Time to get out the white sheets and hoods-gather the torches and pitchforks - let's storm the castle!

Anyone else we should be labeling as unethical crooks and/or elitist radicals (please tell me who we are missing)?

NSFOCfraud.org....The silent maj....hello...anybody else out there...I ordered 30 more white shirtsssss....helloooo? Dr. Daeschner???? Mark???? Helloooooo?

-----------

By the looks of your "list" you definately missed placing your name on the list. I call you unethical elitist and radical. Only such a small person could write such a narrow minded baseless slanderous remark. For shame.

"Your SB states that they will involve the IEPA. Now your SB says they will just purchase the land and start building on it without know for sure it is safe. Your SB espouses numbers (i.e., bussing costs) that are laughable. Your SB is ignoring a BB estate suit that could cost $20 MM. Lisa Madigan says Midwest Gen has had over 7600 polution violations. You and your SB say it is okay to start building as long as we fence it off and address it later."
_______________________________

Yes they will involved the IEPA when it is time to as stated by IL Law.

Yes they are purchasing the land and will start building on it. For you to say if they do or do not know if it is safe is laughable. Unless you've viewed the Phase II studies and have worked with MidwestGen you do not know if it safe either.

Unless yo work for Laidlaw I'll trust Laidlaw and our consultants over you, thanks.

The BB settlement "could" cost us $20 million. It could also cost us as less as $5 million. Why should that hold up building a 3rd HS?

"Lisa Madigan says Midwest Gen has had over 7600 polution violations." Well, Lisa Madigan has her own issues regarding trust but let's say she's right. Show me that 1 out of the 7600 polution violations ever existed at the Eola site. Even if 1 of them existed they have surely been identified and none of them would of or could have happend where the school will be because it was farm land.

They do plan on fencing off land in the NE corner of the property. The did not say they would take care of it later. This is the site of the former peaker plant that will have been out of use for 2 years by the time the school is built. It is hundreds of yards away from the school and close to 30 acres away.

Yes I do have high expectations for my school board and I believe they are taking the right steps for safety and to move forward with a 3rd high school that has been delayed too long.

Anonymous on April 1, 2008 6:51 PM

It should read:

We would all like to say thank you to the School Board and Dr. Draescher for moving forward with the plans to build a third high school on contaminated property and for not being responsible for our children. Thanks for your coniving and cunning ways of dividing this district. Thanks for marketing the BB site to get your YES vote only to abandon that site and cost us millions of dollars. Oops! That's right Dr. Destruct said we won't be paying anything. By the way thanks for bringing him in to destroy the programs for special needs children and to run a muck amgonst our community. Yeah, Thanks!

Your ad hominem response undoubtedly reflects your shallow intellect. Try debating on fact. Your SB said that safety would be their primary concern. Your SB states that they will involve the IEPA. Now your SB says they will just purchase the land and start building on it without know for sure it is safe. Your SB espouses numbers (i.e., bussing costs) that are laughable. Your SB is ignoring a BB estate suit that could cost $20 MM. Lisa Madigan says Midwest Gen has had over 7600 polution violations. You and your SB say it is okay to start building as long as we fence it off and address it later.

If you are okay with the way the SB is operating, your standards are way below mine.

We would all like to say thank you to the School Board and Dr. Draescher for moving forward with the plans for the third high school and not getting derailed by these residents full of anger that they are not getting the school for themselves. You're doing exactly what you were elected to do and that's staying focused on the job at hand which is completing the third high school - what's best for the district as a whole - not the ever so vocal minority. I love living by a quote my mother always shared with us - "Empty Cans are the Noisiest"!

By To Pay Attention on April 1, 2008 12:46 PM
Get a clue. Bolingbrook is still growing so NVHS won't level off for a while. Next, Eola is considered a hazardous site so Stonebridge cannot be a walking community unless they build a bridge, but snow cancels that plan. Last, more kids are being bussed greater distances. You are forgetting about Ivy Ridge, West Winds and half of Owens.

Your information is wrong and your logic is faulty.

*********
Thanks for you agreement/support. You said what I said in my response this afternoon (Big Picture Issues), but you said it in a much more short-winded way!

Give me a break on March 31, 2008 6:34 PM

Lets start out: YES, it is about "Broken Promises" Yes, it is about the land being "SAFE". Also, YES, it is about Fiscal Responsibility, YES, it is about Accountabliltiy.

Lets use your own line of: I suppose it's easier to attack then provide ideas of your own. (This would be redirected at you just in case you don't understand)

Lets use your line: "Finally it then became because you're concerned about (not your) kids safety!! Plays better in the media."

You know nothing about me or where I am from. How do you know that I am not your neighbor?

How about SAFETY and that the IEPA stated they have "Never been contacted by the School Board. The Sun investigated this as you know. Did you not read the paper?

How about the $20,000,000.00 +?

MY LINE: Yes, I am for the NSFOC to find answers since the School Board will not give anyone answers.

So, Give me a break!

As far as making the NSFOC "look bad" - we actually don't need to do anything at all. The verbiage in their law suits says it all - any healthy adult can see that.

To echo the comment from the person who mentioned that Bolingbrook is still growing. If there is any question about that, just go East along 111th street (Hassert Blvd) from Naperville/Plainfield Rd. Both the North and South sides of the street are undeveloped land. All are D204 and would go to NVHS.

To: pay attention on March 31, 2008 11:38 PM

What board meeting are you referring to? Please do let me know so I can review the tape. At the Feb. special meeting about the boundaries (yes, I was there, but have not been back since), I do not recall any comments or responses specific to this issue. I only recall a few people in the crowd commenting on how they did not think the Laidlaw times were accurate - people who have long commutes now (Owen) and kids on buses now that could verify that their times were off by 5-8 minutes, minimum. I do also recall a professional actuary speaking out on this as well, disputing the SBs claims. So, if I missed Kathy Birkett's or Dr. D's comments about "more buses" sorry.........again, let me know, and I'll watch the tape.

So anyway, you say there are more buses to keep shorter routes. More buses = more fuel = more expense. So, you save some time. It does not seem feasible that there can be much of a cost savings if they are having to run more buses for all neighborhoods impacted just to get kids to school in a reasonable amount of time. We can argue all day I guess, but the fact of the matter is, to my knowledge, the SB has never provided one shred of domentation to prove in hard numbers they met any of their criteria other than balancing enrollment. If you have seen figures on overall reduced travel times and cost savings with fuel/Laidlaw please let me know. I'd like to see them. I, for one, do not believe I should have to take the SB's word for it. No one should if it was one of their listed criteria.

I completely agree that it is not all about me and my neighborhood. That's why I made a point of saying that under the scenario of having a third school built NO ONE should have a substantially longer commute. Which, in this case, is many. I don't have the list in front of me, but it certainly includes TG, parts of Ashwood Creek, half of WE, Watts, parts of Owen, Cowlishaw and I believe one of the grade schools right by WV (Gombert?) which is being moved to MV. I used to live off of Eola Road, so yes, I am very familiar with the area. I also have friends who live in Brookdale and Ginger Creek, so I know those areas as well.
I certainly understand that some commutes will be shorter - that's great. But, you see, shorter is better and it is the complete opposite of longer. In my comment I simply said that NO ONE's commute should BECOME LONGER. If the school was not being built at Eola and those neighborhoods you listed stayed status quo, their commutes wouldn't be increasing - they'd be staying the same. No increased commute time, no increased cost, no need to put more buses on the road to "save time". The amount of walkers from those neighborhoods may be some saving grace but, like TG and Welch and Ashbury, I think technically only part of the neighborhoods would qualify - maybe less until they build some sidewalks or walking paths.

So, this overall savings to the district has not been substantiated. And, the list of people now having longer commutes is much more far reaching than TG and WE. It is a fact (in a document authored by MM) that the BB property was ultimately picked because it was the closest one to the "epicenter" (for lack of a better term) of the student population. In 1995 that was Rt.59 and Montgomery Road. Now, with the buildout of Tall Grass, Tamarack West, the neighborhood in Plainfield across from Crone and the still-to-explode Ashwood neighborhoods, it has actually shifted south. It is now 248th St. and 95th St. I am not saying that that is where the new school should be built. But I am saying that BB, or something thereabouts, would absolutely not be creating as many longer commutes across the district, and would probably be creating many more shorter commutes. So, at the end of the day, your arguments for shorter commutes for some in the north sound to be more important to you than the longer commutes for many. Should I say now that sadly this isn't about you and your neighborhood (don't know where you live) - or them and their neighborhoods?

Thank you, but I also don't need any insight on overcrowding. Scullen is overcrowded with portables out front now. Fry is among the most crowded grade schools. There may be some temporary relief, but with two brand new developments still in the works - Ashwood and Mandalay Bay yet to come - Scullen for sure and by the SB's own admission will be overcrowded again in a few years. Where are they building a ton of new houses in the north these days?

There is a bridge already smart guy/girl!!! My information is faulty? I'm guessing you've never even driven up here and know what the Eola site looks like. How the school will be on former farmland, how the power lines and so-called "dangers" are hundreds of yards away from where the school will even be.

My guess is you're probably like all the other clueless NSFOC supporters that know nothing about the site and just take others word for it to generate scare tactics. That goes for twisting what the school board has done the past 2 1/2 years to try and satisfy those same people that now make up the NSFOC.

Sorry your information is wrong, faulty and just plain ignorant to try and justify your selfish wants.

To: pay attention on March 31, 2008 11:38 PM

What board meeting are you referring to? Please do let me know so I can review the tape. At the Feb. special meeting about the boundaries (yes, I was there, but have not been back since), I do not recall any comments or responses specific to this issue. I only recall a few people in the crowd commenting on how they did not think the Laidlaw times were accurate - people who have long commutes now (Owen) and kids on buses now that could verify that their times were off by 5-8 minutes, minimum. I do also recall a professional actuary speaking out on this as well, disputing the SBs claims. So, if I missed Kathy Birkett's or Dr. D's comments about "more buses" sorry.........again, let me know, and I'll watch the tape.

So anyway, you say there are more buses to keep shorter routes. More buses = more fuel = more expense. So, you save some time. It does not seem feasible that there can be much of a cost savings if they are having to run more buses for all neighborhoods impacted just to get kids to school in a reasonable amount of time. We can argue all day I guess, but the fact of the matter is, to my knowledge, the SB has never provided one shred of domentation to prove in hard numbers they met any of their criteria other than balancing enrollment. If you have seen figures on overall reduced travel times and cost savings with fuel/Laidlaw please let me know. I'd like to see them. I, for one, do not believe I should have to take the SB's word for it. No one should if it was one of their listed criteria.

I completely agree that it is not all about me and my neighborhood. That's why I made a point of saying that under the scenario of having a third school built NO ONE should have a substantially longer commute. Which, in this case, is many. I don't have the list in front of me, but it certainly includes TG, parts of Ashwood Creek, half of WE, Watts, parts of Owen, Cowlishaw and I believe one of the grade schools right by WV (Gombert?) which is being moved to MV. I used to live off of Eola Road, so yes, I am very familiar with the area. I also have friends who live in Brookdale and Ginger Creek, so I know those areas as well.
I certainly understand that some commutes will be shorter - that's great. But, you see, shorter is better and it is the complete opposite of longer. In my comment I simply said that NO ONE's commute should BECOME LONGER. If the school was not being built at Eola and those neighborhoods you listed stayed status quo, their commutes wouldn't be increasing - they'd be staying the same. No increased commute time, no increased cost, no need to put more buses on the road to "save time". The amount of walkers from those neighborhoods may be some saving grace but, like TG and Welch and Ashbury, I think technically only part of the neighborhoods would qualify - maybe less until they build some sidewalks or walking paths.

So, this overall savings to the district has not been substantiated. And, the list of people now having longer commutes is much more far reaching than TG and WE. It is a fact (in a document authored by MM) that the BB property was ultimately picked because it was the closest one to the "epicenter" (for lack of a better term) of the student population. In 1995 that was Rt.59 and Montgomery Road. Now, with the buildout of Tall Grass, Tamarack West, the neighborhood in Plainfield across from Crone and the still-to-explode Ashwood neighborhoods, it has actually shifted south. It is now 248th St. and 95th St. I am not saying that that is where the new school should be built. But I am saying that BB, or something thereabouts, would absolutely not be creating as many longer commutes across the district, and would probably be creating many more shorter commutes. So, at the end of the day, your arguments for shorter commutes for some in the north sound to be more important to you than the longer commutes for many. Should I say now that sadly this isn't about you and your neighborhood (don't know where you live) - or them and their neighborhoods?

Thank you, but I also don't need any insight on overcrowding. Scullen is overcrowded with portables out front now. Fry is among the most crowded grade schools. There may be some temporary relief, but with two brand new developments still in the works - Ashwood and Mandalay Bay yet to come - Scullen for sure and by the SB's own admission will be overcrowded again in a few years. Where are they building a ton of new houses in the north these days?

Get a clue. Bolingbrook is still growing so NVHS won't level off for a while. Next, Eola is considered a hazardous site so Stonebridge cannot be a walking community unless they build a bridge, but snow cancels that plan. Last, more kids are being bussed greater distances. You are forgetting about Ivy Ridge, West Winds and half of Owens.

Your information is wrong and your logic is faulty.

To: big picture issues

"Lastly, I am still waiting for someone to explain to me how it supposedly takes only one more minute for TG to get to WV than it does to get to NV (as published by Laidlaw/the SB when boundary decisions were announced) when it is 5 miles farther away."

Let me explain it to you since you weren't obvioulsy paying attention during the school board meeting. The routes from TG to WVHS will be shorter with more buses. The bus routes in TG to NVHS are longer routes because it is a shorter distance to NVHS. Now does that make sense?

"Also, there is no way this meets the criteria of saving transportation costs or minimizing travel times. How ridiculous it is for ANYONE in the district to have a longer commute that costs the district more money when a school is being ADDED"

It isn't all about you and your neighborhood sad to say. Did you realize there are 2 very large neighborhoods up by Butterfield Rd.? There is also Brookdale. Those 3 neighborhoods I believe have more houses then TG and will have significant shorter bus routes and therefore will probably be a wash for the buses from the TG neighborhood to go to WVHS. The transportation cost savings were over the district as a whole, not just about TG and WE. It is still the same amount of kids that will need buses. Furthermore a lot of the houses in the Stonebridge neighborhood and Cambridge Chase will no longer be bus riders when they were attending WVHS. Again, it is about savings district wide.

Regarding your comments on the Eola site being the wrong site I disagree. While enrollment numbers at NVHS level off and drop by a few hundred students WVHS still is growing. Come visit the elementary schools and middle schools that feed into WVHS currently and you will see how overcrowded we are. I know you believe that the majority of the population doesn't live up here but we are definately feeling the effects of overcrowding. I could raise many reasons why we don't need a school in the south just as easily.

To: Offended Warrior on March 31, 2008 6:51 PM
Re: Your following blog

1st: I AM a WVHS student.

2nd: Did you even realize that your kids AREN'T EVEN GOING TO MVHS! So if your kids AREN'T attending this new school, how can you justify saying that your sueing the school district for building this school on a site you claim is redeemed unsafe, even though your kids aren't even going there?

hm...that leaves one option

IT IS DEFINATELY ABOUT WVHS!!!

***********************
Trusting that you actually are a WVHS student, good for you for getting involved and voicing an opinion. I hope that you have noticed that the ridiculous and pointless name calling cuts both ways. I live in a neighborhood that has been repeatedly stereotyped and blamed for many of the district's problems, yet I have never done such a thing to anyone else. Also, I have told my son, that WV is a perfectly fine school other than it is far from where we live, and going there doesn't make very much sense to me when we have another perfectly fine school 1 mile down the road. No dissing of the building, the teachers, or the students. Period.

I am a school teacher. As such, I teach and encourage my students to see the "big picture", hence my name on the blog. Please understand that just because people's children are not going to MVHS that doesn't mean they are unaffected by the decisions surrounding it - especially where it is slated to be built. Just like 10 yrs ago when the whole district built NV in the south to meet growing population needs, the whole district is now paying for MV. IF it is unsafe, it affects all of us. I don't want sick children. I don't want the district to not be able to continue on a good path because our money will have to be spent on land clean up and lawsuits. I don't want the reputation of the district to suffer for bad, rushed decisions that will keep people from wanting to live here. It is kind of like the HS programs that teach about drunk driving.....once a drunk driver gets behind the wheel, is he or she the only person at risk?

Please think about it further, and don't assume that all people who are unhappy about how boundary decisions affect their children and their daily lives are unhappy about WV itself. And also please don't think that people who are not currently going to MV are not concerned about potentially very serious issues about the site choice. These issues can very realistically affect all of us sooner, or later. Thank you.

TO: By scare police on March 29, 2008 9:59 PM

Drove through Tall Grass today and all around their neighborhood and by their clubhouse. Then decided to take the back way to WVHS and not take 59, 75th and Ogden. I think it took me a whole 15 minutes and what was with weekend traffic and ironically getting stopped by a train. I think everyone complaining that it will take so long to drive to WVHS can stop. Your drive on weekdays will be just as short because the traffic will always be going the opposite way.

**************
Scare Police -
First, it is completely incorrect to say traffic will always be going the opposite way. Morning commutes from the south to north are absolutely terrible with the rush hour traffice going NORTH to get to the train and the expressway. If you don't believe me, Dr. D said it himself at a PTA talk about 1.5 months ago at Neuqua. Check the past Daily Herald articles to see for yourself. If he has made this observation himself, why one must ask, would he see fit to throw more students and more buses on the roads going NORTH during rush hour?

Second, how many "back road" bus routes does Laidlaw drive? I think the specific routes were asked for but, once again, never provided to those who asked for them. The back routes that I know of from TG call for left hand turns immediately over grade level RR tracks after sitting at a stop sign. School buses have to stop at tracks. School buses are much bigger than cars. There is barely room for the bus to clear the intersection before having to stop for the tracks. Hardly efficient, or safe. If Laidlaw is planning these back road routes for the sake of efficiency, I would seriously question it for safety reasons. Ogden might be slightly better, but there are no over or underpasses until you get as far north as New York St.

Lastly, I am still waiting for someone to explain to me how it supposedly takes only one more minute for TG to get to WV than it does to get to NV (as published by Laidlaw/the SB when boundary decisions were announced) when it is 5 miles farther away. Unless the bus is leaving the neighborhood half empty to save time, or is driving an average of appx. 200 mph for the duration of the added miles, there is absolutely no way that this can be substantiated. Also, there is no way this meets the criteria of saving transportation costs or minimizing travel times. How ridiculous it is for ANYONE in the district to have a longer commute that costs the district more money when a school is being ADDED. It only makes it grossly apparent that the school is being built in the wrong location - too far away from the majority of the student population. Even if Eola were sparkling clean, it still makes absolutely no sense. You do not have to be an actuary or demographer to figure out such things - basic common sense will do. So, please apply some here and maybe try to understand why some people are very angry with the SB, their lies, and incredibly poor judgment.

First, let me state that I think WVHS is a good school and you can get a fine education there. Case in point, my good friend's daughter is graduating from WVHS this spring and will be attending Notre Dame next fall. I live in Ivy Ridge and would have been sending my son to WVHS in 2010. Now he may be heading for the Eola site. I want proof that it will be safe.

Second, Daeschner started it with a snide elitist comment before anyone made any comments. He displayed a lack of leadership later when people stated that they could not hear him and he replied, "good". Daeschner was unprofessional in his interactions with the parents of his district. He was wrong.

Third, this is a legal matter. There are three fundamental questions. Should a School Board be able to present a plan, state that it can pay whatever price the court seems fair, try a quick-claim, which would have forced them to pay for it, and then pick a site that it rejected as being unsafe. Next, it is the SB obligation to prove that the Eola site is safe before it purchases the land. It needs to have experts clearly identify what their tests are, how they conducted them, and what the results were. They have an obligation to try to find any fault with the land before they try to purchase it. Finally, they must be fiscaly

To: Is it safe

1st: I AM a WVHS student.

2nd: Did you even realize that your kids AREN'T EVEN GOING TO MVHS! So if your kids AREN'T attending this new school, how can you justify saying that your sueing the school district for building this school on a site you claim is redeemed unsafe, even though your kids aren't even going there?

hm...that leaves one option

IT IS DEFINATELY ABOUT WVHS!!!

To: IS IT SAFE? on March 31, 2008 3:50 PM

"For those opposed to NSFOC IT WAS NEVER ABOUT WAUBONSIE VALLEY EVEN THOUGH YOU TRY TO PLAY IT THAT WAY..............GROW UP!!"

Oh you're right let's go back to the video tape shall we? It was about:

- But they are building us a walking bridge.
- But we bought/built our house here, you can do that to us!!
- We don't want to drive 6 miles.
- We don't want to make a 20, 30, 33, 45, 60 minute communte to WVHS. (this number keeps going up by the way which is funny)
- We don't want to cross railroad tracks.
- You promised us you promised us, you can't change your mind.
- We were the reason the referendum passed. How dare you say we weren't.
- WVHS is dangerous and we're scared to have our kids go there.
- We want MVHS or no where at all. We deserve it.
- Stop you're going too fast.
- If you don't build it at BB you can't build it at all.
- Finally it then became because you're concerned about (not your) kids safety!! Plays better in the media.

IS IT SAFE?? Do I have all those about right? Those were all the arguements I heard. It was always about those issues and it was only about the last issue when everyone in the district though the NSFOC was a joke. Well, those of us that are informed still think you're a joke!!!

By the way. How do you know that wasn't a student that wrote that blog above? They have off school today. Also, how do you know that wasn't a NSFOC supporter that finally realized their selfishness and pettiness. I suppose it's easier to attack then provide ideas of your own.

To: IS IT SAFE

Heck yes i am a teenager...
or is it that your just afraid to admit it because you know im right!!!!!?!?!!!

Thank You "Thank you Offended Warrior" I appreciate your support and feel so enlightened to know that there are people like you in this district who have an open mind and are willing to listen to the small voices like me! I appreciate your collaboration and hope to make this all a better situation with YOUR help! God bless!

:)

have a happy spring break!

Anonymous on March 31, 2008 4:52 PM

So you want a school more than a safe site?

IEPA already stated that they have "NOT" been in contact with the SB and you are still standing behind them?

I would say the only ones looking bad are the School Board and the fools who beleive them.

To By IS IT SAFE? on March 31, 2008 3:50 PM

"Another blatant attempt at trying to make the NSFOC look bad."

In case you haven't noticed, no additional help is needed to make the NSFOC look bad, the group is doing a good enough job on their own.

Thank You Offended Warrior on March 31, 2008 1:26 PM

Get a clue this is no teenager and you were never a supporter. Another blatant attempt at trying to make the NSFOC look bad. Not happening.

Besides, this is about the school board and their attempt to shove things down the voters throat. Just because Dr. Dashner wants to start in April. Slow the train down and make sure the location is a safe location.

For those opposed to NSFOC IT WAS NEVER ABOUT WAUBONSIE VALLEY EVEN THOUGH YOU TRY TO PLAY IT THAT WAY..............GROW UP!!

To: Offended Warrior on March 31, 2008 11:13 AM

AMAZING!!! I was touched by your comments!! If you are truely a student of WVHS then I am proud of you, the school you attend, and the education you're receiving. You're comments and thoughts brought a tear to this parents (my) eyes. It is a shame this is going on!!!

I was a supporter of the NSFOC and YOU have made me see the light and I thank you!!! It was selfish of me to think how I wanted the school closer. Because that's ultimately why I got involved with the NSFOC.

The Sun and Daily Hearld should interview students like you from both NVHS and WVHS. Maybe it would open all of us parents eyes!!

To By Anonymous on March 30, 2008 2:26 PM.
Shame on you for listening to your husband in the first place and being fooled. It's obvious that he doesn't respect your point of view and he runs the house. Bad analaogy. Just plain awful.

Excuse me NSFOC, but you have absolutely NO RIGHT to say such awful things about our superintendent. He is doing the absolute BEST that he can for EVERYONE...and if that doesn't seem to float your boat then just leave the district. If you REALLY want what’s best for your kids, then you’d accept the decisions with grace and dignity...and GET OVER IT! Mr. Daeschner thought he was joining a great district with a great reputation and now he's getting a bunch of bologna from people like you. The least you could do is RESPECT him for his calm manner and professionalism while dealing with this situation. If that means your kids attend WVHS then GREAT!!!!!!

This whole deal with Waubonsie being "too far" for your poor babies to get to is ridiculous- 5 whole miles, WOW!! I bet you drive your kids 5 times that distance just to take them to their after school activities. Your tax money is paying for buses, so why not put it to use? Hey, you could help save the environment and probably lives with fewer crazy, careless teens driving on what you consider busy roads!! HMMM!!! There’s a thought!

Enough with the excuses; everyone knows you don't care about the new high school at all. The sole concern fueling the hoopla is that you don't want your kids going to Waubonsie because you think Neuqua is so much better. HELLO: NEUQUA is on the ACADEMIC WARNING LIST and is considered a FAILING SCHOOL just like WAUBONSIE...and NAPERVILL NORTH and NAPERVILLE CENTRAL...so what makes you think your kids are so much better? Were all those lessons you taught your kids like don’t discriminate, be biased, or prejudiced just lip service? How about “don’t judge a book by its cover”? You all are the biggest hypocrites this side of 59. How can you just assume that because the neighborhoods that feed into Waubonsie aren’t as well heeled as you snobs, that WVHS isn’t as good of a school as Neuqua. Maybe we have a larger Latino and African American population than you, but does that really make us “bad” or “ghetto” or “stupid”. NO! And how would you know anyway. You don’t walk through those halls everyday, you don’t sit in those classrooms, and don’t know any of our teachers or what we are learning. YOU JUST DON’T KNOW! So you have NO RIGHT to make these false accusations. I am an honors student at Waubonsie and am offended by these claims. Everyday I see what goes on and it is wonderful! The students around me are eager to learn and want to be just as successful as anybody at Neuqua. You might think that we have gangs and a bunch of druggies controlling the halls-WRONG! Do you even know what goes on inside the doors of your own school? Did you ever think about the fact that drugs and alcohol are just as readily available to your kids? Remember that the next time you let your kid go to a party. You better check to see if the parents are home. Sex, drugs, and alcohol aren’t bound by social status. Oh, that’s right; your kid’s are perfect little angels! EVERY high school has problems, there will ALWAYS be problems; you can’t deny that. So I’m really curious to know, what truly makes you think that you’re so much better than ME…you don’t even KNOW me…Stop the lies and get your facts straight….or would you rather get shown up by a teenager? Don’t stress yourselves, I already know the answer. Anyone who sues themselves must be a complete idiot and will never get it!!!

I wonder if anyone would really care about the $91 million surplus if we weren't in the battle over boundaries. I say boundaries because that's what it's all about. If WE & TG were still slated to go to NV none of these blogs would exist.

I've lived here for over 15 years and I can't remember this much fighting over our SB or SD. It's amazing how in a matter of a few weeks a handful full of people can really tear up a community.

Time you all get a hobby. Springs coming take up gardening and let the people who were elected to do their jobs do it. If you don't like run for the SB next time or move!

NO I DON'T LIVE UP NORTH

I have taken time to read a number of these blogs. I find it interesting that there are so many entries attacking people from the south. I would think that these people would be asking for proof that the Eola site is safe and asking to the SB to detail exactly how much the Eola site is going to cost. I find their apparent lack of curiosity a little bit disturbing considering the fact that this same SB told them two years ago that this site was unsafe.

The Powerpoint document that the SB posted on their site stated that the BB land will cost $31 MM while the Eola property will cost approximately $16.5 MM. I found it interesting that the document sated that the $31 MM total included damages while the $16.5 Eola site did not. We know that the BB estate is suing the SB for walking away from their land after tying it up in court for 2 years. We also know the BB estate is suing for upwards of $15 MM. If they get only $10 MM, the difference in price falls to just $4.5 MM. It appears that he extra damages should have been applied to the Eola site rather than the BB site. Was this an oversight? I doubt it.

We know that the $4.5 MM difference isn’t much considering hidden costs associated with the Eola site. We know that there will be large undisclosed costs for destroying wetlands on the Eola property. We know there will be large costs to remediate the property, if it CAN be remediated. We know that there will be a significant increase in bussing costs. We know the BB land is safe and is a working farm. We know that 37 acres of the Eola site has signs warning of pollutants. After today, we know the SB wants to move forward BEFORE the IEPA makes a ruling on whether or not the land is safe. Yet, so many bloggers are attacking people from the south for asking questions. I have a lot of friends whose kids go or have gone to Waubonsie. I think it is good school. Why is it that you want to get out of it so badly that you are not asking the most basic questions?

I, for one, do not trust them. I would like to see facts about contaminants and costs before the SB moves forward. I want to know how much it will cost to clean-up the site. I want proof that the land is as safe as the BB site. I want to know how much it will cost the district to destroy the wetlands on the property. I want to know how much more the district will pay for bussing. I want to know how much money will be rewarded to the BB estate. I can’t believe some people would want a school on the Eola site so badly that they would abandon their fiscal and parental responsibilities.

I will not abandon mine. It is for these reasons that I contributed to the NSFOC and it is for these reasons that I offered to be a complainant. Hopefully, the suit will force transparency and responsibility on this rogue and arrogant SB.

By Anonymous on March 30, 2008 3:28 PM

Another shameful comment by the TG an WE people - amazing how truly awful you people are. I was not aware of your true nature until now - shame, shame - really.

Sorry I don't live there. Do you blame everything you don't like on those poor folks in WE and TG? Maybe those evil people are responsible for high gas prices, the weather, the economy, the war, the uninsured, teen pregnancy, global warming, etc?

I won't venture to guess where you live but obviously your parents did not teach you not to stereotype or discriminate.

Now do you have any comments about the real issue (the $91M budget surplus in a district with both high schools on academic watch)?

Anon March 30 - 2:26

The SB showed dilligence in securing a safe site? What district do you live in? Or at least quit using Anonymous and just call yourself "Live Up North"

They ruled out safer sites with a rush for the 2009 opening after they bumbled the BB deal. Also some of the SB really likes that North site that benefits their own neighborhoods. Who cares if their kids are grown or will be gone - they still reap benefits for their own neighbors and house sales.

I guess it is ok with you that our SB will not delay Metea before they get approval from the IEPA. Thats right, they on plan building Matea before they get the NFR paper. It could take months to years to get that letter. Meaning Matea could always be an incomplete school and a waste of our tax dollars.

By $91M Budget Surplus on March 29, 2008 8:06 PM

Am I the only one who i troubled by the fact that our district has accumulated a $91M budget surplus? Thats alot of money Dr Dash. Let me put it into terms you can relate to:
Your Depends adult diapers cost $67/case and so you could buy 1,358,208 cases of Depends and thats alot of diapers!!

What other financial news are you going to spring on us next?

Another shameful comment by the TG an WE people - amazing how truly awful you people are. I was not aware of your true nature until now - shame, shame - really.

TG and WE residents I need your help. I'm going to sue my husband. He promised me we would never move out of the area in which we were raised, I know it wasn't written in our vows, but I wouldn't have married him had I known we would have to move away from our friends and family that we've grown up with. I need a crooked lawyer, bc this is not what he promised. I know it's hard to fight something like this as it isn't infidelity I'm suing for which is in the legal contract. It is our boundaries that are changing and the location of where we are to raise our children - what crooked reason could I claim - oh there are high tension wires close to the area he choose too - I've heard the name Collins associated with crooked stuff like this - can I have his number. This analogy reminds me of the very frequent posts of the "bait and switch" argument of I went to but Krakus has and...so on. You are poor examples of parents those whose name is in support of this law suit. Do the right thing and allow the SB to move forward with due diligence in their efforts of securing a safe site for our school. You should all truly be ashamed.

I have a suggestion to all the unhappy parents who do not want their children to attend WVHS, private school! I have two children that graduated successfully from WVHS. They had wonderful, caring teachers, they were involved in many of the sports and clubs and made life long friends. Their experience at WVHS was very positive. However, my last child will be attending Aurora Central Catholic. This district has gone crazy. My issue is not WVHS but the insanity of many of the parents in this district. I do not want my child to be raised to have a tantrum everytime things dont go his way. I want him to be raised to be loving and accepting of all cultures and lifestyles. I would like him to problem solve and find alternatives to adversity. I think the most disturbing part of all the ugliness that has transpired is the fact that I sit in sunday mass surrounded by many who claim to live a christ like life. Some of these people are the same who claim to have compassion for those less fortunate than them as long as their children dont have to sit next to them in class. They claim not to be prejudice against any race or religion, as long as their daughter doesnt bring someone home that is different. We need to take a look at ourselves, we are talking about children. This snobbery is being taught to our children through the poor example being set by the adults in their lives. What a shame. So I say instead of spending the money on a lawsuit that will do no one any good, choose a private school. Its cheaper,your child will receive a fine education and the reputation of the district can speak for itself.
Go Chargers!!!!!!!!

Anonymous on March 29, 2008 6:35 AM

"Perhaps you should ask someone to read the law suit to you! The suit has NOTHING to do with broken promises in fact it never even mentions these words!"

I just need to point out that you were incorrect in your statement. Please look at the lawsuit again especially page 6.

It talks about what the district promised and goes to page 11 I beleive.

Thanks!!

to 204

well 5 miles isn't 2. That was my point. And my kids won't use the bridge since I am across the street from Neuqua and not in TG or WE.

My vote counts too. I voted for the third HS. It had nothing to do with boundaries but the fact that because it joined with the restructure of the bond issue, I wanted lower property taxes. I voted for lower property taxes. My vote counted.

wrote:
By South School on March 29, 2008 8:00 PM
The center of the student population is 248th and 95th and no longer Rt 59 and Montgomery. So we now have 2 North Side schools and 1 Central School. If Dr Dash wants a North, Central and South school he needs to build one south of 95th St. Eola is a hazard, BB is too expensive...time to bring Hamman and Macom back to the table.

What??? Have you seen a map of the district? Everything west of that intersection is another school district. How in anybody's mathematical process can that be the center of the district's population. Did we merge with the other Aurora school district since dinner? Just goes to prove you can't believe the cr*p on this blog. What a nut case.

Drove by the (currently under construction) walking bridge over 59. I won't even get on the topic of power lines and the electroic substaion. My comment is that of our school district and their quote "The TG neighborhood is not a walking neighborhood". If I remember correctly you have to live less then 1 1/2 miles away from a school by taking common roads to be considered walkers. Sorry I don't have the facts but that is only between 10-20% of TG residents. Therefore bussing would still be provided and needed for the majoirty of the TG neighborhood. Bottom line, TG would never have been walkers even if they were going to attend NVHS. I also seriously doubt that those that would have walked would have walked between the months of November and April.

Drove through Tall Grass today and all around their neighborhood and by their clubhouse. Then decided to take the back way to WVHS and not take 59, 75th and Ogden. I think it took me a whole 15 minutes and what was with weekend traffic and ironically getting stopped by a train. I think everyone complaining that it will take so long to drive to WVHS can stop. Your drive on weekdays will be just as short because the traffic will always be going the opposite way.

As far as the power lines in TG I will give you that those lines that run East West through TG are not the same lines as the ones on the North side of the Eola property. Here's where I have an issue. Those power lines are less the a 100 feet from houses!!! THAT ELECTRIC SUBSTATION IS RIGHT ON TOP OF YOUR CLUBHOUSE!!!

If you have driven by the Eola site and/or looked at maps the power lines are hundreds of YARDS (not feet) from where the high school will be. The electric substation and (currently being dismantled) Peaker Plant are even farther then the power lines.

In summary, I guess we're not comparing apples to apples. I'd be far more worrked about EMF's if I lived in TG then if my kids attended MVHS.

Dear anti NSFOC: see your post above that says "
By too many wrongs to count... on March 29, 2008 2:12 PM

Mark (Dollars and sense),
PLEASE no more ridiculous analogies to shopping retail and voting in an election.
I would not be stupid enough to buy the Old ham because I am an EDUCATED shopper nor would I vote for something not on my ballot."
-----------------------------------------------------
Get a clue. They marketed Krakus (BB land) not od Ham. Thus, it's like signing up to buy one thing, then getting delivered another thing. Which is why Brookdale people are happy: they wanted a different H.S. then Waubansie (ie. the boundary fights) and now they are happy. But, realize, "ridiculous analogies" to shopping retail is belittling the truth. They marketed something which, if realized was not going to happen, would NOT HAVE PASSED.

GET OVER IT. It is bait and switch. Stop lying to yourself. THE THIRD H.S. WAS NEVER WANTED AT THE EOLA AND MOLITAR AREA. Period.

It's like you people who wanted out of Waubansie are now like "yes, we voted for a need for a third H.S. and are IGNORING what was promoted."

Can anyone actually argue that the vote would have been "yes" with what they are proposing now.

Also, for those supporters of the SB, please admit you would value the new school built on a dangerous ground that has environmental hazards over the interest of your kids and others.

Wouldn't you all want NO HAZARDS?

Am I the only one who i troubled by the fact that our district has accumulated a $91M budget surplus? Thats alot of money Dr Dash. Let me put it into terms you can relate to:
Your Depends adult diapers cost $67/case and so you could buy 1,358,208 cases of Depends and thats alot of diapers!!

What other financial news are you going to spring on us next?

The center of the student population is 248th and 95th and no longer Rt 59 and Montgomery. So we now have 2 North Side schools and 1 Central School. If Dr Dash wants a North, Central and South school he needs to build one south of 95th St. Eola is a hazard, BB is too expensive...time to bring Hamman and Macom back to the table.

Moderator Jim to "Shawn Collins": I deleted your post, after having briefly posting it because of the name. Maybe you are the Shawn Collins who is the lawyer for the NSFOC group, or maybe you just happen to have the same name as him. But, without having corroboration of your actual identity, I can't post comments in that name.

nosuchthingasneutral on March 29, 2008 6:29 PM

Wow, 5 WHOLE miles! That really is a sacrifice. So sorry to inconvenience you. That's why there's buses.

PS: That bridge will NEVER get used. The kids won't walk that often - if ever - even with the bridge.

To Anon Mapquester -

People in Tallgrass do not live at Fry school! My friend lives in very South-central Tallgrass and is 1.8 miles and three stoplights from the NVHS main campus and 1.4 miles from the freshman campus. It is even closer if they walk. Also 2/3 of the TG neighborhood is closer than that by up to a mile. My friends are 6.8 miles and about 8 stoplights plus train tracks from WVHS. Admittedly, 2/3 of the neighborhood is closer to WVHS than that by up to that same mile but with same amount of stoplights. This is not about going an extra 2 miles. I think it's five miles difference. ALso most parents go East for jobs, restaurant, and shopping and not West, making the it an even more inconvenient commute.

Sorry Moderator Jim- forgot my email with the original submittal

I drove by the Eola site today and can tell you the power lines up there are much much larger and more numberous than the ones going through the southern community. Not an equal comparison by a long shot. I suggest you compare for yourself before you post your comments.

Ti Anon Mapquester -

People in Tallgrass do not live at Fry school! My friend lives in very South-central Tallgrass and is 1.8 miles and three stoplights from the NVHS main campus and 1.4 miles from the freshman campus. It is even closer if they walk. Also 2/3 of the TG neighborhood is closer than that by up to a mile. My friends are 6.8 miles and about 8 stoplights plus train tracks from WVHS. Admittedly, 2/3 of the neighborhood is closer to WVHS than that by up to that same mile but with same amount of stoplights. This is not about going an extra 2 miles. I think it's five miles difference. ALso most parents go East for jobs, restaurant, and shopping and not West, making the it an even more awkward and inconvenient commute.

I was being sarcastic about "being safe at Welch". It was sarcasm to portay that all 204 residents here are really looking at this the same way - what is best for my own situation. I am totally for slowing down and re-studying now that some things have changed (site location, enrollment projections).

to: anon2 on March 29, 2008 4:59 PM

So now a fuel tank is the problem? C'mon will the madness EVER end?

Fuel tanks have been exhumed and soils remediated successfully at thousands of gas stations across the country. These are ones that are buried. The ones you're referring to are above ground, so therefore, any remediation would likely be much less costly - if even necessary.

We're still waiting on the reports. Stop the "Chicken Little" crap until ALL the facts are known.

From: 204 on March 29, 2008 8:14 AM

..."Since most of the support (and the founding fathers of NSFOC) are from TG, some of us find it odd that they "doth protest" about power lines and electric substations (peaker plants) and other hazards at the Eola site.."
-----
do you know what a peaker plant is?? if that is a peaker plant in TG, where is the big fuel tank like at eola? or does the electric company run down to gas city to get a gas container full of fuel to run it?

what do you think that big fuel tank is/was filled with at eola?? ... chocolate syrup?

There go those lovely Brookdale folks. Lets continue our name calling and give no facts. These are the same folk that write down liscence plate numbers at NSFOC meetings. Lets not talk about how this site is wrong for the long haul. It will increase transporation cost up 13%, the boundaries cause many splits and incearsed commute times for many, we haven't seen phase II, we don't know the BB damages, lets rush to open a school in 09 and rip these students off a great HS experience, lets pray these kids don't get hurt while they are remiating the property while they are in school, I could go on and on.

The Brookdale people want their shiny, new school and will even try and start rumors such as split shifts and sending TG/WE to WV. Brookdale feels that TG/WE should be punished by being sent to WV. What a great way to portray WV. If this were to be true WV-4700 and NV-4500. Not going to happen. Then the state go on and on about power lines in TG. SO WHAT. If people choose to live by them then that is their choice. Plus the power lines are not like the switching station the school will be by. It is not an apple to apple comparison. This lawsuit about more the EMFS. It is to get the message to the SB that they need to slow down and not rush this.

From: safe at Welch on March 29, 2008 11:35 AM

if you are really from welch.. no one is really 'safe'(?).. whatever you mean by that.. as long as there is no written prioritized boundary criteria in the school district policy manual.. it just says the SD will try to have students go to neighborhood schools.

so don't kid yourself!

For Residents of Tall Grass:
I just ran the numbers in Mapquest and it appears that going from TG to WVHS will be something like a 5 mile commute one-way. The current commute to NVHS is something like a 2 mile commute one way.

I guess I don't feel sympathetic about making someone drive an extra 6 miles a day - round trip. In the scheme of things that's not that bad - really nothing. And, I'm sure you can do this quicker if you don't use 59 and cutting across Wolf Crossing and up Eola. So the traffic complaint isn't holding much water for me either. You could drop your kids off on the way to the mall or the spa. Your choice. It'll be on the way!

For Residents of White Eagle:
I ran the numbers in Mapquest and it appears that going from WE to WVHS will be something like a 2.99 mile commute one-way. The current commute to NVHS is something like about 2.44 miles one-way. So, really the additional 1/2 mile seems pretty insignificant.

I am sick of the pipeline babble.

YOU ARE ALL SURROUNDED BY PIPELINES. If you don't like it move to an unpopulated area without the privilege of public utilities.

http://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/Documents/NPMS_Pipelines.pdf

By never met a lawsuit I didn't like... on March 28, 2008 7:03 PM
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).

As I said and I will say it again you all need to get a life. Who cares if Tall Grass is by power lines or not. That has nothing to do with The safety of the new school. The new school is not going in the Tall Grass subdivision. Also, if there are 300 members as you keep saying that does not add up to all the people who live in Tall Grass. There are 1000 homes in the subdivision plus surrounding townhomes. As for White Eagle I believe there are about the same amount. My conclusion is this is not supported by those two neighborhoods as you keep saying. If that were true there would be over 5000 members. As for the law suit, get over it, people in this country have a right to sue. I personally think the location is wrong. Also, the only people I have heard happy about this site are from these blogs. I know several people who live in Stonebridge and Brookdale and they are not happy over the site choice. Could it it be that the silent majority is really the silent minority. We would only know if it were put up for another vote, which I do not think will happen so we will never know who is the majority or the minority.

Mark (Dollars and sense),
PLEASE no more ridiculous analogies to shopping retail and voting in an election.
I would not be stupid enough to buy the Old ham because I am an EDUCATED shopper nor would I vote for something not on my ballot. I would go somewhere else and buy the ham I want.Sorry but everyone's vote is still very much a part of the 2006 results. You don't get to "withdraw" your vote because you don't like the outcome.
Aha!...... Why don't you and your lemmings MOVE somewhere else? You could buy a house close to a high school and hope there's no new growth. If growth does occur, then sue somebody for SOMETHING if they try to move your kids to another school location. Good luck selling the house that you brought up environmental concerns about.

On a side note, what kind of person sues a school district after they admit publicly that they only voted for a third high school because of what they thought the possible location could do for them personally? In other words, they don't want it now that there's no benefit to themselves.Who cares what happens to all of the other people's kids? There are so many wrongs in this it will never be right!

To people who want to talk about EMF and high wires to divert and distract from what most people are concerned about. (higher taxes for possibly no improved situation (NVHS remains mega), broken SB promises, wrong north site location, boundary "criteria" fiasco, etc)

If I lived in Tallgrass, I would not choose a house by the wires. Less desirable for re-sale even if they are technically "safe". Public perception doesn't like the wires anywhere. Not at school sites either.

I also wouldn't see my 2 teen kids walking the bridge too often. Reality - kids don't walk. They are not walking from the other NVHS walking neighborhoods either. Maybe a few from Burnhham Pt.,Stonewater condos and Glenmuir apartments.

However, (if I lived in TG) I would be enjoying my 5 minute commute dropping them off to NVHS school, school activities, and friend's houses. But now the commute will be 40 to 60 minutes roundtrip in the opposite direction for those residents. (oh yeah and across those wicked tracks) Considering that didn't exist when they chose to buy their houses there, that stinks for them.

sorry suzie. The lawsuit is not about environmental concerns. Unless the site used to be a nuclear waste sie, the site can be remediated and Shawn Collins absoluley knows this. The environmental concerns are raised to in order to scare up donations. This is about the TG ang We residents feeling that they are too good for WHVS.

And it is obvious that this is about raising money since the NSFOC who filed the suit cannot be straight about tax deductability of donations and the voting structure of their organization. Only a fool thinks this is about environmental issues. If you feel the TG and WE residents are too good for WVHS, send them your money. If you believe that there really are environmental concerns, do a little research.

To Sprinkbrook Spew?:

I believe Springbrook was not to slated to go to NVHS is several of the original boundary proposals. TG was going to NVHS in 4 of 6 of those proposals, if I remember correctly. Then Jeanette Clark started in on her test score (economic)balancing and Mr.Glawe (of WE) took TG along for the ride with WE to Metea at BB site. A clever swapping Springbrook for TG. He (Glawe) said it could have gone either way.

I would like to sue the NSFOC for attempting to negate and jeopardize my referendum vote and the district's third high school.They have sued our district based on their perception of "broken promises"?!I've seen better lawsuit foundations on Judge Judy commercials!
I think I would have a good case, especially if the third high school doesn't get built. I happen to know a few "super lawyers" myself! I am meeting with them on Monday to discuss.

I am amazed by the thoughtfulness of my Naperville School District 204 neighbors to the south, who regard my children's health and safety above their own families. They are fighting with such passion and zeal to protect my children. I thank them for their noble efforts.

However, I find it difficult to believe that their consideration for my children is greater than their own. Their concern, which cites pipelines and high-tension power lines, is clearly a ruse. Those "hazards" at the Metea location run north and south -- passing directly though those very same neighborhoods opposed to the Metea location. The Tall Grass subdivision clubhouse is within 100 feet of a high-energy electrical switchyard and substation, which is much closer than where the high school will sit.

Next time you drive south on Route 59, notice the construction of the people bridge and its proximity to those overhead high-tension power lines. Are they opposed to that bridge due to EMF concerns?

I am certain that no one - not the school board, our local government, the press, our communities, and our judges -- will be fooled by this obvious scam. Of course there's always coercion and intimidation. Nonetheless, thanks for raising the issue of safety for our children.

Eric Hale

Naperville

Google Mr. Hale, He lives in Brookdale. It is the constant name calling with no facts. This is just one of the many letters Brookdale residents who voted no for the 3rd HS continue to write.

Now lets stop focusing on TG/WE and focus on the SB who put us in this mess in the first place.

And the opposition to the lawsuit proves the need for the lawsuit: By Anonymous above responded to my points by saying:

"Thanks for the post.I agree with you. Some folks based their vote on the third high school on where they thought it would go and what it would do for them. Others based their vote on whether this district needed a third high school...even if that meant the school they were attending my not change, may not bring anything new,or may not effect their property values."

-------------------------------------------
So, "some folks" being fooled as to why the voted "yes" (ie. where they thought the third high school would be) are now NOT part of that vote; so we can count just those who voted for the need of the third high school?"

That's like saying we had a sale at the grocery store for Krakus Ham for $3.99 per pound; but we the store managers actually couldn't get Krakus for that proice, so they are flling the ham in the Deli with some other brand called Old Ham which really is nothing like Krakus Ham. Then the consumers who signed up to buy the Ham on sale thinking it was Krakus are told "too bad, take the Old Ham, afterall you agreed you needed ham for your groceries."

And some would take the Ham, eat it and not care - because Old Ham is better than the current Ham they are eating. But, the voters who voted for Ham were voting for Krakus.

I heard the Cubs organization say they are going to win the penant this year. Being a Cubs fan I hope they do but if not does anyone want to join me in a law suit if they don't. Because after all they broke a promise.

to: Suzie on March 28, 2008 9:00 PM

Keep up if you can.

The correlation betweeen where the TG houses, pool and bridge are and how that relates to Eola is simple. There are power lines and an electric substation in extremely close proximity to TG homes. Right next to them! And their kids will walk by the substation and under the power lines when they use the new bridge.

Since most of the support (and the founding fathers of NSFOC) are from TG, some of us find it odd that they "doth protest" about power lines and electric substations (peaker plants) and other hazards at the Eola site.

The simple fact is, I guess these things (power lines and electric substations) probably aren't the REAL concern since they chose to situate their homes - and subject their precious eggs - to these "hazards" by building where they did in TG. Now they'll turn red in the face and fumble their way through defending this accusation because the truth hurts.

Fast Forward: But, it wasn't until they had exhausted other reasons why the SD shouldn't build at Eola (RR tracks, 6 mile commutes to WVHS, "we want it on BB or nothing" .....) that they seemed to gain support outside of TG when they landed on false, speculative rant "the site is contaminated ".

Now we ALL know that the site reports are not all back, nor have they been shared yet (confidentiality agreements) so any discussion around whether the site has contaminates on it or not - and to what degree - is purely speculation.

That begs the question. Okay, if the "safety issues" aren't the REAL concern, then what is?

The only thing left is BOUNDARIES.

The NSFOC group has conveniently distanced themselves from this original position (even though it's at the root of what NSFOC wants). And, the reason is, so that they could pull in more unwitting suckers to help fight their BOUNDARY BATTLE for them.

Suzie and NSFOC:

Perhaps you should ask someone to read the law suit to you! The suit has NOTHING to do with broken promises in fact it never even mentions these words! Just the fact that you want it on the BB property or nothing at all! The fact that you and the NSFOC keep saying this does not mean that is what you are suing for!

Also, I have been your Atty’s web site and he boasts a very impressive list of environmental suits he has settled, however, the web site list nothing about environmental case he has litigated. Since I doubt this case will ever make it to trial I ask the question of what is the NSFOC really willing to settle for?

I’m sure I will never hear back, but at least I can say I asked the question.

Holding aside the attempt at triangulation, Tall Grass is behind NSFOC, that's pretty much established as fact on this board. NSFOC (Tall Grass people) continue to bring up "possible" EMF hazards at Eola. Their lawyer went on ad nauseum about this at the meeting on the 25th -- I know this to be true, I was there. I find it hypocritical that NSFOC people would trot out the "possible" dangers of EMF when they're living in a community that is more exposed to those dangers than most of the other neighborhoods (hey, I just made an unsubstantiated claim, just like the NSFOC!). I find that a sick argument and am glad people are calling them on it.

As the saying goes, if you live in a glass house...

Oh, and your "promises were broken" line is tiresome. I do not believe that's what this case is about, especially when people at the NSFOC meeting were strategizing on how to have MV built at Macom (I was there, I heard the discussion). I have read NSFOC's complaint and nowhere does it state that Macom is a possible site (BB or nothing, eh Suzie?). It's about boundaries. It's about a blatant attempt to stay away from a fantastic school in Waubonsie Valley.

Yes, you have the right to sue, and as a defendant, I have the right to fight back. And I will. And so will the other defendants in this case. BTW, YOU'RE a defendant in this case too.

There is a new link of "Infamous Quotes" on the NSFOC website. While there is a lot of rhetoric going on right now by both "sides" of this discussion, after reading the quotes on this new page I have to concur that they are all accurate and true. Kind of interesting to see them all in one place like that. Quite a nice body of work our district officials have provided us.

Here's the link:

http://www.nsfoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=101&Itemid=88

Are you all serious? Who care's about where the Tall Grass Bridge is or the pool. What does that have to do with the safety of the new school? You are all insane. Did you all read the lawsuit? The entire thing? It is about promises that were broken. Whether you agree with the suit or not everyone in America has a right to their opinions and has a right to sue. I am not part of the law suit, but I am glad that we all have the right to stand up for what we believe in. I am guessing that you all who keep slamming the law suit must feel threatened in some way. Otherwise, if the suit has no merit as you all are saying why do you care? If it is just going to be thrown out of court, who cares? Give it up, get a life and worry about more important things in our society. Did you know we have a war going on and American soldiers are putting their lives on the line for our freedom?

I may not be the most experienced person posting here, but let me just say that I am completely baffled at the situation. In my mind, the issue clearly reflects the egos of those fighting the the new boundaries. The issue is not one of concern for boundaries, safety, or any other outrageous excuse. It is an issue that centers around Naperville elitists not wanting their kids to attend Waubonsie Valley, because they fear what we have to offer at our school, and refuse to accept the diversity that makes our school great.
I've often heard of our school referred to as the "slum" school, but let me have you know that we don't know the slums, and clearly Naperville residents don't know the slums, because we live in the suburbs. How can WVHS be a "ghetto" institution if we actually score higher on tests than NVHS? How are we a slum school if Stonebridge currently attends? I would really like an answer. If these people can't come to terms with what a public school is, they most certainly have the money to send their kids to a private academy, because truly that is where their mindset can roam free.
But if not, they must come to terms that money and whining is not going to get them what they want every time. I am an honors student at WVHS, and I embrace what my school has to offer. I am proud to be a Warrior, and the ignorant and downright outrageous claims made by the parents of NV will only slow down the process of getting done what needs to be done.

Made you Angry:
Can you point out the angry insults from springbrook parents? I guess I didnt see them.

Springbrook to WVHS:
Weaseled out ? WEASELED OUT ? You cant be serious. The only place I ever saw a suggestion of Springbrook going to WVHS since the BB property fell through was in the TG HOA proposal which was posted on their website as they were desperately trying to get someone else to take their place.

nsfoc is a joke. Hey its about boundaries. Its about raising money from uniformed residents (not tax deductable but they won't tell you that) to support a lawsuit that cannot be won so they must be after a settlement (Shawn Collins trademark) and I don't see how a settlement would satisfy any of the donors (members? voting members? - don't believe the NSFOC board of directors is willing to answer that - let alone be honest about it). This NSFOC BS is almost out of money and out of time. RIP NSFOC.

for the record, at first I had some sympathy for your cause but I can never support a cause based on a fraud.

I am only one person posting. Nice try.

Fact-Brookdale resident caught writing down liscence plate numbers during NSFOC meeting.

Fact-Most of the letters written in the Sun Opinion are written by Brookdale residents. Most are name calling towards WE/TG. Just google their names.

Brookdale voted NO. Now they want a 3rd HS. By the way the power lines near TG are no where near what the ones are like at the Eola site.

To:Get out your measuring sticks on March 28, 2008 6:06 PM

Also, if you listen to the TG talk about the bridge being needed so that their kids can walk to school, extracurricular activies and sporting events - they'll be on that bridge "all the time".

In fact, the kids probably won't use the bridge at all. They'll be driving their new (LEASED BMWs) that their parents leased because they can't afford the cost of actually buying a BMW.

That way their parents can keep up the "we want everyone to THINK we're rich", and "we deserve what we want" facade. I guess nobody's ever told them "no"?

Hopefully the third high school won't open at all seeing as we don't need it anyway and referendum money should be refunded to the taxpayers.

This whole thing is disgusting !!!

Please don't respond to the Brookdale basher that is posting under four or five different aliases. They obviously live in either WE or TG and are trying to deflect criticism onto Brookdale(and now
Springbrook) because all their other arguments are failing. This person has too much time on their hands, not enough sense and enjoys getting people riled up with ingnorant statements. Ignore them please and maybe they'll go away.

"I just drove past the construction of the infamous TG bridge on rt. 59. OMG... it is right under the high voltage power lines."

Can someone please take an EMF reading at the bridge site for the rest of us? I'd like to compare it to the results at Eola.

Seriously, it was funny enough to hear about the TG homes and pool being under the power lines, this is just is more comedy than I can handle. Chris Rock ought to use this stuff in his act.

To: Anonymous on March 28, 2008 5:03 PM

Did you also happen to notice the Electric Substation that the kids have to walk by enroute to the bridge that runs under the power lines?

Kinda boggles the mind that, if you believe their argument, the Eola suit is about the safety of the kids when their own homes have power lines and electric substations right next door to them.

What is the REAL issue? Because we're not buying the "safety" argument.

REAL issue = Boundaries

I just drove past the construction of the infamous TG bridge on rt. 59. OMG... it is right under the high voltage power lines. How ironic. It's like they want their kids to get as close as possible to the EMF. A bridge to the sky. The "safety first" NSFOC might want to look into that.

Look at how angry, hate filled and insult filled the responses are from the Brookdale and Springbrook people and their stooges.

You didn't like it when someone called you out for your elitism and entitled mentality, right?

Good! A little taste of your own medicine - hopefully it will make you think before you spew your hatred about other communities like WE/TG/MW

Now watch as your high school site dies. No school for you! Watch the tantrum.

Word of advice...
If you feed the animals they'll keep coming back. Don't respond to the Brookdale insults. WE all know the truth and where it's coming from. Ignore and move on...we need to recognize the desperation.

By JAS on March 28, 2008 2:12 PM
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

I would have to go with the school board as the LIE.

NSFOC: Truth

This one must be half way around the world by now!!! :)

You are so right!!

OMG!!! Is there just one guy out there that keeps posting about how much he hates Brookdale. Hey Stupid...we can all tell you're the same person. You keep using the same arguements over and over again. Get some new material, since most of it is wrong as it is.

I've read every post on these blogs for the past 3 weeks and only 2 or 3 times have I ever heard anyone say they were from Brookdale. I don't even think I've seen a Brookdale resident say they were for MVHS at Eola. If I'm wrong please show me proof.

To: Brookdale wants it all and wants it now on March 28, 2008 11:31 AM

Regarding your comments:

"Brookdale wants it on a potentially unsafe site exposing the whole district to potential liability just so they can get a nice new school."

It is potentially unsafe. Do you know that for sure? Do you have test results? I would like MVHS at the Eola site as well and I don't live in Brookdale...imagine that!!! 58% of the district voted for a new school if you remember correctly.

Hmmmm...haven't seen a Brookdale resident insult anyone. However, I don't live in Brookdale and think you're an idiot.
_____________

"Brookdale bullys everyone including state senators to get it all."

Really? How are they bullying state senators? By sending emails? Same thing the NSFOC is doing. However, I also see the NSFOC digging into peoples personal or professional backgrounds. Is that bullying?
____________

"Brookdale and their stooges on the SB want to push ahead with contracts and building activity on their new school before anyone else can find out the extent of the issues with their site."

First of all the school board was elected by everyone in the district. If you remember there was an election for the school board 2 years ago when MM and CB won in a landslide. Everyone loved them then when they were fighting for a 3rd high school on the BB property. Well, that fell through and now everyone is calling MM reckless. Give me a break!!!

Secondly, you dumb dumb, they can't build the school without releasing the test results. It is their right to keep those results private if that is what MidwestGen or our IPSD attorny's request. However, they have every right to sign contracts with materials and contruction company's to get the ball rolling on the new school.
_____

"Its pretty clear that Brookdale wants it all and wants it now - and won't stop at anything including insulting children to get their way!"

Wow, now Brookdale insults children? Next thing you're gonna tell me is that Brookdale is stealing childrens candy as well.

Grow up Brookdale basher!!! For once in your life try arguing a point with some civility, common sense and facts.

to: Springbrook to WVHS on March 28, 2008 2:53 PM

Sorry, I don't live in Springbrook nor am I the other aliases you refer to.

The following aliases are all the same person and they're from Springbrook which should be going to WVHS but weaseled their way into NVHS....

sesame street test
anonymous
Anonymous
We live in IL
Prozac nation
.........

Brookdale wants it all and wants it now on
Meds in brookdale
sickofnamecalling
vindictive north
---and maybe---
yeah right

What do these psuedonym's have in common? They are all used by the same person!

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

I would have to go with the school board as the LIE.

NSFOC: Truth

Its time to "throw the bums out" of this SB. The power has clearly gone to their heads.

They cheat, lie, disrespect us all and serve their subdivisions instead of the whole district.

This whole problem is a consequence of the SB's arrogant and self-centered approach to spending our money.

They should all resign for their incompetent handling of BB and now the Eola fiasco. BTW, how about refunding the $91 Million surplus to the taxplayers.

Its time for us to get some competent professionals into these positions instead of these jokers.

I don't live in brookdale but I feel the need to defend the people in brookdale.

1. The people of brookdale are not suing the taxpayers of this district.

2. The district voted for the 3rd high school.

3. Nobody knows if the site is safe or not. Most everybody believes the district will go above and beyond to make sure the site is safe. After all, they went above and beyond in trying to secure the BB site.

4. You say Brookdale maligns and insults everybody. The NSFOC is the most insulting pile of garbage I've seen online. It insults my intelligence to think that they believe people will donate money to an organization that cannot be honest with their own "members."

5. All of contracts you mention are all contingent on all issues being met and satisifed.

6. You think brookdale wants it all and wants it now? You think they are bullying senators? It was the NSFOC that got Linda Holmes involved and not brookdale.

nice try

To: Brookdale wants it all and wants it now on March 28, 2008 11:31 AM

I don't live in Brookdale. And I think the 3rd HS is a good idea.

Brookdale wants the 3rd high school even though they didn't vote for it.

Brookdale wants it on a potentially unsafe site exposing the whole district to potential liability just so they can get a nice new school.

Brookdale maligns and insults anyone who will get in their way.

Brookdale bullys everyone including state senators to get it all.

Brookdale and their stooges on the SB want to push ahead with contracts and building activity on their new school before anyone else can find out the extent of the issues with their site. They want it now!

Its pretty clear that Brookdale wants it all and wants it now - and won't stop at anything including insulting children to get their way!

to: Toxic Waste Dump on March 28, 2008 10:42 AM

1. In case you didn't realize. We live in IL not CA. So, it doesn't really matter what laws other states have. Y

2. How do you know that there is likely to be "significant contamination"? Are you an expert in PCBs? Couldn't the site be effectively remediated even if there were some contaminants on the site?

3. There are EMFs everywhere and the school will be situated a safe distance from any powerlines

What I dont' get is why NSFOC doesn't want the SB to continue to pursue this site even before conclusively knowing the results of all of the studies.

THAT is the question we are ALL asking of NSFOC.

The SB is not trying to hide anything. They are bound by a confidentiality agreement and cannot violate the agreement. I am certain that all the information that everyone needs will be made available in due time.

Stop the "I want it all and I want it now" tantrums.

The fact of the matter is we don't know if the site is contaminated or not - the SB has not released the Phase II studies.

What we do know -
1. There are 3 high pressure gas pipelines on the site. This would disqualify this site per CA law. Apparently, Brookdale people want to apply a lower standard of safety for our kids.

2. The gate on the MWGEN property clearly says "Caution PCBs". If there's a sign warning this, there is likely to be significant contamination.

3. There are several powerlines around the site so there is a likelihood of significant EMF on the site. Need more measurements at 5 and 20ft of the ground level to accoutn for the likely floor heights of the school building.

What I don't get is why the Brookdale and Fraud supporters want to send our kids to this site even before conclusively knowing that it is safe.

By MH on March 28, 2008 8:05 AM
Good news posted in the Daily Herald today. Much to NSFOCs chagrin, Linda Holmes publicly states she is not trying to disrupt the deal.
The school is moving forward!

Thanks MH.
Perhaps she heard our voices too.

Jim,
Can you run another Sun poll?

Are you confident in the IPSD 204 Superintendant and Board's ability to lead our district?

Thanks for continuing to ask the hard questions. Without the press our community would be totally in the dark!

What's with the constant argument about people going off their meds coming from Brookdale supporters.

Are there that many people that are "familiar" with "meds" for psychological issues or is this just another attack tool for the Brookdale supporters.

I continue to be amazed at how low Brookdale supporters will go - insulting WE/TG, insulting children, making comments about meds. Its just pathetic!

By NSFOC SAFETY MISSION on March 27, 2008 11:24 AM
Okay.....here it goes...

Taken from the NSFOC website .
NSFOC SAFETY MISSION:
*NEVER allow a school to be built on a site which will expose our children to ANY envirnomental hazards...
*Fuel the debate for safer schools.
*Raise needed funds for NSFOC

Who's first?!!!! :) :) :)

Let's see a site that will not expose our kids to ANY environmental dangers/hazards...I am wondering where anyone will ever build a school.

It can't be built on farmland where chemicals, pesticides, and fertilizers may have been used. It can't be in the vicinity of power lines due to EMF's. Not near any natural gas pipelines that would supply gas to homes,businesses and such. Not near busy intersections (getting hit by a car at a busy intersection could be an "environmentally" unsafe site)additionally, where one might inhale noxious exhaust emissions and poisonous gases. Not close to train tracks where a potential for derailment may occur. Let's not forget the possibility of earthquake faultlines,folks.What about radon levels?

The building inside probably should not have computer screens or fluorescent lighting either...the EMF'S are outrageous!!I don't even want to think about the makeup of the carpet fibers, the copy machines or the television monitors.

Seriously,
I don't think ANY school being built would or could be on time based on the nsfoc mantra because realistically there is NO place that a school could be built free of ANY environmental hazards.We must rationally recognize and address safety issues within the scope of reason and also recognize that remediation is a logical and widely used, dependable method to ensure blatant issues obtain satisfactory resolution.
I am willing to wait until this remediation can be identified and addressed accordingly.I look forward to the district's third high school on the Eola site.

TO: By Survey says... on March 27, 2008 9:39 PM
Interesting poll on the Sun again. Seems only about 50% of the respondents think we need a 3rd school. Maybe there is another option to Eola.

Response: The survey as of today has 714 votes, 55% of those votes are yes, 44% No. Does that really sound like we need another option? I am for a 3rd high school, but you can not base it on a survey in the Sun. Sorry Jim....
Things will only change if the SB says the land is not safe. They are not going to build on land that is unsafe, that is why the lawsuit is so silly. These people just need to feel they are in control. Guess what they are not. The SB is and they are taking proper steps to insure safety. If the land is not safe we still need a third HS.

To Prozac Nation

LOL

to: You're wrong

Just an observation....and a suggestion.

Observation: Vindictive North is either off their meds or just trying to keep the fun going on these blogs by being outrageous.

Suggestion: Either way, it probably isnt worth your effort trying to respond. It will go in one of VN's ears and out the other either way.

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

"Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Makes you wonder why ANYBODY posts to these boards doesnt it?

Including me!

I would like to take a moment to thank all of the lawyers currently suing our SCHOOL district. Thank you Mr. Collins (nsfoc/Furstenau rep.). THanks Mr. Helm (Brodie rep.) and let's not forget Mr. Simon(Brach rep.).We appreciate you taking the opportunity to gouge a ridiculous amount of money intended to go toward educating our childen and paying our hard working teachers and staff. We appreciate your willingness to line your pockets with a "little" extra at our kid's expense.This is what America is all about, truly! Enjoy those vacations guys!!!

Good news posted in the Daily Herald today. Much to NSFOCs chagrin, Linda Holmes publicly states she is not trying to disrupt the deal.
The school is moving forward!

I really had no opinion about the Brookdale folks until now. They voted no to the 3rd HS. They are the elitists in all this. Their letters to the Sun are nothing more then to keep the hate campaign on TG/WE. This is all about Brookdale wanting out of WV. They fought for it in the 06 ref and wore their orange shirts. Please the excuse of a split MS is very WEAK. Plus this lawsuit includes many throughout the district. How could Brookdale by itself have a lawsuit??

When I watched the Brookdale residents at the site meeting, this is where the south bashing started. It has worsen on these Blogs and through their letters written to the Sun. I want Brookdale called out for what they are!! They are very angry people. I couldn't believe how they threatened Kurt Bradshaw after the first set of boundaries. I was truely scared for him. Now Brookdale resisdents are looking at people's liscense plates numbers while they sit inside during a meeting. What is up with that? Now I hear about their ugly comments sent to a Senator. These are the elitists. These are the ones that soooo desperately want out of WV.

NSFOC...I know you are out there somewhere. Just need you to answer 1 question. Do your members have voting rights? It is all right there in your incorporation papers. I hope you haven't lost them.

For everyone attacking Brookdale - whatever they've done to voice their interests/concerns is all within their right. What a person does not have the right to do is sue to get things their way. For the record, I don't live in Brookdale nor do I know anyone there, I just had to speak of this hypocrasy TG and WE keep going back to.

Will new HS for D204 open on time?

Let's see what the project time line probably looks like at this point in time:

Obtain Land Jul 2008
Submit Design for Review Aug 2008
Complete Review Oct 2008
Advertise/Bid Project Nov 2009
Award Project Jan 2009
Proj Substantial Compl Jun 2010
School Opens Sep 2010

And this is based upon no substantial delays during the project. If anything goes wrong it will take longer and the Sep 2010 opening date will be missed.

Anyone who says this school can be open for the Sep 2009 school year simply doesn't understand construction and what it takes to build something as large and as complex as a high school.

Seems there was an article in the sun today and the pastors son recorded license numbers from cars visiting 3000 Timberhill Court.

Lets wait for those results and bump them up against the NSFOCfraud membership list. Maybe thats why they were not at the NSFOC meeting Tuesday.

Interesting poll on the Sun again. Seems only about 50% of the respondents think we need a 3rd school. Maybe there is another option to Eola.

NSFOC - What it the point of the Infamous Quotes section of your website?

My favorite quote. My kids should go to NV because that is what I paid for!!!!!!!!!!

Pretend for a moment: If we all agreed to let WE and TG stay at NVHS, don't you think the lawsuit would go away?

Really people, especially the NSFOC supporters who are NOT from WE or TG. Do you REALLY think that the WE and TG folks would continue with this nonsense? Do you REALLY think they care about ANYONE else's issues if they were safely assured of continuing at NVHS?

The rest of the NSFOC (and there can't be THAT many who aren't from TG or WE) would be dropped like hot potatoes, left to pick up the pieces for themselves and pay Shawn Collins by themselves. Shaw Collins is more than happy to take your money all day long even though it's common knowledge (self-proclaimed by NSFOC) that the lawsuit is a long-shot.

LONG SHOT....did you hear that??? Why do you even continue with this losing cause?

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE. We're trying to help you but you're not seeing what is right in front of your faces. Get out while you can....run away from the NSFOC quicksand before it's too late.

By mark on March 27, 2008 7:39 AM
I see a lot of insults on this board related to where someone lives or what they believe. It would be refreshing for people to discuss the facts; and the different views on the facts:

1) Ref vote: one side says it's very wrong that people were voting for BB but it was not on the ballot, one side says it's alright that the sb marketed the site of bb and then built it somewhere else. I'd like to see a debate on that issue. It's really at the heart of why people are upset. Can anyone remember anytime the SB warned us that BB would not happen? Please, if someone who is support of the sb can illustrate that the SB warned us - then I think there would be merit to listen to the pro sb side. Right now it just seems like a handful of people who want the new school cause they won the lottery and the school is now near them?

I for one asked in 2006 what would happen if BB fell through. They admitted new land would need to be looked at which logically would call for new boundaries.Needless to say, my husband did not attend one boundary meeting. He said it was a waste of time unless we owned the land we were assigning boundaries to. The school board agreed to this "exercise" because a select group demanded it be discussed prior to another ref. vote. see email excerpt below....

Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 11:38:23 -0600
When people ask us if boundaries could still be changed, we have to answer that theoretically they can be. WE also have stated that this is such a huge issue that if would be difficult to do. That is all we have said.

Howie Crouse

to: Silent Majority???? on March 27, 2008 7:32 PM

Okay, we concede we're not THAT silent...but, let there be no doubt, we ARE the MAJORITY.

NSFOC has a couple of hundred stooges.

That leaves many thousand non supporters. Hence that makes the non-NSFOC supporters the MAJORITY. It's basic math.

Tim Waldorf - Please know this posting is a fact not an emotionally driven post. It is soooo obvious to everyone that you're wrapped around somebody's finger or in their back pocket - nice place to be. If I were you, I would report on both sides of the issue bc one side speaks for the majority - that's the side you're missing, and that might be of interest to most reporters. It also looks bad for their (TG and WE) argument alltogether as if they've paid you off or something - I'm just saying how one makes himself look is important in every aspect of one's life - just thought I'd share this as a fact.

Bottom line. This law suit is for personal gain. Why would you file a law suit against a site before it has even been tested. Sure, we all want to make sure it is safe - but at least let them move forward with due diligence BEFORE you file a suit. The majority of the voters of district 204 have all shwon their outright disgust with the TG and WE residents for filing this suit and the recent happenings don't look on the up and up under the political spectrum as well. It'll all come out in the wash - it always does on this level...

The true signs of "dirty politics" is lurking throughout the last turn of events. I'm sure these politictians don't want things to be drudged up about them, which I'm hearing there is some drudging to be done. Could/will get ugly.

To: Jas

"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!!"

Why you ask? Because he's an elected official that was trying to fight for a piece of land that he promised to try and get for same group of people that are now suing him. That's right the NSFOC. MM and the school board did everything they could and because of their hard work now people bad mouth them and say they are reckless. I'm sad that we didn't walk away from the BB property 2 years ago. We could have already had a high school at the Eola property.

To: Vindictive North

"Notice how once anyone points out the North/Brookdale's hypocrisy and their vindictive nature - they start again with the insults."

I don't recall insulting anyone. However, I do recall in your previous posts as refering Brookdale residents as vindictive, vicious, evil, elitists who chose to unnecessarily harm the children.

"The North and Brookdale in particular voted overwhelmingly AGAINST the 3rd high school."

I will give you that Brookdale voted against the 3rd high school, but the rest of the north which is over 10 neighborhoods and more then 1200 middle school students and 2500 high school students and their parents voted overwhelmingly "yes" to a 3rd high school. Because you have an issue with Brookdale please stereotype the rest of the north. I also have the election results as well by precinct and by polling place and if you'd like to compare those numbers I'd be happy to.

"Now they want a 3rd high school, so the Northern/Brookdale elitists can get their kids our of WVHS - which has been their aim all along."

Again, this is probably the proudest group of parents in the whold IPSD. This neighborhood and parents have been attending WVHS for more then 25 years. Your arguement doesn't make sense.

How has Brookdale hurt "our" kids? Explain that to me because they were the biggest supporters of NVHS. Again, I don't recall this neighborhood filing a lawsuit in 2006.

I personally live in Oakhurst North and for you to bash the whole "north" because of your personal dislike for Brookdale is being short sighted. The neighborhoods on Eola from Ogden all the way up to Butterfield Road have a history of supporting the IPSD referendums in 2006, 2005 and 1997.

Vindictive North your venomous speech is more angry then I've ever seen directed towards any one neighborhood since these blogs started.

Thanks for the info on contacting Linda Holmes, Fred McCloskey and Midwest Gen. I will be sure to contact them to express how much I feel the SB has deceived us and my huge concerns over the Eola site. Also, it's humorous how the Eola supporters call themselves the "silent majority". They are neither....silent(hardly!!), or in the majority.

I recognized Mr. Chad Martinson in attendance at the NSFOC meeting on Tuesday as well.

Didn't this guy lead the vote no campaign for Brookdale in the 06 referendum?

Now he is asking how we can get rid of school board members?

Seems Chad is torn between NSFOCfraud and NSFOC.

Chad...... If you read this blog, come clean.

To All Bloggers,
When will the environmental test results be provided to the public? Please let me know as I am falling sleep....zzzzzzzzzzz

To: Vindictive North

"I live in the north but don't live in Brookdale. You forget that there about 6 or 7 other neighborhoods up here. We all voted overwhelmingly for a 3rd high school on the BB property. Are we selfish? Are we vindictive? Aren't we all trying to do what is best for all the kids of IPSD?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Looking at the Vote Results by Precinct in 2006 is quite interesting. Do you all realize that only 17.2% of voters in Precinct 19 - River Glen Church, on Raymond Drive (Brookdale area)voted in support of the Referendum. Yes, that's correct 82.8% VOTED NO! Now everytime you talk to anyone from Brookdale they tell you they supported the 3rd HS. Huh? Interesting that everyone seems to fall in that 17.2%. Also, Precinct 25 Word of Life Lutheran on Tudor (right off of Brookdale Road), 80.6% voted NO for the Referendum. Don't let people food you, the majority of Brookdale voters DID NOT SUPPORT the referendum. It's only now when their backs are up the wall and their watching their potential new HS go up in flames that they're coming out in droves. Those that want to portray themselves in a very altruistic way pretending they supported it are just not telling the truth.

Many in Brookdale need to look in the mirror.

JAS

Did not he spend the $5m to try and get the land you wanted? And still want?

TO Anonymous on March 27, 2008 4:31 PM

Perhaps you missed the part of my blog referencing overcrowding in school as well? .

I did miss something:
I may have erred by only citing athletics in my example. There are many other extracurricular activities that are also impacted by overcrowding. I realize that perhaps extracurricular activities (sports, music, the arts etc) may not be important to you, but they are to others in the district

However, don't forget the overcrowding in the classrooms too.

Enjoy your retirement old man.

Time and time again bloggers have argued for another school because one of the overcrowding issues is that hundreds of kids try out for a sports team and only 20 get picked.

So 200 kids and 20 spots. So now we have two schools and the same 200 kids split between them so now we have 40 spots. And you want all of us to spend $130 million so another 20 kids can play on a team? You're serious?

Maybe we would be all better off to come up with some new rules on HS athletics. Maybe instead of just one team per school there should be more? Maybe the number should be based upon total enrollment or something simpler like just who wants to play?

Fine, if the kids want to play sports let's all work to find a way to make that happen. Let's just not build a school we don't need just so 20 more kids can make a team.

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

Notice how once anyone points out the North/Brookdale's hypocrisy and their vindictive nature - they start again with the insults.

Its started already - with ""north" resident" casting aspersions about the "class" of TG/WE. I guess you can count on elitists from the North/Brookdale to bring up class distinctions!

BTW, check the election results - I've examined them precinct by precinct - guess what! The North and Brookdale in particular voted overwhelmingly AGAINST the 3rd high school. Election results and counts are public information.

Now they want a 3rd high school, so the Northern/Brookdale elitists can get their kids our of WVHS - which has been their aim all along.

Frankly, as I said, I actually used to think that a North high school was a good idea. Until, I saw how vindictive the North/Brookdale has been in achieveing their goal. Literally, throwing our kids under the bus to get their "entitlement".

There are options to have a North, Central and SOuth high schools while at the same time reducing bussing etc....but the North/Brookdale chose to ram a proposal down everyone's throats that very intentionally harmed our kids. There was no need to, but they CHOSE to.

That fact and their behavior since, with the insults and comments - directed both at the residents and most egregiously, even at the kids, of WE/TG has proven to me that these North/Brookdale people are vindictive.

I was a suporter of a North high school - now I am an ardent and motivated activist working to ensure that the vindictive North/Brookdale doesn't get what it wants. You changed me!

To: By Anonymous on March 27, 2008 2:59 PM

I to was at the NSFOC meeting and asked I believe 2 questions. I am not a NSFOC supporter nor am I a NSFOCfraud supporter. What I am is against what the NSFOC is doing to the IPSD and how they are going about doing it. I also believe there are other motives, but that's been covered already.

I am registered at both web sites like I imagine a lot of the parents are. How else are we all getting each others information. I also know for a fact that of the 90 people in attendance probably only about 80% of them support the NSFOC.

What's your point in your blog? We all feel a certain way and everything will play out in time. All any of us can do is watch and see. The NSFOC can't stop things and the NSFOCfraud group can't advance tihngs.

To: By anonymous on March 27, 2008 2:55 PM

"No, you are right, they didn't file a lawsuit. Yet they did vote against the referendum.

Now, they are huge advocates for the third high school and are calling others selfish.

Hey pot meet kettle.

It's mind boggling to me!"
_______________________________________________________

Kind of like the membership of the NSFOC voted "yes" for the referendum. If were were led to believe them they were solely responsible for the 32 point swing.

But now they are against it? If I remember the referendum didn't have boundaries or land attached to it, and yet they are saying BB or nothing in their lawsuit. What could me more selfish then doing something for your own benefit and not of the IPSD?

Now that is even more mind boggling!!!

I've seen the weak explanation by Brookdale/North elistists that they argued against splitting Hill middle school - I was there and it was CLEARLY about these elitists not wanting to go to WVHS.

Notice how these same vindictive people want to split Scullen middle school. Another example of how they want to screw others for no reason.

There is no way in **** that the North/Brookdale will get anything...primarily because you vicious, vindictive, evil, elitists chose to unnecessarily harm the children of WE, TG, MayWatts etc.

We didn't do anything to harm you, but you chose to harm us for no reason...we're angry at you for this. I don't mind going to WVHS, but I will do everything I can to ensure that the North/Brookdale doesn't get what they want because of their despicable behavior.

Like I said, I used to support a high school for the North - not anymore - because you Brookdale/North people have proven to be so vindictive!

NSFOC is this what you want? on March 27, 2008 10:42 AM

"Just saw this on another blog/post. Scary, huh? Don't think it won't happen? It's already happening at our elementary and middle schools. If you voted yes to the referendum but now you're against it..is it worth taking this chance???"

____________________________________________

Talk about the NSFOC using scare tatics..............look in the mirror.

To: Vindictive North

I live in the north but don't live in Brookdale. You forget that there about 6 or 7 other neighborhoods up here. We all voted overwhelmingly for a 3rd high school on the BB property. Are we selfish? Are we vindictive? Aren't we all trying to do what is best for all the kids of IPSD? To oppose a high school because of one group and the rest of the district pays for it, that is showing your true colors. Is this the same opinion of all of your other TG neighbors as well? Because one group was rude or called you names or got what they may have wanted and we didn't get what we wanted you're willing to oppose less crowded and more opportunities for all of the kids in IPSD? Wow I don't remember anyone saying anything like that from Brookdale. I though all of the parents from this district had a little more class.

I guess nobody from NSFOC reads this blog. I have been asking about the ownership structure and how decision will be made in regard to the lawsuit. I have not a gotten a single response. Not 1.

Truth must hurt.

By anonymous on March 25, 2008 1:34 PM
word to the wise, the NSFOC will post the head count of their meeting as 100% supporters. No wonder they are inviting everyone to come out regardless if you support or not. Just watch how the Sun reports this to see if they are objective in their coverage.

________________________________

Do you know this as a fact? The minute I see Chad Martinson's name as a supporter of NSFOC I'll believe this.

He was at the Tuesday meeting and is a known NSFOCfraud member.

Has Chad switched sides? He did ask a question at the NSFOC Tuesday meeting that left me wondering.

He asked "How do WE get rid of the current school board?"

I'm wondering why he's interested in getting rid of the current board since the NSFOCfraud site thinks they are so wonderful.

By you're wrong on March 27, 2008 2:42 PM
To: Vindictive North on March 27, 2008 12:14 PM

I don't live in the Brookdale area either but attended every one of those school board meetings back in 2005 and 2006. The reason for the orange shirts was because they didn't want their Middle School to be split. They were sticking up for those Title 1 schools that feed into Hill Middle School and felt that it would be harmful for those Title 1 students if you split them from Hill after such amazing progress had been made in their middle school. If you have been paying attention about Hill Middle School it has won state and national awards for it's diversity and how well the school performs.

It had nothing to do with not wanting to go to WVHS. When all was said and done Brookdale was split from Hill Middle School and they were to attend WVHS while the rest of the middle school was to attend MVHS on the BB property. Those Brookdale parents love WVHS and always will. Were they happy, probably not because they wanted their middle school to stick together. It had nothing to do with WVHS or MVHS.

Here's the major difference as I see it...THEY DIDN'T FILE A LAWSUIT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T GET THEIR WAY LIKE CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS ARE DOING!!! Now, argure that!!
________________________________________

No, you are right, they didn't file a lawsuit. Yet they did vote against the referendum.

Now, they are huge advocates for the third high school and are calling others selfish.

Hey pot meet kettle.

It's mind boggling to me!

To: Vindictive North on March 27, 2008 12:14 PM

I don't live in the Brookdale area either but attended every one of those school board meetings back in 2005 and 2006. The reason for the orange shirts was because they didn't want their Middle School to be split. They were sticking up for those Title 1 schools that feed into Hill Middle School and felt that it would be harmful for those Title 1 students if you split them from Hill after such amazing progress had been made in their middle school. If you have been paying attention about Hill Middle School it has won state and national awards for it's diversity and how well the school performs.

It had nothing to do with not wanting to go to WVHS. When all was said and done Brookdale was split from Hill Middle School and they were to attend WVHS while the rest of the middle school was to attend MVHS on the BB property. Those Brookdale parents love WVHS and always will. Were they happy, probably not because they wanted their middle school to stick together. It had nothing to do with WVHS or MVHS.

Here's the major difference as I see it...THEY DIDN'T FILE A LAWSUIT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T GET THEIR WAY LIKE CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS ARE DOING!!! Now, argure that!!

Isn't part of the reason that we need a new HS the fact that there is overcrowding in our two HS now?

Let's just say that enrollment doesn't go up by one kid - at all, never - but just stays at its current level. We still have an overcrowding issue.

By most accounts the overcrowding isn't a good environment for learning and opportunities for extracurricular activies. What do you do when hundreds of kids try out for a sport and there's only 20 positions on the team?

If you were REALLY concerned about the kids - and I mean ALL kids (not just yours) - you would recognize that we need another HS.

Wouldn't it be in the SD best interest to ensure that ALL kids in the SD, regardless where they live in the SD, have the same opportunities for a good education and extracurricular activities w/o the overcrowding issues?

Sure, that might mean your kid doesn't get to go to the school they do currently. The SD doesn't care about YOUR kid, they care about ALL kids in the SD. To that end, I am certain that once the Eola site is investigated and tested then (and only then) with the SD move forward with building the school.

The 3rd HS is a chance to change our direction and provide better opportunities for ALL kids in the SD. Not just the ones who feel that they deserve what they want.

NSFOC, stop being so selfish and transparent with your true intentions.

Good luck getting re-elected Ms. Holmes.

In case you hadn't realized, more of your constituents are against NSFOC than supportive of them. How are you going to sugarcoat your support of them come election time???

You, Todd Andrews, Shawn Collins and NSFOC call all eat my grits.

Will new HS for D204 open on time?

If on time is defined to mean for the first day of classes for the fall 2009-2010 school year... not a chance, not even close. Fall of the following year isn't looking real good at this point either.

If the projections were wrong we have nothing to worry about and everyone can relax.

If the projections are right the SB and Administration better start working on a contingency plan... something like higher than 80% class room utilization, slightly larger class sizes, etc. Heck class sizes these days are so small they provide lots of flexibility for situations like this.

Alternatively temporary classrooms could be brought in, more class periods added, or we could contract with some or all of our surrounding school districts to send some of our kids to other schools. Oh horrors, temporary classrooms? Let's remember it is the teachers, the students, and the parents that matter the most... not the room.

Temporary upticks in enrollment are not the end of the world. School districts have been dealing with this problem for decades without all of the anger and emotion we've seen demonstrated locally.

Let's all make sure we are not making a $130 million dollar mistake for a solution that may not cost us anything.

Getting Senator Holmes to change her stance should be easy. Her list of financial supporters is public record (do a google search for Senator Linda Holmes). We need to contact the donors and find out where they stand on whether it is appropriate for a state senator to pressure a private entity not to sell property so a select few do not have send their children to WVHS. We also need to get the names of the "directors" of the NSFOC (required by law to be public record) and compare to the donor list.

Its going to be tough to get re-elected. This is an election year for the senator.

The North/Brookdale didn't need to screw the people of TG, WE and MayWatts/Cowlishaw to get their new high school, but they chose to.

I live in TG (love my neighbors and TG) and have always thought the North needs a high school. I like the idea of a North, Central and South high school in 204. I didn't like how the people of Brookdale needed to ride a bus for such long distances to get to WVHS.

Until - I saw the orange shirts, the behavior of the SB and their supporters from the North/Brookdale and the vicious attacks on the people of TG and WE. Its absolutely sickening how these people in the North have sunk to such lows. The insults have hardened me - and at this point I will do whatever it takes to prevent the North from getting a high school because they attacked us for no reason. We're simply defending ourselves from a vindictive, vicious North and their stooges on the SB.

The North/Brookdale has said we rode the bus for a long time, so now we are going to screw you and make your children ride a bus for a long time even if they don't need to. That is vindictive and I will fight it with everything.

As far as I am concerned, the North/Brookdale took a path that was evil and intentionally put our children at risk for no reason. That has changed me from a supporter of a school in the North to a strong opponent of anything for the North/Brookdale.

It was also announced at the NSFOC meeting (Tuesday) of which about 90 people attended that they don't plan on giving up. Even if the Phase II studies come back clean or they come back with issues and MidwestGen has a remediation plan IT STILL WON'T BE GOOD ENOUGH FOR THEM!!!

They want further testing then want further lawsuits against all of us they want to suck the IPSD dry for all they are worth. They will try to do it as long as they can because it comes down to getting their way.

Admit it NSFOC, I heard your fearless leader say it himself, he wants a "white glove" study. Give me a break!!! This site (Eola) will never be good enough for you because it isn't benefiting you as you see it. Is that about right? If all the studies come back well and good, doesn't this wash your hands of the enviornmental scare tactics you are using? Heck your kids aren't even the ones at risk. You really want me to believe you're more concerned as a taxpayer then a parent who's kid will attend MV. Let's ask the parents who's kids will attend MVHS.

If you're successful in stopping a 3rd high school you do realize that your kids could still attend WV and have split shifts with those evil "north" residents kids as you now refer to them.

NSFOC Safety Mission,

Those 3 items listed are actually items #4 through #6. The first three, in order of importance are:

#1) Ensure our kids don't go to Waubonsie.
#2) Take other measures to ensure #1 is safe.
#3) Take even more riduculous measures if #1 and #2 aren't achieved.

So Senator Linda Holmes is in favor of split shifts and trailer classrooms? That will be the result if she prevents the district from buying the Midwest Gen site and her buddies at Macon don't get their price. That must make the rest of her constituents very happy. Another 1 term senator...good luck Linda with your home remodeling business.

By You've lost your MINDS!!! on March 27, 2008 11:35 AM
By anonymous on March 27, 2008 10:50 AM

"I would rather have split shifts then sick children if the site isn't safe."
______________

Are you serious? Are you that blinded by your position of no new school on the Eola property? WE NEED A 3RD HS!!! There's one small difference, actually 2. There is no known reason that kids will get sick there. Phase II studies haven't been released and remediation plans haven't been released. Therefore you don't know if the site is safe or not. The FACTS are we will have split shifts and property vaules will tank, way more then if we had a school on the Eola site. The second reason is your kids won't even be attending MV. None of us can afford split shifts!!! If we do have split shifts at WVHS they better make sure the TG and WE kids don't go to school at the same time as the kids in the north, or since the NSFOC is the one potentially causing the split shifts make the NSFOC kids get the worse of the split shifts at WV.
_____________________________

Wow, talk about jumping to conclusions. I agree we need a 3rd high school (obviously I'm not from Brookdale).

Since you state that Phase II results have not been released YOU don't know whether or not the property is safe or not. I trusted the district when they said we'd see those reports over 3 weeks ago.

And... How do you know my children won't be attending Metea Valley?

I stick to my original statement. I'd rather have split shifts and trailers than have to deal with ONE SICK child as a result of possible danger on the Eola site.

Again, I haven't seen the reports. Have you?

By anonymous on March 27, 2008 10:50 AM

"I would rather have split shifts then sick children if the site isn't safe."
______________

Are you serious? Are you that blinded by your position of no new school on the Eola property? WE NEED A 3RD HS!!! There's one small difference, actually 2. There is no known reason that kids will get sick there. Phase II studies haven't been released and remediation plans haven't been released. Therefore you don't know if the site is safe or not. The FACTS are we will have split shifts and property vaules will tank, way more then if we had a school on the Eola site. The second reason is your kids won't even be attending MV. None of us can afford split shifts!!! If we do have split shifts at WVHS they better make sure the TG and WE kids don't go to school at the same time as the kids in the north, or since the NSFOC is the one potentially causing the split shifts make the NSFOC kids get the worse of the split shifts at WV.

Okay.....here it goes...

Taken from the NSFOC website .
NSFOC SAFETY MISSION:
*NEVER allow a school to be built on a site which will expose our children to ANY envirnomental hazards...
*Fuel the debate for safer schools.
*Raise needed funds for NSFOC

Who's first?!!!! :) :) :)

By Well we're movin' on up on March 27, 2008 9:44 AM :

You live in Bolingbrook. What do you know about Naperville schools?

(There you go. That was just for fun from a fellow SE-side 204er who finds this all just a bit ridiculous. Wait for the Phase II results, then decide if it worth suing to stop the school board. No one has signed a contract to buy anything yet)

I am still waiting for anyone from the NSFOC to come forward and explain the structure of the NSFOC. Little Timmy had another article in the Sun (free copy littering most driveways). He refers to the NSFOC has having members. Does this mean they are structured like a private country club where the members have voting rights. Or did little Timmy mean to say supporter/donors who have no voting rights? Seriously people. Who is the NSFOC? Since they cannot win the lawsuit (never raise that kind of money), what is the purpose of the organization? They say it is to keep the School Board accountable but they are not suing the board, they are suing the taxpayers. People on the blogs keep telling us to quit saying this is made up of TG and WE residents but has anybody seen the corporate papers for the NSFOC?

Their website is a scam. They ask questions as if they do not have the answers. Any environmental attorney can answer those questions for them. Since they have an environmental attorney, one should assume they have these answers. If the answers supported their cause, I am sure they would have posted them.

I will ask this again. How is the owership of the NSFOC structured? Who decides how to settle the suit? Owners only? If the owners all live at TG and WE then calling out the self interests of TG and WE are fair since any settlement would be to the benefit of just TG and WE - regardless of where the other supporters and donors live.

The uninformed are the easiest to scam. The goal of the NSFOC is to misinform and raise money.

By NSFOC is this what you want? on March 27, 2008 10:42 AM
Just saw this on another blog/post. Scary, huh? Don't think it won't happen? It's already happening at our elementary and middle schools. If you voted yes to the referendum but now you're against it..is it worth taking this chance???
___________________

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....

___________________________________

I would rather have split shifts then sick children if the site isn't safe.

Just saw this on another blog/post. Scary, huh? Don't think it won't happen? It's already happening at our elementary and middle schools. If you voted yes to the referendum but now you're against it..is it worth taking this chance???
___________________

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....

am I reading this correctly? Did the NSFOC ask Senator Linda Holmes to put pressure on Midwest Gen to back out of selling the land to the district? Does anybody see that NSFOC has conceeded that the land can be remediated so their only hope is that the district cannot buy the land?

NSFOC - out of money and out of their collective minds.

Also, Midwest Gen would be foolish not to sell the land since the land would never get top dollar from another buyer since it is set so far back from Eola. Top dollar tends to be paid for retail and housing developments. If the land that surrounds it is built up and the Midwest Gen property is buried deep in the back, Midwest Gen will sitting on property they will never be able to sell and will still have to pay to remediate.

By mark on March 27, 2008 7:39 AM
I see a lot of insults on this board related to where someone lives or what they believe. It would be refreshing for people to discuss the facts; and the different views on the facts:

1) Ref vote: one side says it's very wrong that people were voting for BB but it was not on the ballot, one side says it's alright that the sb marketed the site of bb and then built it somewhere else. I'd like to see a debate on that issue. It's really at the heart of why people are upset. Can anyone remember anytime the SB warned us that BB would not happen? Please, if someone who is support of the sb can illustrate that the SB warned us - then I think there would be merit to listen to the pro sb side. Right now it just seems like a handful of people who want the new school cause they won the lottery and the school is now near them?

2) Environment: let's keep this simple, is it clearly safe or "unknown" --- why would we allow any school children, rich, poor, middle class - they can live anywhere - why would we put kids on property that was "unknown" as to the level of risks....especially future risks. What is in the land may not come up as problems for years to come.

3) Cost. BB we'd spend a bit more for what we get. This is normal in business and government. You pay now or you pay later. Meaning, you buy BB you pay now, you buy Eola - we all pay later. Thus, for those of you against NFSOC - wake up and stop making it a personal thing, treat the issue as logical.

The anti fraud site guy has just him and a hanful of people. There's been no meeting, no rally...nothing; he just comes to the NCFOS meeting because he's lonely on the issue. He's from brookdale; and instead of playing the orange shirt game again, why not take the approach that you care about where your kids go to school and you do not want them along I88 at a old power dump with 40 years of hazards.

Mark,
Thanks for the post.I agree with you. Some folks based their vote on the third high school on where they thought it would go and what it would do for them. Others based their vote on whether this district needed a third high school...even if that meant the school they were attending my not change, may not bring anything new,or may not effect their property values.

Secondly,why would anyone file a lawsuit against an entire district and then create a propaganda platform that has nothing to do with supporting their own lawsuit? Why would they vote yes for a high school and then decry you better build it in this spot or DON'T build it at all(so....NONE of you kids will get a high school if it doesn't go where WE want)? Why would they call a site unsafe if they haven't seen the test results yet? That seems like a waste of money from a group calling for "fiscal responsibility".What is all of the supporter's money going toward? Envirnomental testing to prove their propaganda? No. It is going into Mr. Collins pockets even after he chose not to file for injunction since he knew he wouldn't win.

Lastly, How do you know the final BB costs when none of us do? How do you know it will be cheaper? How do you know "we'll pay later for Eola" when we don't have the testing results or the contract verbage in front of us?

Frankly, the arguments do not seem logical at all. They seem to be based on "action before facts"...again isn't this what the NSFOC group has been accusing the SB of doing?

"Can anyone remember anytime the SB warned us that BB would not happen?"

Mark, Christine Vickers was the only board member against the 3rd HS. In the first boundary meeting (I was at all of them, I believe it was the first meeting -- maybe the second), she read from a prepared statement criticizing the need for the HS. In this critique she stated that approving the referendum was not a guarantee the proposed site would stick and that the district could build the thing wherever they chose. She made a couple of other points that have also come true.

We are parents of two children slated to go to Metea Valley High School at the proposed Eola site location. We would like to share our thoughts on the so called environmental concerns being rased by the group of Tall Grass and White Eagle residents that have brought this incredibly frivolous and selfish suit against the school board. I am first and foremost a very overprotective mother. I make sure my kids always wear there seat belts, always cover them in 50 sunblock, make sure they take their vitamins/eat their vegetables every day and drink at least 5 glasses of purified water every day. We never start the car in the garage - even with the door open - bc we are all to aware of the risks with the fumes. I would not send my children anywhere to put them in harms way - their health and safety is my #1 job. I am a graduate of the University of Michigan and was a member of Greenpeace. I am all too familiar with citizens passions about keeping things safe. This, however is not about safety at all. This suit is brought about by a group of parents so enraged that their children will be slated for Waubonsie Valley, they are willing to create whatever smokescreen they desperately can so they can get the school in their neck of the woods. Their are plenty of organizations that fight for a real cause that have credibility in the public eye - do not insult those organizations (or the informed public) by giving this Tall Grass White Eagle group any credibility whatsoever! Their reasons are not the concern of safety of our children - their only concern is to stop this and get the school in their jurisdiction and everyone in the disctict knows it. We all trust the experts that this will be a safe place for our children to go to school and believe me, they would be fighting for it to go up if it were in their neck of the woods - power lines and all , we know this to be fact bc their neighborhood is surrounded by power lines. This will all be proven without a shadow of a doubt - evidenced by the roll out of this school. We need to band together and not let small group of entitlests control what's best for our children, and that's forging on and breaking ground on Eola - home of Metea Valley High School.

To: TG and Proud on March 26, 2008 10:39 PM

"I am sick and tired of subsidizing schools for all you southerners with your huge houses built in corn fields. I have lived here for umpteen years and remember when the first kid sparked up a number behind WV at lunchtime....blah blah blah."
__________________________

Wow, is that how you think us in the North feel? Please don't give yourself so much credit. To be honest we think very little of you in TG, and we don't spend our time thinking about how we can get even why would we want to? As much as you'd like to believe we're not trying to be like our neighbors. I even hear your WE neighbors saying how TG wants to be like WE. You can't even get along with your neighbors.

Our houses are just as big as yours and were probably built in corn fields. Does that matter, no. As far as your comment about the kid that sparked one behind WV, let's not even go there shall we. To be honest I'm not even sure where you were going with that one. We all know that NVHS has just as much if not a bigger drug problem then WVHS.

Can we all just stop the attacks? Please. I've read far more attacks on the north the past 3 days then I've read attacks on the south.

to: WVHS Neighbors

Given this news story, does anyone want to repoen the discusssion of why some people dont want to send their kids to WVHS? Despite how much you want it to be so, all things aren't equal in this world. Some are safer and better.

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

Finally a shred of Truth on this board!

NSFOC is mostly WE and TG folks who dont want to go to WVHS because they think it is full of crack-heads!

Posted by WVHS neighbors..

Yes, those PTA meetings should be interesting. See the Sun story today about the crack house with prostitutes that was busted. 1000 feet from an elementary school. It wasnt near Fry or WE. It was a WVHS feeder school.

Given this news story, does anyone want to repoen the discusssion of why some people dont want to send their kids to WVHS? Despite how much you want it to be so, all things aren't equal in this world. Some are safer and better.

Now,now...lets not forget about those murders in White Eagle, shall we?

Thank you Bill Blass for your post. We are in full support of the board with the Eola purchase.

I am from the east side of 204. The south east side.

I am going to keep going to NV. My situation doesnt change. In fact it gets better because TG and WE are moving out of my school which makes it less crowded.

I am just sitting back watching the southwest side and the north side trade insults and shred each other. And I am getting off free as a bird. Sure, it's entertaining, but.....

I do feel a little left out. Can someone please hurl and insult or two my way ? Just so I can feel included?

If I were the decision maker for Midwest Gen I'd be running for the hills.

I hope they are starting to figure out who they are dealing with. The 204 School Board cannot be trusted.

And even more district scare tactics. Better be able to prove the need for split shifts this time. At least half the district doesn't believe what you or what your mouthpieces say anymore. Way to take hit those moms and dads in the heart where it counts. They'll do anything for their kids especially if they are being held over a barrel. You should be proud! nsfocfraud=markmetzger organization!

NSFOC enlists state legislators to derail 3rd high school

Story Highlights:

- NSFOC desperate as they have not enough raised enough money to pursue further legal action
- NSFOC pleads with State legislators to help spread misinformation and scare tactics
- Inexplicably, certain legislator(s) agree to help -– now pressuring/threatening Midwest Generation to back out
- If that happens, likely outcome is 2 high schools, overcrowding and split shifts for District 204 HS students
- These legislators need to hear from you -- the Silent Majority -– as soon as possible
(details and contact links below)

We’ve all heard that desperate times call for desperate measures. Well the NSFOC is desperate -– and knowing they can’t win their lawsuit, their 200 paying members have somehow convinced certain state legislators to take up the fight.

Over the past few weeks, almost all of you have asked what you can do to help. From what we’ve heard, we think your help is needed immediately. Now that the NSFOC has convinced legislators to spread their misinformation and scare tactics, they are working hand-in-hand to pressure Midwest Generation to cease contract negotiations with District 204 (Midwest Gen along with AME are the two current owners of the land upon which Metea will be built).

If Midwest Generation is scared/threatened into backing out of the deal (and with Brach-Brodie no longer an option), the potential result is devastating: two high schools, middle school and high school overcrowding, and split shifts for D204 high school students. If this sounds like the exact opposite of what you voted for -– and these actions deepen your disdain for the NSFOC -- these legislators need to hear from you and the rest of the Silent Majority.

Here are the legislators who have decided to support the NSFOC (and in the process, are showing complete disregard for your vote for our much-needed 3rd high school). To show your support, we ask that you contact them as soon as possible to voice your support for the 3rd high school and the Eola site –- as well as your disappointment in their highly questionable motives for disregarding your vote.

Senator Linda Holmes | 815-609-3711
mailto:Senatorholmes42@sbcglobal.net

State Representative Tom Cross| 815-254-0000

In addition, the following legislators have been contacted -– but have refused to join in spreading the NSFOC’s misinformation. You may also want to contact them to let them know your feelings as they might help their peers in the legislature better understand the NSFOC's true motives:

Congresswoman Judy Biggert | 630-325-2002
judy@biggert.com

Senator Randy Hultgren | 217-782-8022
rh@senatorhultgren.com

We're truly amazed at the tactics to which the NSFOC is resorting (though nothing should surprise us given their past actions). It's time to put this behind us once and for all. Since the results of a referendum are apparently not enough for the NSFOC nor their new legislative friends, please take the time to make your voice -- the voice of the entire Silent Majority -- heard.

As always, thank you for your support.

the http://www.nsfocfraud.com/ team

Here we go again with the district's scare tactics. Fool me once ....

"Ladies & Gentlemen:

I wanted to pass along some pertinent info that I received from a reliable source. I was told Midwest Gen is nervous about selling their parcel of land to D. 204 because of the NSFOC lawsuit, so this land sale is far from over. Apparently, NSFOC has engaged the State Senator from their district, Linda Holmes, and she is openly against the land deal. I confirmed this with Randy Hultgren's office today (he is the Sate Senator for our district)and they confirmed her stance. I asked her what Randy's stance was on this
and she said "he has not taken a stance on this issue"
and I let her know that the majority of his VOTING population support this transaction so he needs to take a stance and that they were going to be receiving many more phone calls and emails, so please don't make a huge liar out of me and if you support Metea on this parcel of land, either email or call his office! I personally called because I feel that is better with politicians (she couldn't just delete my email)! His contact info is
(630)682-8100 or rh@senatorhultgren.com .

You may be asking why Linda Holmes is getting involved in a parcel of land that is not even in her district?
Well, I did a little digging and one of her campaign contributors is Macom Properties, sound familiar? Well it should, they were trying to sell the land @ 248th street to IPSD, hmmmmm...

This is all about personal greed and it turns my stomach, so I feel it is my purpose to expose these guys for what they really are!!!! How can you help?

1) Call or email Randy Hultgrens' office, let's get
him engaged!
2) You can email the VP of Technical Services for
Midwest Gen and let him know the Parents of Children
attending this school support this sale of property
for the new high school. His email is
fmccluskey@mwgen.com , his name is Mr. Fred
McCluskey.
3) Get the word out to everyone in our community
and solicit their support as well AND if you have
friends in Brookdale or Oakhurst North, get the word to them
too please!!!!

I'll keep you posted! If you wish not to be on this
distribution list, please let me know, I will not
take offense...

Thanks to all of you that have stepped up thus far,
we are doing the right thing!

Oh and by the way, if you go to
http://ipsdweb.ipsd.org/Subpage.aspx/OnDemandVideo
, go to the January 28 board meeting, open it, fast
forward to about the 1 hour mark, you can see Todd Andrews,
the spokesperson for NSFOC basically pleading to not
send the Tall Grass kids to WVHS because NVHS is
within walking distance... Never once does he
mention the new site being a safety hazard in his 3+ minute
plea!!!

By Anonymous on March 26, 2008 7:10 PM

I also really do hope that TG and WE also end up at WVHS (Aren't those PTA meetings going to be a lot of fun).
----------------------------------------------

Yes, those PTA meetings should be interesting. See the Sun story today about the crack house with prostitutes that was busted. 1000 feet from an elementary school. It wasnt near Fry or WE. It was a WVHS feeder school.

Given this news story, does anyone want to repoen the discusssion of why some people dont want to send their kids to WVHS? Despite how much you want it to be so, all things aren't equal in this world. Some are safer and better.

I see a lot of insults on this board related to where someone lives or what they believe. It would be refreshing for people to discuss the facts; and the different views on the facts:

1) Ref vote: one side says it's very wrong that people were voting for BB but it was not on the ballot, one side says it's alright that the sb marketed the site of bb and then built it somewhere else. I'd like to see a debate on that issue. It's really at the heart of why people are upset. Can anyone remember anytime the SB warned us that BB would not happen? Please, if someone who is support of the sb can illustrate that the SB warned us - then I think there would be merit to listen to the pro sb side. Right now it just seems like a handful of people who want the new school cause they won the lottery and the school is now near them?

2) Environment: let's keep this simple, is it clearly safe or "unknown" --- why would we allow any school children, rich, poor, middle class - they can live anywhere - why would we put kids on property that was "unknown" as to the level of risks....especially future risks. What is in the land may not come up as problems for years to come.

3) Cost. BB we'd spend a bit more for what we get. This is normal in business and government. You pay now or you pay later. Meaning, you buy BB you pay now, you buy Eola - we all pay later. Thus, for those of you against NFSOC - wake up and stop making it a personal thing, treat the issue as logical.

The anti fraud site guy has just him and a hanful of people. There's been no meeting, no rally...nothing; he just comes to the NCFOS meeting because he's lonely on the issue. He's from brookdale; and instead of playing the orange shirt game again, why not take the approach that you care about where your kids go to school and you do not want them along I88 at a old power dump with 40 years of hazards.

I'm starting to think maybe if we just give the cry babies their way, that being TG and WE maybe they will finally shut up. Fine give them their 3/4 built school that is $600,000 an acre. I'm just soooo sick of the complaining of how they (TG) voted based on boundaries and land and we don't want to go far to school and we want the new school, blah, blah, blah. I'm tired of the mostly TG attitude it's sickening. Do you honestly believe you were the reason for the 32 point turn around in the vote, I doubt it.

Build them their new high school and let's all get back to normal. Taking the T and G off of Tall Grass is so appropriate. Do TG residents take pride in how much they complain until they get their way? Oh no, you file lawsuits, I almost forgot.

Now it isn't about boundaries or land. Now you're trying to convince yourselves and everyone else in the districts you're fighting for a greater cause then just the high school where you want it. It's NOW about the "kids" right? You're soooo concerened about the district? So concerned you're suing for:

1. The school is on the BB property or no where.
2. To stall the school district.
3. If it isn't on the BB property you return all the money to the people in the IPSD even though we all voted for a 3rd high school.
4. To give the NSFOC back all your money when you sued all of us in IPSD 204. Plan on giving that back to your members should you ever see it?

Is this concerned about the kids? Yeah, your kids getting a new high school. It always has been and always will be. Can't wait until you have your 3/4 built high school and the rest of the IPSD votes down your referendum to complete your school or give you a swimming pool or football field. You'll probably complain all over again....oh yeah, and file another lawsuit.

I was at the NSFOC meeting last night and I am NOT a supporter of the NSFOC. No one tracked my license plate number and/or followed me home. More speculation and rumors stated by those that do not want a school and/or do not want a school in the north. Just like there have been many rumors started by those against the NSFOC. Even though I don't support the NSFOC I found all of their members to be very friendly and open and honest, imagine that!! I just see things differently but that's not a bad thing, is it?

Can we all just take a deep breath and calm down and see how things play out. The School Board has not released information and the NSFOC has no new information for their members. Obviously no one knows what the School Board plans to do next and as the NSFOC will tell you themselves, there is nothing they can do at this point to stop them. By both sides raising as many new and crazy issues just makes all of us look ridiculous.

I see people from the north pointing fingers at the majority of the members of the NSFOC as being residents of TG and WE. I think we'd all agree that is a fair statement. Sure they may have other members but it is a majority of TG and some WE residents and other residents from the district as well. At the same time, to keep pointing fingers at people in Brookdale and Stonebridge is wrong. There are many other neighborhoods in the north and trust me Brookdale and Stonebridge aren't the driving force just like the NSFOC would claim that TG is not the driving force of the NSFOC. Remember there are a also a lot of families that aren't effected by the 3rd high school and their children won't be affected. Those families may have taken a position or maybe they haven't.

My other observation is that neigher the NSFOC or the NSFOCfraud groups are in the majority. While the NSFOC encourages involvement their numbers are very low. On the flip side the NSFOCfraud website is more of just a place to go for informaiton and is reporting on it rather then sharing any new information. Remember all of us reading these blogs only make up a small part of this district.

Can well all as adults also stop digging up dirt and dragging people's names through the mud. Mr. Andrews has had his address posted (although I never did see that), Mr. Collins is being attacked, Dr. Daesshner, Mark Metzgerand numberous people. No matter what you believe none of those individuals (and many otherst) deserve to be attacked for what they believe is right. For you to personally attack them and say they are self serving or selfish or reckless or irresponsible is your own opinion, remember that.

Maybe if some of this ugliness would stop from both sides of the issue we could start to have some productive dialog. Although that is just my hope because when it comes down to it I know that certain people will not give up their positions no matter what and won't compromise. It's their way or no way at all. That above everything else is the saddest part regarding this issue. Please don't reply with what you feel is the saddest part of this issue, it's your opinion, and I'm sure if I asked someone else they would say something different. Please also don't reply to my post and say it was the School Boards fault or the NSFOC's fault, or BB fault, or the referendums fault, or anyones fault. I don't care who's fault you believe it is. Maybe instead of putting the blame on someone you can think about how you can be part of the solution. I hope one day we will all be able to move past this, but then again I doubt it.

Entitled Northsiders? Did someone really write that? Would that be the same Northsiders who built NVHS with no benefit of their students going to it? Would that be the same Northsiders who voted YES for the 3rd hs ref when it was slated to be at Brach Brodie? Is that the same group who willingly bussed some of their kids miles past the closest elementary school for a horrific bus ride for little kindergarteners with nary a word or lawsuit? Where is the entitlement in that?

Perhaps you are thinking of just one subdivision? Drive up and down Eola and you will see no entitlement - just a group of people who may not be thrilled with all decisions, but just process it and move on.

A friend of mine asked me an interesting question last night when I was explaining the controversy in our community over the safety concerns over the MV site.

If there were 3-10 sites available to build a new home on and one of them had 2 -30" and 1 -22" natural gas lines with over 700 psi running through them 4 feet under the house would you choose that site if others existed?

Hell no.

Well then why in the world would any sane person pick that site for a school with 3000 kids and 200 staff when there are other sites available?

I guess I do not understand the SBs decision now that these facts are out in the public. Seems that there were alternatives to Eola each with issues to resolve and this one was chosen because it had the best chance of opening in 2009.

I guess I don't buy that its worth the risk to get it open earlier.

Wait a year and find a safer location. Why risk it when our kids are involved? Put a storage facility on that land and move on.

to: Tall Grass and Proud of it

Not so quick on the uptake, eh? I already admitted I wrote the first post to help the action along a little. Do you actually READ the posts on this board ?

Besides....I did not use your psuedonym to post. In fact I dont even see a comment on this board from you....but maybe I just missed it.

MY psuedonym is "TG and Proud." And I am the person who Beverly Hills prayed for. Please dont try to hijack prayers that were meant for me (isn't that a typical TG thing to do).....because I really do need them. And since Beverly Hills is going to all the trouble to pray them, I think I should be entitled to recieve them.

But now I think I will start posting as "Nannuk of the Northside" and see how that works out! Stuff like:

"I am sick and tired of subsidizing schools for all you southerners with your huge houses built in corn fields. I have lived here for umpteen years and remember when the first kid sparked up a number behind WV at lunchtime....blah blah blah."

Apparently the Brookdale/North elitists were stalking people who attended the NSFOC meeting last night and took down license plate numbers.

If this is true and they use this information in any way - they'd better get ready to do some jail time for stalking.

What else could you expect from the entitled, elitist North/Brookdale gang!

to anonymous at 7:57. I am neutral in this and check this out because I find it entertaining but I really have to question you accusing the folks from the north who keep spewing ugliness...have you seen the NSFOC website? The website is the definition of spew.

Main Entry: 1spew
Function: verb
Pronunciation: 'spyü
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English spīwan; akin to Old High German spīwan to spit, Latin spuere, Greek ptyein
intransitive senses
1 : VOMIT
2 : to come forth in a flood or gush
3 : to ooze out as if under pressure : EXUDE
transitive senses
1 : VOMIT
2 : to send or cast forth with vigor or violence or in great quantity -- often used with out

to anonymous at 7:57. I am neutral in this and check this out because I find it entertaining but I really have to question you accusing the folks from the north who keep spewing ugliness...have you seen the NSFOC website?

Say what? on March 26, 2008 5:42 PM

Well, what you stated is not correct. IEPA does get involved prior to a close on a property. Also, just so you know if a person ever becomes sick due to contaminated land they can go back several owners not just the current owner. Also, NSFOC claims it "MAYBE" contaminated they just want proof it is safe. Thanks.

By the way, did you call IEPA? Just curious.

What the heck? This thread is supposed to be about whether or not the new HS will open on time!

Can't any of you over-opinionated, self-proclaimed experts, and well rounded know-it-all's stay on topic for more than one post?

If Naperville is a model of anything is sure is a fantastic example of a community where a lot of people have more money than brains.

Those of you who can't seem to contain your irrational desire to go off on tangents and other ill-conceived rants, please refrain from clicking on the "Submit" button until you have confirmed that you are leaving a comment that is even remotely related to the thread's listed topic.

Those of you who so far have just been bitching and whining... yes, you know who you are! Surely you have more to offer to the discussion than just this?

I implore everyone to let the school board do their job and finalize their due process in making sure the Eola land is safe and forge forward with the 3rd high school. Please set your own needs/wants aside - this is costing us all in more ways than just financial. I live in the south and have nothing to gain for my children as far as boundaries.

These posts sound like school children on the playground....did you know that my brothers friends next door neighbor's uncle.......

For anything to be credible I want to hear it straight from the horses mouth with their name posted. Anything other than that is nothing but a bunch of crap coming from people with to much on their hands.

Not necessary to post under the guise of TG WE or NSFOC as you're rants are public with your outright lies and propoganda you've passed out in those (possibly illegal) fliers. Oh, and of course your website. And I forgot one more thing - the wonderful footage we have of Todd A stating the true reasons for his opposing Metea.

"This just gets better and better and (except just had a transferee from our company tell me he is no longer looking in Naperville (as a whole) because of the school mess (does not know there are 2 districts)."

Well, there you go NSFOC folks, property values going down because of the lawsuit (of course subsequent posts will blame the school board, but hey, a lawsuit is a lawsuit folks). Self fulfilling prophecy here.

Well done, NSFOC.

ANONYMOUS 5:11- 204 one of the best school districts in the nation? LOL That is a hot one. You must listen to the realitors. 204 doesn't come close to the districts on the North Shore. We don't have th money they do and they have SB members that are run professionally and not the clowns we have to deal with.
This whole mess has really worn me our. I don't care where my kid goes just so long we have the new HS. I just hope Tall Grass loses out in the end. The don't deserve anything considering what they have put us through.

To Tall Grass and Proud of it 4:54pm

The post was to TG and Proud 10:`12am. If you read their posting you'll understand why I wrote that response. Keep up the good work you do like some many others in Tall Grass.

Is NSFOCfraud going to now post the names of whoever had a car in the VFW parking lot last night.

This just gets better and better and (except just had a transferee from our company tell me he is no longer looking in Naperville (as a whole) because of the school mess (does not know there are 2 districts).

This is getting out of hand and the folks from the North who keep spewing the ugliness on this site should be ashamed of themselves.

Run Forest Run....time to relax and take a breather. I checked outside the sky is not falling.

I think I'm going to buy stock in the makers of anti-anxiety drugs. It's clear a lot of you need it. And it's also clear that many of you need to spend more time doing something else than bullying each other on this site.

Do you see that NSFOC stole that poor puppy???

Looks like it is back to WVHS for Brookdale and Stonebridge.

I also really do hope that TG and WE also end up at WVHS (Aren't those PTA meetings going to be a lot of fun).

I know that many post anonymously and now I guess I know why. I tried to use a pseudonym of "Tall Grass and Proud of It" but unfortunately it has been used by others here to post. For what it's worth, I've posted only my original comment and then one follow-up in which I thanked Beverly Hills for my prayer. The other comments were NOT mine. I guess I'll now have to post as "anonymous" as so many others do.

Did anyone ever stop to think that someone might actually be posting inaccurate information under the guise of "NSFOC" "TG" "WE" "Brookdale", etc. just to get others riled up? You'd like to think not but then again, I heard about someone chasing license plates at the NSFOC meeting last night. That's just pathetic! I guess it just shows you the lengths that people go to get their way. SAD.

Yes....please call IPEA and see if Midwest Gen has contacted them since they are the ones that own the land.

The search and FOIA's are on the parcel of land....We have also requested any contacts from Midwest Gen, the District OR anyone else. Nothing at all on the land since 2006 (for some reason it is listed as being in Eola not Aurora so you know to ask for both).

Please call if you do not believe me....Please! This is important and I am tired of the bull going on. There is a reason no Phase II has been released (can not fence off the entire school site) and this District is throwing away the promise that we voted for of a 3d school....which is no dragging on into a 3d year (which ticks me off!).

Call....please...each and every one of you. This is not right and it is time to stop blindly following the folks up North who feel it is finally pay back for what they think they have gone through.

Use your minds and open your eyes.

Call the IPEA.......They need permission to release the Phase II....sure, but going on three weeks (why if everything is so great would anyone hold back permission????).

Also, would NOT the confidentialty agreement preclude Dr. D from telling the NSFOCfraud lemings that Midwest Gen is getting cold feet (I guess we now know what they were all talking about at the City Counsel meeting last night).

Dr. D...a little suspicious isn't it...I mean Good Night!

Looks to me like the Sun is doing the right thing. Running a survey on DO WE NEED A NEW SCHOOL.
The recession is just starting in Chicagoland as per the news this morning. House values will plumet, so will house sales.
However, foreclosures in pricey areas like Naperville will increase.
Do we really need a new school for all the people that are going to move here? With alot of foreclosures on the horizon school attendance may drop drastically. Do we really need these additional costs?
THINK IT THROUGH

to anonymous at 5:11

What do you mean it isn't any of WE/TG concern? We LIVE in 204!! We are subject to the tax increases! We are subject to the same mismanagement and trickery by the SB that you are being subjected to! We will be affected by the BB payout the same way you will, we will be affected by the millions that it will cost to clean up the waste dump the SB wants to build the school on, we bill be affected by the lawsuits when YOUR kids and school teachers become ill! What rock did you crawl out from under? I am so thankful my kids are going to WV! I would move if my kids were assigned to MV -- I am concerned about their health and well being, not reckless, just to say we have a 3rd HS -- big deal! Grow up and get real and protect your kids. Look at the open ended BB costs, look at the fact that we have no enviromental reports yet, look at the fact that the super was run out of town in his last job for just this very stuff -- arrogant disregard for the community -- he is a power monger determined to get his way at all costs. WE & TG are very much involved and should be involved. The school board hasn't communicated anything except platitudes. We are not putting ourselves in a bad legal position -- you and the SB are -- it is INSANE!

To: Anonymous on March 26, 2008 5:33 PM

The school district DOESN'T OWN the Eola property. MWGen and AME do, which is why they don't have any record of the SD calling. Duh!!!

Check to see if MWGEn or AME have called the IEPA.

Typical NSFOC babble. Yet they claim to have the "facts".

Let's make a list:

-SENATOR Linda Holmes....check
-Tim Waldorf......check
-The approximately 4,000 people that live in Tallgrass....check
-The approximately 3,000 people who live in White Eagle...check
-The executives at Midwest Gen who now do not want to sell this land for a school........check
-The 3,000 people registered at NSFOC.....check
-The 400 plus people who have now donated to NSFOC.....check
-The Jefferson County Teachers Union (who kicked Dr. D out)....check
-IPEA who have no record of a request from 204.......check
-The thousands of 204 residents that are now questioning what the heck is going on....check

Anyone else we should be labeling as unethical crooks and/or elitist radicals (please tell me who we are missing)?

NSFOCfraud.org....The silent maj....hello...anybody else out there...I ordered 30 more white shirtsssss....helloooo? Dr. Daeschner???? Mark???? Helloooooo?

Anonymous 5:11... "This is one of the best school districts in the nation."

Nice that you want to believe that statement. There simply isn't any objective proof to support your statement though. The last time any nationwide rankings of schools was published D204 was no where near the top, not for the nation and not for Illinois for that matter. In fact D203 scored higher than D204, not that they did all that great from a national perspective either.

There are thousands of school districts in the US and taxpayers in every single one of them would also like to believe their school district is one of the best in the nation. We do have some great and dedicated teachers who could do wonders for raising our national standards. The biggest obstacle they consistently run into is the D204 Administration and the SB.

Until something changes with the SB and the Administration we will have to be comfortable knowing that are kids are getting a better than average education.

This is one of the best school districts in the nation. We have the honor of being rated as the #1 place to raise a family, which we have all attributed to that rating. Unfortunately, Tall Grass was not here - fully at the time - of the Money Magazine rankings, so we might not be as lucky next time. The only parents that have a right at all to raise any concern (certainly legally) over the Environmental issues of the Eola site are the parents with kids slotted for that school. The SB has been communicating their steps to show due diligence here and we are comfortable with their reports. TG and WE - Please know that you're putting yourself in bad legal position as it is not your right to stop this from happening. It's time for everyone to go back to their own corners. Again, their are other options for your children if Waubonsie is that bad for you (which it shouldn't be) - please don't move up north as we've avoided you all for a reason - and it's not the numbers...

Why aren't there any investigative reporters digging into these questions for answers? Why are they just doing articles of what people tell them (from both sides)? Isn't that what "good" journalism is all about? I know this is a political hot button, but come on - how about a little back bone? Shouldn't we be begging some "good" investigative reporters to dig deep into these questions for the sake of the public? Who can we trust at this point? Most of us just want to hear the truth from BOTH sides of this mess, we want are tax dollars being used wisely and most of all safely for our children. Someone do the right thing out there! (if that's even possible at this point)
tip: start with the IEPA................

Call the IEPA and see if midwest generation has contacted them since they are the ones that actually own the land!

Is Linda Holmes in bed with Rezko? Sorry but I do not know why we would put a HS on land that is bordered on 1 side by another school district. Besides, the lawsuit would prevent the purchase of Macon in the same way it is trying to prevent Eola.

It looks like it is time to have Linda Holmes finances checked.

By Beverly Hills on March 26, 2008 10:56 AM
To TG and Proud

You really want us to believe you live in Tall Grass NOT!!! Nice try to smear the good reputations of good people. If you have this much time on your hands why don't you volunteer at a shelter. I feel sorry for people like you who have to go so low to feel better about themselves. I'll say a prayer for you I think you need it.
____________________________________________________________________

How dare you make such a comment! I 100% stand behind what I wrote and I don't need you to call me out. Do you honestly think that I'd make this up! Yes, I do live in Tall Grass and I definitely do what I say I do (and I do volunteer once in awhile at a shelter and even collect massive gifts for kids at Christmas through Families Helping Families). Thanks for the prayer though, I appreciate it!

It might be open on time w/o the interence of the meddling NSFOC idiots.

PS: it will never be on the MACOM site either. There's RR tracks, Power Lines and Electric substations to deal with there too. Plus, Do you really need two schools on (or 1 block from) 95th street??

Hey Anonymous 3:39

I have a great idea! How about a land swap? The southern part of of the church land on Eola for the 25 acres of BB we already own? Then no midwest gen purchase necessary, and the school is another quarter mile further from the power lines!

You could sell tickets to hear the squealing over at NSFOC if that happened!

I also called the IEPA and guess what...NO RECORD of any contact by the District.

I think they are trying to set up AMES to get them to sell the entire church land to the District and move the flock elsewhere. They have no intention of moving forward with Midwest Gen and this is just another sham. No one that these folks are not willing to steamroll over in the name of "progress".

Will MV open on time? Let me bore you with a little D204 history:

WV construction started in the spring of '73 and did not open until fall '75. Cost was $8 million and the school had less than 300 students the first semester. The gym didn't open until May '76 and the pool over a year later in Oct '76 This project was plagued throughout by construction delays. As a brand new district at the time it did however need to meet a state mandate to have an operational h.s. within 2 years of creating the district. So come hell or high water the building was opened. We've paid the price with this building ever since.

Even a school as small as the original WV building took over 18 months to construct just the basics... more time when the gym and pool are considered.

Back in the late '80 and early '90 the SB and administration repeatedly told voters that we would NEVER, EVER need a third h.s. All of that PROOF was used to justify the need for NV back in the mid '90's and get that referendum passed. This same SB told us then that WV would peak at an enrollment of 4,450 in '07 and NW would peak at 4,800 in '08. Both the Sun and the Daily Herald reported these enrollment projection claims back then.

The land for NV was purchased in '94 followed by construction which finished just in time to open for the '97-'98 school year. NV cost us $62 million just 10 years ago... anyone want to calculate this value in today's dollars?

Way back around '72 or '73 when the District was formed one of the assets that was conveyed to D204 was the high school land site that had been purchased by the now defunct D107. This high school land site was located at 87th and Modaff Road. Does anyone know or remember what happened to this parcel of land? For the life of me I can't remember ever hearing anything more about it. Is it possible our SD204 Administration simply forgot they own this land?

To By that's strange on:

I disagree with you. I do not believe that the majority of parents in IPSD are happy with the way things are going currently. I think that you are in the minority. A lot of people just do not have the time to deal with these issues and attend all of the meetings, but I am yet to hear from a happy parent outside of these blogs. I have heard from people up north and south and they are not happy campers. I would love to see all of this go back on the table, I think you would be very surprised at the outcome. From what I can see is that their are a minority of people who really want this school to happen no matter what the cost. I am not sure who is being selfish. I see mudslinging mainly directed at people in the south. Funny, but I have not seen it directed back. I will agree with you that most people involved in the NSFOC have agendas, but I also feel that the reverse (NSFOCFraud) is true as well. Everyone is looking out for themselves. No one is going to put their kids second to others. I don't care what you say, I just do not buy that.

From Dr. D's friends up North...

Looks like the Phase II is a problem after all...
Hi-

....

>From what I was told, Midwest Gen is getting
nervous about the bad press from the radicals in the
south and we need to reassure them, that this is a
good thing for our district. I heard that they will
be meeting around 1:00/2:00 this afternoon, with Dr,
Daeschner.... Thanks!

Laura

Lisa

Also, contact Randy Hultgren, our State Senator, for
him to jump on board to support this transaction!!!
Rumor has it that Senator Linda Holmes is supporting
the NSFOC (she is their district Senator) and trying
to strong arm Midwest Gen to not doing deal... I did
some digging on her And 1) one of her contributors is
Macom Properties who was trying to sell the land
parcel to IPSD in far south and 2) she lives in
Plainfield! Politics at it's best!!!

Regards,

Lisa

People in the North side feel entitled to get a new high school even though they voted down the referendum for the 3rd high school because they control the school board.

These elitists want to get their kids out of WVHS and that is the sole reason they are pushing this. Their statements clearly indicate that they feel like they have "put up with" WVHS and now they feel entitled to a new school.

Fine - Pay for it yourselves.

You want to locate it on a toxic waste dump - terrible that you would do that to your children - but fine, take the liability as well. If the district ever gets sued then only the North and people attending Metea will pay any damages.

Now listen to the North siders whine....

The 3rd high school will open the same year (2011) enrollment peaks and then starts to decline. The 3rd high school is a massive waste of taxpayer money and will never be needed.

Just keep the WV freshman campus open and cancel this boondoggle high school and get a couple more portable classrooms for the middle school level if need be.

These idiots are 204 could never make it in the private sector where you have to answer to upper management and shareholders. At district 204, they answer to and listen to no one. In the real world, they all would have been fired by now and replaced with competent people.

At 204, it is all about some vision of a legacy they have for themselves.

Can anyone out there please repost the video of the School Board hearing when Todd Andrews was begging for his kids not to go to Waubonsie?

Of course it won't open "on time", nothing district 204 has ever said about the 3rd high school has been the truth.

The 3rd high school will never be needed now that we have declining enrollment.

The 3rd high school is only about some legacy 204 officials want for themselves.

2009 is looking less and less likely.

I never took that date seriously anyway. A 2009 opening at Eola always just seemed like an excuse to eliminate Macom.

To: No Glee for Me

That's strange, every time I've written the school board or sent them an email I've heard back from them. Maybe it's in the way you're addressing them, much like you address the people that disagree with you. By the way, which is the majority of the IPSD. I've written both MM and Dr.D and have heard back from them in the past.

It's a shame that you are getting your information from an organization of unhappy parents that didn't get their way and are suing the IPSD (you), and considering their information fact. Maybe you should abandon ship because the majority of parents in this district are happy parents that are proud of their school district and the education their children are receiving.

By Anonymous on March 26, 2008 12:01 AM
To By No Glee for Me - please - do you really think we beleive you're not NSFOC....
-------------------------------------------------------------
I am not NSFOC, I live in the Watts area and have basically given up on this dysfunctional district. That's how out of touch many of you are that think this is only a TG/WE problem. There are many people out there that are unhappy with the decisions of the SB, but have not joined NSFOC. I have written letters to the SB that do not get answered. Unfortunately, NSFOC is providing more information than the SB. I have an eighth grader so I don't have time to ride out the storm. I don't want to move but think it's time to abandon ship.

I called the IEPA and was told that the school board NEVER called them about the land at Eola. What happens now? How do we know if it is safe? Answers. Thanks!!

Suzie,

You states:I do not understand why some of you are not concerned about the safety of this new site. Are you that naive to believe everything that you read.

I am a mild mannered parent, if you mean do not get caught up in all of the rhetoric on this blog and then rant, rave and insult.

I am concerned. My question back to you is why would a concerned parent/citizen use a Blog filled with lies and emotional rants to address those saftey concerns? Seems to me your efforts is better spent getting the facts for yourself.

Do I believe everything I read? No. And I truely think that no believes everything that they read or hear. However, I do believe most people everything they read if it supports their cause. You seems to be implying that we should trust the SB. Maybe. Maybe not. However, Suzie, have you taken the personal time to get the facts regarding EMF and other issues being raised. Do not take NSFOC opinion, SB, your neighbor, a friend of a friend, etc. opinions.

Suzie, When I vote or sign a contract I DO believe everything I read on a ballot or contract. Do not take my word or anyone else word for the wording on the ballot. Go and do the research yourself.

You also mentioned: Have you heard of Amoco? Do you not remember the cancer cluster?
Yes, I remember very well. Isn't the facility still there? Was AMOCO forced to stop (or voluntarily stopped) doing the research that was being done? Isn't there also a concern about some the Dupage County Buildings also causing health issue. However, Judges and DuPage county constitents are still doing business there.

Suzie, and everyone else, make a list of the your concerns and then addressed both, reasons that support your beliefs and reason that debunk your beliefs. Play devil's advocate.

I believe you will then step back from all of the speculation and either confirm your beliefs or be more rational about this situation.

(don't have time to proof read all that I typed(pecked) so i'll ignore all insults pertaining to grammar/spellings, etc)

Anthony

Beverly Hills

Ouch! You nailed me!

I am not even involved......but hey.....I was just trying to keep the good times rolling on these boards.

But is my post really so much different from those calling names? The Pro group calling out "snot-nosed, booger eating little brats from TG" ? Or the Anti group shouting about "self-serving, back-stabbing, selfish northerners, sending their kids to school on a toxic waste dump"?

Maybe so. I will try to be more subtle next time.

I will, however, take exception to one of your comments. The residents of TG are undoubtedly good people, but based on my reading of these boards, they sure dont have a good reputation!

I appologize if I smeared them.

Someone under the moniker Southsider has a comment that has appeared twice. That comment notes that the 3rd HS is needed because Neuqua is so overcrowded. I just want to make a quick clarification.

Neuqua currently has 4491 students with a stated capacity of 4200. That works out to 1123 per grade. The middle schools that presently feed Neuqua have an average of 1258 per grade, so Neuqua's enrollment will go up for the next three years. However, the average per grade enrollment of the elementaries that feed Neuqua are 1119 per grade, so by the time you get to 2013, Neuqua will not be any more crowded than it is now.

You may think that removing White Eagle and Tall Grass will make Neuqua suddenly less crowded. I have news for you, removing those two subdivisions from Neuqua only reduces class size by 235 student. Avg class size at Neuqua will go from 1123 now to 1023 in 2012. Is that the crowding relief you voted for? My guess is that you thought IPSD204 was giving you crowding relief at NVHS so that your daughter can make the play and your son can be on the team. What this board is really doing with your yes vote (and mine) is rebuilding Waubonsie so the North side can have a new HS and they can then close WV in 10-15 years after the enrollment bubble has passed through the system. That is the real reason the Eola site was chosen over the Macom site.

To TG and Proud

You really want us to believe you live in Tall Grass NOT!!! Nice try to smear the good reputations of good people. If you have this much time on your hands why don't you volunteer at a shelter. I feel sorry for people like you who have to go so low to feel better about themselves. I'll say a prayer for you I think you need it.

To all the mild manner parents,

I do not understand why some of you are not concerned about the safety of this new site. Are you that naive to believe everything that you read. I do not trust the school board members or the administration based on their track record. I know that they are volunteers but I am not sure they have all their facts straight. How can I beleive them after all the lies and deception. I am okay if my kids go to WVHS or NVHS, but I would not want them to go to MVHS on the site that is currently picked. How do you all know that kids will not get sick? Have you heard of Amoco? Do you not remember the cancer cluster. I know someone who was affected and I do no wish that on anyone. Really think about what you are supporting. You say that people who do not have kids going to MVHS should not be concerned, well that is where you are very wrong. I bet you all would be the first to sue if this happened to your little darlings. Guess who picks up that tab. We all do. Most importantly, I would not want anyone's children to get sick. We should all be asking hard questions to our school board and administrators.
I do not understand the name calling and insults that I have been reading. It makes you sound very uneducated and not very mild mannered. The best was someone posting directions to a person from Tall Grass's house. That person has young children. I think that went a little too far. If people in Tall Grass live by power lines that is their choice. Sending kids to a school by power lines is another story. I do not live by power lines, again, a choice, I would not want my kids to spend their entire day in a school built by power lines. The funny thing is, I am yet to see a person from NSFOC, TG or WE because those are the groups that have been insulted, throw insults back at the mild mannered parents or put down WVHS. The only thing I have seen is the mild mannered parents saying that people are insulting WVHS, but I am yet to see a post backing that up. If there was one please post it. I looked in the archives and could not find one either. All I see are insults coming from the North. Shame on the mild mannered parents.

I do not want to hear about your so called "facts." "Facts" can be manipulated.

Everything I need to know I can see at the end of my nose. And what I know is that I can SEE NEQUA FROM WHERE I LIVE. Fair is fair and I want my kids to go there. I have a bridge being built to prove it.

I have a more expensive house and pay more taxes than most people who go to WV. So I have more right to choose my school. If you pay more, you should get more. That is the way our system works. If you dont like it MOVE! Preferably to some communist country where the value of reward for hard work and financial success is not accepted.

I make a reservation at Club Med and pay the price, I have a right to be upset if I end up at the Red Roof Inn. Who can argue that?

Just TRY to tell the people in Kinloch they are going to WV and see how far you get! HA!

I am sorry (NOT) if you boo-hoo people are unhappy about it. But I plan to keep fighting for what I want.....what I PAID for!

To George Fox on March 25, 2008 6:09 PM :

But you've hardly stated the "whole truth" in your reply either, have you?

"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!"

If you know the truth, tell us. You aren't showing any evidence to contradict the school board.

"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."

The boundary recommendation packet does NOT state the park district is an 'obstacle'. It only notes the cost is estimated due to the unknown cost of the land swap with the Park District". That clearly indicates the Board does not consider this an obstacle. As for the "whole truth", why not also mention the owner with life estate rights and ComEd, who also owns part of the property?

"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. "

Do you have evidence? Or just conjecture? It isn't 'truth' just because you state some numbers.

"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?"

Whole Truth? "somewhere between a probability and a certainty for exposure" is the full quote being bandied about. There's a big difference between that and "a certainty for radioactive exposure". And no one is saying it is still not between a probability and certainty, but one also has to consider the peaker plant is being demolished, while it was still viable in 2006.

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.

The school board indicated the Park District WOULD maintain the bridge, but as a secondary route. In interest of providing the whole truth, it is true the park district did say they would consider making this a priority one route if the school district asked if it were going to be used as a primary walking route.

"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. "

I agree with you here. D204 probably can afford the BB site.

"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."

District 204 employs lobbyists on a wide range of issues. These costs are all lumped in together but this is public information. If you don't have it, sue under FOIA.

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

But that's not what the lawsuit says. The lawsuit is not asking for environmental tests or amounts paid to lobbyists. It is saying spend whatever amount is necessary to buy BB and build a high school there or else.

By Anonymous on March 25, 2008 5:38 PM
Moderator Jim..

Since you are looking for investigative stories, has the Sun called Illinois EPA to see what its involvement has been in regards to the studies that the District has done to date. Can you confirm whether the District has represented that the Illinois EPA has been involved?

I have FOIA's as well as an email from Illinois EPA that indicates that they have had no involvement whatsoever, nor have they received any requests to become involved?

If you are interested, tell me where I can fax this information and I will be glad to.

_____________________________________

This was posted on one of the other blogs. I sure hope the Sun looks into this.

George Fox on March 25, 2008 6:09 PM

"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."

I agree with you, Great information by the way. I want the WHOLE truth too.

While I do not agree with every decision the school board has made, I do believe they have done the absolute best they could with the information they had at the time.
These people are only trying to give the district what we all desperately need....a third high school. They are not going through this process "for fun" and the toll it has taken on their personal lives must be extremely difficult. I think the folks at NSFOC really have only had a taste of what this kind of stress is....they may have had a sampling in the past few weeks but try a few years like the SB members have endured!

Hindsight is always 20-20 and there will always be people quick to point out "they should have done this" or "they could have done that" after the fact. Sometimes you have to make tough decisions, go with it and move on. Otherwise it just becomes "analysis paralysis" and absolutely NOTHING would ever get accomplished by second guessing every painful step.I've been teaching my kids this since they were little. I think it applies to all of us.

It is time to move forward. Get the third high school built and ready for the kids that desperately need it. My kids are old enough that they will be fine regardless of what happens but there are many more kids coming up in this community that will be greatly disadvantaged if our schools are allowed to become increasingly overcrowded.This district will not build on an unsafe sight. Period.

Quite frankly, this site will have been under more scrutiny and testing than probably any other site in the area.Goodness knows what we'd find if we put other area schools or even our homes under the same rigorous controls and sampling!

For the sake of our children, please allow the process to work itself out,stop pointing fingers and reliving how you would have done it better and let's MOVE FORWARD as a unified district. Thank You.

So now we're back talking about Macom?

Sorry, the school board can't build a school at Macom. There was a referendum in 2006 and apparently, since the school board said the school would be at Brach-Brodie, it has to be built there. Some residents are suing over that.

How is Naperville Schools For Our Children going to spin being okay with the Board choosing Macom as replacement for BB?

To Glee Club on March 25, 2008 1:52 PM

"Another word comes to mind Mark...NAUSIA. "

If your tell me your child doesn't go to Neuqua. If he does, could you ask him how to spell NAUSEA?

To I Think They are Them on March 25, 2008 2:48 PM:

MWGEN has a lot to gain as well in not releasing the results.

a) assume there are some contaminants on the property.
b) assume MWGEN knows they will be responsible for the clean-up prior to sale.

If the school board releases the Phase II results AND ends up not buying the land because they can't reach agreement with MWGEN over the clean-up, then MWGEN is faced with holding land that has been publicly exposed as contaminated. Making it very hard for them to sell it to someone else.

I am wondering if there is some way that all the intellects who are members of NSFOC can be made to pay all those District 204 legal fees and other costs related to this group's frivilous law suit.

After reading many of the blogs and letters to editor, I conclude that NSFOC supporters primarily fall into three groups:

1. Those with sour grapes mentality who voted NO in the last referendum and now want to negate all the YES votes cast by 58 percent of those who bothered to vote. You voted No because you don't think a third high school is needed -- which is ridiculous (just ask any student or parent of such with kids at Waubonsie or Neuqua).

2. Those who are unhappy with the School Board's boundary decisions -- as if anyone wants to move -- even though everyone knows that at least 1/3 of our high-school students HAVE to go to the new high school in order to relieve the overcrowding. Don't you folks realize that if all of you who are now unhappy with the current boundary decisions were accommodated, a different group of residents would start throwing tantrums (setting great examples for their kids) because now their kids would have to go a high school that is not their first choice.

3. Those who think the Board has deceived them and that the third high school should be built on the BB site, regardless of the surprising and ridiculous but binding price set by the jury. Do you really think the Board should spend money they don't have -- and which definitely would violate the terms of the last referendum -- just so your kid can go to the school of your choice?

Fortunately, as shown by the recent Sun poll, a substantial majority of District residents do not agree with NSFOC efforts (the lawsuit, and other fear-based tactics) that are wasting time and taxpayers' money.

We have one of the best school districts in Illinois, if not the nation, because the first priority of the Board, administration and teachers has always been to provide Dist. 204 students with the best possible education. I continue to put my faith in them and those parents and residents who understand how difficult that task can be -- when faced with the emotional response of people who are mad primarily because they aren't getting their way.

For all those who attend Neuqua currently and will continue at Neuqua with the new boundaries. Please take a moment to read the following post. You will see how important it is to move forward with the 3rd high school and the NSFOC is trying to stall this for their own personal gain. You sould be aware of what they are attempting (most likely unsuccessfully) to do is stall the construction date - this will affect your children with an overcrowded school:
By South Sider on March 25, 2008 10:02 AM
I commend the Board for trying to get tis building completed and rectify the horrible over crowding situation that is effecting my children's high school educatin and experience. I have a child that attends Nequa and another who will be a freshman next year. I can tell you from the experience my daughter is having that it is not an ideal situation. The halls are over crowded, she has to walk outside in order to get her classes on time, she has to eat her lunch on the floor, and she has to share a locker. These are not the conditions I would like to see my son have to deal with his high school years.

As for the planning of the new High School, there has been ample time to for the designers to address the all of the issues a previous poster asked. The design is the same as it would have been on BB land.

As for everyone's concern regarding the power lines that are at the edge of the property, I think it it really grasping at straws. I have a Masters degree in Electrical Engineering and have looked at a great many of the studies concerning power lines and their link to cancer. There are as many, if not more studies that find there is no link than there are studies that say there MIGHT be a slight risk. With the studies that say there might be a slight risk, the power lines were MUCH closer to the test subjects and the amount of power the test subject were subject to was much higher. So please, enough with the power line scare.

I agree the land should be cleaned up before the school utilizes the land. But from everything I have read and know about Peaker Power plants, there are no serious poisons associated with them. Diesel Fuel and anti freeze are the worse chemicals typically used. I would venture to guess that most of the people that are concerned about these chemicals being on the land have simiiar or possibly even worse chemicals in their own garage, I know I do.

The bottom line is, as a district we voted and agreed a third high school was needed, and it is. The school board is not going to move any dirt until the final environmental tests are released, and there has been more than enough time to do a proper design and review of the building. Let's get light this candle.

OK everyone - the NSFOC's latest grasp at a straw: They are referring to the north side as elitists - an attempt to turn the tables. So sorry, we have a proven track record of strong character up here, evidenced by the fact that we have opened our checkbooks not once but twice to build them new high schools (even though the BB didn't work out, we were still supporting it until it went off the financial charts). Oh, and the best yet is choose the Maccom site - oh, and if the North fights this we'll throw out the entitlement card. NSFOC, go home, enjoy your families and get used to WVHS - because it's the people inside the building that matter.

By Orange Crusader - Thank you again for being so honest with your rants - your latest post addressing those in the north: "The south will rise again.........and then the boundaries will change - hope you like WVHS.... wow - that says it all. I think we all know where entitlist attitudes will bring you - to irrational posts like this. Hey, but at least your being honest - this should be the
tag line of the NSFOC...

To By No Glee for Me - please - do you really think we beleive you're not NSFOC....

Got this sent to me. Looks like the propaganda machine is in full force from Aurora..... I'm assuming it will be accompanied by a glowing review tomorrow of overwhelming support.

Let's see, Stuff the Sun Poll, check. Stuff the Annexation hearing. Check. Hide the Phase I / II results. Check. Full steam ahead!

===================================================================

From: LDELMORE@aol.com [mailto:LDELMORE@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 4:22 PM
To:
Subject: Re: March 25 City Council Meeting - Please attend

We do need individuals to sign up to speak tonight in favor of the Metea school site.
If you are you planning to attend tonight, please contact the city clerk's office ASAP to get on the speakers list. Telephone Number 844-3615!

Lynda D. Elmore
Alderman, Ward 10
City of Aurora
Phone: (630) 898-0403
Email: LDElmore@aol.com

PS: There's power lines running through MACOM as well.

I can see why this is so much more desireable than Eola - and safer too.

To 204 ATM on 3/25 at 10:18 AM--I read that the SB has to offer to sell the BB land they now own back to BB for the price they paid for it in 2005. I can't imagine why BB would refuse to buy it back from the SB--it's worth more now than it was in '05.

Really? I should get a grip? That's laughable. How about we have the Sun take a poll to prove to you that the NSFOC needs to get a grip. I will be at the meeting tonight just to see what latest way the NSFOC will try to spin NOT building a high school or only to build it if it is on the BB property.

Time is ticking NSFOC you're running out of ideas.

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.

By NSFOC MEETING UPDATE FOR TONIGHT on March 25, 2008 5:24 PM

"WARNING FOR THOSE NSFOC MEMBERS THAT WILL BE ATTENDING TONIGHTS MEETING. YOU WILL MOST LIKELY HAVE TO DRIVE FARTHER THEN YOU WOULD IF YOUR CHILDREN ATTENDED WVHS."
___________________________________________________

OMG!! Get a grip!

Yes, there will be a meeting tonight folks. Please see the ad in the naperville sun. Those of you who would like to attend please come and ask questions and they will try their best to answer them and if they can't they will find the answer. NSFOC is not hiding anything and I think this meeting tonight proves it.

By the way I believe Mr. Collins will be present as well to answer questions.

There is much discussion about the safety issues and environmental issues putting our young people at risk at the EOLA site, but has anyone considered the danger that we are putting these young people in by boundaries requiring them to drive great distances through crowded rush hour traffic to a far off new school? The boundaries do not put high school students safety first.

By 204 on March 25, 2008 5:08 PM
to: By Logical Site on March 25, 2008 2:08 PM

MACOM site? Get serious. That's not going to happen.

What about the RR tracks and the Electric substation at the MACOM site. Why are they concerns at EOLA and not the MACOM site? Self-serving reasons I'm guessing.

Click on this link below. Scroll to the left until you get to 95th and 248th ave. See the RR tracks and the Electric Substation!!!! The electric substation is the LARGE tan-colored square next to the RR tracks.

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/3995+W+95th+St+Naperville+IL+60564-4615/#a/maps/l::3995+W+95th+St:Naperville:IL:60564-4615:US:41.709779:-88.207478:address:Will+County/m:hyb:12:41.709779:-88.207478:0::/io:0:::::f:EN:M:/e
_______________________

From what I'm hearing from a great number of posts is that there should be no concern with EMF.

Yet, for those that are concerned, I've seen the data on EMF for the Macom site and the same study on Eola and Molitor.

According to the data, the Macom site has much lower readings.

Thanks for the map, I've seen both sites.

WARNING FOR THOSE NSFOC MEMBERS THAT WILL BE ATTENDING TONIGHTS MEETING. YOU WILL MOST LIKELY HAVE TO DRIVE FARTHER THEN YOU WOULD IF YOUR CHILDREN ATTENDED WVHS. YOU MIGHT HAVE TO CROSS RAILROAD TRACKS DEPENDING ON THE ROUTE YOU DRIVE. YOU WILL ENCOUNTER CONSTRUCTION IN DOWNTOWN NAPERVILLE, AGAIN DEPENDING ON THE ROUTE YOU DRIVE. YOU MIGHT RUN INTO TRAFFIC THAT COULD SIGNIFICANTLY DELAY YOU.

JUST THOUGHT I'D WARN YOU SINCE I KNOW TRAVELING FARTHER THEN YOU WANT TO IS AN ISSUE FOR THE MAJORITY OF YOU. WELL, UNLESS IT BENEFITS YOU, THEN OF COURSE YOU'D DO ANYTHING EVEN DRIVE OVER 6 MILES AND DONATE MONEY.

KEEP IN MIND THE NSFOC LAWSUIT SAYS BB PROPERTY OR NOTHING. IT DOESN'T EVEN PROTECT YOU FROM NEW BOUNDARIES SHOULD WE ALL HAVE TO BE CROWDED INTO 2 HIGH SCHOOLS.

BRING YOUR CHECKBOOK AND/OR CREDIT CARD. REMEMBER WE'RE NOT YET NON-PROFIT AND THERE ARE PEOPLE WATCHING US. OH, AND YOU WON'T BE GETTING A REFUND SHOULD OUR LAWSUIT FAIL, WHICH ACCORDING TO OUR ATTORNEY IS NOT A "SLAM DUNK". HE LOVES OUR MONEY JUST THE SAME THOUGH, AND WE LOVE HIM.

Hey Orange, trust me Brookdale doesn't care if their kids to to WV or MV. It is those of the NSFOC as evidenced by their own lawsuit that care where their kids go to school (NVHS or MVHS on the BB property or nothing). Quit trying to spin it to look like the Brookdale residents are the ones complaining or suing. They have supported this district longer then you and I.

to: By Logical Site on March 25, 2008 2:08 PM

MACOM site? Get serious. That's not going to happen.

What about the RR tracks and the Electric substation at the MACOM site. Why are they concerns at EOLA and not the MACOM site? Self-serving reasons I'm guessing.

Click on this link below. Scroll to the left until you get to 95th and 248th ave. See the RR tracks and the Electric Substation!!!! The electric substation is the LARGE tan-colored square next to the RR tracks.

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/3995+W+95th+St+Naperville+IL+60564-4615/#a/maps/l::3995+W+95th+St:Naperville:IL:60564-4615:US:41.709779:-88.207478:address:Will+County/m:hyb:12:41.709779:-88.207478:0::/io:0:::::f:EN:M:/e

By anonymous on March 25, 2008 4:39 PM
Gotta Love the supporter fo the Macom site. The site isn't for sale and would require another eminent domain battle. That was so much fun the first time let's do it again!! He/she must own that land.
_______________________________________________

This is completely not true. The Macom site WOULD NOT require another eminent domain battle. Who told you that? Mark Metzger?

The school could have been built on that site for much less than what you were told by the district. There would not have been any need for an eminent domain battle. You are completely incorrect in your post.

Isn't the Macom land right next to TG ? Hmmmmmm...how surprising...

I love the elitist comment when you refer to Brookdale residents. You must live in one of the guest houses in the back yards of Tall Grass.

Gotta Love the supporter fo the Macom site. The site isn't for sale and would require another eminent domain battle. That was so much fun the first time let's do it again!! He/she must own that land.

Why ? Because the vote-no crowd will never stop pursuing their interest in keeping the maximum number of dollars in their own pockets. They will NEVER go away. So if it is delayed until 2010, they will try to delay until 2011. And 2012. Simply put, they would rather risk overcrowding than risk spending extra $$. I wont.

I will admit the following:
- I am not certain of the enrollment numbers. Nobody is.
- I wish the site were further south. But it isnt.
- I wish TG and WE could go to whatever school will shut them up.

Life is a series of choices. People make those choices based on their perception of the risk of various decisions, and their fundamental values. I voted yes because my "risk perception" and "Value" equation is that I would rather spend a few more dollars, maybe even unecessary ones, than have overcrowded schools.

A majority of the district voted the same way.

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

Look at it this way......a majority of you voted for George Bush (twice!) and I am stuck with that for another 9 months (and counting down every minute). We will be paying off THAT $3 trillion rat hole for generations!

Cant you afford to spend an extra few million to educate my kids????

Northside/Brookdale - thou dost protest too much!...its obvious to anyone that you protested in 2006 to pull your kids out of WVHS and are pulling all kinds of stunts now to ensure that they go to Metea rather than WVHS....

this has always been about the elitists in the North of the district and Brookdale feeling a sense of entitlement to pull their kids out of WVHS and send them to a "new school".....in order to accomplish that you have thrown the kids from the rest of the district "under the bus"

The south will rise again.........and then the boundaries will change - hope you like WVHS....

Northside/Brookdale - thou dost protest too much!...its obvious to anyone that you protested in 2006 to pull your kids out of WVHS and are pulling all kinds of stunts now to ensure that they go to Metea rather than WVHS....

this has always been about the elitists in the North of the district and Brookdale feeling a sense of entitlement to pull their kids out of WVHS and send them to a "new school".....in order to accomplish that you have thrown the kids from the rest of the district "under the bus"

The south will rise again.........and then the boundaries will change - hope you like WVHS....

"Are you saying that an "elected" volunteer can never be criticized for bad decisions because they are volunteers?

If you are, I completely disagree."

_______________________________________________

No I'm saying that it is disgraceful for those people that are saying that the school board or any individual on the school board orchestrated any of this. Events happened that were out of the boards control like the final price on the BB property. To say that they saw this coming and planned all along to build on Eola is just a joke.

Fine be unhappy with them. The fact still remains that a 3rd high school referendum passed and they are building a 3rd high school. I applaud them for continuing on course regardless of minority opinion. I also applaud them for continuing on course based on a referendum that was passed. To do otherwise would be more of a failure. Sorry but at some point as a board member you have to do what is right for everyone in the district. Some are always not going to be happy. Just a shame those who were not happy decided to sue after everything the school board did to fight for them.

To: We need Logic not panic when selecting the school site

Look at the attendance numbers. If the numbers remain the same NV starts to decline at 2011. However, the "north" or those at WV the attendance stays constant. Fact is the "south" is declining. Come visit some of the elementary or middle schools in the north and you'll see for yourself.

No voice is that how you feel? Ths south has no voice? Seems to me that I supported a referendum that built a high school in the south in 1997 and a high school that was supposed to be built in the south at the BB property. Why did I do that you ask? For the better of our whole district. It is obvious that you are only concerned about your needs. Heck, the school board has opened up their checkbook for the past 11 years to those in the south. Also I might add fought long and hard to get the BB property.

Please give me a break. If you want to balance the district have a high school in the north, central and south, like they will be doing.

To Sad.
Take an antidepressant and wake up.

The SB was told BEFORE the referrendum about the likely cost of the condemmed land on BB ($600k/acre). They were blind to reality and have passed up several other viable options in pursuit of BB and what the Jury decided was less than the estimate they had of $600/acre BEFORE the referrendum.

Their efforts in Springfield although noble in your mind wasted over a year of time and millions of our dollars.

I am not disgusted at all with my comments but I am very disgusted with the incompetence of this school board and Superintendant and the situation THEY have placed us in today.

Say what you want about the NSFOC but I for one am cheering that they have the courage to challenge the SB and demand that the community (aka parents) be involved in decisions that impact their children.

Yes, I'm feeling GLEE. GLEE over how immature those members of the NSFOC are acting. I know my kids are going to get a great education either at NV, WV or MV. What I am worried about is if the NSFOC is successful for no 3rd high school at all. See how popular your group is then and how the property values for all of us fall beyond belief. Sorry but I don't want my kids attending mega-high schools. It's sad that those at NSFOC only want a high school where they see fit. Don't believe me look at their own lawsuit. It's clearly says the BB site or no high school at all.

By u r uninformed on March 25, 2008 3:41 PM
To: Orange Crusade

You obviously didn't attend those meeting as is evidenced by your lack of knowledge or by the NSFOC directing you what to say, which is becoming a common.

The orange shirts were a protest to them not splitting up Hill Middle School. In the end they didn't win their battle and they still split Hill Middle School under the old boundary changes. It had nothing to do with those at Brookdale attending WVHS those are some of the longest and most pround familes of WVHS.
____________________________________

I was at the meetings and agreed that splitting Hill middle school was not a good idea. I was very surprised though to have heard the Brookdale community voted 80/20 NO to the referendum.

How do you feel about Scullen being split? Is it okay with you? It seems as though it is. Seems like a double standard.

By sad on March 25, 2008 3:33 PM
To: Glee Club

You should be ashamed of yourself, seriously ashamed. Do you even realize the hard work and missed family time the members of the school board missed because they were working on the BB debacle as you refer to it. Do you know how many trips to Springfield the school board and MM and the IPSD attorney's made to court rooms and took time from their family? What a disgrace you are Glee Club!! They won every battle except the last judgement. Who would have thought the land would come in so expensive, no on except for the greedy BB attorney's.

____________________________________

To: Sad

Are you saying that an "elected" volunteer can never be criticized for bad decisions because they are volunteers?

If you are, I completely disagree.

For those of you who don't already see it coming the NSFOC has a new strategy. BB or Macom or no school. My god the NSFOC is like a 3yo that keeps wanting to change the rules.

Only problem is your lawsuit doesn't support Macom. It says BB or nothing. If you are successful you will still most likely have new boundaries that will place TG and WE kids at WVHS.

You can keep trying to play the safety card and how Eola will cost more money but no one is buying it. Put out a real lawsuit that says you don't want to change boundaries unless it is BB or Macom and everyone will have a lot more respect for you. Although I highly doubt it.

After reading the 45 comments above - It is obvious there is no Glee in Naperworld today. Does anyone feel full of M2-reported glee yet? The community has been insulted - enough already.

To: Orange Crusade

You obviously didn't attend those meeting as is evidenced by your lack of knowledge or by the NSFOC directing you what to say, which is becoming a common.

The orange shirts were a protest to them not splitting up Hill Middle School. In the end they didn't win their battle and they still split Hill Middle School under the old boundary changes. It had nothing to do with those at Brookdale attending WVHS those are some of the longest and most pround familes of WVHS.

Get your facts straight and quit pointing fingers at Brookdale a proud neighborhood who most likely supported the high school your kids go to for now (NVHS). I wore a orange shirt myself and I don't live in that neighborhood myself because if you look at the history of Hill Middle School you will find out how successful it is and how it has been recognized nationally. Those Brookdale residents were only trying to protect those Title 1 elementary schools that unfortunately aren't always heard loud enough.

Fact still remains they didn't see the need to file a lawsuit. NSFOC should look to Brookdale and see how grown-ups act. If you want my opinion it was the TG neighborhood that acted immature in 2006 and are still 2 years later.

Mr. Metzer, I don't see any humor in the way you are leading this school district.

Looks like these will be my choices for my eighth grader:

1) Go one year to WVHS. Switch to half completed Metea where building and remediation of contaminated site are ongoing. No pool, gym, varsity sports.

2) Go To overcrowded WVHS for 4 years when promise to open in 09 fails because of delays, lawsuits etc.

3) Move to District 203 where neither HS is on academic watch.

Yes, option 3 looks pretty good, but I'm not laughing.

To: Glee Club

You should be ashamed of yourself, seriously ashamed. Do you even realize the hard work and missed family time the members of the school board missed because they were working on the BB debacle as you refer to it. Do you know how many trips to Springfield the school board and MM and the IPSD attorney's made to court rooms and took time from their family? What a disgrace you are Glee Club!! They won every battle except the last judgement. Who would have thought the land would come in so expensive, no on except for the greedy BB attorney's.

Yet, they were open and honest and reported everything in the newspapers and on their website of what was going on with the BB land. Only for it to not go their way to no fault of theirs and those people the IPSD and school board were fighting for turn around and sue them. DISGUSTING!!!

As far as the enviornmental studies go I hope they release the results and hour before they break ground because that's all the NSFOC group deserves. It's a shame you're ruined it for the rest of the district especially the real parents that have kids slated for MVHS.

to NSFOC listens...you think the supporters of the Eola site are using lies to scare people? Have you looked at the NSFOC website? It is lie upon lie designed just to scare people into donating money. EVERY environmental question the site lists either has been answered by your attorney (but not posted - that would keep people from falling for the scare tactics and donations would dry up) or will have to be answered per state and federal law. Who do you think you are kidding? NSFOC survival is based on scare tactics.

TO TG Resident...so you want to send your kid to any school as long as it isn't WVHS?

To I Think They are Them...the Midwest Gen property is still private property. If they do want wish to have those test results released yet, there is nothing the district can do about it. The results will be released. Just not as soon as most of us would like...including me since I believe we can then get on with the discussion of remediation.

Does anyone know how long it took to build Neuqua?

To: NSFOC LISTENS BUT NOT THE SCHOOL BOARD

I noticed in your reply to my post that you didn't answer the questions I posed to the NSFOC either. I'm not sure anyone at the NSFOC has considered what they filed the lawsuit for, and/or what the ramifications are should they fail or succeed. They really pigeon holed themselves. Their lawsuit doesn't protect them from anything other then a school on BB or not on BB, or no school at all. OMG!!! Imagine if there were no 3rd high school at all and the TG kids still had to go to WVHS...a crowded one at that!!!

i'm wondering... if the new school is built on the northside of town and much of the growth on the southside was beacause of the expectations of attending a fancy new school... will there be a sudden jump in new housing on the northside and the growth on the southside will come to a halt?

MACOM is a fantastic site for the school Since >60% of the kids live south of 75th street and the growth in population is south this is a logical choice. However, its clear that the SB does not want to put the school in the South. Lehman etal have been at their doorstep for almost a year but have been shut out by the SB. One of the early blogs in the sun had info that Lehman had reduced his price further but Dr D did not reflect that in his site presentation to the board. Spinning Eola and the natural choice.

I find it inexcusable to build a school where they said they would not before and have never answered the question about what changed. They either lied to us before the referrendum or are lying now.

I understand that folks in the Northern part of the district drive far to WV and if the population were also growing North I'd see the sense in building the school there. But that is not the case.

Its clear that the Southern section of the district has no representation aside from Alka who appears through her own actions to be only concerned with Springbrook. So although logical there is no one at the table advancing logic.

From today’s Sun:

“The district has had the results of those tests for two weeks, but, due to a confidentiality agreement with the various parties involved in the land purchase, it has been unable to release them. Those parties have agreed to only release the results when all parties are ready to do so, he said.”

Metzger did not say who had not agreed to release the results. I have to believe that it is the school board themselves that are holding this up. Metzger did not say it wasn’t the school board either. They are the only ones that would have anything to gain by not releasing the results.

Based on everything I have read about this so far I have to think this is right on.

To anonymous on March 25, 2008 1:13 PM

No, sadly, nothing seems to make the school board listen - or talk, or be completely honest, or show good judgment, or make good decisions, or admit their mistakes, or show integrity.

Frankly, I don't want the shiny new school. Never did. I wanted the school closest to my home, like most other reasonable people I know (but careful - please don't confuse those people with elitist snobs like me). But, I was willing to compromise for a school that was slightly farther away because it was a school that was more strategically/centrally located to benefit the entire district - to deal with an overcrowding problem that has, by the way, mysteriously subsided to a large degree in the last two years (pesky little detail, I know). I certainly don't wish the shiny new school in its latest incarnation on anyone, given the Eola location and the apparent rushed circumstances under which it will be built. I honestly do care, even if my kids won't go to MV now, because maybe they will in the future. I'm sure the SB can come up with some criteria that would justify TG and many others driving past not one, but two, schools to get there - and they will say it is cutting transportation costs - and they will publish that it will only take us one more minute to get to MV than it takes to get to WV! After all, it's only going to take one more minute to get to WV than it does to get to NV, even though it's 5 miles farther away. Honest...Laidlaw says so! After two years of this, one thing is clear - there is no end to the ridiculousness of what the SB can come up with to push the agenda du jour.

In all seriousness, bottom line, the Eola land is questionable. Who cares to what degree. The SB even spelled that out for us. So, were they lying then, or are they lying now? Bottom line, the location does not best serve the ENTIRE district now, or in the future. It's too far away from the majority of the student population, and that is only going to become more true as more houses are built south of 103rd St. I don't even care if the lies and blunders of the SB to date have no legal standing in court. They are decisions void of good judgment and long term vision for this district - all of us wil pay in the end - in different ways, to varying degrees. But, it will happen.

Maybe next time the SB should do what other districts do - form committees and include constituents, teachers, board members, students, etc. in creating the criteria for site choices and boundaries. Bet they could come up with more than 3(!)criteria, and bet the number one criteria on the list would be proximity - whether it's one mile or six, if that's the closest we can get due to district's unfortunate geography. And also in these scenarios in other districts, the SB and admin. actually JUSTIFY how their choices meet/don't meet EVERY criteria. Not answers like: "Laidlaw said so, we're comfortable with that" "We gave it our best shot", "It's tough", "In our opinion"....and on and on. Answers like these are simply unacceptable from experienced professionals with doctorate degrees, as well as from elected volunteers who are there to SERVE the community.

But forget involving people on the ground level and actually keeping them in the picture - too messy. The Board might then actually have to be accountable. This approach also cuts into the usefulness of the whole elitist snob angle for people like you who can't come up with anything better. Please open your eyes and your mind - stop making excuses for the SB.

By anonymous on March 25, 2008 1:13 PM

"to NSFOC listens...do you really believe this is about getting the SB to listen? This is about money to keep the Tall Grass kids out of WVHS. Oh I'm sorry...I didn't realize you lived at Tall Grass and know that nobody will send their checks if they knew the NSFOC truth. This is not about a lawsuit the NSFOC cannot win. A lawsuit that will require millions more money than the NSFOC can ever raise. This is about elitist snobs who don't want "the shiny new school" being built for non-Tall Grass students."

______________________________________________

Yeah,uh sorry to burst your bubble but I don't live in Tall Grass or White Eagle. I know they are fine subdivisions.

However, your "elitist snobs" comment is uncalled for. I see that you must be the one always blogging with this signature comments. What your version of truth? Are you a school board member? Are you that worried about a lawsuit? No one knows where it will go. You don't know how much money they can raise. I do know how much money the SCHOOL BOARD can spend without even thinking about the consequences of their actions.

NSFOC is for all of us who believe the SCHOOL BOARD NEEDS TO THE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. IT'S NOT ABOUT NOT WANTING TO GO TO WV even though you try your hardest to make people see it that way.

I feel sorry for you and your children if you have any. It's people like you who teach your children to lie and scare people to get your way. NSFOC wants answers from the school board and they are trying to get them.

Regarding the school being built in 2009 why rush it. Start in 2010 with a full facility.

Does anyone else remember the Brookdale Orange Crusade - when the elitist people from Brookdale wore orange to all the boundary discussions in 2006 - yelling, screaming, bullying to get their entitlement, desperately try ot get their kids out of WVHS and into Metea.

This whole thing is about the North side of the district approaching the 3rd high school from a sense of entitlement.

Its so disingenuous of them to now try and blame other communities of what the North is doing/has been doing.

Don't forget Northside/Brookdale - there are more people in the south. Brookdale/North voted down the referendum when they realized that they wouldn't get their "entitlement" of their kids not attending WVHS. The south carried the referendum.

In the end the "silent majority" in the south will prevail because of our votes....the North/Brookdale's orange crusade and elitist, entitlement mentality to get their kids out of WVHS will fail....count on it....

The school will not open in 2009. That was just another of the SB lies to get backing for this crappy site. This was their way to say Eola was better then Macom. Another big lie delivered to us straight from our SB.

By So much to do, so little time.... on March 25, 2008 12:40 PM
NSFOC,
I kinda have a busy night scheduled for tonight. If I come to your meeting do I have to pay a cover charge and can I take pictures for my website? Also, is it okay if I bring my Ipod if I get bored? Can I get Mr. C's autograph? Thanks
p.s. I am totally serious.

_________________________________________________________

For you, no cover... Come to the back door and ask for "Big Dan". He'll let you in. Pictures, no problem. If you bring a Polaroid I'll even sign one for ya. Ipod, please do. I'm bringing my Gameboy. Mr. C's autograph? I don't know about that one. Bring some cash or at least a checkbook.

CB

The 3rd High School should be located on the Macom site. Both the Eola and 75th Street sites should be abandoned, one for safety reasons and the other for cost reasons.

The Macom site, has none of these safety issues, would be priced competitively, reduce transportation costs across the district, reduce unsafe travel conditions including crossing railroads and Rt 59.

The only criteria the Macom site doesn't satisfy is the entitlement that some people in the North feeel for a 3rd high school close to where they live. Since the population density and center of population is closer to Macom the "silent majority" would be served rather than a entitled, elitist North side of the district.

Metzger's quote in the papers this am is a joke. Glee is not blowing in the wind over the secret meetings, lack of information and more importantly lack of involvement of parents in the process.
Another word comes to mind Mark...NAUSIA.

When will you wake up and realize this mess was orchestrated by your covert actions and insistence that parents are an obstacle and it’s a waste of time to include them.

Your arrogance and complete failure in managing the BB debacle gives us in the community 0% confidence in you and Dr D. The rest of the SB appears to be acting like lemmings behind you two and you should be ashamed. You and you alone have created a situation where people for years will be shaking their heads over the 204 district leadership.

I'm sure the environmental results will be released 24 hrs before closing so that the community has no time to question your infinite wisdom and Dr D's opinions about what they mean. It’s a real shame. Had we had true leadership in the district this entire process including the lawsuits could have been avoided.

Rather than point fingers at the community, the organizations formed or subdivisions you need to look in a mirror for the root cause of the catastrophe in 204. Mark, its time to step aside and for us to find a new leader who is willing to include the community and communicate openly and honestly. Maybe we can name a building in your honor. There is an outhouse on the BB property that seems fitting.

will collins be there tonight to answer our questions?

I would be willing to contribute $ to NSFOC if NSFOC would post on their web site the current names and addresses of it's organizational leaders.

word to the wise, the NSFOC will post the head count of their meeting as 100% supporters. No wonder they are inviting everyone to come out regardless if you support or not. Just watch how the Sun reports this to see if they are objective in their coverage.

to Stop...you do realize that the school will open with only freshmen and sophomores? There will not be varsity players required for varsity sports until the following year. They are opening the school this way so as not to uproot juniors and seniors as they are preparing for and applying to college.

to NSFOC listens...do you really believe this is about getting the SB to listen? This is about money to keep the Tall Grass kids out of WVHS. Oh I'm sorry...I didn't realize you lived at Tall Grass and know that nobody will send their checks if they knew the NSFOC truth. This is not about a lawsuit the NSFOC cannot win. A lawsuit that will require millions more money than the NSFOC can ever raise. This is about elitist snobs who don't want "the shiny new school" being built for non-Tall Grass students.

I implore the SB and SD Admin to STOP all this 2009 nonsense.
Let's make sure this site is safe - not guess and wish and hope. These are our kids we're talking about here. Yes I agree we need a 3rd high school -but why pay $5M - $10 Million in expedite charges to open a shell of a school. As it is we're talking about No Gym, No Auditorium, No Pool,and with construction going on - mud for parking lots, 17 acres fences off for remediation.
All the time we heard even at BB, the kids moving in there deserve a FULL high schoolexperience. What why is that differentnow that the high school is located north. It's bad enough they are asking 1/2 the new school to have a horrible commute because the site is not where the population is, but now they get there and are missing all these amenities and no varsity sports to boot. The 8th graders today destined for MV only get one high school life like all of us - why make theirs crappy compared to the kids at ourother 2 schools ? Is this what we paid $150M for ?

Note on the sports - world class players like V DiBernardo would not be playing this year if this was fall 2009 and she moved from WV to MV -this is a dumb policy in an era of club sports and well trained athletes - but with no gym and no sports fields - how can we call MV a school in 2009. You can't in my book. No auditorium for our wonderful 204 music program - c'mon.

Move the opening to 2010 - build a complete school somewhere - even if it was BB - do not open until it is a real high school.

Yes, I know it's crowded - but quite frankly my oldest was at WVHS when it was more crowded than this 10 years ago - and somehow got a great education without the threat of split shifts and the like. Did the school get smaller since then ?

Let's put all ego's aside for a change and do the right thing for the kids and the taxpayers.Do notopen 1/2 a high school.

The relevant question isn't "Will the school open in 2009?" The question that should be asked is "SHOULD we be accelerating construction to open the school in 2009?" The $5m or $10m spent on expediting construction is throw-away money. The ONLY justification I've heard from the district is when Daeschner stated, "because our kids are worth it." Huh? So what exactly is the threshold that is justified based on the worth of our kids? Is $50m throw-away justified? In my opinion the SB should slow-down and stop being in such a hurry to get this over with. As a project manager I can tell you that the worst projects are those with an unrealistic schedule. The premium we'll pay is most certainly NOT simply the differential of paying OT. The number of dependencies in a construction project such as this are tremendous, and rush projects are always the most inefficient. I almost hope we can't break ground in April, just to force the SB to slow down. And let's now fool ourselves - those NSFOC folks aren't slowing anything down. The delays to date are all based on actions of the SB.

NSFOC,
I kinda have a busy night scheduled for tonight.If I come to your meeting do I have to pay a cover charge and can I take pictures for my website? Also,is it okay if I bring my Ipod if I get bored? Can I get Mr. C's autograph? Thanks
p.s. I am totally serious.

By Keep Donating to NSFOC on March 25, 2008 10:41 AM

"Keep donating to the NSFOC? Why you ask?

If you are so concerned why don't you attend the meeting and ask your questions. Everyone is invited. But, I guess you won't because you can remain negative on this issue and try to force blame elsewhere instead of looking at who is responsible for all of this. THE SCHOOL BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE!!

I will keep donating to the NSFOC because we need answers and unfortuantely this seems to be the only way. Also, there are alot of school boards that have been sued don't kid yourself.

See you at the meeting!

Referendum discussion for need was 2004. Real estate was booming then. New homes, new subdivisions....

Then, 2005 - still a need. But the ref fails because voters said no until they are marketed where the site will be. Pure no vote.

Then, 2006 - SB markets where the site will be. And even gives boundaries - in these boundary discussions the marketing of "hey, now, if we can't get BB land, OK, then voters must live with the site being somewhere else." No, just the opposite. Vote for the ref - because you will go here. OK, voters say yes.

Now, 2008 - Real estate tanking. Less residential as fast as planned going up. The bubble is for a couple years. And the voters said "no" to Eola --- as evident in their vote for "Yes" to BB.

Come on. Slow down. Rush the wrong site. Rush the money out the door. Even Metzger has to be embarrassed of what he the rest of the Board did.

They should immediately stop. Apologize for this situation. Go back for a revote on the Eola - or buy the BB land and build. We can wait until 2010 to do it right. My gosh, do we tell our kids to study the night before the test, at midnight. Or do we properly prepare ourselves.

Again, SB has to stop blaming others and take responsibility for their actions.

If these guys were a lawyer or accountant they would have been fired months ago. They would fire themselves if they did this to their families. Ego, pride and longevity. Who can argue with facts.

What is going on behind closed doors at the School Board? What do they know that they are not telling us? NSFOC has done little other than filing a civil suit and stating their position. This is not stopping D204 from proceeding with construction. What is.... ?

- They are taking significant heat from the press
- They don't own the land
- They have not settled the BB situation nor know the true cost of settlment
- Someone does not want the environmental study released

Come on Mr. Metzger, times like this require leadership. So far you have exhibited anything but.

If they started digging TODAY there is no way this school building could possibly open for the 2009 school year. Anyone who tells you that this building can be finished in time for the 2009 school year simply isn't being totally honest or doesn't have any understanding of construction project schedules.

IF this entire project was already out to bid at this point in time there is a good likelihood this school building could be ready to open in time for the 2010 school year.

The reasons why this school building can not and will not be ready to open for the 2009 school year:

1. a minimum of 18-24 months are needed to construct a high school building. This is not on the smaller size of the building scale either, rather it is on the larger end of the scale so we should conservatively estimate that it will take closer to 24 months.

2. This project isn't even close to being out to bid. The longer the bid preparation process takes, the further back it will push the entire schedule. Don't forget that an unhappy second or third bidder could file suit if they are unhappy with the bidding outcome and push the schedule back as well.

3. Weather could delay the project... rain, high winds, tornado, snow, cold, etc. It is also possible for there to be storm related damage that could be another unforeseen setback.

4. Accidents happen on construction sites all the time. Workers get injured or worse. Buildings collapse. Investigations take time.

5. "Owners" and "contractors" some times just don't get along and end up suing each other... yes, another law suit and it could come from either party. Some times general contractors or subcontractors go broke in the middle of a project. All potential unforeseen delays.

6. Same thing happens between general contractors and the architects. Or the building owners and the architects. Law suits in the construction industry are very common. They tend to drive up the project cost and cause additional delays.

7. Inspections and occupancy permits may or may not be obtained on time. Sometimes it is a scheduling problem. Sometimes the inspectors find shoddy work and require it to be done over. A building this size will have a ton of inspections during the course of construction. At any point a stop work order could be issued until something is fixed or corrected.

8. Some of the biggest causes of delays on construction projects are related to:
Schedule conflicts - someone is held up waiting for someone else to finish something else first.
Inadequate staffing - subcontractors do not want to add additional staff, they want to get by with who they already have hired.
Inadequate equipment - more and more subcontractors rent as opposed to owning equipment so they factor in a daily cost to rent as part of their bid price. The equipment they need may not be available when they need it.
Design delay - workers simply can not build it the way the architects drew it on the drawings and nothing gets done until an engineering solution is found.
Material delay - a lot of materials for a job like this are custom ordered and are not stock items. Shipping delays are common. Even for stock items no one carries inventories for a lot of construction materials anymore and products are literally shipped from the factory to the job site for immediate installation... just in time concept. If the factory gets backed-up or has a breakdown another delay.
Material quality - sometimes what is shipped is simply the wrong component or has quality problems... more delay while these issues get sorted out.

There are lots and lots of other examples of what could go wrong and push even the best of schedules several months behind.

Considering everything that has gone wrong to date on the whole concept of a third high school, why should any of us believe that our SB can now pull off a miracle the proposed project schedule. I don't believe it for a minute. If you believe it can be done, I sure would like to know what you are basing your belief on other than blind faith and trust in the SB.

I meant to add....if anything, the unscientific poll shows us the makeup of the NSFOC group. They are the only ones voting :)

Naperville Sun editors....
The need for a third high school was already voted on by the people under an official ballot. It passed. We don't need an unscientfic poll to support or refute this fact.The only people wasting their time on this poll are the NSFOC people because of their email telling their lemmings to vote.....

to all concerned as to why the results have not been released...the midwest gen property is 9as of today) private property. The district has said they want to release the data but they are contractually prohibited from doing so. I do not beleive they are hiding anything since the facts will have to come out eventually anyway.

I do have to ask why the NSFOC with an "enviromental" attorney on retainer, lists basic environmental questions on their site but does not give any answers? Their attorney must not be very good...or they know the answers but if they put the answers on the website, the uninformed will quit writing checks.

By JR on March 25, 2008 6:56 AM
Ready on time? August 2009? Oh yeah? Highly unlikely!

Metzger and the rest of the board will toss millions of the tax payers dollars at contractors who will gladly take it. When it is not on time, the board and the contractors will say they did there very best but, everything was against them and it just did not happen. $8-10 million later (extra $ paid to contractors), it opens in 2010. What a joke of a President and Super D we have. What a waste! Can we start to impeach the board now or after they p?ss away 150 million dollars or more.

Oh yeah, and in 2010 here is what 204 will get. A school partially completed, kids dodging bull dozers, trucks, lumber, etc. School girls being harrassed by construction workers. Like teachers, will these construction workers get back ground checks? Who knows and that is scary! No gym, pool, auditorium, etc.

Sounds like a good high school experience to me. Good times and good memories. It should be a real plus for 2004 to put kids in a situation like that. Very well done 204!

Jr,
You talking about the Eola or BB site? How old are your kids?According to NSFOC lawsuit this will be BB or nothing....Uh oh!!!!

NSFOC will you return the money to your membership if the following happens?

(a) You don't get a school built on the BB property?

(b) If the IPSD moves ahead with plans to build a 3rd high school on the AME property?

(c) If the IPSD doesn't build a 3rd high school AT ALL, and yet the bulk of your membership is still sent to WVHS because of new boundaries and overcrowding?

THESE ARE THE ARGUEMENTS TAKING FROM THE NSFOC LAWSUIT AGAINST IPSD!!

To: Just don't get it...

The SB has operated under full disclosure up until January of this year. The SB attorney's advised them not to disclose this information probably because they are working with the IL EPA and MidwestGen. The other reason why is because of the NSFOC. I fully believe that if the NSFOC lawsuit wasn't pending they would have released the information. However, say they release the information and the Phase II studies come back with minor concerns. Well, it just gives the NSFOC to come up with another way to spin the information on why they shouldn't build a high school there. Trust me they will release the studies and the remediation plans and the approval of the IL EPA with the land contract signed and the approval of the City of Aurora. They are speding all the time behind the scenes in executive session making sure all their ducks are in a row before they release any additional information.

Simple question. Where are the results?

If the school doesn't open in 2009, I am going to form a group and sue the school district. I only voted 'yes' on the new school based on statements from the school board that the school would open in 2009.

I know the ballot didn't say that, but that's what the school board told me and that's why I voted 'yes'. They took my money and didn't open the school as promised.

09 High School For Our Children (09HSFOC)!

When is th SB going to be upfront for a change? They owe the taxpayers full disclosure. If the land was safe I'm sure they would have released the info by now. You have to ask yourself WHY!!!!!

Keep donating to the NSFOC? Why you ask?

In the unlikely evet that they are successful and the 3rd high school isn't built (item (a) within their lawsuit) on the BB property and they are successful on item (c) on their lawsuit which states that if the Defentant isn't able to purchase the BB property that it return all the money and don't built a high school at all.

THEY WILL STILL NEED YOUR MONEY IF THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL!!! WHY?

Because there is no guarantee that they (TG) still won't have to attend WVHS because we will have 2 overcrowded high schools and TG will still have to most likely move out of NVHS. They will then have to come up with another frivolous lawsuit of why they shouldn't attend WVHS.

Did you people even think about your lawsuit before you wrote it, or was it a timing issue? It has misspellings and not very well thought out ideas. Maybe you should file a second lawsuit because you care about all of the kids so much. Heck, it can't make you look worse then you already to. Did Mr. Collins firm type this, do you really think he's concerend about your views or is he more concerned about your money? If he is concerned about your views I would have expected a more well thought out strategy. Then again as Mr. Collins maybe he's already chalked this one up to a loss.

Finally, I can't wait until the NSFOC meeting tonight!! I'm sure you'll have a bunch of new ways to twist and spin why a 3rd high school shouldn't be built on the EM property and only on the BB property or not at all.

Without a doubt, 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.

To JR. Any delay in the building of Metae (at Eola) can be attributed soley to the NSFOC. Their selfish acts are only going to cost us more money in delays and legal fees - nothing more! The building of Metea at Eola will happen and they know it, they are only trying to delay to get one more school year for their own kids and costing the rest of us $$$. Never has a law suit been brought against a school board when the majority of the tax payers are against it!

No way will the high school open in 2009.

By Future Matea Mom on March 25, 2008 8:16 AM

"So does anyone know when the environmentail study is scheduled to be released? Is there a deadline? Really, that's my major concern at this point..."

_________________________________________________

Right now there is no date for the release. It is a major concern for us as well. Friends of ours are going to have kids going to MV and don't want them attending a contaminated site either. My cousin who is an enviromentalist for a large company told me that it would cost millions of dollars to remedi the site and that the attached land also needs to be looked at which I believe is the AME land. He said that it could have leached over because of how long the site operated. I really don't see the school opening on time if everything is done above the bar.

The school board knows what the studies are of the Phase II study. They have for over 3 weeks. Have you ever thought that they don't want to release them to the public until they feel they are ready to? Yes, you heard me correct until they are ready to. Remember our school district has always been open and honest with us through all of the legal battles on BB property by communicating on their website to notes in the backpacks to the newspapers. Now they are facing a lawsuit from NSFOC so they have decided to only release information when they see fit. If you would have paid attention that is the legal advice the IPSD received from their attorney's because of the NSFOC lawsuit. You folks caused the school board to keep informaiton secret until necessary.

Do you think they have been just sitting on the results of the Phase II studies? I bet they have been working on a plan with MidwestGen and when they release the results of the Phase II studies they will also release the remediation plans. They are already removing the Peaker Plant if you haven't noticed.

What you haven't opened your eyes to see is that plans are moving forward to build a 3rd high school. Contracts are being signed, plans are being made, meetings are taking place and because of the NSFOC this time we just don't know about it. However, it will all come out soon enough. Do you really think they would be signing all the contracts and making plans with MidwestGen and the City of Aurora if there were major problems with the Phase II study. I doubt it, they would have probably moved on to another site.

Let me also remind you that the NSFOC says the BB property or no 3rd high school at all for anyone. If it is the BB property that school will be missing quite a bit because of the high land cost. If we don't have a 3rd high school are all the NSFOC members sure they won't still be moved to WVHS down the road? Are you ok with being known as the district that has 2 overcrowded high schools? How do you think that will effect all of our home values?

The school will open on time. Even if they don't start digging until May, there is plenty of time.

I cannot imagine sending the children in our 204 community to a school that is not finished. I think it is time the Board admits that the 2009 opening is a 10 million dollar mistake, not to mention all the mistakes that happen when you rush. This is true whether the school is built on the Eola site or BB.

The kids starting at MV will already be facing a school with no varsity sports in the beginning, but then to send them to a school without a pool, gym, etc. is just not fair. The children of our community deserve better.

M2's statement about people being "full of glee" is downright disrespectful. To me, it just reinforces the arrogance of the Board to move forward at all costs. They do not want to be proven wrong. M2 needs to understand that people have a right to be suspicous about the environmental reports. He says there are confidentially agreements. Usually, good news is not confidential.

It would be nice for the board to have a Q&A session with the 204 community. There are too many unanswered questions. Here are my first questions: What do we do with the land that we already own at BB and have you called the BB attorneys back to try to negotiate?

I feel we cannot close on the Eola site until we know the outcome of BB. To do otherwise is a slap in the face of taxpayers.

I commend the Board for trying to get tis building completed and rectify the horrible over crowding situation that is effecting my children's high school educatin and experience. I have a child that attends Nequa and another who will be a freshman next year. I can tell you from the experience my daughter is having that it is not an ideal situation. The halls are over crowded, she has to walk outside in order to get her classes on time, she has to eat her lunch on the floor, and she has to share a locker. These are not the conditions I would like to see my son have to deal with his high school years.

As for the planning of the new High School, there has been ample time to for the designers to address the all of the issues a previous poster asked. The design is the same as it would have been on BB land.

As for everyone's concern regarding the power lines that are at the edge of the property, I think it it really grasping at straws. I have a Masters degree in Electrical Engineering and have looked at a great many of the studies concerning power lines and their link to cancer. There are as many, if not more studies that find there is no link than there are studies that say there MIGHT be a slight risk. With the studies that say there might be a slight risk, the power lines were MUCH closer to the test subjects and the amount of power the test subject were subject to was much higher. So please, enough with the power line scare.

I agree the land should be cleaned up before the school utilizes the land. But from everything I have read and know about Peaker Power plants, there are no serious poisons associated with them. Diesel Fuel and anti freeze are the worse chemicals typically used. I would venture to guess that most of the people that are concerned about these chemicals being on the land have simiiar or possibly even worse chemicals in their own garage, I know I do.

The bottom line is, as a district we voted and agreed a third high school was needed, and it is. The school board is not going to move any dirt until the final environmental tests are released, and there has been more than enough time to do a proper design and review of the building. Let's get light this candle.

Can they build it if they start by mid-April? Maybe, maybe not. A lot depends upon the weather and other things that are very hard to predict. A few injunctions could hold up construction indefinitely.

Throw enough money and bodies at the construction project and the building probably could be finished for this self-imposed deadline... imagine here one of the home makeover shows...

This thing is such a rush job one can only imagine all of the design mistakes that will be made. NV was not thrown together like this. A lot more thought and input from the community was received and there still were some mistakes.

What will the quality be like with something rushed like this project? Will MV be equal to or worse than WV or will it be equal to or greater than NV?

Or are we just cobbling together a throw away building that will only last 10-20 years?

From a practical standpoint those who are against the third HS do not care about these aspects... they simply don't want another building.

What about those who are for a third HS? Other than beating the drums for the project.... no one, but no one is diving in to understand what we are about to build.

The building size, the classroom size, the construction materials, the interior finishes, the equipment. What will it look like outside, what will it look like inside? What will it cost to operate? What will it cost to maintain? What choices have been made to lower the operation and maintenance expense over the life time of the building? How many serving lines and seats will be in the cafeteria? How big will the auditorium be? How many lanes will the swimming pool have? What size hall lockers will be installed? How many parking spaces will be provided?

What are the answers to these questions? What are the answers to these questions from our students perspective... they will be the biggest user of this building?

Or does everyone who wants the 3rd HS so badly simply trust the good judgement of our SB on all of these detail?

So does anyone know when the environmentail study is scheduled to be released? Is there a deadline? Really, that's my major concern at this point...

In today's article, Mark Metzger dismissed the notion that the delay means bad news. He is quoted as saying
"I am quite certain that those that have a negative opinion of the situation are spinning this with much glee," he said.
------------------------
I don't know if I can take any more of this gibberish! I am hardly "full of GLEE" at this situation NOR at the thought of a potentially hazardous site NOR barreling forward making additional costly mistakes... with our children!

This is NOT a PR campaign the community is engaged in - but it seems Mr. Metzger thinks it is. We are NOT FULL OF GLEE - We are CONCERNED (1) about how important it seems to Mr. Metger that he needs to "protecting" himself with PR-oriented comments - he is not doing the right thing - period and it's time to own up, not cover up. Mr. Metzger is not being honest with the ocmmunity - nor forthright and we are NOT full of glee to find out each time he makes errors and mistakes and doesn't own up to it.
And (2) We are NOT full of GLEE to be stuck with disfunctional decision-making and an undignified board President.

I can't see the school being ready by August '09.

I've read dozens of Phase II reports, something must be going on for it not to be released.

How can they start moving dirt when they don't know how much BB is going to cost?

A better question is WHY would they start moving dirt without knowing all of the costs?

Ready on time? August 2009? Oh yeah? Highly unlikely!

Metzger and the rest of the board will toss millions of the tax payers dollars at contractors who will gladly take it. When it is not on time, the board and the contractors will say they did there very best but, everything was against them and it just did not happen. $8-10 million later (extra $ paid to contractors), it opens in 2010. What a joke of a President and Super D we have. What a waste! Can we start to impeach the board now or after they p?ss away 150 million dollars or more.

Oh yeah, and in 2010 here is what 204 will get. A school partially completed, kids dodging bull dozers, trucks, lumber, etc. School girls being harrassed by construction workers. Like teachers, will these construction workers get back ground checks? Who knows and that is scary! No gym, pool, auditorium, etc.

Sounds like a good high school experience to me. Good times and good memories. It should be a real plus for 2004 to put kids in a situation like that. Very well done 204!