years ago from Ohio to Illinois was a piece of cake.

She will be going to the new high school with those high power lines. I am concerned about her safety because those lines are filled with magnetic forces that effect your body and mind. We currently live in a home that has ComEd power lines going down our back yard put those lines are just filled with electricity and have no effect on your body. The line do make a high pitch noise but we have gotten used to the noise.

To Have it your way on 3/22 at 5:29--Analogies are no fun if they have to be explained. As written, the Whopper analogy is really very simple and explains how some people who disagree with the site change see things. If you want to get into other issues like menus, other people's state of hunger or sandwich selection, write your own. For more practice, see Mark's cotton shirt analogy on 3/22 above.

And yes, I do have a junior at NV. I'm surprised you remembered that but not previous posts that stated I supported the referendum. This fact might make it difficult for you to fit me into the neat little category you've labeled "selfish southsider", but if you try I'm sure you'll find a way to twist that into a negative as well.

to howie lives on 3/22 4:36 pm

Howie is a PAID CONSULTANT to D204 ????!!??? Another good-for-nothing baby boomer suckling a non-deserved paycheck. RETIRE already and GET THE HECK OUT OF HERE---go to FLORIDA, play golf and eat blue plate specials. The boomers have done enough damage to this country and have given NOTHING in return. Consumers not producers. Please get off the planet.

I thought it would be good time to remind folks of the NSFOC INSIDER'S take (a real person with real insight...scary as it is..)
Posted by: Anonymous | March 9, 2008 03:27 PM

By NSFOC Insider on March 10, 2008 2:25 PM
As someone with access to inside information, I thought I'd make a few statements to clarify a few things.

1. I feel terrible for the many good people within TG and WE who are being trashed. It is unfair to attack entire communinities based on the actions of a few residents.

2. I respect the people in our community who TRULY are concerned about the health risk at the AME site. Unfortunately there are many others who couldn't care less (NSFOC organizers), but have joined your cause simply because it helps their own agenda.

3. I espcially feel bad for most of the people in WE. Due to a lack of judgement by one WE resident who booked the clubhouse for the NSFOC meeting, WE has been given more blame for this lawsuit than they deserve.

4. The "organizers" of NSFOC are 100% TG residents. There are approx 10 of them. They have been plotting and scheming since the 2006 referendum to stay at NV. They have recruited a few WE leaders, but the core leadership group remains TG.

5. These "organizers" do not care about what's best for our district as a whole, or whether AMEs is a health risk. They care about themselves and themselves only.

6. The "organizers" are trying to court as many people/communities as possible because they know the power of mass. They are courting the health risk crowd, they are courting the "vote no" people, they are courting their "friends" in WE, they are courting anyone they can.

7. These "organizaters" are just using everyone. If the SB ruled tomorrow that TG would stay at NV, so long WE, so long AME health concern people, so long everyone... the fight would be over.

8. These "organizers" reluctantly were going to live with their second choice (MV at BB). But there is no way they were going to accept going to WV no matter what. They are essentially responding like a cornered animal. Attack.

9. These "organizers" don't believe any verdict will force construction at BB. All they really want is a delay or injunction. Because to them, doing nothing about our overcrowding still keeps them at NV. They would rather stay at a crowded NV than any other scenario that involves them moving.

10. Perhaps the most scary thing of all, is that these people seem to believe what they are doing it totally justified and right. I have found this to be the most frightening thing of all. Even when their freinds question their actions/motives, they are simply told to move out of the way. This train is full steam ahead.

Dollars and Sense,
I don't see the whole Burger King correlation as I did not have a menu of properties(sandwiches if you will) to choose from on my ballot, but maybe you did.
Anyway, the point I am getting from you is that you wanted a Whopper,it doesn't really matter what anyone else may have wanted, AND if you can't get a Whopper, you would prefer that everyone (primarily the district's kids)else go hungry too.You certainly wouldn't want to "lower your standards".

OR

Maybe....you're just not hungry and it really doesn't matter to you if anyone else is. Didn't you say you have a Junior at NV?Any possiblility you were a 2006 NO voter...I mean why pay for someone else's kids, you know what I mean? Thanks to NSFOC you now have a "good excuse" too :)

to anon 3/22 12:50 pm

You really seem to enjoy foaming at the mouth about those terrible folks from the south side of Naperville. All of Naperville was treated to a bait and switch. And now it appears, at least according to the Herald, that the board is again going to delay releasing environmental studies of the Eola tract. Should it not be our duty as taxpayers and parents to know the condition of that land? Someone close to me recently went into remission from a life-threatening disease that was brought about by environmental contaminents. I just want the facts. I just want a full disclosure from the SB. But never mind me or my concerns. I'm just another south-sider.

From reading many of these comments, it is obvious that a lot of the people jumping on the NSFOC bandwagon have absolutely no environmental concerns but rather just want to stop a 3rd high school from being built anywhere.

So, in a couple of years, if that high school does not come to fruition, I hope the White Eagle and Tall Grass residents who initially filed this lawsuit don't complain when their children are crammed into WVHS anyway, since they will undoubtedly be moved to WVHS as the two high schools will need to have a more balanced population count. I can't imagine any of that group being unhappy with that possible outcome.

By Alan Liebeman on March 22, 2008 7:13 AM
Howie Crouse arrogantly led 204 down this slippery, poorly planned path then bailed out into retirement world to leave the board and new superintendent to deal with the mess. To thank him for his keen leadership, the district named a building after him! Good going 204 board!!!

Alan, I agree and to top it off now I understand that Howie is still screwing the school district by working as a consultant advising Moe, Larry and Curly (aka M2,SD and JC) on financial management.

Where is Walter Jacobsen when we need him? The legend of Howie lives on...

After browsing thru "most" of this nonsense, here is a thought: how
about scrapping a 3rd high school altogether and cut our losses now. Who is the brain surgeon that decided we needed one anyway? An even worse decision was made to put it on BB...one of the busiest 4 way intersections in all of Naperville and ridiculously close to WV and NV. Quoting someone from earlier, WOW ! Now we have a lawyer involved. Enough said on that, way to go people ! More tax dollars going to waste.

If you wait long enough

TG Resident,
Please explain what you mean by "better position".Is it because some have traveled over 7 miles for years (and you argue about traveling 5 or 6)and now may have a chance to reduce their commute? Or did you mean 'better position' by perhaps, attending a different school? Please define better position and be completely honest.

Basically I mean better position by having something, or more than one thing that you didn't have before. Examples: closer commute/middle school not being split/new school, opposed to older one; it a relative and subjective thing, slightly different for everyone, I suppose. But, I don't think any of these things I've listed could be argued as not being "better".

Kind of like your comment about driving over 7 miles for years now and maybe getting a chance to have a shorter commute. This is a better position, right? Is it one people should feel "entitled" to because they've "done their time", so to speak? That word has been thrown around an awful lot, and mostly directed to TG and WE hasn't it? But how is your idea any different? It's ok for people at Watts, for example, to have a longer commute Brookdale can have a shorter one? I'm just saying this, of course, to make the point that constant mud slinging toward one subdivision or group of people is ridiculous...........everyone is fighting for what they want and what they believe in and no one is going to gain without a loss on the part of someone else. It just can't happen because of the way the SB has handled things. The finger pointing and name calling from the north toward the south is just as transparent as people are claiming the NSFOC's motives are - that's all I'm trying to say. No one should be pointing fingers.

To Mark on 3/22 at 10:04 AM--You and I think alike. Here's my analogy from a previous post:

Say you go to Burger King, order a Whopper and pay for it. Then you are told, sorry, the price of beef has become so expensive we cannot give you a Whopper, you get a chicken sandwich instead. But I don't want a chicken sandwich, you say. I'd rather get my money back. Sorry, you are told, we're not giving you your money back and you have to take the chicken sandwich. Would you be angry? Maybe angry enough to sue? You probably would be, and you probably would--and you should. They advertised a Whopper, took your money, and gave you a chicken sandwich. That's outrageous! And that's what the NSFOC says the school board did. They don't "think" voters were promised the BB site, they WERE. The school board advertised it, guaranteed it, and collected the cash. They didn't expect the price of beef to double, but it did, and now they're in the process of making your chicken sandwich. Some might say, well, a chicken sandwich is ok, it's still lunch, but obviously others don't feel this way. If the SB had just come back to the community and discussed this problem prior to moving on Eola, the lawsuit probably never would have happened.

Hold everything...

Did I read in the Herald that the Illinois EPA has not been overseeing the Phase I and Phase II testing (another lie???).

We are "holier than thou" in this case for sure. The SB did do due diligence and more to secure the BB land and has delayed us long enough in doing so. Finally, they're doing what's best for the district as a whole and moving forward on the Eola site. The way I see it, is they've known all along what a pain the residents in TG and WE are and tried to do everything possible to appease them bc they knew they wouldn't get a hard time from the peaceful folks in the north. After way too much time dedicated to trying to pacify you, they've moved forward for what's best for the district as a whole and that's saving $17 million, and putting a school up north to balance the district. Makes total logical sense to any clear minded adult. For the record, the Eola property will have passed more testing/scrutiny than any other school site in the district, which I'd like to see them all pass.

By TG Resident on March 22, 2008 11:35 AM
We Know the Truth - 10:14
"No, that is not the point. The point is that everyone who now sees themselves in a better position - many of whom probably voted "no" against the referendum in the first place and who are now jumping up and down at the thought of Eola ..."

TG Resident,
Please explain what you mean by "better position".Is it because some have traveled over 7 miles for years (and you argue about traveling 5 or 6)and now may have a chance to reduce their commute? Or did you mean 'better position' by perhaps, attending a different school? Please define better position and be completely honest.

By No Future Referendum on March 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To all the "holier than thou" posters who are saying "shame on you for voting based on what the SB told you" and not the exact language of the referendum, I have one question.

What do you think the odds of passing ANY future referendum are, now that we've established the precedent that the SB can say one thing and do another? Slim to None?

This will be a "fool me once" issue that comes back in spades.

You're right. That's exactly what NSFOC is hoping for.

To all the "holier than thou" posters who are saying "shame on you for voting based on what the SB told you" and not the exact language of the referendum, I have one question.

What do you think the odds of passing ANY future referendum are, now that we've established the precedent that the SB can say one thing and do another? Slim to None?

This will be a "fool me once" issue that comes back in spades.

I am from dist 203 and have no gain either way. What I'm seeing is; You're all (those that are suing) saying the same thing - "we would not have allowed for the 3rd high school to be built unless it is for us". Each and everyone of you (for the lawsuit) is saying it over and over and it's shocking to me that you actually feel you have a right to sue the sb and say "give it to us or else". Wow.

We Know the Truth - 10:14
No, that is not the point. The point is that everyone who now sees themselves in a better position - many of whom probably voted "no" against the referendum in the first place and who are now jumping up and down at the thought of Eola - keep saying that this is about TG not going to NV. Isn't that what Majorianthrax's initial post was about? As far as I can see, it didn't say anything about Metea. And the point is also about propagating the idea that one subdivision has poisoned the district. It's a baseless, ridiculous idea that is only further harming the community. If you, or anyone, thinks that is true you did not attend pre-vote boundary meetings where people were stepping all over each other trying to be heard, nor have you been following the chain of events. The SB, the admin., BB, the lawyers....everyone is playing a role in how this has turned out. For me personally, the whole thing starts with the SB and some of the poor planning/decisions they've made. It has just been an unfortunate, downward spiral since then. My point is no one subdivision is to blame. To say otherwise is just wrong. What good can come of that?

re:anonymous

Every posting I read from you is tinged with venom towards Tall Grass and White Eagle. Get rid of it. I live in the Fry area ( Heatherstone - go ahead and attack me over the boundary thing) and certainly don't hold any grudges against you. Until you can get over whatever personal grievance you seem to have against them, all your comments will reek of bias. I don't care who originated the NFSOC lawsuit. At this point, it is a necessary check against the authoritarian powers that the school board assumes that it has. "They can do whatever they want"... sure, unless some are willing to speak up. If you want to live somewhere where elected officials can do whatever they want with your tax dollars without fear of being challenged, might I suggest Siberia?

To Anon on 3/22 at 9:32--Oh, good grief. Baby chicks are idols? Only if you worship them as your God. Geez, you must be a lot of fun to live with.

Yes, any kind of celebration of spring is not in the Bible. Yes, it is a made up commercialized non-holy day. So what? It has nothing to do with the Bible but I like it anyway, like fireworks on the 4th of July and hearts on Valentine's Day. But you probably manage to suck the joy out of those occasions because they're not in the Bible, either.

It's obvious you're not interested in a rational exchange of ideas. Your response was mean-spirited and it sounds like you're just spoiling for a fight wherever you can find one. Take it somewhere else.

So Eola is NOT the more geographically reasonable location, the south was. And not just because the southern people are selfish and want to use the new school if they're paying for it. It's because the rampant development and population growth out here is choking this part of 204.as posted by Dollars and Sense.....

Dollars and Sense,
Doesn't it make you wonder with the southern part of the district being "choked by the growth" that anyone in that area would jeopardize a third high school altogether by filing a lawsuit that states "Build on BB or don't build at all"?

By TG resident March 22 @ 1:47am
I have to disagree with YOU. We've been moved out of our high school AND our middle school is being split. Right now my daughter is at a sleepover with all her best friends - non of which she'll be going to high school with. I'm not suing the school district. IF Brookdale did show up wearing orange shirts in protest of their slated boundaries - that is certainly their right to do so - AGAIN - they did not sue over this. Thank you again for proving over and over what this is really about. Also, the anger you're all feeling over you lawsuit against the taxpayers of this district is very well justified as you are suing US.

By TG Resident on March 22, 2008 1:27 AM
Majorianthrax 6:10
I'm sorry, but I disagree with you. Tall Grass has long since been "unassigned" to NV. That ended with the referendum passing, in case you forgot, as TG was slated to go to Metea. A fact that was known to voters BEFORE the referendum passed.

TG resident,
That's the point. They were okay with the new Metea. They were not okay with WV. Hence the lawsuit.

OK, let's keep it simple. Who would disagree with this:

1) Kohls or Macy's markets a 100% cotton shirt for sale for $20
2) You go in, buy the sweater, but the label doesn't say what material it is made out of
3) You then find out that the shirt is made of a different material, one that hurts your skin, and one you WOULD NOT have bought if you knew it was made of a different material then cotton.

Then, Kohls' or Macy's says "too bad, you bought it at the register, I know we advertised 100% cotton, but we had to change our minds; Cotton wouldn't work out."

And you say "hey, I want my money back" -- and they said "nope, when you bought the shirt you should have NOT assumed it was 100% cotton because on your receipt it didn't state that it was a cotton shirt, but rather a shirt with a name brand."

You can bet that this is bait and switch.

So, please don't tell me that the language on the ballot sets the sb free. If this is true, then people should be able to market anything they want (lies) and then let people go and vote for the issue.

I want to know why the enviromental samples for the Midwest Enegry property still as not been released.

Can anyone answer that?

By Anonymous on March 21, 2008 6:38 PM
To Anon on 3/21 at 4:18 p.m.--What do eggs and rabbits have to do with Jesus? Nothing. Easter comes in the spring, sometimes very close to the first day of spring, like this year. The eggs, rabbits, chicks, baby lambs, baskets, etc., are a celebration of spring. Baby animals are symbols of the new life that spring brings, of the renewal and rebirth of nature we see all around us when winter ends. After all, God gave us the seasons; what's the harm in enjoying them? Easter is not pagen or sinister, just an appreciation of the fresh life around us. Relax.

...I'm sure you would have been with the ones worshipping the golden calf. Nowhere is the celebration of spring in the bible. Just another made up commercialized non-holy day.

Baby animals are symbols? you mean idols! hmm that's banned according to the bible.

Looks like you need to read the bible. Oh, I guess you're one of the ones who misread your ballot too. Or did you not vote? Or are you above us all. If you are neutral, then stay out of the conversation

go plant a tree and relax to 'celebrate spring'.

NSFOC, lost causes are the only ones worth fighting.

Can anyone answer? How are donations to a non for profit organization tax deductable? Is NSFOC a charity?

Howie Crouse arrogantly led 204 down this slippery, poorly planned path then bailed out into retirement world to leave the board and new superintendent to deal with the mess. To thank him for his keen leadership, the district named a building after him! Good going 204 board!!!

Majorianthrax 6:10
I'm sorry, but I disagree with you. Tall Grass has long since been "unassigned" to NV. That ended with the referendum passing, in case you forgot, as TG was slated to go to Metea. A fact that was known to voters BEFORE the referendum passed.
If not TG, you'd be hearing from whatever group was moved out of their desired/closest high school, then split out from the rest of their middle school to boot. People from the Welch attendance area on previous Blogs have admitted as much. Do the bloggers speak for everyone in that area, of course not. But you are delusional to think there would be no revolt from anyone besides TG....that's giving us way too much credit. Many people in the district have voices and are capable of using them when they wish to do so.

As a matter of fact, didn't Brookdale show up to boundary meetings en masse in orange tshirts to protest when they were on the receiving end of boundary decisions that didn't favor or please them? Didn't they (in majority) vote down the referendum because they weren't getting it "their way"? C'mon - of course they did. I already know that your tired response is going to be "Yes, but in the end they didn't sue the school board". And, you're right. Tall Grass is not suing the SB either.

That was only round one. Now let's take it to the hypothetical next level in round two - After all the hysteria of choosing a site and boundaries, the Board turns around and moves the site. Then they move Brookdale's assigned attendance area even farther away, siphoning them off from the rest of their middle school as part of the new plan. The Board then effectively doesn't meet their stated criteria, gives Brookdale no say in the matter, and simply says "too bad". Under these circumstances maybe Brookdale would have sued them. Maybe at first they wouldn't have, but would once they found out the new site was potentially dangerous (which does affect everyone)....or found out that the Board still owes yet unknown millions of dollars to BB for backing out of the condemnation suit and haven't explained how they are going to pay for it....or could prove the projected enrollment numbers used to pass the referendum were inflated and false. Hypothetical, so I guess we'll never know, will we? But, based on the activism shown at the Board meetings I attended, I certainly wouldn't say "never". Would you? And honestly, I would support their right to protest however they saw fit.

Some TG residents are part of the group who have filed a complaint against the SB. But again, TG itself is not suing the SB, so please just stop the hate. If you are going to cast stones, say where you live and how you voted.......and justify why, exactly, you are now excited about the proposed location for Metea. So much so that you are willing to call out specific neighborhoods and blame them for everything....whatever that is. Thanks.

By Anonymous on March 21, 2008 5:44 PM
To juno on March 21, 2008 2:57 PM:

Sorry, but the school board, as elected officials, ARE PERMITTED to do whatever they want. They are only legally required to use the money to build a third high school.

We ELECTED them to represent us and make decisions for us. You don't get to vote on every issue, not in Aurora, not in Springfield, nor in Washington. This is NOT a 'democracy' -- it is a republic and our system of government is 'representative'. You elect the leaders, they make the decisions. If you don't like it, elect better people next time.

All votes WERE taken into account. You approved the money for the new high school, not where it would go.

And for the 10,000th time -- voters don't get to vote on school boundaries. The district has the right to change those at any time. Don't like that? Well, go to Springfield and get the law changed.
_______________________________________

I respectfully disagree with your point that an elected official is permitted to do "WHATEVER THEY WANT". The school board is an elected body yet are responsible to make GOOD decisions for the entire district.

Fiduciary responsibility applies to the 204 school board. I realize they are volunteers. I realize they sacrifice a lot of their time as board members and I appreciate their willingness to volunteer. However, they are still accountable to all residents in the district. To say they are permitted to do "WHATEVER THEY WANT" is simply untrue.

To Anon 3/21 at 6:33 PM--Another level-headed post. With all the sarcasm and name-calling on this blog, it's nice to hear from an adult. I have just one comment on your post. You wrote, "Now that the Eola property has become available and they're able to save the taxpayers $17 million . . ." The school board has not saved us any money yet. If BB gets even close to what they are asking for in damages, and remember, they got what they asked for the last time, the school board will have LOST US MILLIONS. That's because the total cost of paying BB damages and buying the Eola site would total more than the BB site would have alone. The SB is putting 204 in a precarious position by closing on Eola before they know the final cost of what they'll have to pay in damages to BB. So whether they end up saving or losing the taxpayers millions has yet to be seen.

To WV area resident 3/21 at 3:11 PM: A very level-headed post, thanks! One point, though. You stated "But now that the third school will be built in a more geographically reasonable location to support the district . . .". Eola is not the most geographically reasonable location, Brach Brodie was. That's why the school board choose it and tried so hard to get it. Eola was chosen when BB didn't work out not because of it's location, but despite it. The sellers were willing and the SB could take it quickly and begin construction. The three high schools will be geographically distributed within the school district, one south, one central and one in the north, but building on Eola in the north is placing it away from where the building and population boom is occurring, which is in the south. There will be a 40-30-30 population distribution between the three schools, but about half of the 30% who will be attending the Eola site don't live in the north, they will be bused in from other areas in the district. So Eola is NOT the more geographically reasonable location, the south was. And not just because the southern people are selfish and want to use the new school if they're paying for it. It's because the rampant development and population growth out here is choking this part of 204. You can verify all this yourself by going to the district's own website, ipsd.org. Go to 1/15/08 Metea Valley Land Recommendation, then click on Land Report for the Board. It's all there.

sorry Moderator Jim but your response just shows how the Naperville Sun is nothing more than a forum. You had the environmental lawyer in your offices. He chose to talk about the environmental issues at the Eola site and you feel asking him something as basic as "can't most if not all toxic issues be remediated?" was moot. Shawn Collins needs to scare the people fo the district in believing there is a problem with the site to keep them donating to the NSFOC in order to line his pockets. No fear equals no money. And the "reporter" and editorial staff can't ask basic questions? I can't wait to see how cheated the supporters feel when they realize that this was a ploy by their attorney to raise money for his law firm while he had full knowledge that the environmental issues were minor and easily remediated.

You had Todd Andrews in and did not ask him any real questions either.

By the way, the Daily Herald reported that the Illinois EPA will be involved in the Midwest Gen remediation. Not a peep in your paper.

Your paper is good for nothing more than lining the bird cage.

Anonymous on March 21, 2008 5:36 PM
"I look just fine in the mirror telling NSFOC to sod off."

Thanks for helping me make my point about negativity and hatered.

Anonymous on March 21, 2008 4:43 PM
"Yes democracy, just like when you voted for the 3rd high school, no matter what the location."

Sorry to disappoint you but I voted "NO".
By the way, they were pushing BB to get their votes, let's not forget that. Go back and read the papers and the minutes.

Anonymous on March 21, 2008 5:44 PM
"Sorry, but the school board, as elected officials, ARE PERMITTED to do whatever they want."

Are you kidding? Here's something to think about.........

Isn't it the government that is responsible to make sure our bridges are safe........OOOOOOOOh how many people in Minnesota are happy about their inspections right now?

Isn't it the government who is responsible to make sure the levies are safe?........... I would guess New Orleans isn't happy with the government right now.

It is a Democracy where people can stand up and question governmental officals WE ELECTED and WE ARE PAYING FOR WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS! How do you think laws are passed and policies changed? It is because someone stands up and says: This is not right, ordinary everyday individuals who we feel the government officals elected are not adequately doing their jobs. It is done everyday.

God Bless America!

…so my 5yr old was watching a Disney movie on t.v. the other day and a commercial came on about a really cool cereal (colorful and sugary) she of course proceeds to ask for it and I tell her that it’s not good for you. She then interrupts me and tells me that they said it was ‘good for you’. I explain that she cannot believe everything she reads and sees, she needs to read the food label herself. Fast forward to a play date a few days later, I overhear her telling her friend how this cereal commercial doesn’t tell the truth about how bad this cereal is for you and that it’s important to read the labels.
My 5yr old has learned how to do due diligence, how is that all of you that voted for or against the 3rd high school couldn’t do the same. For all of you that claim bait-n-switch, you should have done your due diligence before voting.

I take full responsibility for my vote! I don’t hold anyone else accountable for my INTERPRETATION OF THE REFERENDUM!

"[NSFOC] cannot be characterized as a handful of disgruntled Tall Grass and White Eagle residents who hate Waubonsie Valley High School". Yet all of the leaders named in the article live in Tall Grass.

"Those boundaries would send students [at] Fry area to Waubonsie, which is about 8 miles north of their neighborhood." No, Google Maps says it is 6.0 miles. And actually, it is only 3 miles of straight-line distance and only 2 miles "North" of Fry. Did anyone at the Sun do any fact-checking?

"The original location for Metea would have been about 3 1/2 miles from the Fry attendance area." It would have been 4.1 miles from Fry to the start of Commons drive, the planned entrance to the School.

"The high school at that location was approved under a referendum, which many NSFOC members supported." No, the high school "AT THAT LOCATION" was not on the ballot. The Sun should be more objective.

Said NSFOC member Jim Walker. "I was excited about opening a new school." Thank you for being honest about this, Mr. Walker. So it isn't about 'neighborhood schools' or 'distance' since you had no problem going 2.5 miles 'north'. (BTW, Brach-Brodie and Waubonsie are on almost the exact same latitude. BB is actually slightly 'north' of Waubonsie.)

"NSFOC has filed lawsuit demanding District 204 build Metea at Brach-Brodie as promised." This is the ONLY thing NSFOC's lawsuit allows. It doesn't demand a SAFE school at all.

"You have to realize that, when they did their site selection, they ruled this site out," Okon said. "Nothing has changed on that property to make it safe today." NOTHING? The peaker plant isn't operating any more. That's certainly changed. The site was never 'ruled out'. They chose a site they preferred more.

"The site was rejected originally because of environmental concerns." No site was 'rejected'. One was 'selected'. Read the WHOLE quote -- "saw no advantage in constructing a third high school in such a location IF (emphasis added) there is any possibility of abandonment for health reasons" The "IF" is a key word there. Also, note they were discussing IF they had to abandon the high school.

"Critics of the group are quick to point out that NSFOC wasn't worried about environmental safety until new boundaries sent their children to Waubonsie. " This is true. They were not. The group's name itself and their first website shows ALL they were concerned about was "Neighborhood" schools. Not power lines and pipelines and peaker plants.

"But Walker said there's a big difference between choosing to swim in the pool next to these lines just a few hours a day and a few months out of the year, and being forced to spend eight or nine hours a day, 200 or so days a year at a school next to them." These kids don't spend 8-9 hours a day, 365 days a year in their homes in Tall Grass? Where do they sleep then?

"The referendum failed the first time. The referendum with the school on 75th and Route 59 succeeded. Then the situation drastically changed. So, if things didn't work out that way - the way that that vote was created - we need a new vote." This whole sentence makes no sense. Voters do NOT approve school boundaries in Illinois. Ever.

"This is the same gang that told us they were going to buy Brach-Brodie if the referendum passed," Collins said. "They broke that promise. These are the guys who said, 'Eola-Molitor is too dangerous. We won't buy it.' They broke that promise. These are also the guys that said, 'We're confident we're going to win the condemnation case,' and they got their heads handed to them. Everything that's important that has come out of their mouths has not been correct," Politicians broke their promises. Surprise!

"Why wouldn't a responsible organization say, 'You know what? Time out. We don't know what Eola-Molitor costs right now. Until Judge Killander in DuPage County in the condemnation case says what the Brach-Brodie owners are really entitled to, we can't really tell you what the real cost of Eola-Molitor is, and we better stop until a court gives that decision,'" Collins said. BUT this is NOT what the NSFOC lawsuit is asking for. It says BUY BRACH-BRODIE NO MATTER WHAT THE COST. This is NOT 'fiscally responsible'

"We demand those answers for safety, fiscal responsibility and accountability," she said. "And, until those are answered, we don't know how the board can move ahead."

NO, READ MY LIPS. NSFOC IS DEMANDING THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PAY WHATEVER IT COSTS TO BUY THE BRACH-BRODIE PROPERTY AND BUILD THE THIRD HIGH SCHOOL THERE. Read their complaint. It is NOT asking the district to 'slow down'. It is not demanding the District sign a contract with Midwest Gen indemnifying the District from ANY environmental claims related to Eola. IT IS DEMANDING THE DISTRICT BUY BRACH-BRODIE.

This group is about Tall Grass wanting Neuqua or Metea @ Brach Brodie. NAPERVILLE Schools For Our Children.

To Anonymous on March 21, 2008 6:33 PM:

"We have been in the Waubosie School district (always)"

Waubonsie is not a School district, although most of the NSFOC wishes it was a separate district so they could have the Naperville School for (their) Children.

To curious on March 21, 2008 7:37 PM

The question is, who is 'rushing' anything? Has someone closed on the land deal? Are there bulldozers on the property? The board has been authorized to sign a contract on the land. That's it.

Just because a school board member says they want to break ground on April 1 doesn't mean they will. Wishing didn't make it so at Brach-Brodie either. How many times did M2 tell us they'd be breaking ground at any moment?

As far as the referendum 'expiring', well, they currently have our money. The longer they hold that money without building a school, sooner or later, some community group is going to sue them to give it back since "they said we'd have a new high school in 2009 and I voted 'yes' based on that. I wouldn't have voted 'yes' if I had known the school was going to be delayed until 2010. That smacks of 'bait-and-switch'".

Sound familiar?

I agree there is no need for name-calling. We can argue with each other without making it personal.

Question for anyone who can answer-

Does the 2006 referndum have a expiration date? Why the rush to build on a potentially unsafe site? The SB is willing to pay extra fees(millions) to open the school in August 2009. Did the referendum state if the school didn't open by a certain date the vote is void. I can't understand that they want to purchase this land prior to knowing what the BB mess is going to cost. There's something just not right. Any clarification would be appreciated.

On a seperate note. Stop all the name calling. I thought Naperville/Aurora were the kind of towns who would help their neighbors not hurt them.

I don't live in TG or WE and originally thought the lawsuit was a bad idea. However, based on the actions of the SB in the past weeks and the TG/WE bashers on these blogs, I'm beginning to think it has merit. What rational, half-way intelligent human being would think that the SB should move forward and purchase the Eola property before knowing the damages from BB? Where are the environmental reports on the Eola site that were promised weeks ago?

The thing that bothers me most are the attacks on people who voice concerns. The attackers seem desperate to have Metea in their neighborhood. So desperate it seems, that they could care less the cost to the taxpayers and to their children.

Hey Mark,

You claim the school board has done nothing but spend our tax dollars, well, that's exactly what you elected them to do. Spend our tax dollars to provide the students of district 204 with the best education our money can buy.

You also say that suing the board is the only way to stop the SB from hurting our community, claiming it as a way of "speaking up." Funny, I thought that taking money away from the core function of providing educational services to defend a frivolous law suit would cause more harm. Call me crazy!

And finally: "For those that are supportive of the bait and switch fraud, shame on on you. You would never teach your children to say one thing, and then 'trick' others to win. Or would you.."
Are you kidding me! I'll be teaching my kids to read anything they sign and make sure they know exactly what they are agreeing to. I'll teach my kids to not believe everything that they hear and make sure and do their homework ... come on Mark, multiple sources of information! Shame on YOU and everyone else who was naive enough to vote on boundaries and the BB property when neither were on the ballot.

To Anon on 3/21 at 4:18 p.m.--What do eggs and rabbits have to do with Jesus? Nothing. Easter comes in the spring, sometimes very close to the first day of spring, like this year. The eggs, rabbits, chicks, baby lambs, baskets, etc., are a celebration of spring. Baby animals are symbols of the new life that spring brings, of the renewal and rebirth of nature we see all around us when winter ends. After all, God gave us the seasons; what's the harm in enjoying them? Easter is not pagen or sinister, just an appreciation of the fresh life around us. Relax.

I am a resident from the North. We have been in the Waubosie School district (always) and were here when the (at the time) most expensive high school in the nation was built. Due to our location, our taxes are higher than anywhere else in the district. We never sued over the fact that our tax dollars were going to fund this massive over spending on a high school. We only got asked questions from WE and TG residents "Oh my, you're in Waubonsie School district, what are you going to do when your kids get to high school age?" My response has always been the same, my impression on Waubonsie has been favorable, due to the great kids I've known to graduate from there; and for those who don't agree that Waubonsie is a great school, there is Benet or the many other private schools from which to choose. Then came the third high school. Most of us agreed it was needed as many of our neighbors experienced their children having to go through overcrowded classrooms, etc. As the school board dedicated way too much time in trying to secure the BB property at exorbinate prices, non of us in the north ever thought of suing. We might not have liked the expensive BB site, but we allowed the school board to do their job. Now that the Eola property has become available and they're able to save the taxpayers $17 million, I commend them for their efforts in ensuring this land is safe. When this all goes through, I will feel very comfortable sending my children there, as all our neighbors will - and let me assure you, we are all diligent when it comes to the safety of our children. We live near the land in question, and it is not where the NSFOC would like you to think it is. It is on a clear piece of land closer to lovely homes that will be yards from the new school. I'd like the other school sites in this district to pass such scrutiny as the Eola site.

To Mark on March 21, 2008 2:01 PM

I've been waiting for someone to Godwin this blog. Thanks.

"If the residents don't speak up about what is wrong - and sue - then we'd be left with a school board who will hurt, not help our community. "

NO, you'd be left with your elected officials -- who you would vote out next time. That's how the system works.

Do you know what is truly amazing about all of this? If Tall Grass had been assinged to NV then NSFOC wouldn't exist, all the fighting would be nil and #204 would be on the back pages. It is unreal how that one subdivison has poisoned the district.

Moderator Jim...I can't beleive you deleted it.

I want to know why you did not challenge the claims of the NSFOC and their attorney while you had the chance. Collins claims to be an environmental attorney. Who better to ask questions like...can't most sites be remediated? Don't the Illinois and Federal EPA have strict standards in regard to remediation? Doesn't Midwest Gen have to remediate regardless of whether they sell the land or not? Doesn't remediation have to be completed prior to the sale of any land? Doesn't remediation, if done properly, remove all toxins from the land? These are the topics that get bantered around and you had an environmental attorney in your offices available for questions. These questions are not specific to the case but are the basis fo the case. If the environmental attorney cannot answer these questions, the NSFOC just wasted all their money.

To juno on March 21, 2008 2:57 PM:

Sorry, but the school board, as elected officials, ARE PERMITTED to do whatever they want. They are only legally required to use the money to build a third high school.

We ELECTED them to represent us and make decisions for us. You don't get to vote on every issue, not in Aurora, not in Springfield, nor in Washington. This is NOT a 'democracy' -- it is a republic and our system of government is 'representative'. You elect the leaders, they make the decisions. If you don't like it, elect better people next time.

All votes WERE taken into account. You approved the money for the new high school, not where it would go.

And for the 10,000th time -- voters don't get to vote on school boundaries. The district has the right to change those at any time. Don't like that? Well, go to Springfield and get the law changed.

To Anonymous on March 21, 2008 4:33 PM :

Suing the school board is not "Democracy folks". It's entitlement run amok.

I look just fine in the mirror telling NSFOC to sod off. The negatively is coming from Todd and his gang. Just read the gloom and doom on nsfoc.org.

But hey "it's for the kids" right?

Someone please tell me where is the dividing line? What is the dividing line between North and South Naperville. I want to know which side I am on. Also, with population growth, does this line move?

Come on, does it really matter?

Come and listen to a story about a man named Dash
Then new school super, who thinks we’re full of cash,
Mark sent him out huntin, for a site for a school,
And he picked out Eola, oh what a fool.

The price was cheap and it was close to his home
Who cares about the parents he’ll decide this on his own
Whats in the soil reports, nobody can he see
Oil that is, black gold, Texas tea.

Well the first thing you know ol' Dash's a millionaire,
Kinfolk said Dash move away from there
Said Californy is the place you ought to be
So they loaded up the truck and moved to Beverly.

Hills, that is.
Swimmin pools, movie stars and a new school district.

*************************

Well now its time to say good-bye to Dash and all his kin.
And they would like to thank you folks fer lettin them drop in.
No matter he’s been fired, by several before you
He’ll get another job, from a Californy Fool

Take your shoes off. Don’t come back now, y'hear?

That's called Democracy folks. God bless AMERICA!!

Yes democracy, just like when you voted for the 3rd high school, no matter what the location.

Wow! I have to tell the Sun and Tim thank you for your article it was very well written and tells the other side of the story.

By the way folks, we have seen plenty of articles from the Sun from the school board's point of view. They are now telling both sides of the story. Maybe you should do your research. Funny how you were all for the paper when they were reporting from the SB side and not the others.

For those of you who seem to show up on every blog with your hatered and negativity; it sounds like you need to seek therapy. Your negativeness and name calling to not only the Sun, their reporters, NSFOC members, and neighborhoods are uncalled for.

As asked by some of you, "Is this what you teach your kids?". I suggest you take a long hard look in the mirror and try to handle your emotions and act more professionally. If you were one of my employees you would have been sent to anger management by now.

I have to say I applaud the NSFOC for taking this on. I have friends who are afraid to speak up but quietly are rooting for the NSFOC to find out answers for them since their children are going to be attending MV.

The school board needs to slow down and get answers. Then proceed from there and that is what the NSFOC is asking them to do. That's called Democracy folks. God bless AMERICA!!

To Anonymous: I accidentally deleted (sorry) your last comment on why we didn't ask the NSFOC people and their lawyer certain questions. Resubmit it and I'll reply. Thanks.

By NV, MV ...just not WV on March 21, 2008 2:36 PM
By what a joke on March 20, 2008 8:08 AM
Mr. Andrews is right it is not about his kids and those of the NSFOC (90% of which are TG and WE residents) attending NVHS. It is about those kids NOT attending WVHS. They have made that perfectly clear!!! Look at their own lawsuit. It's the BB property or nothing as far as they are concerned. Nice try Mr. Andrews but you can't fool the majority of the district, they can see right through your smoke screen. Everyone look at the lawsuit, it's BB or nothing or return the money to the taxpayers. Well, that's not an option Mr. Andrews, we voted on the referendum for a 3rd high school not the location of a third high school. You and the group you claim you are just a member of are holding the rest of the district hostage and for that no one will ever forgive you. It's really a shame since the IPSD has done nothing but try and aquire the land for BB and up until the last judgement won every decision prior to that. The IPSD now can't afford the BB property and it's time to move on to another location. I'm disappointed that the Sun would even consider interviewing such a minority voice. Then again Mr. Andrews and the NSFOC is more concerned about their own desires and wants then the district. Thanks NSFOC for suing US!!!

By Calll it as I see it on March 20, 2008 8:17 AM
Of course it is not about Neuqua--it's all about Waubonsie Valley and NSFOC supporters' desire to do anything humanly possible to prevent their children from going there.

By MH on March 20, 2008 8:21 AM
What do I make of Andrews position? Trying to defend the obvious (that NSFOC is truly about boundaries).

Also, I thought previously they said had "thousands" in their ranks.
Appears to be the same ~200 from weeks ago............

The above posts have it accurate folks. Here's yet another fine example of this group's abominable attempts to send their kids anywhere but WV. Yes,it's about boundaries ...not fiscal responsibility or safety.......... SAD BUT TRUE!!!

An email was sent to me by a friend in the south dated Jan.16, 2008. It's author is a Mr. Greg A. and he spent much time and effort putting together a lengthy email and spread sheet with boundaries worked out for the Macom site.
He states he "strongly disagrees with the Eola site"."Presumably Fry&White Eagle would be shifted out of Neuqua and in to Waubonsie". He goes on to provide numbers and how they could gerry rig to send Fry, White Eagle and 4 other schools to Metea on the Macom site and leave the current schools today at WV.
Further down,"However, the district administrators'(Eola) plan would cause major disruptions on the south end of the district with the aforementioned shift of WE and Fry students presently attending Neuqua to Waubonsie.This disruption to students will not be soothed by happy parents excited about the impact on their home values.Instead, it is likely to cause LAWSUITS, CALLS FOR A NEW REFERENDUM with the potential to delay the project..." (resulting in more costs). Lastly, he states, "...put Metea in south NAPERVILLE at the Macom site where it belongs. If you don't I'm also quite confident that you will face a horrendous public uproar from the southern Naperville residents...".

By Anonymous on March 21, 2008 3:34 PM
You know what is worse than what some of the posters have said...they will all get up Sunday morning, put on the Easter dress, suits, etc. and pack every Christian church from the north to south end of this district.

I hope when you are sitting in those pews you ask for forgiveness and learn to forgive those who have trespassed you. Isn't that what today is all about...Good Friday and Easter Sunday...forgiveness, new life and hope.

My hope is that you all stop the name calling and move on from this issue. But I know that won't happen. After you all eat your big dinners and leave grandmas house, you'll come back home and start the mud slinging all over again.

And what was the reason you got up to celebrate Easter with family and friends?

*****I don't celebrate easter, pagan holiday. What in the world do eggs and rabbits have to do with Jesus. But anyway thats a whole nother issue.

WV Area Resident,
You are the most honest person on this entire host of blogs.

Folks please do not be played by the NSFOC.

They are about boundaries and/ or the VOTE NO circa 2006 population. "fiscal responsiblility" and "safety,safety, safety" are angles being used to get you to pay for their frivilous lawsuit. The only agenda on their minds is how do we get our kids to NV or MV . Build at BB or don't build the 3rd high school at all accomplishes their mission. These are people that care more about their property values than your kids or SB accountability. They didn't form until boundaries were announced that did not meet the aforementioned agenda. Thank you.

You know what is worse than what some of the posters have said...they will all get up Sunday morning, put on the Easter dress, suits, etc. and pack every Christian church from the north to south end of this district.

I hope when you are sitting in those pews you ask for forgiveness and learn to forgive those who have trespassed you. Isn't that what today is all about...Good Friday and Easter Sunday...forgiveness, new life and hope.

My hope is that you all stop the name calling and move on from this issue. But I know that won't happen. After you all eat your big dinners and leave grandmas house, you'll come back home and start the mud slinging all over again.

And what was the reason you got up to celebrate Easter with family and friends?

So let me undestand "Juno"

You didn't read the previous ballot that did not say you are voting on boundaries and a school site location, but now you want a re-vote on the boundaries and the school site location?

Lets see I take a test and don't understand or read the question. Then I ask that I be given the test again with what I thought the questions were?????

Its simple - Read before you sign, vote, or whatever. No do-overs.

By Need Tax Advice on March 21, 2008 11:52 AM
Attention: By anonymous on March 21, 2008 11:03 AM

Can you please provide me with your business information as I need some assistance with my taxes which are due next month? My 1099 lists sales of stock, mutual funds, and cd's. I'm not sure if they qualify as long-term or short-term gains. Based upon your feedback, it appears that you are qualified to answer these tax questions for me and my household. Also, I just receieved Form 5498. What is this form for?

I am looking to open a small business and I'm not sure if I should open a Limited Liabilty Corporation (LLC),Subchapter S Corporation, or General Partnership? Please let me know when you have a free moment, as I'm not sure of the tax advantages of each business entity.

Thank you.

Here's some free advice, go to HR Block. The IRS loves to audit their returns.

From date of purchase to date of sale less than a year - short term. Greater than a year - long term.

Form 5498 what? There are different forms of 5498.

Which type of entity you choose? Depends on number of shareholders, purpose, do you plan on growing. Maybe a sole proprietorship would be enough for now. Have you already started making money?

Take it from me - if you have this many questions and won't see a professional accountant/lawyer, you probably shouldn't start a business. You're starting on the wrong foot.

There are alot of books out that answer these basic questions. Try the "Dummy" or "Idiot" series (no pun intended).

oh, almost forgot - corporate returns were due last month - 3/15. Not-for profit 5/15. Make a mental note.

I was against the third high school, simply because I believe our district is peaking in enrollment, and for the short term we could make do with alternate solutions. Sure if money was no object I'd prefer to have smaller classes, etc. But I plan to live here a long time and don't want to be saddled with the cost of what I believe will be over-capacity for decades to come. I don't know about you, but my taxes are plenty high to begin with. Yes, they can restructure the cost so we don't pay more now, but we aren't stupid. It has to be paid for.

But other folks loved the idea of a brand new school in their back yard, and not far from the OTHER new school in the district. So they voted for it and effectively reached into my wallet to support their children's education. Okay, not much I can do about it.

But now that the third school will be built in a more geographically reasonable location to support the district, (once the EPA and others clear the site), they don't want to pay for it. They can blah blah all they want about their reasons, but it is obvious to everyone with half a brain. Why should they pay for a school they won't get to enjoy? I understand where they are coming from, but resent their attempts to sell their position as anything other than self-serving. I, for one, appreciate the fact that the SB has found a lower cost solution so they don't waste our hard earned dollars just to accomodate a select part of our district. And I admit to finding some satisfaction in seeing the real motives behind those that voted for the referendum. I'd also like to "thank" them for costing the distict more in legal fees, and for delaying the building of the extra capacity they voted for.

I'm a WV graduate, and my kids will be WV graduates, whether this third school is built or not, so I don't have a bias here. But I see no reason why we should be forced to pay top dollar to put the school at the BB location when other options exist. Perhaps that will leave a few dollars to update/upgrade WV, or maybe no one really cares about that....

By Need Tax Advice on March 21, 2008 11:52 AM
Attention: By anonymous on March 21, 2008 11:03 AM

Can you please provide me with your business information as I need some assistance with my taxes which are due next month? My 1099 lists sales of stock, mutual funds, and cd's. I'm not sure if they qualify as long-term or short-term gains. Based upon your feedback, it appears that you are qualified to answer these tax questions for me and my household. Also, I just receieved Form 5498. What is this form for?

I am looking to open a small business and I'm not sure if I should open a Limited Liabilty Corporation (LLC),Subchapter S Corporation, or General Partnership? Please let me know when you have a free moment, as I'm not sure of the tax advantages of each business entity.

Thank you.

I'd help anyone with their tax issues, for a fee, not free, thats how I EARN a living.

I'm sick of this my neighborhood/your neighborhood garbage. I am not from White Eagle or Tall Grass, but do reside in the Fry attendance area. I am in full agreement with the NSFOC. The school board are elected officials. They are dealing with public funds. They cannot be permitted to act as if they have the priveledge to do whatever they want due to a so-called mandate based on deception. If District 204 truly desired to rectify the situation and act like the elected officials that they are, they would cease any further attempts to adhere to the 2009 deadline for Eola, would have a full disclosure of the environmental study, and call for another referendum based on the boundary changes and third school location at Eola. All votes need to be taken into account. With the information I have now, I never would have voted for a third school.

Moderator Jim/Editor,

Why do you allow a comment (Suckbrook???? Suckdale????) to be posted with vulgarities towards subdivisions? I thought you were screening these (mostly anonymous) posts. These blogs are getting nasty enough without this crap.

"Someone send Bradshaw his NSFOC membership pin "

He won't do that until Mark tells him to. I thought we elected independent thinkers to the board, not sheep. Unfortunately we all need to wait awhile to remedy that.

Also, nice witch-hunting and slander in the first few posts, Brookdale and nsfocfraud. I'm sure the editor would love to talk to you if you had the courage to show your faces.

Unfortunately, all they'd get is a tired re-hash of "the Sun is unfair", and "so your politicians lied to you, get over it" Let's face it, the MWGEN brass ring is slipping from your fingers, but you haven't yet realized every inane comment you make is driving people further and further into the NSFOC camp.

FD wrote

Our Naperville children and the Naperville/Aurora communities deserve a better.

Interesting wording. What do the Aurora children deserve? I know what you tried to say, but your meaning comes through. It's all about you.

Thank goodness for the press. Let's face it, without the Sun reflecting on their readers views - and reporting it, we'd be in the Hitler' days. Should we assume that school board is right and the press and readers should not question them.

Again, the reason our schools are successful are due to parents, teachers and tax dollars. The school board has shown they have done nothing but spend our tax dollars.

If the residents don't speak up about what is wrong - and sue - then we'd be left with a school board who will hurt, not help our community.

For those that are supportive of the bait and switch fraud, shame on on you. You would never teach your children to say one thing, and then 'trick' others to win. Or would you...

So, I have to read through yet another blog about fake accusations by NSFOC against our school board. We are the ones being (attempted to be)decieved by this extreme group.

If the Sun is going to report about the NSFOC in a "fair and balanced manner" can you at least get the facts straight? In the article today, it is stated that Fry is 8 miles from Waubonsie. Not true guys. Waubonsie is less than a mile more than the Brach Brodie parcel.

Taken from Illinois Attorney General website:

Can I get information about a charitable organization’s operations and expenditures directly from the charitable organization?

Yes. Federal law requires each charitable organization to send you a copy of its federal form 990 for a reasonable charge.

The watchers of the watchers are being watched.

NSFOC, you'd better make sure your I's are dotted and your t's are crossed.

We can't seem to spell Neuqua, Waubonsie, nor Metea correctly. But we all can spell IRS.

To By anonymous on March 21, 2008 11:03 AM

I posted this on another blog earlier this morning:

Registration of Charities
225 ILCS 460/2
Sec. 2. Registration; rules; penalties.
(a) Every charitable organization, except as
otherwise provided in Section 3 of this Act [225
ILCS 460/3], which solicits or intends to solicit
contributions from persons in this State or which
is located in this State, by any means whatsoever
shall, prior to any solicitation, file with the
Attorney General upon forms prescribed by him,
a registration statement, accompanied by a
registration fee of $15, which statement shall
include the following certified information:
1. The name of the organization and the name or
names under which it intends to solicit
contributions.
2. The names and addresses of the officers,
directors, trustees, and chief executive officer of
the organization.
3. The addresses of the organization and the
addresses of any offices in this State. If the
organization does not maintain a principal office,
the name and address of the person having
custody of its financial records.
4. Where and when the organization was legally
established, the form of its organization and its
tax exempt status.
5. The purpose for which the organization is
organized and the purpose or purposes for which
6
the contributions to be solicited will be used.
6. The date on which the fiscal year of the
organization ends.
7. Whether the organization is authorized by
any other governmental authority to solicit
contributions and whether it is or has ever
been enjoined by any court from soliciting
contributions.
8. The names and addresses of any
professional fund raisers who are acting or
have agreed to act on behalf of the
organization.
9. Methods by which solicitation will be made.

I am watching this very closely considering I have a legitimate not for profit.

They also have to maintain information on everyone who donates.

Taken from the NSFOC website:

Please note, we have applied for a Federal ID for non-profit status.

If

we are granted non-profit status, then donations will qualify for tax deductibility and company matching funds. We will inform you of the final outcome, but you should give knowing the situation today, and the possibility that the non-profit status

may not be granted.

We will run as a non-profit either way.

The tax deductability and company matching would be the only items impacted by the government's decision.

I thought we lived in a district with some highly intelligent people but I guess I'm wrong. Anybody with half a brain would know that a defendant always lays low and let's the attorney do their talking or talks only when deemed appropriate. Unless you have an attorney like Drew Peterson who has made a joke out of his client. No one shows their game plan until game day, unless you have a screwball attorney.

And for all your arm chair quarterbacks please come forward if you think you can do a better job as a SB memeber so I can vote for you. I expect to see a lot of people running next round.
Oh wait that's right you are all a bunch of cyberbullies and would never take the time out of your personal life. You just talk the talk.

I have issues with Collins saying we were deceived. Didn't the school board take extraordinary measures to try to buy that land? Hey Collins, are you going to sue the federal governmaent claiming we never put men on the moon? or how about covering up aliens at Roswell NM?

Moderator Jim to Anonymous: Precisely the point. We look forward to talking to them...when they decide they want to talk. Meanwhile, we're simply in the business of reporting news in a fair and balanced manner.

Moderator Jim: I'm confused, weren't the people of NSFOC talking to the Sun? How did you get their comments?

Attention: By anonymous on March 21, 2008 11:03 AM

Can you please provide me with your business information as I need some assistance with my taxes which are due next month? My 1099 lists sales of stock, mutual funds, and cd's. I'm not sure if they qualify as long-term or short-term gains. Based upon your feedback, it appears that you are qualified to answer these tax questions for me and my household. Also, I just receieved Form 5498. What is this form for?

I am looking to open a small business and I'm not sure if I should open a Limited Liabilty Corporation (LLC),Subchapter S Corporation, or General Partnership? Please let me know when you have a free moment, as I'm not sure of the tax advantages of each business entity.

Thank you.

TO: anonymous on March 21, 2008 10:47 AM

In my opinion, these questions have already been answered.

Questions you should have asked of their so called environmental attorney...

Is it true that claiming environmental concerns is the first line of defense to stall any construction project?
Why would anyone want to start construction on a potentially contaminated site?

Is it true that environemntal concerns at the Eola site can be remediate ?
Can they? Has the site been tested for the substances found in this type of environment? Do we know what really needs to be remediated?

Is it true that now that testing has been done, MidwestGen is responsible for remediation, regardless if they sell the land or not?
This is a question for the school board. The public has not seen the Phase I/II studies. What substances were found. What substances did the testing look for?

Is it true that the title cannot change hands on the land until remediation is complete?
If that's the case, why does the school district want to start moving dirt by April 1st?

Is it true that the Federal EPA and Illinois EPA have strict standards regarding the safety of any site where remediation is required?
Do they? Is the IEPA involved?

Is it true that the same environmental concerns (EMF, Gas Lines, and the Railroad tracks also run through Tall Grass?
I don't see any railroad tracks or pipelines running through tall grass. I also don't see a sign posted that said it contains PCBs.

Is it true that there is no case law supporting your case to force the district to buy the BB Land?
That's because government bodies don't usually back out of condemnation lawsuits.

Is it true that it would cost the NSFOC millions to take their case through the entire process? (Just $1 million would cost each of the 200 supporters $5000 each...providing that some of the 200 aren't grade school children of other NSFOC supporters).
I'm not the NSFOC, but from where I see it, the damages at BB are more substantial than any lawsuit with the NSFOC. Why are we still moving forward with the Eola Site without knowing these damages?

to suckdale and suckbrook. what do you want to be when you grow up? its hard to be credible when you act like a pouting child. This is not about Brookdale or Springbrook. The residents of Tall Grass and White Eagle (and a few others) are suing the ENTIRE district. That's right...they are suing you. Now go back outside and play nice.

By Anonymous on March 21, 2008 10:03 AM
To No to Entitlement on March 21, 2008 8:25 AM

Tim Waldorf has covered stories for the school board too. I'm sure he would cover more stories about the school board, but in case you have forgotten, the school board has chosen to stay silent.

So you see my point. He writes articles "for" people. Why can't he be an objective reporter? Get some facts instead of just forwarding others opinions?

Come on little timmy...you can do it.

Moderator Jim...why didn't you ask those questions of NSFOC? They are the ones making the claims to the contrary. Grow a pair.

For $150 million dollars, our kids deserve better than ground contamination, EMFs, adjacent hazmat RR cargo, and 20" - 36" flammable/hazardous material pipelines criss-crossing the school grounds.

To All Involved,
Thank you very much for the constant bantering back and forth. This is simply too good to be true. The more that you argue and debate, the more that you are giving this cause "free press". The people that I work with had no idea or concerns regarding the new school site. Upon reading The Naperville Sun day-in and day-out, people are actually talking about this. This is the cheapest advertisement that any side (for or against the third school could ask for).

Keep up the debate, I mean free advertisment.

There is incontrovertible evidence now that the school board has lied to everyone (including at board meetings and to the newspapers in the last couple of months)- wait and watch - its coming -

This school board does not represent district 204 they only represent suckdale (aka brookdale) and suckbrook (aka springbrook)- watch as their school board gets flushed down the toilet for their lies

more questions you should have asked.

Isn't it true that the NSFOC is an activist organization and as such, donations will not be tax deductible as the NSFOC website claims? Because a corporation is set up as not for profit, it does not qualify the donations as tax deductible. There is a difference between activist and charitable not for profits.

If they are misleading about this, what other NSFOC points are misleading?

Isn't it true that as a registered Illinois corporation, the names of the directors of the NSFOC are available to anyone via the Illinois Secretary of State's office? No more being anonymous. As soon as the incorporation hits the records, I will be sure the publish the names of the directors and their subdivion(s).

Tweety improved the Naperville Sun. we all know the reporters cannot.

Crazy me, I thought MARCH MADNESS was all about college hoops but I guess not if you live in IPSD 204.

I have to make this quick. The parot looks full. I must do the only thing I can do with the Naperville Sun. Coming Tweety...here is the paer to line your cage.

Seriously. You had representatives of the NSFOC and their shark for hire, in your offices and you didn't think to ask any questions? And you say you were represented by a reporter and an editor? Who are you kidding? Did you agree to the meeting only if you weren't allowed to ask questions? Did you agree to publish thier views without substance if they purchased a full page ad?

Questions you should have asked of their so called environmental attorney...

Is it true that claiming environmental concerns is the first line of defense to stall any construction project?

Is it true that environemntal concerns at the Eola site can be remidiated?

Is it true that now that testing has been done, MidwestGen is responsible for remediation, regardless if they sell the land or not?

Is it true that the title cannot change hands on the land until remediation is complete?

Is it true that the Federal EPA and Illinois EPA have strict standards regarding the safety of any site where remediation is required?

Is it true that the same environmental concerns (EMF, Gas Lines, and the Railroad tracks also run through Tall Grass?

Is it true that there is no case law supporting your case to force the district to buy the BB Land?

Is it true that it would cost the NSFOC millions to take their case through the entire process? (Just $1 million would cost each of the 200 supporters $5000 each...providing that some of the 200 aren't grade school children of other NSFOC supporters).

Now I do imaging you did ask some questions. How are you? What do you think of this crazy weather? Will you be buying another full page ad? etc.

have to run...Tweety looks like she is about to add some value to this paper.

Here's a few questions for all to ponder. Why construct a High School on property having several large diameter DOT Hazardous/Flammable pipelines running through it, having major industrial electrical power lines adjacent to it, and having potential long term safety/environmental concerns resulting from a heavy industrial plant still on the property? Wouldn’t anyone of these unsafe conditions by itself be enough not to purchase such a site? Wouldn’t all three dangers combined suggest even greater safety risks? We all know that some form of construction can occur within 25 to 100 feet of pipelines. However, do you honestly believe this standard should also be applied to schools that educate our children? Do you think evacuation of several thousand children would be easy should the worse occur? Why increase risks that add to the chance of potential fires, explosions, environmental toxity issues and/or electrical concerns. I’ve been to the property. Does someone really believe it's possible to adequately mitigate away all these safety risks?

Our Naperville children and the Naperville/Aurora communities deserve a better. Also, what type of image does this serve for the Naperville and Aurora communities and school districts? Surely, there is a safer property within the same general vicinity.

Without a doubt Tim W is tied into Todd A somehow - that's got to be the only reason he his writing this junk - and yes Tim it is junk you're being sucked into writing. I have emails that almost say just that.

I'm glad to see members of NSFOC step forward.

Maybe the Sun should now interview the people associated with nsfocfraud.c0m. (If they can find them)

To Just trying to stay neutral on March 21, 2008 9:08 AM

gang definition

Main Entry: gang
Function: noun
a group of persons having informal and usually close social relations

To No to Entitlement on March 21, 2008 8:25 AM

Tim Waldorf has covered stories for the school board too. I'm sure he would cover more stories about the school board, but in case you have forgotten, the school board has chosen to stay silent.

To the Naperville Sun editors. Aren't you guys sick of dealing with/interviewing the ever so "needy" Todd A. and NSFOC.

I thought the article on Thursday put the nsfoc in a bad light but the one this morning just puts the nail in the coffin. Our Standards WILL Not Be Lowered, the folks against this group will be bring up the wvhs vs nvhs all over again. The longest distance from tg (middle school) to wvhs is 5.6 miles not the reported 8 miles.

But the real attention getter is when the Jack A_s lawyer calls the school board and I quote,"this is the same gang that told us they were going to buy Brach-Brodie if the referendum passed". That's news to me ,I guess when I voted for board members I was actually working to elect gang members.Maybe this is a stretch but I would have assumed attorneys would speak with a little more intelligence. But we all know what happens when we ASS U ME.

Looks like we are not the only victims (another great choice by the Board?)

For Immediate Release

Wednesday December 7, 2005
Daeschner: Superintendent of the Year?

(Bowling Green, Kentucky) – The Bluegrass Institute has serious reservations about the selection of Jefferson County Public Schools Superintendent Stephen Daeschner as the commonwealth’s “Superintendent of the Year” by the Kentucky Association of School Administrators (KASA).

The district overseen by this superlative superintendent contains 10 high schools in which more than 75 percent of the students failed to achieve reading proficiency in 2004, according to data collected from various sources and published at www.kentuckyalliance.org. Yet these same schools graduate an average of 65 percent of those students. Daeschner presides over this inexcusable disparity of children failing to achieve proficiency in critical areas and the number of diplomas being granted.

If Daeschner represents the best of Kentucky’s public-school superintendents, then the KASA’s award is as meaningless as some of the diplomas he has handed out through the years.

Fifty-seven of Jefferson County’s 130 schools failed to meet federal standards during the 2004-05 school year, up from 55 schools that did not meet the previous year’s requirements. As Daeschner was being granted the award, more than 30,000 students within his charge were languishing in failing schools. Is this what we should expect from the best superintendent in the state?

“In 1995, Daeschner’s district claimed five of Kentucky’s 10 lowest-performing schools as measured by ACT scores,” said Richard Innes, education analyst with the Bluegrass Institute. “A full decade later, the district claimed seven of the 10 lowest-performing schools. What criterion does the KASA use in determining outstanding performance by a public-school superintendent?”

Even some JCPS school board members have pointed out Daeschner’s failure to address some of the most critical issues facing the district, including a persistent achievement gap between black and white students and the poor performance by the district’s middle schools, where 35 percent of students scored novice (the lowest of four categories) in math this year.

“Perhaps the association should do some homework before handing out next year’s award,” said Jim Waters, Director of Policy and Communications for the Bluegrass Institute. “Only administrators who exemplify the kind of leadership that all superintendents should emulate deserve such an accolade.”

– For interview information, contact Jim Waters, Director of Policy and

I agree with Board member Mr. Bradshaw (his previous comments in regards to Makon are interesting as they apply to EOLA):

"Incumbent Curt Bradshaw said many problems exist with the Macom site and until those are resolved, the school board needs to stick with the Brach-Brodie site.

"We explored the plan in great detail," Bradshaw said. " The school would sit next to a ComEd substation and that is just one among the long list of negatives. I do not think putting kids next to a substation is in the best interest of our kids."

Someone send Bradshaw his NSFOC membership pin (looks like there are now 3001 members and growing).

It’s About the Kids
Safety *Fiscal Responsibility*Accountability
www.nsfoc.org

It's about time someone is holding the school board accountable. I'm tired of the school board flat out lying to us.

It appears yesterday that 3 members of the NSFOC, hired shark Collins, and an editor and a "reporter" from the Naperville Sun sat down to chat. I noticed that the timing of it was the same day as a school board meeting. I also noticed that the reporter was the same as reported on all previous NSFOC material. It begs a few questions.

1. Does the Naperville Sun qualify as a newspaper? Have they investigated any of the issues of the Eola Site? Have they looked into the remidiation process? Have they looked into state and federal laws regarding any land (being sold or not) that has found via testing to require remidiation? The Sun circualtion is incredibly small. A great source for where the garage sales will be this weekend, but not a great source of what most reasonable people view as news.

2. Is Tim Waldorf a student at NVHS? Does he live at Tall Grass or White Eagle? Has he been a finacial supporter of NSFOC? I imagine he is a student at NVHS with aspirations of being a reporter some day. Rememebr that the Naperville Sun has an incredibly small circulation. They cannot possibly have the funds to hire a qualified reporter. A qualified reporter might actually do some actual research.

3. Did the fact that the NSFOC pay for a full page ad entitle them to another one sided story?

4. Does anyone really question Shawn Collins motives? He gets his name in the paper regularly with this story. It won't be long before people beleive his firm is a big law firm. Although his website is professional done, his firm is still a small firm. I would feel very comfortable recommending his firm to handle a DUI or divorce case after the NSFOC money runs out. He is gambling that the judge will make the district pay his fees. This absolutley will not happen if the judge finds that the suit has substance.

Come on little Timmy. Do some objective homework. If you want to represent yourself as a reporter, do some actual work. Don't let others write your work.

Come on Naperville Sun. This story does keep people coming back to read the blogs but if you want to be more than a source for garage sale ads, act like a newspaper.

Come on Shaun Collins. This may help with your image in Tall Grass but you cannot fool the balance of the district. You are not looking out for the people of the district and all of us know it. The NSFOC money will be gone soon and so will you.

Say No to Entitlement!!!

When are the N people going to realize that the rest of us are enjoying the fact that they're suffering? It's about time the "haves" suffered a bit, isn't it?

And NSFOC is right to make the charges. So now let's hear from the District - keeping in mind that now it's the District LAWYERS leading the PR campaign - let's see how responsibly they react, how adequately they explain, and how truthful they are willing to be with us. Truthfully, I don't expect much but more of the same. Please, 204, surprise us.

...about 3 1/2 miles from the Fry attendance area. The high school at that location was approved under a referendum, which many NSFOC members supported.... TAKEN FROM TIM WALDORF'S ARTICLE THIS MORNING.

Tim, looks like NSFOC got you too. The third high school was approved but NOT at that location OR any location. That location wasn't on the ballot...the district didn't own enough land anywhere to put it on the ballot.Please retract this false statement on the same page as the article !!!!

Also, the Eola/Molitor site was never "ruled out" as unsafe. No testing had been done and they didn't feel it necessary to go through that if BB was still the property they were looking at to purchase. The point is these people take SB letters that were written years ago when circumstances were different and they attempt to impose what they think the author was implying to the new situation we face today. NSFOC is about not getting the school they wanted to go to and everything else is just attempted distraction from their very sad and misdirected motives. 3,000 registered on their website....like "Bozo the Clown@aol.com" .Make it "2999".

I said it before, I'll say it over and over. So you were lied to by politicians. Are you shocked? You shouldn't be. Is this the first time that's ever happened? No. Will it happen again? Probably.

Is it grounds for a lawsuit? No. The only thing that was voted on was to authorize the money for a 3rd high school. They could have built in on Pluto. Any statements made publicly before, during, or after the referendum are just your elected offcials trying to get your vote.

My Referendum ballot that I voted on said I was voting on a 3rd high school - not a 3rd high school on the Brach Brodie property - what did yours say?

How can anyone own a home and NOT know that things can go wrong and it aint done until its done? Sorry your own naivety led you to be blindsided to the idea that could happen. You didn't see it coming so its the School Board's fault? Shame on you.

What more could the School Board do to get BB? What step did they miss? (and why aren't YOU volunteering to do that overworked, nopaid job?)

Should we build anyway without the funds? That's a financial policy that works for some, I guess. I have no credit card debt and own my cars,etc. so obviously I am more conservative.

I still haven't heard a good answer to the basic question - why was it ok to go to Metea at BB but not WVHS?

nonsense.It's already been visited. Read the other blogs. Goodbye NSFOC.