D204 sets timeline for new HS

Now that the land hurdle is behind us, we can actually start to build a high school.

Thanks to the church, SB, etc for getting this done.

Let's see how long it takes for the name calling and the venom and the accusations of elitism and racism from both sides of this issue to come out. Let's see how long it takes before posters using language that most of us would be horrified to have our children use in a public forum.

Is there no way for the people interested in this issue to keep the discourse and disagreement civil? I challange all (and the Moderators too) to not let this discussion sink into the cesspool.

I'm thrilled that construction will be starting soon on the much needed third high school. My child will not benefit as she will already be out of school by then, but it is great for 204 as a whole and that is what the focus should be for now - educating the students and improving the school district.

Thanks to AME and the tenacious efforts of Dr. Daeschner and Mark Metzger, we will finally have a third high school. They have worked tremendously through all the mud slinging and stayed focused. I applaud them for doing the right thing. I only hope Linda Holmes does not go unpunished for her tampering and her efforts to try and derail this project. She also should be thanking the church for stepping in as if this didn't go through, the district would be heading for a disaster with overcrowding and a domino effect of misfortune throughout the district.

It's an embarrassment to our district.

It's amazing.

It's the biggest bait and switch in the history of school districts.

The saddest part is the "overcrowding" argument they (sb) claimed as their "need" to move on the school now.

NOT one (1) resident spoke up about that need at the last meeting.
In fact, the people who would be affected by the overcrowded were pleading to slow down and not build there.

They are building this school with the knowledge that it was not passed. They are building this school against the will of the district.

It should be illegal. I sincerely think this desire was the desire of a "few" who were just tired and upset with NVHS being as nice as it was. Thus, the opportunity to build a new shiny school up North (were no one would vote it in) became available, and they took it.

Sad. And evidence is in the NSFOC lawsuit and the 5 to 1 attendees at the sb meeting asking them to slow down.

The fix was in. Let's face it. Stop trying to spin it. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Thank you to the board, administration, AME and all others who worked thru the challenges to get this moving. Thanks their families as well as the stress of this process takes a toll on them as well. I pray that we as a community can move beyond the anger and hurt that was felt on all sides of this issue. Go Mustangs!

Just imagine where we would be if the BB Trust was as cooperative as the church.

GREED, GREED, GREED....

Confused and Confounded: I (and a lot of others, it looks) wholeheartedly accept your challenge! I've been keeping tabs on these threads as well, and I've been extremely encouraged by the majority of recent postings in "Salvation for 3rd HS Site?" It seems to me that folks on both sides of this issue have begun to lay down their firearms and make the best of this situation. If you haven't already, check out the "Salvation" thread postings from the past 24 hours. Of course, there are still those "rotten apples" who are determined to be a part of the problem instead of part of the solution. However, you'll find people from the "North" extending a welcome to the soon-to-be new attendees of WVHS, as well as residents of the "South" excited about the opportunity to help their new school continue to improve and flourish. I think we all can acknowledge the fact that our kids are watching us and learning from how we choose to handle this matter. So, "Confused," please don't lose heart! I haven't...I'm quite hopeful.

I'm very happy the SB is moving forward as quickly as possible. Hopefully, the lawsuit filed by the few residents will be dropped, and the BB settlement will only be for the fees owed to them (which is how I read it).

Re: Confused and Confounded Maybe it is time to encourage folks to write in non-combative styles. Many bloggers have mastered this art, here are a few that I came up with from the past blog:

Wvhs Already Great Dollar and sense New W V Parent

Eola Poor Choice MR Perspective Warrior Pride SC

Big Picture Issues Incredulous Civics Lilly &

Greg Forrest (aka Fast Times)

These folks emulate imho what a successful blog should look like. Another addition many of the anony. folks.

I am going to make the following comment from an objective point of view, so all you haters back off.

In my opinion, this saga is a long way from "over". You can bring out the grading equipment and even start digging a hole in the ground (watch out for those giant gas pipes!), but we have NOT heard the last from the NSFOC, the Brach Trust, and the Brodie Trust. Plus all of the other ancillary characters in this drama...i.e, Linda Holmes, Sidley & Austin, etc.

That is where the problem rests.

The ongoing litigation is NOT A SEPARATE ISSUE from the construction of MVHS at Eola. All of this is tied to the construction of a third high school. You can try to detach it, hope it doesn't amount to anything, and then high five about MVHS getting built.

But take some time to read the Brodie suit. Consider that they now are working with arguably the most powerful lawfirm in the state of Illinois, and that they are hoppin mad at 204. Metzger can tell the press that the suit has no merit, but do you really think this power team would be gathering right now if the case was fluff? Even if you think the odds of a Brodie victory are, whatever, 25%. That is still a HUGE overhang on this district. A HUGE overhang on the 204 budget. And a HUGE overhang on our wallets and our reputation as a community.

If they prevail, which I personally think there is far greater than 25% chance that they will, Metzger and Dash are going to play the victim role, call everybody else evil and "anti-kids" and then ask all of us to get out our wallets. They'll point out that thank God THEY are able to put kids first, unlike those heathens Brach and Brodie (and NSFOC of course, they never miss a chance to throw them under the bus). They'll point at their brand new MVHS at Eola, and say "See! We're the good guys!"

Folks, this is real. This is not without merit. And this continues to exist because the Board and Dash continue to pretend like it does NOT exist.

Think about it.

And while you're at it, do a little research on Sidley & Austin and decide if you'd like to take them on.

I for one am disappointed. Aside from this episode devolving into a class debate fraught with insults and half-truths, the SB & superintendent have shown that they lack both the character & ability to rise above the fray. Rather they too have allowed themselves a role in this debacle.

Matea will be long stigmatized, the community is fractured and most importantly the rational voice of the community (those who are in favor of allowing the ENTIRE district a say in the where and most importantly how much questions related to Matea) has been alienated to an extent that I fear a feeling of apathy may win out over involvement. I say this because it seems that the one who shouts loadest and last wins.

(Full Disclosure: I would feel the same way if the SB simpy capitulated to the NSFOC however because their activities may ultimately result in providing all of the voters in 204 a voice in the Matea placement I wish them well.)

I'm surprised it didn't make today's paper that the district closed on the land yesterday. This was verified by Curt Bradshaw last night at Fry.

Good for the Board. Maybe the campaign to take away the North Siders' neighborhood school can now dry up and go away, and I hope NSFOC's members are prepared to compensate taxpayers for the extra $2.3 million they've cost us.

What a load of horse hocky!

Rush to buy the land, rush to build the school. Open it up without everything in place. Deja vu WV grand opening.

Same thing as WV fast forward 30 years. WV was a piece of garbage when it was built with a ridiculous "open" floor plan due to a brain cramp suffered by the SB many decades ago and sold a bill of goods by the then golden child architect.
WV is still a piece of garbage building that has suffered thru knee jerk building additions without ever having a master plan to guide it. It has suffered from years of neglect and deferred maintenance. It has pretty much used up it's useful life and is not too far from needing to be replaced.

Fast forward to present and we have parents and a SB who are rushing to build another piece of garbage building. Rushing just to get it open. Just to try to meet self imposed deadlines.

NO ONE HAS STOPPED TO REALLY LOOK IN DEPTH AT WHAT WE ARE ABOUT TO BUILD. NO ONE HAS DUG INTO THE DETAILS. ALL A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT IS A BUILDING NO MATTER WHAT.

Well I for one do care. I want a well built quality building that is equal to or better than how NV was constructed. I do not want my tax dollars wasted on another disposable building that was rushed to completion.

If we let this happen we will pay and pay and pay for these poor decisions. Look over the last 2-3 year period and count up the number of really poor decisions this SB has made. How many really, really poor decisions are we going to let them make? How many really, really poor decisions are we going to let them make before WE ALL say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH?

How soon do you think it will be before the first injuntion to STOP CONSTRUCTION will be filed? How has MM and the rest of the SB factored that into their timeline?

To Matea Either Way

First, Metea is spelled with an "e", not an "a". Secondly, the school will only be stigmatized if people perpetuate those labels. Stop saying that and it won't become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Metea will be a wonderful high school, I have no doubt, joining both WVHS and NVHS in providing a great education to 204 students.

M-E-T-E-A

M-E-T-E-A

M-E-T-E-A

M-E-T-E-A

M-E-T-E-A

looks like its not only the kids who need the 3rd HS

I forgot to add that Chad was only in the disappointed club for a few days - try to swallow the pill of being in the disappointed club for ever and then call the residence of White Eagle and Tall grass "elitists," when you are able to swallow the pill you are expecting others to take - like loosing your precious Metea - then I do not think you are in a position to call anybody names. And quite frankly I would definetely leave the church out of it especially if you want to call people you have never met "elitists!"

To Moderator Jim: I take issue with the following partial quote from your blog thread "So, at long last, it looks like everyone will walk away happy."

Not even a question mark at the end???????

In any case, I am fairly certain that "I for one, am not walking away happy persay." The only way I could have walked away happy was if the entire district had the same voice input into the new location as what was done for the BB location. GREAT POST by "Metea either way"

From your article May 7th is the start date for construction. does anyone know where all the diggers/bulldozers are going to be coming from? ie are they going to be blocking any roads? I got stuck this morning behind a couple of WIDE LOAD trucks carrying construction equipment. Would definately like to steer clear of those bad boys when things really get ramped up. need to find some alternate roads to utilize.

From BigMike : "And a HUGE overhang on .... our reputation as a community."

Sorry - that boat has sailed.

And for MarkM mentioning the 5 to 1 attendance ratio at the school board meeting:
1) Attendance (due to space)is limited at the sb meetings
2) A majority of people will show up at a (any) meeting in which they are at odds with the actions of a commission or board - fewer people will make time in a busy schedule to attend a meeting at which the actions of the board coincide with their views. As an example: How many park district, library, planning commission, city council, fire district, etc board meetings have you atteneded lately? Hence, most D204 citizens that agree with the sb felt no compunction to take up space in the crowded meeting room to exhibit that agreement.

Moderator Jim to Greg Forrest: Operative word "looks" - that's for you guys to decide as you weigh in with your comments. It's all about your perception, reality etc. Just because something "looks" a certain way doesn't mean it really is.

I agree with Northside Bob's post. I think the NSFOC should be responsible for the additional $2.3 million this tragedy has cost us.

Right on Active Citizen. It always seem you get bigger crowds with people who don't agree with you on something. I am quite happy with the way the SB has handled things. No need for me to show up. I sent them an email thanking all of them for their countless long hours of meetings and more importantly for their families. How many of us would be willing to spend as much time as they have away from their families? Not I!

But from the looks of things our next election is going to have hundreds of names of the ballots. All those complaining I'm assuming are going to run to make it better. Or are they the typical people who critize the work volunteers do at all levels but never offer to help.

***By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 10:48 AM
I agree with Northside Bob's post. I think the NSFOC should be responsible for the additional $2.3 million this tragedy has cost us.****

They will be, as well as me, you and everyone else in 204.......and by the way, the same goes with all other settlements/litigation stemming from the placement of Metea.

$2.3M! Forget about it. That's going to be pennies compare to the BB cost.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 10:48 AM
I agree with Northside Bob's post. I think the NSFOC should be responsible for the additional $2.3 million this tragedy has cost us.
.............
That's the same thinking that got us in this mess to begin with. You think it is ok for the SB to have and use two legal teams at taxpayers’ expense but one Community Group who oppose this SB is not allowed to bring legal action due to a precedence the SB set. You can't sue for spite. The SB/Taxpayers will pay all of the legal fees and there will be no counter suit because there is no case. When the judge rules in the NSFOC lawsuit we will find out who is on the right side of the law, and then that will fuel the BB case. If one wins they will all win. The SB is not in a position to ask for money's to pay their legal teams to defend themselves. If I am wrong, show me the documentation that shows a precedent where a SB was able to successfully get back legal fees from someone who sued them.

Oh we won't be suing for spite - that's what the NSFOC did. The NSFOC has caused us money - the sb has saved us money - kudos to the SB.

To Anonymous on April 17, 2008 9:52 AM
What a load of horse hocky!

Rush to buy the land, rush to build the school. Open it up without everything in place. Deja vu WV grand opening.

Same thing as WV fast forward 30 years. WV was a piece of garbage when it was built with a ridiculous "open" floor plan due to a brain cramp suffered by the SB many decades ago and sold a bill of goods by the then golden child architect.
WV is still a piece of garbage building that has suffered thru knee jerk building additions without ever having a master plan to guide it. It has suffered from years of neglect and deferred maintenance. It has pretty much used up it's useful life and is not too far from needing to be replaced.

Fast forward to present and we have parents and a SB who are rushing to build another piece of garbage building. Rushing just to get it open. Just to try to meet self imposed deadlines.

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

You couldn't be farther off base. In case you weren't aware, this is the same building design that would have went on BB, they didn't design it over the weekend. Just to give you a little perspective, the Sears Tower which has 110 floors and 4.4 million gross square feet, was completed and had occupancy in 36 months. Surely an experienced construction crew (like Turner) can complete a 3000 student facility in 17 months.

Check out:

http://www.sidley.com/default.aspx

This is who Dash, MM, Alka, Glawe, Bradshaw and whoever else is stuffed into their little clown car are going to be up against in the BB litigation.

All that litigation goes away if you just build the school where you told the electorate you'd build it.

I am still dumbfounded as to the support the SB is getting for settling on the Eola site. Half of the school district does NOT support the building of a 3rd HS at Eola and thousands of homeowners could see their property values decline by ~10%.

Consider the following:

1. Boundaries...shouldn't it have been a requirement that every student be afforded the opportunity to either stay at their current school or be given an opportunity to go to the new MV? People's current home values are based in part on which high school they belong to. If everyone got to stay at their current school or go the new Metea Valley, then no one's property values would have gone down...it would have either stayed the same or gone up. This is the difference between being disappointed (which I can accept) and being screwed (which I don't accept). For the people who currently go to WV, you could argue that a redistrict to MV would improve their property values, so the only people who would be disappointed would be the people who are currently at WV and would stay at WV (no chance for a property value increase), but they wouldn't be screwed because they would be in the same position as before.

Instead, people being redistricted from NV to WV could see their homes decline in value by tens of thousands of dollars. Any time someone in TG or WE sells their home or tries to refinance, they may as well be sending a $50,000 check to a family who moved from WV to MV and saw a similar increase (instead of decrease)to their property value.

For the people who support the building at Eola, would you still support it if the district personally billed you $50,000 to build there? And on top of that, increase your property taxes to send you to the least desireable HS in the district?

2. Logistics: The location of a 3rd HS that far north does not make sense. When the referendum passed in 2006, the population center of the district was located near the Walgreen's on the corner of 87th and Route 59. Today, the population center of the district is near the Wendy's on 95th street. I think most would be surprised to know that in 2009, both NV and WV would both be located NORTH of where the center of population of D204 is. If we should be building anywhere, it should be south, not north.

3. District discontent: The SB is engaged in a propaganda campaign to convince supporters of the EOLA site that supporters are in the majority and that the dissenters are a vocal minority. Given the number of people who voted NO in 2006 and the number of people who voted YES, but now regret that vote, I think an educated guess of the % of households in the district who are against building on EOLA is somewhere between 45% - 65%. With that much discontent, which has not been recognized by the SB, there is no way that we are ever going to be able to operate MV because an operations referendum will never pass.

The decision to build on Eola will be one that the district will regret for the next generation; its unfortunate that more people don't see that.

I don't know what the best answer is to resolve the overcrowding issue, but I do know that building a 3rd HS on the Eola site is not it.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 11:50 AM
Oh we won't be suing for spite - that's what the NSFOC did. The NSFOC has caused us money - the sb has saved us money - kudos to the SB.
_____________________________

The SB has saved us money? How is that? How many millions did we waste pursuing BB land?

5 million dollars in legal fees- already gone
??? millions spent on lobbyist fees pursuing quick take
Damages that could exceed 20 million dollars.

Someone needs to FOIA the invoices for the quick take lobbyist the SB hired.

Do it quick before they destroy or alter the documents. I believe some of that is already happening.

This is great news for the community as a whole. Let's start digging....

It is also great news for the health and safety of TG residents. Now that Metea is moving forward, we can all focus our attention on stopping construction of the "death bridge" being built over rt 59 near the TG community.

Thanks to NSFOC, we are now very aware of the dangers of EMF. Therefore, the bridge, which is right under the high voltage power lines, and brings pedestrains within 50 feet of the EMF source, can be brought to a halt.

After all, it's all about safety, right NSFOC?

District 204 is now the proud owner of the AME land. The closing was yesterday and we now have title to the property in hand. Congratulations to the community!

Actually, 6 to 1 against the new school would be the vote.

There were only 20+ people in support for Metea being built, and they were all Waubansie people.

Now, if there were more supporters they would shown up.

It's Brookdale. Also, does anyone NOT doubt that this was all drawn up years ago? When we were being feed BB land? c'mon.

You don't sell and buy 84 acres in a couple days. Not even the best firesales in business happen like that.

This was a done deal as soon as the BB land price was a "issue" -- the SB members who wanted a school up North saw an opportunity..

I want to thank the school board for working so quickly to resolve the concerns of everyone in the community. They were able to address the concerns of the toxic soil, prove to us that the power lines really are no danger, and by the looks of layout of the property, put the school a safe distance away from those very dangerous rail road tracks.

I have a child that will be attending High School next year but will not be attending Metea. Metea will help make his high school experience much better than my daughter's has been with the extremly over crowded situation at Nequa.

Thank you once again for having the conviction and courage to not be bullied by a few and do what is best for all of the students of the district.

So Mark M, who shot Kennedy?
You seem to be in to conspiracy theories. Maybe you would enjoy the blogs about the show LOST-- full of intricate theories...

It has already been posted that many many supporters of the SB and the Eola location did not attend the meeting as they felt confident the SB would do make the best decision for the district. Also, I think it is a bit extreme to thing that the whole BB saga was just for show. No one could have predicted how this would all play out. If the board has been trying to buy the AME land since 2005 (and the owners weren't interested in selling...) it is because a northern location makes SENSE.

Way to go SB and Administration. I wish you some much needed peace.

To all of the above bloggers who are still angrily obsessing about the NSFOC--

The district closed on the Eola land yesterday and you still can't give this up. So many of you are determined to keep the hate and unproductive dialogue going for as long as you can.

The NSFOC is not this school district's biggest problem. The law firms representing the BB Trusts in their $40.2 million (so far) damage claims are. That's who we need to worry about. That's the real monster bearing down on 204.

The pro-Eola camp has been jeering for weeks about how small and insignificant the NSFOC is, yet you continue to make them larger than life with your threats and verbal battering. You are so focused on kicking around the little dog that you fail to notice the rest of the pack is planning to have you for lunch.

If you don't get a grip soon, you'll be scattered to the winds when the BB storm hits.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 11:50 AM
Oh we won't be suing for spite - that's what the NSFOC did. The NSFOC has caused us money - the sb has saved us money - kudos to the SB.
**************************************************************

Did you read the lawsuits? It clearly states the legal issues involved (Not for Spite). If you don't want to read and express the truth you should probably stop blogging. This type of stupidity needs to stop so the area can start working together again. Get off it already. Nobody has won anything at this point. My guess is, we just wrote a blank check for this Eola property. No one can tell the tax payers in D204 what the costs really are at this point. The SB potentially cost us all millions more dollars then your little pocket book can handle. Did you see the BB legal team working on this? D204's legal teams are in real trouble on this one. Stay tuned for more stupidity.

"Walk away happy?" Let's see:
- I have 2 kids who will attend WVHS during the "transition" period in which the number of students in the building will be 25% higher than today (already too crowded, right?). I don't hear too many people talking about this, but do the math - when you lose the freshman center and implement the new boundaries = 25% more than today based on posted data. I haven't heard any plan on how this will be addressed.
- My kids will be separated from most of their middle school friends who will be sent to a different HS.
- My kids will spend 10-hours per week on a bus going to a school over 6-miles away when we live within walking distance from NVHS, less than 1-mile away.
- I feel cheated by those I elected to the SB. The reason they aren't entertaining the idea of putting the new HS location to a vote is they know there isn't a chance it would pass.
- I've come to the realization that I'm not supposed to stand up for myself or my family if doing so is in conflict with somebody else's happiness. If I do, I'm called names like "entitled," "elitist," and even "racist." To top it off, I'm told that God is against me.

No, I'm actually quite sad.

And this sadness is deepened by the fact that our community is apparently filled with, according to these blogs, people who will derive great pleasure in my sadness.

Few vs. Many vs. Most

The only way to know how many are for/against the Eloa site is to put it to a district vote, short of this please refrain from quantifying the support of either side.

To anymous:***Secondly, the school will only be stigmatized if people perpetuate those labels. Stop saying that and it won't become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Metea will be a wonderful high school, I have no doubt, joining both WVHS and NVHS in providing a great education to 204 students****

Given the tenor of these blogs, I pray that you are right.

MarkM. 7:49 post: "And evidence is in the NSFOC lawsuit and the 5 to 1 attendees at the sb meeting asking them to slow down."

This spefically says ATTENDEES for the 5 to 1 ratio.

MarkM. 12:47 post: "There were only 20+ people in support for Metea being built, and they were all Waubansie people."

Wow! How do you know "there were" only 20+ people in support of Metea? I believe you mean only 20+ in attendance at the sb meeting in support of Metea. I guess that is possible.

I restate my claim - District members in support of the school board decision did not show up in force specifically DUE TO their support.

MarkM. 12:47 post: "Actually, 6 to 1 against the new school would be the vote".

What an explicit claim. Please post the scientific polling data this is based on - I'd love to see it! I am sure the pollsters were wise enough to pick a random sampling of the entire geographic area of D204, and not just selected populations.

The referendum was passed to build a new high school. I know when I voted for the measure there was no mention on the ballot of where the new high school would be located or how the district boundaries would be set.

Let's move on.

Let's talk about how middle school students are so untrustworthy they must have assigned seats in the lunchroom, and high school students can't keep their tests to help them understand what they don't know and to better study for finals and AP tests, and students from some subdivisions and towns are verbally discriminated against by other students, teachers, and staff. (One high school office worker said "I wish those students from (blank) would get out of our Naperville schools!" Most unfortunately this was heard by a student!)

We have many more issues in our community schools that still need to be addressed. This one has been.

Do we really own the land already? Is that even possible?

Moderator Jim: Another newspaper has reported that the SB has already closed on the Eola property. Your report quotes the District finance guy saying it will take two weeks. What's up?

Thank you SB for getting us back on track to a '09 opening for Metea.

Sincerely,

A proud Mustang parent

To Chimay:

How is Waubonsie the least desirable hs in the district? I wouldnt want my child anywhere near the Taj Mahal and the Elitist attitude you transmit. Why is it that you think you have the right to decide where the High School should be? I dont remember electing you to the school board. They were elected to decide whats best for the district not just you. If they feel that putting the school on Eola I am fine with that. Again I remind all of you when you voted the ballot clearly stated, "DO YOU SUPPORT DISTRICT 204 BUILDING A THIRD HIGH SCHOOL." No where did it say based on boundries or the property. A school district has the right to balance boundries HOW THEY SEE FIT!

Moderator Jim to Anonymous: Yes, it's true - news will be up on our web site shortly. Thanks.

Northside Bob on April 17, 2008 9:21 AM

I still can't believe everyone thinks this is okay. It is not and the fight may not be over yet. So they paid 19 million for Eola.

How about the $12,000,000.00 Curt Bradshaw said we will be owing in damages. Straight from the horses mouth or in his case other bodily functions.

Do I hear a thunderstorm?

I replayed the 4/14 school board meeting, and I found that at 1:59:13, Glawe stated Macom was $300k/acre. However, DD's MV Land Report on Jan 22, 2008 reported Macom's average price per acre was $209,610 for a total of $17.9 Million. That's a SAVINGS of a million bucks!!!

More lies from the School Board!

I'll never forget when the Tall Grass lady stood up at the school board meeting and said "I buy my kids clothes at Abercrombie & Fitch and I am not sending my kids to school with kids who wear clothes fom Kohl's." At least she was being honest how she really felt and didn't try to make up more politically correct BS excuses like NSFOC does to stop their kids from mixing with the Kohl's crowd. You should all be happy as you will at least have the best dressed kids at Waubonsie. Maybe your kids could teach them how to dress better and they could teach your kids that you should never judge anyone by where they shop and that there are more important things in life than material possesions.

To: BigMike on April 17, 2008 8:51 AM

Here's my only issue. While I expect the Brach and Brodie Trusts to be greedy and get as much for their land, I still question what the motive is for NSFOC? I'm asking this in all seriousness. Is it just they feel their vote negated? Was it they felt victim of "bait and switch"?

Say what you will but I did ONLY vote for the pure fact that I felt we needed a 3rd HS for everyone in IPSD. When I originally voted I didn't care if it was at BB, 248th St. or Butterfield Rd (yes our district goes that far north).

This is the reason why I keep scratching my head at the NSFOC. Do I think they raised some great points, yes. Do I think they educated all of us in IPSD, yes. However, I don't see how this will ever be a victory for the NSFOC. And at what cost? Because in the end if they are victorious, we all lose, even the NSFOC.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm shocked that a 3rd HS no matter where it is doesn't take priority over anything else. I thought that WAS the main point of the referendum? I have also said in my previous posts that I personally don't care how much my tax dollars go up if it benefits my childs education. Will I be upset if I feel my SB or SD isn't being fiscally responsible, your damn right I will. However, I personally don't see that in this particular case.

BTW...I also read the Brodie Complaint and from as much as I can tell the SB will be only punished for the 4 months that they didn't notify BB Trusts that they wouldn't use the land. The IPSD was supposed to notify them on Sept 27 and asked for an extension and didn't officially notify the BB Trust until early Feb. Again, that's just my take on things. However, I have no idea what documents were signed between BB and IPSD that made them liable to purchase that 55 acres.

To: Anonymous on April 17, 2008 9:52 AM

Wow, such hate. Sounds to me you should have moved out of the district 30 years ago if you've been holding that much anger for so long.

Maybe you should try being part of the solution and not the problem. Because what I'm hearing a lot of is the blame game. Nothing is accomplished well when we play the blame or name game. Try working together with those you disagree with instead of insulting them. Who knows you might just change your attitude.

By ActiveCitizen on April 17, 2008 10:35 AM
From BigMike : "And a HUGE overhang on .... our reputation as a community."

Sorry - that boat has sailed.

And for MarkM mentioning the 5 to 1 attendance ratio at the school board meeting:

2) A majority of people will show up at a (any) meeting in which they are at odds with the actions of a commission or board - fewer people will make time in a busy schedule to attend a meeting at which the actions of the board coincide with their views. As an example: How many park district, library, planning commission, city council, fire district, etc board meetings have you atteneded lately? Hence, most D204 citizens that agree with the sb felt no compunction to take up space in the crowded meeting room to exhibit that agreement.

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

Your statement is very true. When Napergatians have an issue of disagreement with the City Council it is standing room only.

Wen an issue is not in dispute only 5 old timers show up to agree with the City Council and every body dozes off!

The proof is in the pudding as they say!

To: Matea Either Way on April 17, 2008 9:02 AM

Matea will be long stigmatized, the community is fractured and most importantly the rational voice of the community (those who are in favor of allowing the ENTIRE district a say in the where and most importantly how much questions related to Matea) has been alienated to an extent that I fear a feeling of apathy may win out over involvement. I say this because it seems that the one who shouts loadest and last wins.
_________________________________

You are correct. The longer you harbor those feelings overall stigma over a certain area this SD will never heal. I guess I'm more of the optimist type. I see in the past 2 days people trying to work together. People reaching out their arms and being welcoming.

I for one have not put the blame on anyone or any group. I think we are all to blame for what has taken place in a small or large way. Sure we might not have made the mistakes the SB may have made but we all developed an opinion and that has driven us these past 2 months or past 3 years when this all started. It's all in our perception on how we create our opinions, right?

Until people try to perceive things differently and try to make changes you're right apthy will win over involvement. I for one took it upon myself to involve myself and have since trying to work with Greg Forest on common issues (even though we disagree on the HS) and create a working involvement environment again. Hell, maybe the SB can take a lesson from us!!! That's my hope anyway.

To Anonymous on April 17, 2008 11:57 AM

You clearly do not know the facts of Turner's record related to coming in over budget and/or behind schedule. I'm sure their low ball bid looks real good though they have a really nasty habit of running up project cost with change order after change order after change order. In the end who is going to go back and compare that against the original bids?

Now maybe you would like to talk about dissatisfied customers, or how about shoddy work, lawsuits, employee fatalities? No, I didn't think so.

Come back and offer something credible when you have some facts to back you up.

The jury's still out on that one - the BB damages suit cannot be ignored as a potential cost of the SB's mishandling of this entire process. The BB suit asks for either the district to purchase the land at the decided price or for monetary damages. By rushing to build at Eola to meet a self-imposed 2009 deadline, the SB is eliminating the first option.

The BB land right now would be $12 million more, with no more accruing legal fees and no future damages. What happens if BB is successful in its suit and wins damages of $50 million or more? Does the SB tell us, "Oops, sorry, we didn't think we'd lose - but hey, we paid less per acre for the land itself - we did a good job, right? Now pay up"?

Sorry, but I don't have a lot of confidence in the SB's assessment of the pending BB lawsuits based on their track record.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 1:18 PM
"Walk away happy?" Let's see:
- I have 2 kids who will attend WVHS during the "transition" period in which the number of students in the building will be 25% higher than today (already too crowded, right?). I don't hear too many people talking about this, but do the math - when you lose the freshman center and implement the new boundaries = 25% more than today based on posted data. I haven't heard any plan on how this will be addressed.
- My kids will be separated from most of their middle school friends who will be sent to a different HS.
- My kids will spend 10-hours per week on a bus going to a school over 6-miles away when we live within walking distance from NVHS, less than 1-mile away.
- I feel cheated by those I elected to the SB. The reason they aren't entertaining the idea of putting the new HS location to a vote is they know there isn't a chance it would pass.
- I've come to the realization that I'm not supposed to stand up for myself or my family if doing so is in conflict with somebody else's happiness. If I do, I'm called names like "entitled," "elitist," and even "racist." To top it off, I'm told that God is against me.

No, I'm actually quite sad.

And this sadness is deepened by the fact that our community is apparently filled with, according to these blogs, people who will derive great pleasure in my sadness.
.......................................
Let me be clear. There is no plan other than to slam WE and TG in there to help with OVERCROWDING and balancing the test scores. This test score thing is a bad idea and a gamble at best, but when did that stop our SB. They really must think WE and TG are that much smarter than the Stonebridge students as evidence of this transaction. On that I would have to agree with them for a change. If you follow the SB's thought process they will be expecting a decrease in the value of education so great that it will drop the scores significantly. Don't worry, many tell us that the overcrowding is already happening in the hallways so we are already seeing the scores drop. Wait a minute; WV and NV are very high scoring schools. Do you see any contradiction here? The classrooms themselves are not overcrowded according to students I have talked to. Walk into any HS during class changes and you will see the massive overcrowding the SB supporters are talking about as justification to build the 3rd HS. I would say that the transition will most likely happen as those Northsiders flee WV and we come in. Don't have a heavy heart. There is much change still ahead of us. Even the boundaries and buildings could change and most likely will.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 1:18 PM
"Walk away happy?" Let's see:
- I have 2 kids who will attend WVHS during the "transition" period in which the number of students in the building will be 25% higher than today (already too crowded, right?). I don't hear too many people talking about this, but do the math - when you lose the freshman center and implement the new boundaries = 25% more than today based on posted data. I haven't heard any plan on how this will be addressed.
- My kids will be separated from most of their middle school friends who will be sent to a different HS.
- My kids will spend 10-hours per week on a bus going to a school over 6-miles away when we live within walking distance from NVHS, less than 1-mile away.
- I feel cheated by those I elected to the SB. The reason they aren't entertaining the idea of putting the new HS location to a vote is they know there isn't a chance it would pass.
- I've come to the realization that I'm not supposed to stand up for myself or my family if doing so is in conflict with somebody else's happiness. If I do, I'm called names like "entitled," "elitist," and even "racist." To top it off, I'm told that God is against me.

No, I'm actually quite sad.

And this sadness is deepened by the fact that our community is apparently filled with, according to these blogs, people who will derive great pleasure in my sadness.

______________________________________

To: Anonymous on April 17, 2008 1:18 PM

I feel the same way you do. On top of all the sad facts you listed above, we know learn courtesy of Curt Bradshaw that 19 of 21 Elementary attendance areas in the district hate us.

To: Anonymous on April 17, 2008 11:44 AM

You can't sue for spite. The SB/Taxpayers will pay all of the legal fees and there will be no counter suit because there is no case. When the judge rules in the NSFOC lawsuit we will find out who is on the right side of the law, and then that will fuel the BB case. If one wins they will all win.
__________________________

Wow, do you dislike your school district that much or is it just the SB? Is it the parents as well? You can't sue for spite? I'm having a hard time seeing how if the NSFOC wins their case it benefits all of us? Please enlighten me? I'm not trying to be rude I'm just trying to understand?

Finally, do you wish to see your School District go down in flames that bad? Are you hoping that they owe $50 million plus? Is that was it is about? Who's on the right side of the law? I'm sorry I'm not seeing the connection between how a win for the NSFOC is a win for all of us?

I'm sorry I thought it was about our children and making our school district a better place. I voted on a 3rd HS plain and simple. I also said yesterday that I was proud to be fellow parents with everyone in D204 even if their opinion differed then mine. However, I can't support wanting to see all of us and our children suffer because of lawsuits. I'm not sure how one can take glee in this? I don't care how much you dislike the SB, what you're saying and doing goes against my ethics and morals.

Sorry for my outburst. I'm allowed to have one a day.

To: By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 1:18 PM

"...- My kids will spend 10-hours per week on a bus going to a school over 6-miles away when we live within walking distance from NVHS, less than 1-mile away..."

I can't wait for the bridge to open up so I can see the huge parade of TG high school kids walking to school.

Anyone interested in making a guess of the number of TG kids that walk and use the bridge???

I'll never forget when the Tall Grass lady stood up at the school board meeting and said "I buy my kids clothes at Abercrombie & Fitch and I am not sending my kids to school with kids who wear clothes fom Kohl's.

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

I don't believe this nonsense. I don't know if it was said or not. I doubt it was said. And if it was said, it was said by a planted person.

I have seen these plants on both the Napergate Threads and the School District Threads when the temperature rises.

I wish the Moderator would not publish these "plants" as they cause hostility.

In the Napergate Thread they call these plants out. We have to learn from them and also call these plants at.

No lady would ever make such a statement unless she had no screws...at that point her statement has no merit.

The Moderator should not allow such planted statement most likely by the oppositon to destroy the reputation of TALL GRASS.

I am hoping most of us can see through this nonsense.

Weird. According to Naperville demographics, my personal income is at least higher than 97% of all household income in Naperville. Yet, we still shop at Kohl's for clothing (as well as other stores, but still . . .).

People are just stupid sometimes.

Well,
Looks like the board and superintendant has taken the multi-million dollar gamble with your tax dollars that the school district will win ALL 3 lawsiuts against them.

I am sure glad we all have confidence given all of the other done deals they had sold to us that never materialized.

I can think of one word that describes this board and superintendant
Irresponsible.

> Irresponsible to buy property you're not sure you can afford (until lawsuits settled/defeated)
>Irresponsible to build a school on a site that has safety concerns over other sites without the risks (even if their chances are small)
>Irresponsible to buy property without negotiation (contaminated farmland that is more expensive than two other farms)
>Irresponsible to build a school further away from the population when other property is available nearer the population today and tomorrow
>Irresponsible to conduct public comment periods and not listen/respond to issues/questions.
>Irresponsible to hire a superintendant who was fired from his previous job and when you read the media reports he's cited as someone who did not listen to teachers nor parent.
>Irresponsible to lie OVER AND OVER to the community you represent. Ex "All options are on the table" but 8hrs later (1 business day) make a decision.

Editor Jim,

It would be a great story to contact Macom, Hamman, etc to see if they were even contacted by the board Fri-Mon to see if there was an attempt to look at other sites and to see what their new price was for sale since the previous prices for Macom and Hamman reported by Daschner in Jan were both less than what they paid AME.

Folks, I am personally fed up with the continued lies and spinning done by the board to us. ITs not right.

Christine Vickers appears to be the only member who has the cajones to speak up when something doesn't feel right. The rest hide behind the lie that they are just doing what they think is right. What a convenient shroud to pull over your incompetence and irresponsibility.

Editor Jim, Any chance you guys can see if "all/any options were explored"? Thanks!!

YOu are Sooooo Right Dollars and Sense!

The Big dogs to fear are the BB trusts. It all depends on how pissed off they are and who is in charge of the trust. They have deeeeep pockets and from big mikes post, a Scaaaaary looking legal team. I could sell everything I own and probably would only get to sit in the lobby and talk to an intern for my cash.

Now, our "crack" district legal team and the "top notch" direction they receive from our Admin/SB leaders do not fill me with the unbridled confidence that our SB seems to have.

To all the posters that keep repeating;
read your ballot
read your ballot
read your ballot
hey, dont forget to read your ballot.

Parroting the same thing over and over does not mean that there is no basis or there is no risk no matter how much you, we, me, etc want to believe that it is true.

Usually when someone continues to harp on the same thing over and over and over, they are VERY WORRIED about something. I know this to be true at least in my case. I (and many others including "Metea either way") repeated essentially the same thing for over a month (put it up for a vote). And you know what? in the back of my mind I was fearful that it would never come to fruition. I held out hope to be sure, but look at what actually transpired (my worst fears).

Now my worst fear is that we will get torpedoed by the big dogs, the budget will be wiped, we will have half a HS hanging in the wind waiting for the money that is frozen by the BB damages; WHEN WE could have cut the knees out of the lawsuits by putting it up for a vote to take a big chunk of the basis of the suits and made them MOOT by a confirmation vote.

you dont think I didnt have a few folks come up to me over the past 8 weeks and say in a nice way, "hey there GF, why are you so big on promoting a confirmation vote? what happens if it passes, why risk it if someone actually listens to you since you are also not a proponent of the location for the district as a whole?

NOW LET ME STATE FOR THE RECORD, NO ONE tied to the NSFOC that I am aware of spoke to me about this, just a couple of concerned citizens and pro BB folks that know me and are my friends did; as they would prefer not to take the risk that I am more than willing to take for the good of the district long term (in my opinion). As many of you have already deduced, I am just one of the "uninformed persons who is easily parted with this money" or whatever the catchphraze was at the time.

Putting it up for a vote. AFTER THE FACT and the damages are in, does us little good.

Good luck to us. For all you No limit holder players out there, Looks like our district just moved ALL IN with a pair of jacks. Not sure what BB is holding. Also dont know what NSFOC is holding. But from the parinoid concern by some of the bloggers, they are more worried about NSFOC when we should be looking and worring about the Pro player sitting next to us ( the BB guys/gals)

By What about the safety of TG residents? on April 17, 2008 12:23 PM
This is great news for the community as a whole. Let's start digging....

It is also great news for the health and safety of TG residents. Now that Metea is moving forward, we can all focus our attention on stopping construction of the "death bridge" being built over rt 59 near the TG community.

Thanks to NSFOC, we are now very aware of the dangers of EMF. Therefore, the bridge, which is right under the high voltage power lines, and brings pedestrains within 50 feet of the EMF source, can be brought to a halt.

After all, it's all about safety, right NSFOC?

***************
Just a few comments. First, please stop the Tall Grass bashing.
Second, while I agree that the bridge seems awfully close to the power lines, I don't remember anyone from the City or IDOT asking the residents of Tall Grass where they wanted the bridge built. Third, the power lines you are referring to are powering homes and are relatively small compared to the massive tower and lines at the Eola property. I assume that would also mean a big difference in EMT output, but you and I both should leave that to the experts. Lastly, being in the presence of these lines for the 45 seconds it takes to cross the bridge (which no one is going to use anyway, right?)is not at all comparable to sitting in a school 8 hrs. a day for about 200 days/yr. Please stop....and maybe consider thanking the NSFOC for at least stopping the district from buying 15 acres of land contaminated with PCBs.

To: chimay on April 17, 2008 12:19 PM

Half of the school district does NOT support the building of a 3rd HS at Eola and thousands of homeowners could see their property values decline by ~10%.

Instead, people being redistricted from NV to WV could see their homes decline in value by tens of thousands of dollars. Any time someone in TG or WE sells their home or tries to refinance, they may as well be sending a $50,000 check to a family who moved from WV to MV and saw a similar increase (instead of decrease)to their property value.

For the people who support the building at Eola, would you still support it if the district personally billed you $50,000 to build there? And on top of that, increase your property taxes to send you to the least desireable HS in the district?
_________________________________

What a bunch of ignorant statements!! Is this what this comes down to? YOUR PROPERTY VALUES? Silly me I thought we all moved into IPSD because all the schools were good. I also thought we passed a referendum for a 3rd HS. Not pass a referendum for a 3rd HS so it could increase someones home value. It benefits all of us. I'm sure I could show you how my elementary or middle school out performs yours. It's the SD. What a selfish statement.

Quit being so negative and be positive. Make WVHS the best HS in the district instead of being so unhappy and negative. Otherwise, move out of the district. There are plenty of children and parents that would much rather be at WVHS then NVHS I don't care how new it is. Don't fool yourself and think that everyone in IPSD wants to go to NVHS. It is exactaly statements like this that will always cause division in our SD. I'm sorry to call names but this does strike me as someone that feels entitled. Maybe you should drive around the district. I'm sure you'll find your house isn't the biggest by far in the SD.

Maybe I need to take a break today. I'm trying to be as diplomatic as possible but then there are posts like these.

To: no seg for our childern

your kidding right? someone else mentioned a story like this awhile back. did you witness this first hand? If so at which meeting? I have been at most meetings since Jan 2008 but dont remember this (did it happen back in 05/06?). I have also heard stories of some Brookdale comments at meetings way back in 05/06 time frame, but I have never spoken to anyone that witmessed them first hand.

I dont do much shopping so I am not sure if Kohls is a "bad" thing? I am guessing from your tone it is when compared to Fitch? I do most of my shopping at Costco. They have really good deals on everything including clothes.

To: chimay on April 17, 2008 12:19 PM

there is no way that we are ever going to be able to operate MV because an operations referendum will never pass.
_______________

Thanks, another selfish statement. One of many in your post. Do you not realize that not passing a referendum hurts the whole school district? Are taxes that important to you and outweigh your childs education? Shocking.

BTW...sounds like you have a lot of assumptions.

To: Mark M on April 17, 2008 12:47 PM
Actually, 6 to 1 against the new school would be the vote.

There were only 20+ people in support for Metea being built, and they were all Waubansie people
____________________

Hmmmmm...I recall petition in which close to 1,100 signatures from parents in every elementary school in the IPSD said they supported the SB and the Eola site. By the way these signatures were received during spring break and over 1 weekend. Otherwise, I'm sure that number could have been close to 5,000 if not more.

Why is it TG is complaining so much about driving times. Do you think you will have to drive the farthest? I laugh when I keep seeing the times go up to drive to WVHS. First it was 20 minuest, then 25, then 30, then 45, now I just saw an hour one way.

I drove from the TG clubhouse 6 times during normal time when school would start to WVHS. Guess how long it took me? 15 minutes average 1-way. Just don't drive 59 to 75th to Ogden. That will take you longer.

Here's another tid bit of information TG even if they attended NVHS is 80% a busing community. This was mentioned during the school board boundary meeting. The overall majority of TG would be bussed no matter where they went to HS. Except for 20% and that's only if they went to NVHS.

To: By (NSFOC) No Segregation For Our Children on April 17, 2008 2: PM
Is this really true??

I'll never forget when the Tall Grass lady stood up at the school board meeting and said "I buy my kids clothes at Abercrombie & Fitch and I am not sending my kids to school with kids who wear clothes fom Kohl's."

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 4:29 PM
To: By (NSFOC) No Segregation For Our Children on April 17, 2008 2: PM
Is this really true??

I'll never forget when the Tall Grass lady stood up at the school board meeting and said "I buy my kids clothes at Abercrombie & Fitch and I am not sending my kids to school with kids who wear clothes fom Kohl's."
____________________________

This is not true. I attended every school board meeting having to do with the third high school issue and this was never happened.

Find it on the live feed and give us the date and time on the tape where we can view it for ourselves.

By repeating something false over and over you are making yourself look like a desperate, vindictave fool.

I still think the crybabys who voted for this new school will get their way. Get ready for another surprise. Incidently, when the referendum results were announced they showed that DuPage defeated this and Will overwhelmingly accepted it. That's why I know that TG and WE were the one's who wanted the third (unneeded?) school. Why? Neighborhood schools for THEIR chirdren! Yes the other 2 are already virtually in their backyards and they want a third.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 4:29 PM
To: By (NSFOC) No Segregation For Our Children on April 17, 2008 2: PM
Is this really true??

I'll never forget when the Tall Grass lady stood up at the school board meeting and said "I buy my kids clothes at Abercrombie & Fitch and I am not sending my kids to school with kids who wear clothes fom Kohl's."

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

Smell the coffee! Again those are plants being thrown in by opposition in both the School and Napergate Threads as a result of over heated discussion.

I am surprised people are so naive to believe this nonsensical nonsense....use your 6th sense once in a while, my dear bloggers!

Moderator Jim to Anonymous: I can't remember who posted...but maybe it's time to let go of this Abercrombie/Kohl's thing. It sounds like it's made up and is only divisive. What's wrong with Kohl's anyway...at least they don't use half-naked kids for advertising.

***I'll never forget when the Tall Grass lady stood up at the school board meeting and said "I buy my kids clothes at Abercrombie & Fitch and I am not sending my kids to school with kids who wear clothes fom Kohl's."***

It is true. I heard it myself. I am not sure how I can prove it. Can anyone else help verify this?

I can't think of anything more appropriate to say then WOW!

I can't believe that there is so much hate in this community. We are one school district right? Our school district is one of the best in the state right? I think we all agree that we don't want anyone's kids to be in an overcrowded facility right? The land has been bought, the school will be built, the high schools will have fewer students which will make for happier students.

Yes, in the end we the SD is going to be on the hook for damages at the BB site. I seriously think we are blaming the wrong people for this. Dr. D had nothing to do with that mess. It is Howie Crouse to blame as he was determined to build a flagship high school for himself on that corner. Let's not be fooled for one second that it had anything to do with what was best for the children. If he would have been thinking what was best for the children, we would have never gone into court initially over the land. It would have been decided that we couldn't afford the land and we would have moved onto a plan "b", whatever it may have been.

It is time to get past all of this hate and discontent. Let's be proud of what we have, including diversity within our SD. I will be more than happy to send my children to any one of the 3 HS's in our SD. I think it is important for my children to learn that not everyone is alike and that one can learn many things from people who are different from themselves. The amount of money one has or the size of their house does not make them better or worse than another.

Just so it's clear, my family does not live in the biggest house in the SD or make the most money, but we are happy and have a great moral foundation and that is all that matters.

Time for a big group hug.....

By MR on April 17, 2008 3:26 PM
To: Anonymous on April 17, 2008 11:44 AM

You can't sue for spite. The SB/Taxpayers will pay all of the legal fees and there will be no counter suit because there is no case. When the judge rules in the NSFOC lawsuit we will find out who is on the right side of the law, and then that will fuel the BB case. If one wins they will all win.
__________________________

Wow, do you dislike your school district that much or is it just the SB? Is it the parents as well? You can't sue for spite? I'm having a hard time seeing how if the NSFOC wins their case it benefits all of us? Please enlighten me? I'm not trying to be rude I'm just trying to understand?

Finally, do you wish to see your School District go down in flames that bad? Are you hoping that they owe $50 million plus? Is that was it is about? Who's on the right side of the law? I'm sorry I'm not seeing the connection between how a win for the NSFOC is a win for all of us?

I'm sorry I thought it was about our children and making our school district a better place. I voted on a 3rd HS plain and simple. I also said yesterday that I was proud to be fellow parents with everyone in D204 even if their opinion differed then mine. However, I can't support wanting to see all of us and our children suffer because of lawsuits. I'm not sure how one can take glee in this? I don't care how much you dislike the SB, what you're saying and doing goes against my ethics and morals.

Sorry for my outburst. I'm allowed to have one a day.
..................................................................

That's ok. Don't get me wrong, at this point all of these lawsuits are going to hurt everyone. However, this SB is out of control. If they would have done what they said they would do then none of these issues would be present today. This is all about a SB that makes all kinds of promises and contract and at the end of the day if one thing doesn’t go their way, they try to sue or flat ignore the obvious issues and that hurts all of us to. So, I don't start supporting the SB just because they screw up one more time. I am simply expecting that these goofs we call a SB will lose in the end. That does affect us all. Just simply hoping the lawsuits are going to go away does not make it happen in reality. I have zero confidence in the SB so why would you ask me to support them. Did you enjoy paying for the $5 mill so far on this BB deal gone wrong? That was not the BB guys fault. That was our elected SB representing you. Are you proud of that costing us money already? You would try to tell us all to follow blindly because they are elected officials. This is IL, where public corruption is number one. You need to take a reality check.

I do support the kids and have always been there to support our community. However, I am not one of the followers as my financial well being is sucked down the tubes. So yes, in that way, I wish ill will on everyone. Normally I wouldn't be that way but I was there when the SB told everyone from WE and TG they would send us to WV whether we liked it or not. Just for SPITE. Now I would rather all of us get hurt than just me and my neighbors. We just picked what we thought was a good area to live. Little did we know this would be little our worst nightmare. This area is full of wacky people and I would rather move or fight for what I believe. Does that help? Nobody deserves to be singled out or discriminated against because of where you live so again, yes I think everyone should pay their fare share.

To WOW WOW WOW

YOU MUST BE DR.D! I can't believe the way you are trying to pass the buck! Dr. D and MM and the screwballs on and SB and several opportunities to do the right thing -- they are just (or you are) just to dysfunctional to know what that is! Why hasn't anyone ever questioned DR D's credentials -- he has done the same thing here that he did in his last position in Kentucky -- screw it up -- he is a power hungry mongral that has teamed up with MM and is spending the districts money with free abondon. The BB lawsuit will be interesting. We owe so much money to them that we didn't have to if we had just honored our obligation! Now BB has Sidley & Austin behind them -- it aint going to be cheap or pretty. Howie Crouse?????? Get real. It is all Dr. D and MM and the SB

By Naperville Sun editors on April 17, 2008 5:06 PM
Moderator Jim to Anonymous: I can't remember who posted...but maybe it's time to let go of this Abercrombie/Kohl's thing. It sounds like it's made up and is only divisive. What's wrong with Kohl's anyway...at least they don't use half-naked kids for advertising.
_____________________________

Thanks Moderator Jim,

I like shopping at Kohl's as well. Abercrombie's catalogs are offensive to me.

To Anonymous on April 17, 2008 4:29 PM

Is this really true??

I'll never forget when the Tall Grass lady stood up at the school board meeting and said "I buy my kids clothes at Abercrombie & Fitch and I am not sending my kids to school with kids who wear clothes fom Kohl's."
_____________________________

I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to say this at a public forum, even if they were stupid enough to think it. Unless someone comes forward with solid proof, like the date of the SB meeting so someone could verify this through videos or minutes of the meeting, I think we should stop reposting this comment. It sounds like more TG bashing by the pro-Eola camp, and repeated enough will become a "suburban legend" that will reflect badly on all of Naperville.

from By Driving Times on April 17, 2008 4:21 PM

.."Why is it TG is complaining so much about driving times...
I drove from the TG clubhouse 6 times during normal time when school would start to WVHS. Guess how long it took me? 15 minutes average 1-way. Just don't drive 59 to 75th to Ogden. That will take you longer.."

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

It took you 15 minutes one way... did you, also, PICK UP 40 STUDENTS WHILE YOU WERE DRIVING?

THAT IS WHAT A SCHOOL BUS WOULD DO!

Hello people. Why do you continue to debate driving times and whether Eola is the best location for the 3rd HS?

The SD closed on the Eola land today so it's a done deal. Can't we find another topic to debate over?

To: Cant believe I read it

Not Dr. D here, just a SD resident who is ready for the hate and negativity to dissapate and the healing to begin. Yes, it is a known fact that we both agree on, no matter who we place the blame on BB is going to cost ALL of us money due to somebody's poor decisions. But, the decisions have been made. Yes, we can continue to fight but is that what is really best for our kids? I know that we should all teach our kids to be leaders and stand up for what they believe in. However, at what expense? Are lawsuits by residents against all resdents the way to go? I wish their was a simple way to fix all of this. Realistically, we all know that just going back to purchasing BB is no longer an option. North, south, lot's of money, or little money.....we have got to get past this and do what is best for our kids.

Thanks for reading....I hope that everyone has a good night.

Will one or more of the stakeholders in the THREE lawsuits PLEASE immediately file an injunction! Please! Get it filed immediately and stop this train wreck before it happens.

MM and the SB have been WRONG every single time. We no longer have any confidence in what MM says or his ability to lead us effectively thru this crisis.

It is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE to charge full speed ahead without a factual understanding of who may win, who may loose, and how much we may end up paying in damages, legal fees, etc. The citizens of this SB have an absolute and compelling need to know that MM and the SB are acting responsibly, prudently, lawfully, and within their fiduciary responsibility to be good stewards of this SD.

It is time for Governor to step in thru the Illinois State Board of Education along with Jesse Ruiz and Christopher Kock. Contact each of their offices and demand state action and investigation. Contact the States Attorneys office and demand an investigation. Contact Darlene Ruscitti, our Regional Superintendent of Schools and demand an investigation.

Yes we have a referendum. Yes we want to build a school. Yes we want to build it responsibly. Yes we want to do it without leaving a tidal wave of financial destruction behind that will cripple us and this district for the next 30 years of bonding and tax bills.

The taxpayers of this SD deserve to know and be assured that they will only be paying for the referendum that they approved and that they will not be saddled with ANY additional debt because of choices made by the SB in carrying out their fiduciary responsibility.

I demand accountability. I demand responsibility. I demand transparency.

We all know that none of the current board will survive the next election for reasons of their own making. From now until then we must do everything in our power to prevent them from causing and leaving us with a mess to clean up long after they are all gone.

Having graduated from WVHS (many years ago), Working for 204 (for a while) and still care about the area I have to thank Mark M. for all his time he spends on doing what is best for all kids in 204. All TG parents weren't even a part of the district when Mark was in his (probably) 4th term on the board.

I hope none of the respondents here are public workers that respond and read these forums 10 times a day (wasting company money).

Just move on and let the district grow or just MOVE

to: Greg Forrest, Dollrs and Sense, MR

Sorry guys, I just cant do this any more. I thought we had this reasonably well whipped into shape on the last thread in terms of creating a decent dialog about the issues. Those on which we could agree and those on which we could agree to disagree. But I come here and have to read all the same junk, charges, countercharges, conspiracy theories, stupidity, rationalizations, half truths etc.

..........from BOTH sides of the aisle..........

If you would like, I would be happy to share my email address with the moderator for you few folks and would be happy to continue a discussion off the blogs. maybe even going so far as to (gulp) take some action! give a shout on this blog if you are interested and i will contact Moderator Jim. I will check a few times tomorrow and see if you responded.

I think if there were even A LITTLE bit or originality or wit or entertainment in any of the writting I could take it. but i am afraid i have lost my stomach for this blogging thing. its just too discouraging.

Dollars and sense wrote; "It sounds like more TG bashing by the pro-Eola camp, and repeated enough will become a "suburban legend" that will reflect badly on all of Naperville."

As opposed to the suburban legends floating around regarding the imagined environmental hazards of the AME sight. Started by Naperville Schools For Our Children and it's followers I might add.

To Anonymous on April 17, 2008 3:12 PM

You clearly do not know the facts of Turner's record related to coming in over budget and/or behind schedule. I'm sure their low ball bid looks real good though they have a really nasty habit of running up project cost with change order after change order after change order. In the end who is going to go back and compare that against the original bids?

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

You sound pretty bitter, did Turner build your house in TG?

One more thing.

Tonight I went to the 95th street library with my 7 and 10 year old boys. Have you been there? it is an amazing, wonderful facility.

They played a little on the computers and I went to this blog on another computer. after a while my 7 year old came over and said "are you reading about the new high school again daddy?"

he asked me to log off. we went over to the craft table (which i did not even know existed) and cut out a paper umbrella and glued on some hole-punch dots for rain drops. that was a lot more fun.

you should try it.

Moderator Jim -

To provide the broader audience here some perspective - can you provide some stats on how many unique e-mail addresses have posted on this discussion?
While I know you can use multiple e-mail addresses, so it won't be an actual number, since people can use any tag line they want, I think providing the raw numbers of just how many people are posting would be very enlightening. Not sure if the e-mail is validated in anyway, but if this is all like 4 or 5 people, having it on the public record as representing a broad discussion seems wrong.

Maybe at the end of each discussion board - throw in a how many unique posters there were. I would hate to have everyday folks thinking a 204 civil war is about to break out when its a small group of people who have found its easy to game an anonymous blog.

Response from editors:

Sorry, we simply don't have the time to go through the hundreds of posts we receive on a topic to gather that information.

To: By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 7:35 PM
Will one or more of the stakeholders in the THREE lawsuits PLEASE immediately file an injunction! Please! Get it filed immediately and stop this train wreck before it happens.

MM and the SB have been WRONG every single time. We no longer have any confidence in what MM says or his ability to lead us effectively thru this crisis.

It is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE to charge full speed ahead without a factual understanding of who may win, who may loose, and how much we may end up paying in damages, legal fees, etc. The citizens of this SB have an absolute and compelling need to know that MM and the SB are acting responsibly, prudently, lawfully, and within their fiduciary responsibility to be good stewards of this SD.

It is time for Governor to step in thru the Illinois State Board of Education along with Jesse Ruiz and Christopher Kock. Contact each of their offices and demand state action and investigation. Contact the States Attorneys office and demand an investigation. Contact Darlene Ruscitti, our Regional Superintendent of Schools and demand an investigation.

Yes we have a referendum. Yes we want to build a school. Yes we want to build it responsibly. Yes we want to do it without leaving a tidal wave of financial destruction behind that will cripple us and this district for the next 30 years of bonding and tax bills.

The taxpayers of this SD deserve to know and be assured that they will only be paying for the referendum that they approved and that they will not be saddled with ANY additional debt because of choices made by the SB in carrying out their fiduciary responsibility.

I demand accountability. I demand responsibility. I demand transparency.
_______________________________________________________________

This type of posting is why the blog medium is no better or arguably worse than the crazy guy on the street corner with a megaphone. The obserdity of "I demand accountability. I demand responsibility. I demand transparency." by "Anonymous really speaks for itself - probably everyone should base all decisions on what a cowardly anonymous can type. And yes I understand the irony of my not listing my name; but really, this is nothing more than a MadLib:

I cannot belive the _____ has the _____ or the _______ to take the actions it has. As a _____ parent living in _______, I am so full of ______ for ________ its not even funny. _______ is so imcompetent and stupid that _________. I Personally think that _________, and I can;t even believe that _________ would think _______, they are so ________ its crazy.

Perhaps another good question would be - how many of you posters went through 204 schools, and if you all have, then this whole thing is a lost cause.

Oh- one more for the group - I bet you are all D203 people inpersonating D204 people so D204 looks bad and your home values increase and D204's decrease.

I love the way people bash the church for making a profit on their real estate, but no one seems to mind the lawyers entering into this disaster. BB and NSFOC attorneys are just chomping at the bit and eyeing the D204 cash cow. Why not keep the law suits going the lawyers stand to make huge dollars--and all of it comes right out of our pockets. North or South we all stand to lose--especially when we are so divided.

Its tough for NSFOC and TG is accept the board's direction, but as elected officials ( by majority) they are doing what they feel is best for the district.

nothing personal.

nothing covert.

no conspiracy. just democracy working, and we should be thankful for their guidance. Its not easy to run a SB. And if people feel it is, go public with your credentials and run.

If you get a spot on board, even if I do not agree with your decision, I will go along with the overall decisions the SB makes.

Thats how the process works- even if I personally disagree with the individual outcome- I would go along, because I know EVERYONE CANNOT BE PLEASED.

And every governing body must address the majority of its constituents-even sometimes at the expense of a (very) vocal minority.

And this issue of the 3rd HS, is a very combustible issue...But it seems it is being dealt with in credible way and manner by the SB, even if the final decisions do not resonate with each and every individual person-- the SB seems to be trying to do the right thing here for the kids.

-lets understand its not an easy thing to do, and lets start thinking about what is best for the kids, and then to support our district, teachers and admins...its the right thing to do.

Well - It seems that we cant have a civil dialog anywhere about this issue - I think the Sun is doing the community a disservice at this point in providing a place for people to continue to spew forth this hate and anger. Nothing good is coming from this - nothing positive is going to happen from words written here.

All of you need to rethink your responses - you are poisoning your lives, your families, your children and out community with all of this. This is no longer about the school site, or boundaries - it is now about the lack of respect and decency for people. I dont care if you are North or South, TG or BD or any other place - this is disgusting!

To Anonymous April 17,2008 8:20PM

Rule Number 1 - never ask a question to which you do not already know the answer less you end up revealing your own ignorance.

Anyone even remotely aware of the construction industy would know that Turner does not do residential construction.

If reading words "sound pretty bitter" please recognize the only sound is what you perceive in your own mind. Possibly you should reflect on what would cause you construe bitterness from what another knows based upon over 30 years in the industry.

So to sum this up so far... I am not bitter. Turner did not build my house. I do not live in TG. Three strikes, pretty typical for a nube. Even more typical that you would stereotype so generally and so poorly.

Now if I did live in TG I would think that I would probably have to work even longer and harder hours for my money. That being the case I would have even more reason to be steadfast in my belief that we need some fact finding here and some objective answers to some pretty fair and logical questions. Granted they may be some tough, difficult questions but every voter, every taxpayer every parent, every student, every community, every neighbor, every teacher, and every retiree in this SD needs to know, eyes open, exactly what we are or are not facing in terms of all these lawsuits and potential financial risk on top of the expense of designing, building, furnishing, equipping, staffing, and then operating and maintaining a new high school.

Anyone who dismisses the need for such inquiry does not have the best interest of everyone in this community, regardless of their position on the school, in mind.

It is growing more and more clear that we are going to need the SB to put another referendum on the ballot at the time of our next election.

The referendum question is going to need to ask all the voters if we should retain or change the current practice of electing school board members at large. Based upon the current climate and deep division within our community it is clear to me that since the school board sets the school boundaries within the context of a policy decision we are going to end up with continued border wars and elections for years to come with one community after another trying to stack the board with their candidates.

The only fair and logical way to avoid these border wars is to drop at large board members and divide the district into districts. Yes, I recognize that drawing up these districts will probably also set off some more screaming matches, but for the good of the community I don't think we all want to go thru a situation where the boundaries are constantly in flux because everyone will loose, especially the students.

To RJ on April 17, 2008 8:09 PM--

Still obsessing, I see. Medication may help.

TO: MR on April 17, 2008 2:52 PM

Hi - You asked in all seriousness why the NSFOC is pushing their lawsuit. You stated "Say what you will but I did ONLY vote for the pure fact that I felt we needed a 3rd HS for everyone in IPSD. When I originally voted I didn't care if it was at BB, 248th St. or Butterfield Rd (yes our district goes that far north)."

If you read the lawsuit, you'll see that it acknowledges that there is a portion of our community that feel like you do - "we need a 3rd HS and don't care where it goes." Let's assume these people represent the 42% who voted for the first referrendum that failed.

Then, there's the portion of our community who agree that a 3rd HS is needed but also feel that the location of the HS and the boundaries are relevant and important details. The portion of this group that agreed with the BB location and boundaries represent an additional 16% of the voting community.

These 2 groups passed the 2nd referrendum together at 58%.

Now that the location of the HS has changed, the first group is still happy that the HS is being built, and the second group is upset that a critically important factor in their decision to vote as they did has been changed. You used the term "bait and switch" and that is an appropriate term.

I'll be the first to admit that I'm oversimplifying a bit. It is my opinion that there was a large portion of the first group (42%) who DO care about location, but are so close to their current HS that they felt comfortable voting Yes with little risk of being moved. Within this same group of people who feel that location is important, there are those who voted No both times, since they weren't happy with the BB location. The irony, of course, is that many of these people are now thrilled since the new location is in their backyard, and they have been fighting tooth and nail against the people who, like them, feel locale is important. And then there's the growing group that will vote against anything that our SB puts to the vote simply out of principle.

The bottom line is that the SB recognized that they needed to determine and communicate the location of the HS to sway the votes needed to pass it, so they did. Those betrayed swing voters are now the ones pushing the lawsuit.

The referendum for the third high school put a limit on the amount of money the district could spend on building a new high school. While obviously necessary to keep total costs in check, it can lead to poor decisions if the SB is focused on keeping expenditures directly related to that project low, such as the land, while not considering indirect costs, such as any potential BB damages, that would not count towards the budget for building the school. Money, however, is fungible, and it does not matter whether it's in the capital fund or operating fund, in the end, it all comes out of taxpayers' wallets.

In assessing the total cost of the land purchase, potential damages should have been considered and added to the cost of the Eola land. I don't know whether they did or not, but that's part of the problem - there was no transparency in this decision. I understand that it's difficult to predict whether BB will be successful in their suit, but it's not difficult to incorporate it in your decision. If you think there's a 20% chance of a $50 million judgement, add $10 million to the cost of Eola land. Failing to assess the risk and incorporate it into the decision is comparing apples and oranges. The SB is gambling with our money that there won't be substantial damages as a result of walking away from the BB land. Let's all hope it pays off, or we'll be the ones paying dearly.

OK people. I agree with Civics, it felt like we as a group were really starting to come back together. So in what will be a very lame attempt to keep Civics (and the other intelligent people) on this blog, here are my lame observations on the latest comments people have made on this blog:

By Mark M on April 17, 2008 7:49 AM: "The fix was in. Let's face it. Stop trying to spin it." Yes it was, Mark, now all we need is for the SB to apply this same "magic" to National League East -- it's the only chance the Cubs have to win the Pennant, in the humble opinion of this White Sox fan.

By ron on April 17, 2008 8:10 AM: "Just imagine where we would be if the BB Trust was as cooperative as the church." Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try...

By BigMike on April 17, 2008 8:51 AM: "And while you're at it, do a little research on Sidley & Austin and decide if you'd like to take them on." BigMike, I'm game, but ony if this dude lives somewhere in the district (his kids would probably go to Longwood), be sure to check out his strengths. http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=fighter.detail&pid=717

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 3:12 PM: "You clearly do not know the facts of Turner's record related to coming in over budget and/or behind schedule. I'm sure their low ball bid looks real good though they have a really nasty habit of running up project cost with change order after change order after change order. In the end who is going to go back and compare that against the original bids?" My guess is it'll be the same person who was responsible for getting the appraisal done on the AME land

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 7:35 PM: "I demand accountability. I demand responsibility. I demand transparency." And Greg Forrrrrest demands a recount!

And Finally....!

By Civics on April 17, 2008 8:21 PM: "Tonight I went to the 95th street library with my 7 and 10 year old boys. Have you been there? it is an amazing, wonderful facility." You mean there are still libraries? I thought the Internet and these stupid blogs rendered libraries obsolete.

unbelievable on April 17, 2008 7:59 PM

I can not believe anyone would say thank you to MM and Dr. Destruct. They tore apart this community and cost us millions of dollars. I will be saying my thanks when they are gone.

To Civics on April 17, 2008 8:04 PM--

Say it ain't so!!

Take a break for awhile if you must, but please plan to return. If the reasonable voices are run off by the lunatics, that would leave bloggers like Earth to SB and Lobby This running the show (shudder).

I read your earlier post to Fast (GF) about you being a scientist by training and temperament. I'm married to one of those, too. My husband is a Ph.D. chemist. I have degrees in psychology and public health. It's a weird right brain/left brain pairing, so our kids say. But I know for a fact he would not last 5 minutes here. The emotionality, irrationality and stupidity that's sometimes encountered on these sites would send him right over the edge. I think you've done exceedingly well, for a scientist.

By the way, I had a craft table moment tonight as well. My youngest, a 6th grader at Scullen, plays piano and viola and performed tonight with the Swinging Strings and the NV orchestra. The younger ones did well, but the NV orchestra was amazing, especially when you consider these kids are only 15-18 years of age. Makes it all worth it, in the end.

You can get my email from Moderator Jim if there's anything you need. Good luck, and hope to see you again.

D&S

To Anonymous at 7:35pm,

You do a pretty good job of hiding behind that anonymous name. If you are so outraged that you have to go on your little tantrum, why not put your name on it so all of your neighbors and friends know who you are. Its pretty easy to talk tough from behind a computer screen. Re read your own post, first of all you are asking for someone else to help you:

"Will one or more of the stakeholders in the THREE lawsuits PLEASE immediately file an injunction! Please! Get it filed immediately and stop this train wreck before it happens. Why not do it yourself?????

Then you ask for the governor to help???

It is time for Governor to step in thru the Illinois State Board of Education along with Jesse Ruiz and Christopher Kock. Contact each of their offices and demand state action and investigation. Contact the States Attorneys office and demand an investigation. Contact Darlene Ruscitti, our Regional Superintendent of Schools and demand an investigation. Have you done all of these? Don't you think all of these people have al little bit more to do then where we put a school?

Then you stomp your foot and cry like a baby,:

I demand accountability. I demand responsibility. I demand transparency. Thank you for showing your true colors!

Do you not understand that when you voted, The ballot clearly stated: DO YOU SUPPORT SCHOOL DISTRICT 204 IN BUILDING A THIRD HIGH SCHOOL? No where on the ballot did is say based on the boundries or the piece of land the school would sit on. The board tried to get the BB land its to expensive. The litigation process of that mess cost the district another 10-20 million dollars in additional construction cost to the school as they rose. Now the district has a piece of land and is building on it. Let it go, get over your selfishness and be a part of the district!!! IT'S WHATS BEST FOR THE DISTRICT NOT JUST YOU!!!!!!!!!!

By the way my name is Reggie.

Moderator Jim...about how many posts have crossed these blogs over the past few months????? Thousands? WOW. Time to move on folks and stop the name calling, stereotyping and just plain old "meanness" that flows like the Fox River in spring.

No matter what side of the boundaries your opinion falls on and whether or not you believe the district should even be building a school the reality is that it’s happening...stop the BS accusations, stop the insane grouping and casting of aspersions towards certain neighborhoods and get over it.

There are more important issues in life than bitching like a bunch of idiots about all the insanity here...read a newspaper, do a little homework on the internet, visit someone with a terminal illness, hug a sick child, buy some groceries for a hungry family...with the adversity that many face in the world today I cannot believe we have become so caught up in this silly issue. Deal with something important and touch someone’s life.

Time, time to move on...

I looked at a few of the blogs from last week. One week ago the blog "Land deal is off" was posted with 440 responses, the first one making a joke about it being gone.

Now, one week later, we OWN it.

Awesome.

Did you guys know it was in the 70's yesterday - what a beautiful day. You should all get out and enjoy some fresh air - it's good for the soul (and for a healthy mind).
Peace!

By MH on April 18, 2008 7:40 AM
I looked at a few of the blogs from last week. One week ago the blog "Land deal is off" was posted with 440 responses, the first one making a joke about it being gone.

Now, one week later, we OWN it.

Awesome.

No, MH.

"We got owned" is more like it!

***You are correct. The longer you harbor those feelings overall stigma over a certain area this SD will never heal. I guess I'm more of the optimist type. I see in the past 2 days people trying to work together. People reaching out their arms and being welcome.***

Perhaps you are speaking genreically but please don't mistake my position as one that will continue to demonize the Eola site. You believe that you voted only for a 3rd HS, I'm OK with this. I believe I voted for a 3rd HS on BB and this is still my preference.

If you have followed my posts, you will see that I am relatively new to the district and generally dissatisfied how the SB handled the 3rd HS situation. I was not here for the first referendum but recognize the fact that the SB went to great lengths market BB and the corresponding boundries to obtain voter approval. I have heard it argued that since site specific language was not included in the referendum that the move to the Eola site is acceptable. I'd argue that if the SB did not have full confidence that the BB land would be obtained they should have accounted for this by including the top 3 sites considered with their corresponding boundries up for voter review prior to the referendum. This would have given the voters an oportunity of consider all options. Additionally, this would have compelled the SB to perform due diligence on all sites to allay voter concerns.

Personally speaking, I as was only presented with one option (BB) based upon my community's feedback and voted in favor of it. I have yet to see the same happen with Eola.

Truth be told, I'd be quite happy sending my kids to WV if given the choice but unfortunately this, too, has not happened.

It nice out today also, they already have a crew out their today, i'll bet the earth movers get there before the end of the month!! thanks SB and AME.

To: Anonymous on April 17, 2008 5:11 PM

"So yes, in that way, I wish ill will on everyone. Normally I wouldn't be that way but I was there when the SB told everyone from WE and TG they would send us to WV whether we liked it or not. Just for SPITE. Now I would rather all of us get hurt than just me and my neighbors. We just picked what we thought was a good area to live. Little did we know this would be little our worst nightmare. This area is full of wacky people and I would rather move or fight for what I believe. Does that help? Nobody deserves to be singled out or discriminated against because of where you live so again, yes I think everyone should pay their fare share."
_____________________________________

Anon, I'm am truly sorry you feel that way. I can try and put myself in your shoes and understand why you would be upset when you thought your kids would attend NV when you built or bought your house. The same thing when you thought you would attend MV at the BB property. I'm sorry but I never did hear the SB say they would send WE and TG to WV just for spite. I find that hard to believe. Especially when they took almost an hour at the boundary meeting apologizing to the TG neighborhood about sending then to WV. I don't think they wanted to do this nor had it planned. In all honesty I think it speaks well of TG because they wanted those kids because they will make WV a better HS. Just like they wanted BD to remain at WV back in 2006 because those kids do well in school and have supportive parents. (I don't live there by the way)

What has me most concerned is when you say "I would rather all of us get hurt than just me and my neighbors." This is the attitude that has turned so many in the district against those that represent the NSFOC. It isn't just the north, it's those in the south and east as well. People are saying to themselves, "why would our own parents wish to see ill will on IPSD?" Like I said in other posts, I can understand it from BB but not from our own parents.

I guess at the end of the day maybe our personalities are a little different. I as well live in a very nice house comparable in size to those in TG. While I would be as mad as hell as you, I would try and move past it and make the best of it. Why has this become "your worst nightmare." Remember this is still IPSD and WVHS has just as good test scores as NVHS. Remember this is still IPSD and WVHS has just as good test scores as NVHS.

"This area is full of wacky people and I would rather move or fight for what I believe." I also take offense to this comment. The world is full of wacky people. Examples could be shown good and bad regarding all areas and subdivisions in the district, and both HS. Who knows, you're worst nightmare could turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to your kids. You never know. If you move you'll never find out. I suggest you go to WVNS and ask for a tour and see the HS and see the kids and environment. You'll be shocked at how similar it is to NV except the building isn't as new.

"Nobody deserves to be singled out or discriminated against because of where you live so again, yes I think everyone should pay their fare share."

I agree no one deserves to be singled out or discriminated against because of where you live. But it is the attitide of "I think everyone should pay their fair share" that has people mad. These are the types comment that no one likes to see, just like you don't like to see the comments thrown at TG and WE or the NSFOC. While your comments might not be as offensive they still hurt those that wouldn't think of suing their SB and bad mouth WV.

Thanks again for your follow up. I believe there is much I still have to understand. However, I also wanted you to understand those that are against the NSFOC. I appreciate you discussing this in a civil manner.

To: Civics on April 17, 2008 8:04 PM
to: Greg Forrest, Dollrs and Sense, MR

Sorry guys, I just cant do this any more. I thought we had this reasonably well whipped into shape on the last thread in terms of creating a decent dialog about the issues. Those on which we could agree and those on which we could agree to disagree. But I come here and have to read all the same junk, charges, countercharges, conspiracy theories, stupidity, rationalizations, half truths etc.

..........from BOTH sides of the aisle..........
______________________________________________

Civics - I would hate to see you go. While we do not always agree we can discuss our differences in a calm and civil manner. I would like to keep in touch and will contact Moderator Jim. I also understand why you want to walk away. Just the other night my 4th grade daughter said to me "dad, why are you always looking at that web site about the HS thing." It made me feel bad for not spending the time with her even if I was only on the comuter for 10 minutes. From that point on I've tried to satisfy and contain my addiction of the blogs to work time or after bedtime for the kids.

Hope we can still stay in touch....

MR

To: Awards to Keep Civics on this Blog! on April 17, 2008 11:32 PM

Thanks for adding humor and laughter to an otherwise serious topic. I notice you try and be as unbias to one side as possible. It's almost like watching the John Stewart show about D204.

What level earthquake is this building designed to withstand?

Are the nearby high voltage power lines and gas pipelines a threat to students in the event of a level 7 or 8 earthquake.

Yes we have a huge fault line in Illinois.

To Moderator Jim--

Also forgot. If you need direct permission to release my email address to Civics if he asks for it, then this is it. Thanks.

By Northener on April 17, 2008 9:49 PM
I love the way people bash the church for making a profit on their real estate, but no one seems to mind the lawyers entering into this disaster. BB and NSFOC attorneys are just chomping at the bit and eyeing the D204 cash cow. Why not keep the law suits going the lawyers stand to make huge dollars--and all of it comes right out of our pockets. North or South we all stand to lose--especially when we are so divided.
.......................
That is what many of us tried to tell the SB before they said screw you to over 500 affected voices attending the last SB meeting. Stop all this by doing the right thing. The move they made seconds later was to buy Eola anyway. That did not clear up anything. In fact, I would argue, deepened the divide. Way to go D204 Cash Cow.

To Anonymous on April 17, 2008 7:35 PM--

Here is some useful information:

The BB Trusts would never file this type of injunction. Their lawsuits center on the SB not buying their land. They couldn't care less what other land the SB buys, this doesn't change their complaint one bit.

The NSFOC considered it, but simply couldn't afford it. Apparently injunctions cost a lot of $$.

That's all I know. Hope it helps.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 10:17 PM
To Anonymous April 17,2008 8:20PM

Rule Number 1 - never ask a question to which you do not already know the answer less you end up revealing your own ignorance.

Anyone even remotely aware of the construction industy would know that Turner does not do residential construction.

If reading words "sound pretty bitter" please recognize the only sound is what you perceive in your own mind. Possibly you should reflect on what would cause you construe bitterness from what another knows based upon over 30 years in the industry.

So to sum this up so far... I am not bitter. Turner did not build my house. I do not live in TG. Three strikes, pretty typical for a nube. Even more typical that you would stereotype so generally and so poorly.

Now if I did live in TG I would think that I would probably have to work even longer and harder hours for my money. That being the case I would have even more reason to be steadfast in my belief that we need some fact finding here and some objective answers to some pretty fair and logical questions. Granted they may be some tough, difficult questions but every voter, every taxpayer every parent, every student, every community, every neighbor, every teacher, and every retiree in this SD needs to know, eyes open, exactly what we are or are not facing in terms of all these lawsuits and potential financial risk on top of the expense of designing, building, furnishing, equipping, staffing, and then operating and maintaining a new high school.

Anyone who dismisses the need for such inquiry does not have the best interest of everyone in this community, regardless of their position on the school, in mind.
.......................
Well Said. Can we read that again? Can the guy or gal you wrote this to read that again?

I always enjoy the comments about what the referedum did or did not say. Since some take such a literal translation to the language on the ballot (and that everything represented by the SB leading up to the vote held no bearing), let me point out one additional item that was not on the ballot - the conversion of the WV Gold Campus to a middle school. Since that item was not on the ballot - and therefore no one voted on it - are we to assume that this will not occur? WV will be a MORE crowded school in the 2009 and 2010 school years due to the closure of the Gold campus.

As for the significant savings of the AME land over the BB land ($19 mil vs $31 mil), please remember that the "rush build" expenses are estimated to add $10 mil to MV's construction costs. If the SB has accepted the jury's price for BB and started to build immediately, these rush expenses would not have been necessary. They are now needed at any site in order to meet a 2009 opening date, but they could have been avoided. The district also would not have the pending litigation costs hanging over it.

One final thought. Our district has grown to a point where we have a huge operating budget. Perhaps we have outgrown the feasibility of a volunteer SB. I think that SB positions should be paid positions. This would serve two purposes. First, it would compensate those on the SB for the time and effort required to properly manage the district. Secondly, it would eliminate the arguments defending poor decisions made by the SB just because they are volunteers.

The fault is near St. Louis and it is active. Our history for severe earthquakes this far North is virtually non existent.

By MR on April 18, 2008 10:28 AM
To: Anonymous on April 17, 2008 5:11 PM

"So yes, in that way, I wish ill will on everyone. Normally I wouldn't be that way but I was there when the SB told everyone from WE and TG they would send us to WV whether we liked it or not. Just for SPITE. Now I would rather all of us get hurt than just me and my neighbors. We just picked what we thought was a good area to live. Little did we know this would be little our worst nightmare. This area is full of wacky people and I would rather move or fight for what I believe. Does that help? Nobody deserves to be singled out or discriminated against because of where you live so again, yes I think everyone should pay their fare share."
_____________________________________

Anon, I'm am truly sorry you feel that way. I can try and put myself in your shoes and understand why you would be upset when you thought your kids would attend NV when you built or bought your house. The same thing when you thought you would attend MV at the BB property. I'm sorry but I never did hear the SB say they would send WE and TG to WV just for spite. I find that hard to believe. Especially when they took almost an hour at the boundary meeting apologizing to the TG neighborhood about sending then to WV. I don't think they wanted to do this nor had it planned. In all honesty I think it speaks well of TG because they wanted those kids because they will make WV a better HS. Just like they wanted BD to remain at WV back in 2006 because those kids do well in school and have supportive parents. (I don't live there by the way)

What has me most concerned is when you say "I would rather all of us get hurt than just me and my neighbors." This is the attitude that has turned so many in the district against those that represent the NSFOC. It isn't just the north, it's those in the south and east as well. People are saying to themselves, "why would our own parents wish to see ill will on IPSD?" Like I said in other posts, I can understand it from BB but not from our own parents.

I guess at the end of the day maybe our personalities are a little different. I as well live in a very nice house comparable in size to those in TG. While I would be as mad as hell as you, I would try and move past it and make the best of it. Why has this become "your worst nightmare." Remember this is still IPSD and WVHS has just as good test scores as NVHS. Remember this is still IPSD and WVHS has just as good test scores as NVHS.

"This area is full of wacky people and I would rather move or fight for what I believe." I also take offense to this comment. The world is full of wacky people. Examples could be shown good and bad regarding all areas and subdivisions in the district, and both HS. Who knows, you're worst nightmare could turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to your kids. You never know. If you move you'll never find out. I suggest you go to WVNS and ask for a tour and see the HS and see the kids and environment. You'll be shocked at how similar it is to NV except the building isn't as new.

"Nobody deserves to be singled out or discriminated against because of where you live so again, yes I think everyone should pay their fare share."

I agree no one deserves to be singled out or discriminated against because of where you live. But it is the attitide of "I think everyone should pay their fair share" that has people mad. These are the types comment that no one likes to see, just like you don't like to see the comments thrown at TG and WE or the NSFOC. While your comments might not be as offensive they still hurt those that wouldn't think of suing their SB and bad mouth WV.

Thanks again for your follow up. I believe there is much I still have to understand. However, I also wanted you to understand those that are against the NSFOC. I appreciate you discussing this in a civil manner.
......................................
You also might be surprised that I was in the WV area before I made the move to TG. I just moved hear a few years ago because I have a child with Special needs. The location and proximaty to the schools was very important to the routines that need to be in place for him to be productive. Fry and Scullen are just blocks from our home and NV is just under a mile walking distance. I bought here because I could not find a house for sale in another area that had this type of location. One would think that living in the closest Large Subdivision in the population center would logically keep you going to the schools closest to you.

Now I will have my children going back to a school area I just moved from, my taxes go up, my house value goes down, everyone bashes on my area of choice to live, and my son has to deal with more issues than he should have to, I have to deal with more issues as a result. That is a nightmare.

The SB can't provide a single document, report, study or rational arguement that suports the concept that bussing smart children from one area to another will improve the quality of education provided for those children that are in need. Simply changing boundaries and swaping children does not accomplish this goal either. If they are just lucky, the scores might shift if my children are smarter than those in Stonebrige for an example that might be less intelligent. I doubt that is the case, nor do I beleive that. But that is what your SB supports and you are just blindly following. Not good for the district. Proper urban development would support putting as many schools as nessisary within the population center to handle the needs of that area. It would not tell our community that building a school on the far end of town with the minority of children would be a logical location.

If we are occomadating those in Stonebridge or the northern communities to leave WV we should all just admit that as well. At least I am fighting to stay at my school of choice, not fighting to leave the one I don't like. In fact, to me WV is a good school with good kids and a good teaching staff. However, you should be able to understand why people get upset under these types of conditions.

So to recap the educational benefits:
1. Swapping students is a gamble at best to increase testing scores and does not help the under performing children. That is not a concept that I can support as a tax payer.
2. Adding commuting time for children does not add educational value or benefit the community in any way.
3. Dramatically changing Boundaries to create the Island of TG does not change the education level of the under performing students at any school.
4. If overcrowding was the true issue as to why we even need a 3rd HS we would be seeing the test scores dropping dramatically and that is not happening.

Thanks for the time.

I did some analysis. If a magnitude 9 earthquake occurs on the New Madrid fault line, there will be severe damage south of Ogden Avenue. Extensive damage will occur in Tall Grass and White Eagle. However, Metea Valley high School will be fine and will actually be used for safe refuge.

Taken from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Madrid_Earthquake

The New Madrid Earthquake, one of the largest earthquakes ever recorded in the contiguous United States, occurred on February 7, 1812. It got its name from its primary location in the New Madrid Seismic Zone, near New Madrid, Louisiana Territory (now Missouri).

This earthquake was preceded by three other major quakes: two on December 16, 1811, and one on January 23, 1812. These earthquakes destroyed approximately half the town of New Madrid. There were also numerous aftershocks in the area for the rest of that winter.

There are estimates that the earthquakes were felt strongly over 50,000 square miles (130,000 km²), and moderately across nearly one million square miles. The historic San Francisco earthquake of 1906, by comparison, was felt moderately over 6,000 square miles (16,000 km²).

US Geological Survey
http://quake.usgs.gov/prepare/factsheets/NewMadrid/

Survivors reported that the earthquakes caused cracks to open in the earth's surface, the ground to roll in visible waves, and large areas of land to sink or rise. The crew of the New Orleans (the first steamboat on the Mississippi, which was on her maiden voyage) reported mooring to an island only to awake in the morning and find that the island had disappeared below the waters of the Mississippi River. Damage was reported as far away as Charleston, South Carolina, and Washington, D.C.

The Virtual Times

http://hsv.com/genlintr/newmadrd/

Los Angeles can expect to be mightily damaged by movement on the San Andreas Fault, or the Newport-Inglewood or other neighboring faults, most probably within the next 25 years. But the Eastern and Midwestern states also face ground shaking of colossal proportions, repetitions of such known upheavals as the 1886 Charleston, S.C., quake, the 1755 Boston quake, and the Jamaica Bay quake hundreds of years ago on New York's Long Island. The granddaddy of them all was the 1811-1812 series of three great quakes on the New Madrid Fault (halfway between St. Louis and Memphis beneath the Mississippi), which shook the entire United States. The next time the New Madrid Fault produces such a quake, it is estimated 60 percent of Memphis will be devastated, leaving $50 Billion in damage and thousands of dead in its wake. Memphis, you see - like Armenia - has looked down the barrel of a loaded seismic gun for decades, but has done virtually nothing to move out of the crosshairs.

To Civics: I would really be sad to see you go. I totally understand taking a break from these damn blogs. Who is going to hold me accountable from a logical/pragmatic perspective when my selfish side starts to peek through? I am emailing mod Jim but his email address was not in yesterdays paper that I could see (only phone #) so I will send to Editorials and copy Tim W with my email address.

To Metea either way:

Wow, you and I are near clones except you wanted #3 and I did not in the second referendum. Only reason I did not, is because I thought the best way to relief "projected over crowded situation and or the bubble comming" was either a move to K-6 and 7-9 and 10-12 for school structure or expansion of existing HS's. NOW, if we are trying to lower school sizes and get below 80% capacity or whatever the figure was for optimal learning environment (Alka tyle comment), then that is a different ref. In this case, we should have a 4th HS so all would be around 2200 students in todays enrollment #'s (nequa should be higher than the other 3 as it is larger and has more capactiy). i would be behind this, which would require a fourth HS. Can you imagine? wont happen in the forseeable future given the issues we had with #3.

Ok, I will accept my kids going to WVHS. I just want to request a strict dress code approved of no less than Abercrombie & Fitch. I would also like the cafeteria to add sushi to their cuisine along with serving Perrier Water as an option. My son Chad gets a rash from drinking tap water from Aurora, unless it's boiled first.
Go Warriors- I do love the cheerleading outfits.
Tootaloo, have a glorious day.
Pamela Barnes Ewing

To: DS on April 18, 2008 11:31 AM

The fault is near St. Louis and it is active. Our history for severe earthquakes this far North is virtually non existent.
____________________________

Actually in 1909 Jun 26 14:42 5.1M Intensity in Aurora, IL.

Also in 1912 Jan 2 16:21 4.5M Intensity near Aurora, IL.

One more in 1972 Sep 15 05:22 4.0M Intensity south of Rockford, IL.

It is possible although rare.

I've already heard people saying they could feel the effects of the earthquake this morning this far north. Reports coming from hotels in Oakbrook and Naperville. Don't ask me a tornado wouldn't wake me up.

*Sorry back to regularly scheduled programing...

By Flip Floppin' on April 18, 2008 11:20 AM
I always enjoy the comments about what the referedum did or did not say. Since some take such a literal translation to the language on the ballot (and that everything represented by the SB leading up to the vote held no bearing), let me point out one additional item that was not on the ballot - the conversion of the WV Gold Campus to a middle school. Since that item was not on the ballot - and therefore no one voted on it - are we to assume that this will not occur? WV will be a MORE crowded school in the 2009 and 2010 school years due to the closure of the Gold campus.
*************************************

This is a VERY GOOD point. I have been thinking about it for some time and asking myself if I missed this point somehwhere along the way. I could not remember when and how the decision was made to eliminate WV freshman campus and WHY ? Any ideas out there ?

To: Tall Grass Snobs on April 18, 2008 12:29 PM

I won't even copy and paste your stupid post. Your attempt at humor does no good and only creates more divide in our district.

For the sake of everyone please refrain from creating posts like this. It just shows how immature you are. Some of us in the district are trying to create unity in this district and this doesn't help matters. Your actions are going to piss someone off and now they will throw stones back.

I HOPE EVERYONE WILL JUST IGNORE COMMENTS LIKE THESE. By giving comments like these attention, more are created. Just ignore the "bad apples" and hopefully they will go away!!

To MR:

As always very much enjoy reading your posts. Yes...I still disagree on some of your points/opinions, just as you take same issue with some of mine. this is what makes our country so great and also makes all of us better people and decision makers for the future!!

wITH A BIG NOD and my meager attempt at the scientific method for Civics: This really can be broken down two ways: what you think of the process AND personal wants/needs/passions in regards to the 3rd HS. Civics, it would be very interesting if you could apply some level of the scientific method objectively to the eola issue. If for nothing else then for my own personal edification. I have seen pieces of it in your pervious posts, but if it were all condensed into one document, it would make for very interesting reading. you stated you are not affected personally by the 3rd HS (no changes at all for you or your family)

I think we can all agree that the process was not optimal. For me personally, I take issue with the process; given the precedent set by the board, the same rigor should be applied to the Eola site when the site switch took place. Or in lieu of that, top 3 SB choices will all visible +'s and -'s listed for voter review. I know some take issue with that and think it is un-necessary and the events leading up to the 2nd ref are irrevelant since SB made many efforts (whether we agree with their methods, decisions, or not) to acquire the land. This is a valid argument. I am not sure who is correct or not. However, since we really are in a gray area; I would think we would want to error on the side of safety.

From a personal stand point; I disagree with the location for some objective (in my opinion) reasons and some personal reasons.

My Opinion of site location:
1. school in good geographic location
2. School in bad location for population density
3. Concerns on the gas pipes (yes I lived in Seattle in 1999 when a 16incher blew up and 3 kids died. 100 million in suit settlements. "Bellingham Washington pipline explosion" for those that want to Google it.
4. No confirmation vote with site switch based on precident set prior to 2nd ref passing
5. With removal of Peaker issues and move to the adjcent farmland, I have minimal concern on land contamination. If I was slated in MV's boundries, I would prefer we take core samples to confirm, but from a liability standpoint on chemicals, I think we are free and clear at this point.

Greg's EVIL personal reasons that I dont like 3rd HS location:
1. Yes, I live in the much maligned tall grass. I am 1 mile from NV
2. where I live in TG, my kids are part of the 20% walkers to NV
3. Fry Kids are the only kids from Scullen that are slit off to a different HS.
4. I think any splits that are requred should happen prior to entry into Elementary school to avoid impact as much as possible even if it means going to a E school farther away.

Since the SB are all volenteers (and not paid professionals with no personal stake in the game). I would much prefer the district at large to make the decision on what is best for the district as a whole in our current situation and not 7 board members who live in springbrook, stonebridge etc. etc. etc.

Now given that; Lets get a grip on reality. Is the world ending? Absolutely not. These 3 schools are the most packed with goodies I have ever seen in public schools (except the piddly foodball stadiums that dont knock my socks off). Pools, multiple practice fields, stadiums, planetariums etc. etc. etc. Same criculum that is kick ass. People, my HS had no accounting, no Econ classes and just one calculus course. you had to go to the junior college to take certain courses.

you have to understand some of the personal passion. If i lived in the georgetown area by WV i would be equally upset personally if I was told I needed to go to Nequa and that..sorry.. route 34 is too dangerous to cross and is a nice natural dividing line.

Now, if I could just transer over to georgetown without incurring realators fees; I would be in the exact situation I was in prior to the new HS.

Now, Let the TG bashing and GF bashing begin.....

By MR on April 18, 2008 1:02 PM
I won't even copy and paste your stupid post. Your attempt at humor does no good and only creates more divide in our district.

For the sake of everyone please refrain from creating posts like this. It just shows how immature you are.
------------------------------------------------------------------
I know you are but what am I. Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me. I'm rubber and you're glue whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you.

By Tall Grass Snobs on April 18, 2008 12:29 PM

Earth to SB, is that you?

In addition to the earthquake problem, lets not forget the coming ice age, this area was under about a mile of ice. Or if you guys are in Al Gores camp we wont have to worry about anything in 10 years. Lets keep it to the facts the Eola site is safe, and the right choice.

Got a call from Money Magazine asking for a short interview/survey for its annual survey for the Best Places to raise kids in America. I referred them to these blogs and told them to move on to a city that actually merits consideration (obviously not ours and embarrassed to call most of you my neighbors based on the ugliness of your comments).

By Flip Floppin' on April 18, 2008 11:20 AM
I always enjoy the comments about what the referedum did or did not say. Since some take such a literal translation to the language on the ballot (and that everything represented by the SB leading up to the vote held no bearing), let me point out one additional item that was not on the ballot - the conversion of the WV Gold Campus to a middle school. Since that item was not on the ballot - and therefore no one voted on it - are we to assume that this will not occur? WV will be a MORE crowded school in the 2009 and 2010 school years due to the closure of the Gold campus.
*************************************

This is a VERY GOOD point. I have been thinking about it for some time and asking myself if I missed this point somehwhere along the way. I could not remember when and how the decision was made to eliminate WV freshman campus and WHY ? Any ideas out there ?

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

The conversion of the WV Gold Campus to a MS has always been part of the original plan to ease the overcrowding at the MS level. My point was to refute those who keep saying, "Didn't you read your ballot? You voted for a 3rd HS, nothing else!"

I think most are in agreement that the SB informed us prior to the referendum vote about the WV Gold Campus' conversion to a MS with the building of MV. However, it wasn't on the ballot. If people are going to claim that everything represented by the SB prior to the ballot is illegitimate because it wasn't "on the ballot", then the conversion of the WV Gold Campus falls into the same category.

The SB has taught voters an important lesson throughout this process: Don't believe anything that they say unless it is included in a legally binding referendum. Anything not explicitly stated in the referendum gives them the latitude to do whatever they want. The result, unfortunately, is that future referendums will need to be multiple pages rather than one or two sentences.

To: By Greg Forrest on April 18, 2008 1:09 PM

Likewise GF I also enjoy your posts even if we disagree on some things. Heck, there is just under a dozen of us who debate the issues in a calm rational mannor. Maybe we should create our own minor SB to keep the real SB in check?

I will personally agree with one of your points. This is only my personal opinion and should no way be considered the opinion of the "north". I feel the SB took it upon themselves as elected officials to decide themselves what they felt was the best solution to a problem. I'm refering to after the SB decided that BB was not an option from a financial standpoint. Do I personally feel they probably should have taken it to a vote, yes, in an ideal world. However, I also understand why that most likely didn't happen.

1. Didn't want to go through what they did in 2005 and 2006 which was a nightmare for all.
2. They felt they didn't have the time because the population (they believe) is going up and IPSD can't wait. (this is debatable)
3. After the fallout of the BB property I think they wanted to have three high schools spread out over the district.
4. They (SB) felt they could get everything done the fastest and had the right to do it themselves because they are the elected officials of the SB. They were also determined to keep their timeline.

Having said that I truly believe they (SB) did this with no self interests in mind. Sure we can all argue which SB member did it for selfish reasons, however, no SB members kids benefited except CB's and his kids are still little.

What I'm saying GF is that I see your points but I also see the SB's point. I think it is also hard to wait 1, 2 or 3 years for some of these lawsuits to play out. Granted these lawsuits are a HUGE issue but the SB also has to think short term and what they are going to do about the overcrowding NOW.

Regarding the location of the HS. Some will say this doesn't make sense and I know there have been arguements about financial implications of having a HS in the north. I say this to you. What sense would it make to have 3 high schools between 95th and 111th? Because that is esencially what some have been saying. I've never seen a school district like that. The high schools are usually scattered across the district and not within 1-2 miles from each other.

My only concern is that sometimes I felt like the "timeline" was driving this more then the overcrowding. That is why I sometimes have an issue with #4. While the SB can do what they want as elected officials, we just hope they have all of our best interests in mind. Well this is exactaly what happened. Some people weren't happy and down right mad.

There were 3 types of people that voted yes in 2006. Those that voted yes and their kids would still stay at NVHS but they did it for the overcrowding. Those that voted yes and their kids would still stay at WVHS. Those that voted yes and (they thought based on the boundary discussions) thought they would attend the new MVHS on the BB property. The last group was the obvious group that has been unhappy the past two months. I'm also not sure if this last group voted yes because of overcrowding or because they were going to MVHS at the BB property? I hear and read in the NSFOC lawsuit them talking about boundaries and not overcrowding and the referendum no matter if you feel we were "sold" on a property or not, it was all about overcrowding.

I don't think anyone on the SB thought there would be such a down right unhappy group of people, however large or small they are. I also want to say I understand why they are unhappy for a bunch of reasons. I think the SB saw it coming to some extent but I don't think they imagined they would form the NSFOC and file a lawsuit. I think the school board was driven by their timeline more then anyting. In hindsight I'm sure the SB would do things differently but again they felt rushed because of the coming students. I also personally think the SB feels partial blame for this district chaos and division. They knew no matter what people were going to be unhappy in any scenaro. I don't think they had the foresight to see that this group is actually larger then those that were unhappy back in 2006. I guess what I'm saying is I don't think there was an easy solution no matter who you were on the SB. However, that is just my opinion.

Wow - I've been gone the last couple of weeks and it seems like a lifetime of blogs to read thru to get current with what's going on.
I see some familiar names - Dollars and sense, Greg Forrest, Civics... and the 100's of Anonymous posters (BTW, I don't get the Anonymous moniker - I identify myself as an individual blogger just like many others, but still have a degree of anonymity, so why do people post as "Anonymous"? Are they too lazy or too paranoid? FYI - the Naperville Sun can easily track you via the IP address in your post header, in case you're wondering.)
Anyway, in the interest of promoting constructive suggestions, I have a few of my own. Feel free to add on:
1. Reconcile: Property has been acquired and land construction will begin early May. Deal with it and move on. You can rave and rant about it until you turn blue in the face, but it still won't change what's happening. Pulling for the BB lawsuit to win over the SB will only hurt you financially as a D204 resident. Besides, its better for your mental and physical health - just ask your doctor.
2. Include, NOT exclude: If you're a current WVHS family, invite the new students and families to become a part of your fraternity. If you're going to join the WVHS community, go take a tour of the facility, meet the teachers and parents and try to integrate. This will only help your kids thru the difficult transition.
3. Be humble and respectful: For all the folks who are smug about the Eola location because they are near it, take pause - a SD this large and STILL growing is bound to have to redraw boundaries at some point in the future. I see WVHS shutting down at some point in the next decade - that will definitely have ramifications on the current boundaries.
4. Post blogs as your kids watch: Talk about parents behaving badly! Imagine your kids are watching over your shoulder and reading every word you type as you post a blog entry. That'll clean up this blog site in a hurry.

5. Move: Don't like the boundaries that the District set up? Move to a property that allows you to be at the HS that minimizes your commute and raises your *perceived* property values. Last I checked, the real estate market is desperate for home buyers, so you should get a GREAT deal on a new home!

To Overlooking Metea:

Lets keep it to the facts:

***the Eola site is safe***
It is looking like it may be safer than feared but not exactly safe or at least until I see an EPA report stating so.(If its out there forgive me for not seeing it) But if you are in the camp that the SB saved the district money by acquriring eola of $19.0M opposed to $31.0M for BB,then I can understand your conclusion.

***and the right choice.***
Until the distrcit has a chance to vote on this, it is only the right choice for a few/some (not sure of the # but am certain it is not most/all).

To: Disgusted on April 18, 2008 2:12 PM

Got a call from Money Magazine asking for a short interview/survey for its annual survey for the Best Places to raise kids in America. I referred them to these blogs and told them to move on to a city that actually merits consideration (obviously not ours and embarrassed to call most of you my neighbors based on the ugliness of your comments).
________________________________

Thanks Disgusted, I hope you are joking? Otherwise, I think I just heard all of our property values get sucked down the toliet if you truly did that.

Regardless, we will still be ranked as a great place to live because of our city, our neighborhoods and our school district. This will remain the same no matter how you feel about others in our school district. It just means that YOU need to try and understand them. Until then you're right, you will never be happy.

I do hope the ugliness of the comments stop as well.

By Dollars and sense on April 18, 2008 11:12 AM
To Anonymous on April 17, 2008 7:35 PM--

Here is some useful information:

The BB Trusts would never file this type of injunction. Their lawsuits center on the SB not buying their land. They couldn't care less what other land the SB buys, this doesn't change their complaint one bit.

The NSFOC considered it, but simply couldn't afford it. Apparently injunctions cost a lot of $$.

That's all I know. Hope it helps.
________________________________________________

Great Point D&S: I highly doubt either of the BB Trusts would do this. It makes no financial sense as they are only in it for the money/damages/sell their land. They dont care if D204 buys other land or other capital projects. They only care about their fiduciary responsibility to the Trust.

If they filed an injunction (which they could do if they chose to do so) it would only benefit the taxpayers of D204 to allow this to get resolved before any potential damages come our way at the end of the suits and after we have spent all the capital money. BB is not interested in helping D204 taxpayers.

Like I said, my fear now is we will get hit with these damages and we will have a partially or fully built school and no money in which to pay BB unless the taxpayers kick in the funds via a "pay BB referendum" I have a feeling that would not pass. Then we are left with horrible operating funding cuts as D204 gets put on a "wage" (or in the case of D204 "tax fund reciepts") garnishment so we can pay off BB over the course of multiple years.

This is a worst case scenario and I hope and pray this does not happen it would be a disaster for all of us. Like I said; NO LIMIT HOLDEM game; D204 moved all in with a pair of Jacks. Not sure what BB is holding, or what NSFOC is holding.

To Civics, MR, GF and others,

I took a break from all of the blogs for a day or so. I also felt we were starting to turn the blog into a more productive and issue based conversation. I was saddened to see how it had deteriorated in such a short time.

I would welcome Civics idea of getting a separate email thread to further discuss in an intelligent civil manner the issues before us. While I have not agreed with all of your points (sorry GF, probably more yours than some of the others) I have respected and admired your honesty and reasoning for them. I know these issues are passionate – that is good – it shows we really care. I wish all of the bloggers here would care as much about our district and respect the people and their personal views and stop the attacks, accusations and labels.

I do believe that if you can get enough smart caring people together you can cure a rainy day.

Since the land has been acquired and we as members of the district have little control over the BB suits (which I personally do not care who is representing them, the law is based on fact and precedence – this is not a TV show). Maybe we can focus part of our energy to define and move forward on future checks and balances that may be necessary to ensure that the board is working for whole of the district.

I believe that part of the perception is that exists is based on the board not acting in individual's best interest – maybe GF is right and there should be a vote stated the same as the previous – are we in favor of a third high school.

Whether we like it or not the SB as part of its responsibility has the authority to change boundaries and balance population and distribution of students – they do not need to have any community input on these types of actions.

I think what they did for the referendum was in part to get the new school ref. passed and in fairness to them trying to involve and engage the community in the process. I am of the opinion that we could not afford the time to go through 9 more months of posturing for the “right” boundary for everyone’s personal preference.

I believe we have all probably been in a position at some point in our lives professional or personal where it was just time to make a decision. I think the SB was probably there based on the previous three years plus of work on the third HS issue.

I do not blindly support every referendum that is issued just because it has our schools in it. I do evaluate each on its own merit however.

I do like civics idea of a separate email thread to continue intelligent civil discussion.

Kind regards

To Civics, MR, GF and others,

I took a break from all of the blogs for a day or so. I also felt we were starting to turn the blog into a more productive and issue based conversation. I was saddened to see how it had deteriorated in such a short time.

I would welcome Civics idea of getting a separate email thread to further discuss in an intelligent civil manner the issues before us. While I have not agreed with all of your points (sorry GF, probably more yours than some of the others) I have respected and admired your honesty and reasoning for them. I know these issues are passionate – that is good – it shows we really care. I wish all of the bloggers here would care as much about our district and respect the people and their personal views and stop the attacks, accusations and labels.

I do believe that if you can get enough smart caring people together you can cure a rainy day.

Since the land has been acquired and we as members of the district have little control over the BB suits (which I personally do not care who is representing them, the law is based on fact and precedence – this is not a TV show). Maybe we can focus part of our energy to define and move forward on future checks and balances that may be necessary to ensure that the board is working for whole of the district.

I believe that part of the perception is that exists is based on the board not acting in individual's best interest – maybe GF is right and there should be a vote stated the same as the previous – are we in favor of a third high school.

Whether we like it or not the SB as part of its responsibility has the authority to change boundaries and balance population and distribution of students – they do not need to have any community input on these types of actions.

I think what they did for the referendum was in part to get the new school ref. passed and in fairness to them trying to involve and engage the community in the process. I am of the opinion that we could not afford the time to go through 9 more months of posturing for the “right” boundary for everyone’s personal preference.

I believe we have all probably been in a position at some point in our lives professional or personal where it was just time to make a decision. I think the SB was probably there based on the previous three years plus of work on the third HS issue.

I do not blindly support every referendum that is issued just because it has our schools in it. I do evaluate each on its own merit however.

I do like civics idea of a separate email thread to continue intelligent civil discussion.

Kind regards

Hi MR

Good feedback. Yes I also can see the SB side of things. I also agree, there are no easy solutions and the SB was caught between a rock and a "hard place"

I just try and put myself in the SB's position and I would have been much more comfortable "getting voter input" after it was necessary to switch sites and boundries. First to remove any perception of conflicts of interests and second to reduce the level of discontent amongst the constituents and third, because I feel that it is the right thing to do, given the precedent we set on ref #2.

I am only speaking for me; but I would be much more receptive to the "sorry Greg we are doing XYZ in place of original plan ABC that was listed in the SB flyers due to these factors" and have that message come directly from YOU (and by you I mean the entire voting public of D204)by way of a majority vote.

I think there would have been no NSFOC (at least no basis for a election interference act lawsuit argument) if a confirmation vote was passed and linked to the 2nd ref. Its very hard to argue against the majorities opinion even if you (meaning certain feeder school areas) have to bear more of the "downside/burden" than the average feeder school area. At that point you have to bow to the will of the majority and keep a smile on your face while doing so :)

Again, i think we agree that the timeline pressure (whether preceived or real and thats where we differ on this piece) drove quite a bit of this.

Oh well, not much we can do about it now. Not sure why everyone is in such a hub bub over the quake. There werent even any waves in the quake. The really big ones have ground waves that you can feel (not just the rattling) I have been in biggies in Calie and in Seattle. you cant even get quake insurance anymore. The subduction zone off the west coast is the monster waiting to happen. Biggest ones on the face of the planet happen at the meeting of two continental plates. Not these wimpy san andreas ones. Now the new badrid one is potentially pretty scary, but that has alot to do with the land composition and geography around that fault

By Anonymous on April 18, 2008 1:20 PM
Get a life. You know I am a little more mean spirited to be that juvenile. This one sounds like you.

By Disgusted on April 18, 2008 2:12 PM
Got a call from Money Magazine asking for a short interview/survey for its annual survey for the Best Places to raise kids in America. I referred them to these blogs and told them to move on to a city that actually merits consideration (obviously not ours and embarrassed to call most of you my neighbors based on the ugliness of your comments).
...................................................
This was probably the dumbest blog I have read yet. No real point to it, just wanted to tell the world your problems. If I actually believed you had this call I would worry about your health and well being. Bashing your own town to a national magazine? What would be your point? Do you want to call any national news media to stress your disgust? Might as well. Move if you are so disgusted, this is the situation we are in. Don't be embarrassed, just move.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 10:32 PM
It is growing more and more clear that we are going to need the SB to put another referendum on the ballot at the time of our next election.

The referendum question is going to need to ask all the voters if we should retain or change the current practice of electing school board members at large. Based upon the current climate and deep division within our community it is clear to me that since the school board sets the school boundaries within the context of a policy decision we are going to end up with continued border wars and elections for years to come with one community after another trying to stack the board with their candidates.

The only fair and logical way to avoid these border wars is to drop at large board members and divide the district into districts. Yes, I recognize that drawing up these districts will probably also set off some more screaming matches, but for the good of the community I don't think we all want to go thru a situation where the boundaries are constantly in flux because everyone will loose, especially the students.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Why not one from each grade school--seems logical to me! That way no one can argue that they are not represented. What a voice of reason! My only fear is that too many on the board might make it hard to get anything accomplished (think about legislative bodies).

I must also say that I voted no to the first referendum because it seemed to come out of thin air and I was peeved. My husband did the same. Neither of us ever considered that it would fail, we voted out of protest. When it did fail I did all in my power to educate people about the need and get it passed the second time. That original 48% might have been higher if we had received more information (like that there would be a referendum) in advance.

To MR in terms of "Regarding the location of the HS. Some will say this doesn't make sense and I know there have been arguements about financial implications of having a HS in the north. I say this to you. What sense would it make to have 3 high schools between 95th and 111th?"
----------------------------------------------------
Not sure where WV is located from a North South perspective, but I dont think its in line with 95th. Definately agree we should not have 3 schools between 95 and 111th. I like the idea of a north, central, south from a geogra[hic perspective. The problem to it, is we have a ton of the population (I wont toss out numbers I have seen) crammed in between 87th and 111th. In an ideal world there would be 4 high schools and we could attempt to incorporate East West in addition to pop densities and N/S.
MV: North
WV: Central
NV: South
??: South

besides a 4th HS; Do I even dare say what I am thinking to allieviate the bubble of students in the far south that are making NV a 5,000 student metropolis? It would require working with the Plainfield SD

1. move some of the far south outlying geography to Plainfield district for their new HS being built.
2. Do the reverse and incorporate more of deep south into D204 and utilize Plainfield's "far north" HS as our deep south new 4th HS.

Did I just open up a huge can of worms?

By Flip Floppin' on April 18, 2008 11:20 AM
I always enjoy the comments about what the referedum did or did not say. Since some take such a literal translation to the language on the ballot (and that everything represented by the SB leading up to the vote held no bearing), let me point out one additional item that was not on the ballot - the conversion of the WV Gold Campus to a middle school. Since that item was not on the ballot - and therefore no one voted on it - are we to assume that this will not occur? WV will be a MORE crowded school in the 2009 and 2010 school years due to the closure of the Gold campus.

------------------------------------------------------------------
WVHS gold campus was always slated to be returned to middle school status. That is why NVHS has 1200 more seats than the other two schools, it will continue to have a gold campus. Please don't scream at me, but why will WVHS be so overcrowded since they will be sending some freshmen and some sophomores to MVHS. Has anyone seen exact numbers?

By MR on April 18, 2008 2:55 PM
...............................
Could you explain your comment about having 3 HS's between 95th and 111th?

We have NV and if Metea was built on BB land it is still on 75th street. Did you mean 75th?

If urban development planning was thought of before the towns all grew together around here, someone would have realigned the boundaries to coincide with each community. These boundaries are in place from 100 years ago I bet. However, you typically see schools built were the students are to make them convenient for all to attend. If it took 3 schools in that small of an area to service the public then that’s what it takes. I don't understand the argument that you need a set of schools built in a certain geometric shape or configuration to please the public. I wonder how far Naperville North and Central are from one another? I bet not that far. To be honest, I just checked mapquest and it looks to be about 1 mile. Wow and you thought two miles was close. If that is where the kids are that is where the schools go.

To MR who wrote:

"Having said that I truly believe they (SB) did this with no self interests in mind. Sure we can all argue which SB member did it for selfish reasons, however, no SB members kids benefited except CB's and his kids are still little."
_______________________________________________________________

It's not about their kids. It's about their own home and property values and it's about doing favors for their neighbors who are screaming in their ears and who they have to live by each day. Their bias and favortism was very visible. Those who didn't see it, are getting or keeping what they want with the SB decisions. Rose colored glasses!

It was very irritating to sit through meetings in 2006 and hear some of the stuff coming out of the SB mouths. "Test Score" balancing, my foot! It was a weak attempt, among other things, to mix up the economics of the schools and the amount of parent monetary contribution and efforts for fundraisers, to in order try to mitigate the perception that one school was the "haves" school with the nicer, newer infrastructure and deeper resources. In the long run, they have created two Waubonsies and left Neuqua less diverse and with a more privileged student body then ever! For WVHS, they traded out Stonebridge and Oakhurst to be replaced by TG and WE and "six kids" from Ashwood Park. Then they put Ashwood Creek into NVHS.

Build the school at Eola. But I propose we re-do the boundaries one more time, and really bus the hell out of this district so that everyone can enjoy the smaller schools at the same time that EVERYONE can enjoy being bussed to the second and third furthest school from their house, that EVERYONE can go to school with kids from all diverse (class, race, religion,) demographic categories Then it would be fair!

Can't afford the transportation? So what! We can't afford the third school at Eola either and we're still doing it. I'm sure we could hire Laidlaw to do a study and give us a cheap estimate.

By Spring Brook mom on April 18, 2008 4:34 PM
By Flip Floppin' on April 18, 2008 11:20 AM
I always enjoy the comments about what the referedum did or did not say. Since some take such a literal translation to the language on the ballot (and that everything represented by the SB leading up to the vote held no bearing), let me point out one additional item that was not on the ballot - the conversion of the WV Gold Campus to a middle school. Since that item was not on the ballot - and therefore no one voted on it - are we to assume that this will not occur? WV will be a MORE crowded school in the 2009 and 2010 school years due to the closure of the Gold campus.

------------------------------------------------------------------
WVHS gold campus was always slated to be returned to middle school status. That is why NVHS has 1200 more seats than the other two schools, it will continue to have a gold campus. Please don't scream at me, but why will WVHS be so overcrowded since they will be sending some freshmen and some sophomores to MVHS. Has anyone seen exact numbers?

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

Spring Brook Mom,

You ask a very good question. I actually analyzed the numbers in an old post about a month ago. Here is what I came up with - not exact district numbers, but this should be close:

The third HS is supposed to reduce the overcrowding in WVHS and NVHS. Ironically, WVHS will actually be MORE crowded until the 2011-2012 school year.

Per the SB's website, current HS enrollment is 8182, of which 3,691 (45.1%) are at WVHS. The projected enrollments for the 2011-2012 school year have 28.6% of the district's HS students at WVHS. Using the SB's current numbers of students at each grade, here are the estimates for WVHS students for the 2009-2010 school year:

Seniors (currently 10th graders): 2085 x 45.1% = 940
Juniors (currently 9th graders): 2145 x 45.1% = 967
Sophomores (currently 8th graders): 2362 x 28.6% = 676
Freshmen (currently 7th graders): 2358 x 28.6% = 674

Total students at WVHS for the 2009 - 2010 school year = 3257. Good news, right? That's a 434 student decrease from the current numbers of 3,691. The problem is that the Freshmen campus will have been converted to a middle school, so you just lost space that currently is used for 967 9th graders. Everyone is now in the main WVHS building. You actually have 533 more students in this space than this year! The problem improves in the 2010 - 2011 school year, but you will still have more students in this space than this year. Not until 2011 will there be less students in the main WVHS building than there is today. Just in time for district enrollments to decline.

By Earth To SB on April 18, 2008 4:02 PM

By Anonymous on April 18, 2008 1:20 PM
Get a life. You know I am a little more mean spirited to be that juvenile. This one sounds like you.

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

I do have a life. And part of it is spent torturing you. I know I can throw some red meat your way and you just simply cannot help yourself. I bait my hook and wait quietly for the "large mouth" bass that is Earth to SB to hit my line. You are my puppet and pulling your strings for the enjoyment of all readers of this blog is my primary contribution to this community.

Please respond to this...please...PLEASE!

Sorry all: forgot to type my name in on 2 of my blogs: Anonymous on April 18, 2008 3:18 PM & Anonymous on April 18, 2008 4:32 PM are both me Greg Forrest.

Seems like most of us can at least agree on the following: A good portion of us feel there might be opportunities to "raise the bar" so to speak in terms of the composition of the school board. Exactly what options are the best in terms of changes to make is debateable (permanent consultant not answerable to the board, paid professional SB members, geographic representation from the middle schools etc etc) and feasibility of any changes would also need to be considered. would be interesting to explore further!!

To perspective: No worries! good to hear from you!!
GF

Regarding WV Gold Campus: The SD does not need to vote to convert schools. Wheatland was closed and repopened this fall for PreK classrooms and a storage facility. We didn't vote on that.

The only change they may have to make at the WV Gold camplus is the school sign. I don't think we'll need a referendum to change that.

To perspective

Yes I am totally up for that. we need to complie some kind of list and send it over to mod Jim. if we try and do it piece meal, I think we will burn out his good will on the email sharing assistence.

Going to take a little breather from the blogs, but will check in from time to time over the next 3-4 days or so.

Thank you school board... it is much needed!!!!

Now if you would only change those darn school colors.

By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 11:44 AM
By Anonymous on April 17, 2008 10:48 AM
I agree with Northside Bob's post. I think the NSFOC should be responsible for the additional $2.3 million this tragedy has cost us.
.............
That's the same thinking that got us in this mess to begin with. You think it is ok for the SB to have and use two legal teams at taxpayers’ expense but one Community Group who oppose this SB is not allowed to bring legal action due to a precedence the SB set. You can't sue for spite. The SB/Taxpayers will pay all of the legal fees and there will be no counter suit because there is no case. When the judge rules in the NSFOC lawsuit we will find out who is on the right side of the law, and then that will fuel the BB case. If one wins they will all win. The SB is not in a position to ask for money's to pay their legal teams to defend themselves. If I am wrong, show me the documentation that shows a precedent where a SB was able to successfully get back legal fees from someone who sued them.

------------------------------------------------------------
Personally, I think that this is the ignorant thought process that truly got us into this mess. The Broch-Brodie condemtion lawsuit should never have been filed. The school board filed an unconstitutional lawsuit to take someone's land from them and was then surprised when the legal system worked. You can not just go in and take someone's land without paying a price. This is what sets us apart from the Communists.

Now NSFOC is filing base-less lawsuits against the school board which is going to cost all of us tax-payers regardless of the outcome. Two wrongs never make a right. NSFOC is just digging us in deeper and deeper via the courts. If Brach-Brodie is smart, and they are, they will use the NSFOC lawsuit to win their case against the school board. And while I really hate to admit it, I hope Brach-Brodie does. I will be a defender of our constitutional rights until my last breath. The school board tried to violate those rights, they tried to violate what this country stands for, and they should have to pay for it. YES, I realize that means we all pay for it. Unfortunatly, when it comes to something as important as the government, or the schools, coming in and taking private property it is too important for me to worry about my taxes.

This is something that NSFOC and all of its supporters need to stop and think about. Just because you can file a lawsuit does not make it legally, or morally valid.

Will everyone please stop saying there was a 5-1 ratio at the school board meeting. The only people counted were the ones who actually got a chance to speak. I would have loved to speak in favor of Eola. Unfortunatly, I was with many other Eola supporters in the overflow room. If the school board, or anyone for that matter, wanted an accurate count they should have at least come down to see us for a quick count. It was bad enough that we all sat there through the audio problems and the mouse running around. I would have been happy just standing up and to say "EOLA".

If only our supt could have started the boundary speech with Ladies and Gentleman we have set before you a plan solving the concerns of overpopulation at the middle and high school levels. I would like to extend my appreciation to all in the district for their continued patience regarding this issue. It has come to my attention through the thousands of e-mails from concerned 204 parents that this overcrowding is most acute in our southside schools. Ladies and gentleman I am here tonight to let you know that we are going to solve this issue.

The plan before you as I have outlined is different than the plan outlined at past boundary meetings. Starting tomorrow evening we will be meeting at the grade school level thru the pta organizations to facilitate the changes to those subdivisions and schools most affected. I would like at this time to give a special thanks to the Scullen and Crone middle school attendance families, for these families have been most accommodating with the overcrowding situation. Because the Scullen district will be most affected with a change of high school location and middle school splits we will be at Fry grade school tomorrow evening at 6:30 pm. A light meal will be available for those that may be rushing to attend this meeting.

Again thank you all for attending this meeting, and I look forward to meeting many of you on a individual basis in the days and weeks to come.

With a opening line as outlined above I wonder if we would have the amount of anger and frustration that has been so evident in the past months.

Thank you to flip floppin. Can we use the Frontier campus to help with that? My understanding is that there are kids who are currently districted at WVHS who attend Frontier--what if we labelled it WVHS east for those two years and use it only to alleviate the overcrowding? We could use it only for jrs and srs and focus on the TG "walkers" so they would end their HS experience near the school they want. Will 300 seats accomplish that? After the first two years we could go back to using it for all the schools.

I feel sure that this post will anger many, but if the goal of the 3rd school is to alleviate overcrowding this might make alot of people happier.

I reiterate that my goal is to get the third school before my children hit high school. If not, we will be leaving the district because of the crowding at NVHS. I love this district and the schools, and would hate to do that.

Everyone seems to be in agreement that they were never promised this site and that enrollment will be dropping just as this school comes on line (current schedule).

Does anyone know the construction costs for this school and how they compare to privately contracted buildings? Price per square foot.

A couple of years ago I had a front yard excavation and plumbing repair done. I was told the going rate for this company was $200 hour per employee from the time the left the plumbing contractors building; and, that this was the going rate they billed the school for new construction. I realize that this could have been the contractor making an excuse to rape me since I had raw sewage seeping into the basement.

Are these numbers accurate? What are the rates paid for school construction?

Kudos to flip floppin

Your numbers are correct I did the same calculations after the boundary meetings and promptly went to district offices with information.
Wvhs will be a very busy school in the short term. If anyone is very interested in this tid bit of info review the boundary meeting and notice how long it took one of our board members to calculate the population increase to wvhs when one grade school was split between wvhs and mvhs.
The district is very aware of these possibilities but with all that is going on why piss more people off. Remember the board can tweak the boundaries at their discretion.

Many costs involved for construction are on 204 website, bids have been going out in past weeks. Personal plumbing issues at $200.00 per hour per may be high though don't know what your tolerance for sewage in your home is worth. Enrollment may drop slightly in 2011 and beyond, but look at school boundaries the district has not built out,hundreds if not a thousands more homes are still possible.

The online betting parlor is now open. Current odds are 5:1 AGAINST a 2009 opening. Notice these odds are likely to go much lower in the months ahead. Bet early, bet often. Wait too long though and you will miss this great opportunity to quadruple your investment and offset your property tax increase!

Got a hunch? Bet a bunch! No wager too small to refuse.

MasterCard, VISA, Discover, and second mortgage lines of credit accepted. Tax refund and rebate checks accepted.

Absolutely no insider betting allowed by school board members, lawyers, or contractors.

anon 1:19

i will take you up on that wager, the fur was flyin at north site friday may want to change those odds. Supt likes to kick butt & get er done.

Fast--

Got a question. Can the Metea referendum money be used the pay the BB land damages? At first I was thinking it couldn't be, that the ref. money could only be used towards Metea. But if the board counts BB damages as Metea expenses . . . If this is the case, I think there's a good chance a "pay BB damages" ref. could be put up to vote by the SB (I'm sure they'd have no shame in doing this) and possibly passed by the voters. At least, I don't think it's totally out of the question this could happen.

No rush, just when you get back.

Thanks--D&S

P.S.--I knew that anonymous was you. Glad I'm not the only one who does this.

I am truly saddened by the things i am reading in these blogs. The parents, Students, SB and the NSFOC and administrators of district 204 need to stop and really think about what is going on. I ask you all to stop and think about ALL that you have. You live in Naperville..take a global look at the world ..all the poverty, hunger and the terrible war. I know that some of you are upset that you will ot be going to METEA or stay at NVHS..but really ..think globally..you live in Naperville..just be thankful for what you have ..and stop complaining. Be thankful your children will get a good education , regardless of which high school they attend. Take all this energy and anger and do something good for your community or better yet the world. No, I do not live within a NVHS boundary.

To Annon at 12:36 am

You know, there are many problems in the world, but this is not a discussion point here, so it does not really matter.

My question is, if as as earlier posters indicated, WV will be more crowded for years with the elimination of freshman campus, how does this solve the overcrowding ? If anything, it makes it much worse for WV than it is today. It will have 500+ more kids once the freshman campus is gone and WE and TG are redirected there. How will these 500+ fit into the existing main building ? Will we have more kids per class ? Will they add portables ? Will they eliminate certain classes ? I would really like to know and please don't throw the war in Iraq as your reply.

This is the funniest comment. That those of us who complain should think about other problems more pressing than this.

Take a global look at the problems of the world and think of all we have?

Hello! You don't look at problems and unethical situations like what the SB has done and then "forget it" because people are experiencing hunger and poverty and there are tragedies.

Do you tell your kids "get a C in class, don't shoot for an A" -- afterall, there's hunger in the world, so school should not be that important....

Wow, just read about the WVHS being more crowded in 2009 and 2010. I guess if I lived in TG or WE, I would be thinking of packing up and moving. If you bought pre-2004, you still made a nice profit and to make up the movingn costs, could pick up a good deal on a house (maybe a foreclosure?) in another neighborhood that goes to the a school you could be happy with. I'm serious, you guys got screwed on everything:

1)Pulled out of NVHS after being one of the closest neighborhoods to the complex
2) Sent three times as far to the oldest school with the perception of having problems (lower test scores, gangs, less $$ donations, etc)
3)Fry is the only Scullen feeder not going to NVHS (stay tuned for them to pull you out of Scullen to make up for that.) Your kids get "to make all new friends" when they get to high school, right when things will be tough as teenager in alot of regards.
4)And after paying all the increased taxes for the third school, you get an overcrowded school

I'd sue too. Anything to prevent the above for my current 8th grader. My friend has a colored flyer from the Tall Grass Developer in 2002 that talks about how a purchase in the subdivision will include going to the "state of the art" Neuqua Valley HS. Can they sue the Developer (MAF)?

And more on the topic of WVHS overcrowding - many NVHS senior students use Frontier campus for only part of their classes, so it is very easy to move back and forth between NVHS main building and Frontier campus. This in no way helps WVHS overcrowding as WVHS students cannot simply walk from WVHS to Frontier campus for some of their classes. And of course future MVHS will not have that option either. So, how can we claim that all three schools are equal ? They are not equal. Only one will have a freshman campus that the SD touted as so beneficial to student development. Only one will have a Frontier campus that will have opportunities others won't. With the addition of 500+ students to the main WVHS campus and the elimination of gold campus, where will these 500+ park if they drive (or some of them drive) ? I would also like to know where will MVHS freshman and sophmore swimmers and tennis players, and others practice while the athletic facilities are being constructed as the school opens without them in 2009. Will they be bussed to WVHS or NVHS ? I would really like know.

The entire proposal is supposed to address overcrowding,so let's hear about these solutions.

To Overcrowded WVHS,

I have a Freshman at WV and they have 935 kids in their class.The Sophomores are in the upper 800's. That deducts around 100 kids from the earlier posted formula.I think the 7th and 8th grade formula numbers are slightly high too. Only Juniors and Seniors are given parking privileges so the parking situation will remain the same and then only get better after 2011(when my kid graduates) when the numbers continue to decrease before leveling off.WV kids go to the Frontier Campus now (they are bussed or most drive). The schedules are accommodated accordingly.

The main campus at WV is already somewhat grouped according to class levels (the exception is of course when Sophomores are taking more advanced AP/Honors courses with Jr.s and Sr.s). My understanding is the Freshman classes/lockers will be in a wing and for the most part isolated similar to a freshman center ....just not in a totally different building.

I have heard several ideas on the pool/tennis courts for those teams at MV for that fall.I think a bus to WV is one idea...another was perhaps an agreement or proposal with Dupage swim ? or a local country club for tennis/golf? Sorry I don't have more concrete info. yet on this....I could have a tennis player that Fall at Metea so I will be watching this closely :) Hope this helps!

Hi D&S

yes I think ref money can be used to pay legal fees and damages releated to a capital project. I am not a lawyer, but I am pretty sure I am correct. The current costs of 5 mill have been budgeted into the MVHS capital project already from my understanding.

pretty sick huh? if we get our heads handed to us on a platter by BB, we have two choices. draconian cuts to the operating budget, or an "infusion" of cash from a ref to cover for the incopentance of the SB. Makes me ill to think about.

from a financial risk adjusted basis; the safe play for all taxpayers would be for a TRO to be filed so all this crap can be worked out before the 2006 ref money is gone. That wont happen from the BB folks (they dont care and dont need to they will get their money either way). THose TRO's are very pricy on the downside if the SB wins the cases. I would hazzard a guess that NSFOC does not have a 3 mill war chest to put up bonds necessary for a TRO. Plus you would have the "eola or bust" folks that dont care about anything other than the school up and running in 2009 hopping up and down like their feet were on hot coals. More diviseness.

So, back to my no limit texas holdem analogy: SB goes in with a pair of Jacks. Dont know what BB is holding or NSFOC. If just one has a better hand or "sucks out" and wins from a weaker hand; we will all be right back here screaming about why didnt we settle with BB or wait until we had more visibility to the possible damages... Then we will all be either paying up and re-funding the school boards bankroll so they can contine playing in the game with the big boys or we will be cutting some serious goodies out of D204 and be on some sort of payment plan to payoff BB. maybe we could offer them the Eola land as part of the settlement? LOL just teasing.

Everyone keeps forgetting about the 25 acres we do own at BB. They get the right of first refusal to purchase it back from the SB, but if significant damages come in, we could give it to them (and not sell it) as partial payment for any damages they win. IE they get the land back and dont have to pay for it. Or conversely, we fire sell it and use those proceeds to help pay the damages. Problem is, I think the 25 acres is part of the EOla MVHS budget.

Just wanted to leave some food for thought for the northsiders...
wanted you to just consider how you might feel in a different, yet similar scenario
Imagine that the SB put forth a referendum for a new school to be built on the Eola site. You hated the thought of leaving your beloved WVHS, but you voted for the referendum. Then after the ref. passed, for whatever reason the SB was no longer going to build on this site. Now the SB made a deal with the Aurora SD to send you to Aurora East HS (and not back to WVHS which you hated to leave in the first place) Now everyone knows that the kids at Aurora East are for the most part great kids and that the teachers all do a very good job but this is not what you were hoping for. You bought your house knowing that you were going to WVHS and you were very happy with your decision. Also, maybe fair and maybe not, but new home buyers might be more interested in your house if it were in the WVHS area. Therefore, your house value might have just changed. And on top of it all, your kids now have to travel further to a school that was not your choice, not what you were told by the SB would be their school, your kids will be separated from their middle school friends and you feel very deceived. Then the SB decides to build the school on a different site...but you're still going to Aurora East. Just wanted other people to maybe think about why this is painful for so many.

Greg glad to see you back how about civics?

GF:
Everyone keeps forgetting about the 25 acres we do own at BB. They get the right of first refusal to purchase it back from the SB, but if significant damages come in, we could give it to them (and not sell it) as partial payment for any damages they win. IE they get the land back and dont have to pay for it. Or conversely, we fire sell it and use those proceeds to help pay the damages. Problem is, I think the 25 acres is part of the EOla MVHS budget.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg,

If selling it isn't in the calculations, and they do win an award against us, and at least part of the award requires us to give them that land is it valued at the price that the jury said their property is worth?

To Southsider--Maybe I am really confused, but last I checked, noone is being redistricted to another district. Did I miss something? Have some grade schools been redistricted into Plainfield or Bolingbrook? We all chose to move into district 204, if you have been moved into a new district, I can certainly see your point. Last I heard WVHS is in 204--have we annexed it to the Aurora school district? Since a good portion of WE is in Aurora, maybe Aurora schools are closer? Please compare apples to apples. Ask how the Northsiders would feel if they were promised Eola and then it got moved to BB, what would they do?--Oh,wait, we know, they would be disappointed and react with grace, and they wouldn't sue the school district. Maybe the "Southsiders" could take some lessons.

P.S.-doesn't living within one block of 95th make me a "southsider"? Please call yourself what you are, TG and WE(which isn't even south) don't even make up half of the southside. Please be honest and call yourself TG'er or WE'er.

Southsider,
I saw your post above on the other new topic. Why do you think your property values will go down if your kids are going to WVHS? Do you think that going to NV boosted your home value ? Do you think it has nothing to do with the district but only the particular high school building? I am asking out of all seriousness. I honestly want to know if an appraisal is dependent on this....Did an appraiser tell you this about your home?
Thanks!

ToBy Southsider ; Since you've posted 2x thought I'd post my response as well...
Here's a scenario for you. You live in the north and pay dearly for your house and about 24K/yr in taxes. A second high school is needed for the district. A referendum is put out to vote for the most expensive high school ever (at the time) to be built. You vote yes for this 2nd high school knowing you're very high taxes are going to this incredible overspending of a high school that your kids won't benefit directly from - only that their high school will be less crowded. You embrace your HS even though the 2nd HS gets all the money and the original HS can't even get funding for new computers. Not only do you have to deal with the lack of funding but you have certain people from TG and WE say "oh my" your in Waubonsie district - what ever are you going to do when your children hit HS?? Fast forward to the need of the 3rd HS and these same selfish people kick and scream so much that the board has to find land that they will approve of - one very close to the second high school - the BB site because they want it all for themselves. The board does everything to secure this site - but bc of things outside of their control - the BB site is out of the budget for our district. What ever are they going to do for the children of district 204 - there is very little land left here as everything is built out bc it's such a great school district. Then, literally by the grace of god - the Eola site becomes available having not been on the market previously. We should all be happy - I mean there were 2 - not one but two times the north was looked over as a site for the second and third high school and WE DIDN"T SUE! Didn't like it - but wouldn't even cross our minds to sue our neighbors -no WE MADE LEMONADE with the lemons we were given - and what beautiful lemonade we made. Not only does this selfish group sue - but they rip apart our beautiful northern location with lies and propaganda - calling our land cesspools and toxic waste dumps. Yes, we are outraged at what you've done to our community and please know, it is the nsfoc that did this not the Board as the board has passed us by 2 times and we didn't choose to rip our community apart.

To Greg Forrest on April 20, 2008 12:01 PM--

Aw, crap. That was the link I was missing. I was pondering your reply about the injunctions when I had this lightbulb moment. I was thinking the ref money could only be used to BUILD Metea. After all, this is what was stated on the referendum, as the anti-NSFOC folks are always so happy to remind us. But it makes more sense that the BB damages would be considered part of the costs of building Metea. So when the BB lawyers kick our butts in court the second time around, the SB can loot the ref money to pay the damages.

Alka Tyle said at the last SB meeting that it could take 1-3 years for the BB lawsuit to move through the courts. So depending on when we get the judgment, we could either have a half-completed Metea flapping in the breeze or a completed Metea with no operating funds. The SB could try to defer paying the damages by filing appeals, etc., to get Metea finished and ding taxpayers for the BB damages later. Or Metea could come to a grinding halt while the SB attempts to make the BB damages our problem now.

This is where I, and probably a lot of other folks, too, would tell the school board to eat my shorts. They insisted on going this route, they are responsible for the consequences, not the taxpayers. But this opinion could be in the minority. I'm sure the SB would make it into a "Pay BB damages to save Metea" ref. All who support Metea, especially those in the north attending it, would literally go off their nut at residents opposing it. I can hear it again now, "How can you be so selfish; it's for the kids; you're hurting your own kids and the district," blah, blah, blah, a repeat of what we just went through by opposing the Eola site. Those folks firmly at WV or NV and happy about it might just support such a ref, too, to prevent their kid's HS experience being diminished by overcrowding, if they choose to believe the SB's doomsday overcrowding predictions. So, even though it makes me sick to think about, I think it is possible that TG, WE, et al., could not only end up in the least desirable situation in the district, but also have the privilege of paying more than they ever imagined for it. They'll have to pick up the check for the SB or be blamed for a failed Metea. Pick your poison.

To SS s/maker:

I am going to be hit & miss for the next 3-4 days, but will pop in when I can. Yes, I too miss civics, I sure hope he comes back. I like his objective/scientific method outlook on everything. It helps to keep me grounded :)

To Anonymous on April 20, 2008 12:29 PM--Since you posted 2x, here's my reponse twice:

RE: the end of your statement:

"I mean there were 2 - not one but two times the north was looked over as a site for the second and third high school and WE DIDN"T SUE! Didn't like it - but wouldn't even cross our minds to sue our neighbors -no WE MADE LEMONADE with the lemons we were given - and what beautiful lemonade we made. Not only does this selfish group sue - but they rip apart our beautiful northern location with lies and propaganda - calling our land cesspools and toxic waste dumps. Yes, we are outraged at what you've done to our community and please know, it is the nsfoc that did this not the Board as the board has passed us by 2 times and we didn't choose to rip our community apart."

1) You didn't sue because your location was never "sold" to the voters or in any way connected to a referendum the way the BB site was. You may have gotten lemons, but you knew the situation and accepted it when you moved into that area. It wasn't forced upon you after the fact.

2) The NSFOC did not attack YOUR land, they attacked the MSGen land. The NSFOC attacked the northern SITE, not the northern PEOPLE. It is the northern people who attacked not only the NSFOC, but the folks in WE and TG and all southern residents in general, and they did so in a very personal and ugly way. The NSFOC as an organization or through it's leadership has never attacked, insulted or demeaned anyone who opposed them. Go back and read the blogs. It was the northern residents and Eola supporters who attacked the southern residents and their children with labels as selfish, self-centered, elitists, snobs, brats, racist, on and on. It is these people who have torn this community apart with their take no prisoners approach to getting what they wanted, not the NSFOC or its lawsuit.

3) I have heard the "lemons to lemonade" statement a lot on these blogs from people who are now at WV and will be going to Metea if it is built. Why is this? Do you really consider Waubonsie to be a lemon?

To D & S

YUP
In a worst case scenario (mega damages from BB) "its damned if you do or damned if you dont." we either take dracionian cuts for the District overall, or we kick in the extra XXXX millions for BB damages on top of the 125M for Eola in a follow up referendum. This is why many folks were preaching slow down at the 4/14 meeting. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see we have taken a very grave risk by moving ahead prior to the resolution of the BB issue.

Some would say "who cares?" we need it now and risk is low (in their opinion). Others dont see it that way. ALL THE MORE REASON TO PUT IT UP FOR A VOTE. given all the variable changes that have happened from 2006 ref to where we are now.

In my opinion, this SB's risk adjusted evaluations are very concerning to say the least. I hope (I truly do) that I am not posting in a year, "I told you so" the sky really is falling....or has fallen.

If that does come to pass, I have been wondering how I am going to vote for the "pay BB to save our kids" referendum? I dont want our SD to be wanting for ANYTHING...however it makes me physically ill to think I have cover up for the total incompentancy of our current SB. I guess I can cross that bridge when/if it ever becomes necessary.

Hi Springbrook Mom

I honestly dont know. One would think the value of the 25 acres would be based on the current appraisal from the condem suit but lots of factors could come into play.

Just 2 Examples: Depends on the buyback adendum details in the contract between the two. Depends on the current lawsuit and what the resolution is.

BB could always say "no thanks" dont want to buy it back, dont care at what price. This would then require our SB to sell it to someone in the current market in order to raise cash.

GF, the 25 acres were purchased with a preset buy back clause.

Honestly want to know: I can tell you this, I have lived in the WV area for over 15 years. When NV opened up the value of my home did not go down. It continued to increase as the houseing market did all over. So please don't give me the bull crap that your home values are going dwon because you are now going to WV. In case you haven't heard the housing market is down across the whole country. If your realtor hasn't told you that you need to think about switching realtors or try reading a newspaper and not just the Naperville tabloids.

3) I have heard the "lemons to lemonade" statement a lot on these blogs from people who are now at WV and will be going to Metea if it is built. Why is this? Do you really consider Waubonsie to be a lemon? as posted by Dollars and Sense...

D&S,
Actually I think they are saying the "lemon" if you will, was having to leave WV since it's such an awesome school. They will make lemonade when they are sent to the new school (Metea). Regardless, I think the saying refers to the idea of "making the best out of an unexpected situation" or "working with what you've been given".IMO.

One more thing to Anonymous on April 20, 2008 12:29 PM--

Regarding your comment:

"Fast forward to the need of the 3rd HS and these same selfish people kick and scream so much that the board has to find land that they will approve of - one very close to the second high school - the BB site because they want it all for themselves."

4) The SB did not choose the BB site to make TG and WE happy. In fact, the BB site had been selected by the SB prior to the 05 ref, which didn't pass. That's why the SB was able to go ahead and purchase 25 acres at BB immediately after the 05 ref failed. This was all they could afford and they figured they could at least put a middle school there.

TG and WE were very happy at NV and did not want to leave at all, even for Metea at BB. Some TG folks were even hoping that once Metea was built at BB and enrollment dropped off, they would be permitted to return to NV. This is a first-hand account; I had these discussions with them personally. Those from TG and WE who voted for Metea at BB did so because they understood there simply wasn't enough room at NV for everyone, not because they wanted Metea all to themselves. They would have preferred to have stayed at NV and been left out of the whole mess entirely.

The following was taken directly from the BB lawsuit and illustrates this, just in case you have any doubts:

7. In the event the District placed the School Referendum on the April 5, 2005 election ballot and the referendum was approved by the voters, the District would be able to simply close on the entire 80-acre Acquisition Parcel at the agreed price set forth in the Settlement Agreement on or before May 31, 2005. In the event, however, that the District placed the School Referendum on the April 5, 2005 ballot but the referendum failed, the District could elect to proceed with the SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT in full force and effect by complying with the terms of Section 11 of the SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT by electing ". . . on or before May 17, 2005, to purchase the 25 acres sought to be condemned in the Proceeding for Six Million Four Hundred Thirty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($6,437,500) and to pay such funds to Owners, on or before May 31, 2005."

See? No "kicking and screaming from the selfish people" to force the SB to choose BB. The SB was pursuing BB and making settlement agreements with them long before it was common knowledge, definitely way before the 05 ref, which voters, including many of your so-called "selfish people", voted down.

Before you display any more holes in your logic, please go to the NSFOC website, click on complaints, and review the history for yourself. It's not a difficult read; boring, maybe, but not difficult, and very straight-forward. It will illuminate for you why the NSFOC and BB have filed suits.

To Springbrook Mom and Anonymous on April 21, 2008 2:55 AM--

Yes, the buy back clause stipulates that BB has first option to buy back the 25 acres if the SB wants to sell, and the SB has to sell it to them at the price they paid for it in 2005, $252k/acre. This is to keep eminent domain from being abused by gov. bodies who would use it to obtain land that they could resell later at a profit. If BB declines, and I can't imagine why they would, given that the land is worth twice that now, the SB can then sell it to whomever they want at any price.

Here's to Dollars and Sense:
Please read everything before you react - maybe this would have saved you a lot of trouble with the fact that the referendum did not say BB. In response to your twisting the lemons to lemonade quote - it was 1st posted on April 16th by a group of Southsiders sick of the nsfoc and trying to make the best of a situation they deem as not the best. Now please don't get confused, I am from the north reposting a post from the southside group and their response to this ugly situation created by the nsfoc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Life Gives You Lemons... on April 16, 2008 4:53 PM
No one may know this yet but there is a small and growing group of us down South that - while not excited about having to travel to Waubonsie since we bought homes close to Neuqua for a reason - understand what has happened and why and are not happy about it but have moved on.
There will be meetings all summer long by this excited group of parents - we will be planning our Waubonsie car pools and fundraisers and activities. We will grow and many of us will be meeting with administrators, getting to know teachers, learning all about how this school works and will be very actively involved on a daily basis in every single aspect of this school to ensure a great experience for our children and to protect our interests and representation at all levels.
This is a chance to make this school as "ours" as we want to and need to. A little farther away, a little older, not what we thought we were getting...but ready and waiting for our personal touch and our TLC. We will improve it with our time and involvement and monetary contributions. We'll change what we don't like. We'll work on what needs work. Our kids really need our support and enthusiasm. They are going to get it for sure.
In just a few short years, you will see a tremendous difference - an amazing improvement - Waubonsie will be the envy of all schools -we know we can do this. Life gave us this lemon - come on! We're makin' some lemonade. Join us!
The Southwest Naperville Warriors Lemonade Committee (SNWLC) :)

To Dollars and Sense makes no Sense on April 21, 2008 10:39 AM--

Hey, there, No Sense! Haven't heard from you in awhile. In regards to your post:

"Please read everything before you react - maybe this would have saved you a lot of trouble with the fact that the referendum did not say BB. In response to your twisting the lemons to lemonade quote - it was 1st posted on April 16th by a group of Southsiders sick of the nsfoc and trying to make the best of a situation they deem as not the best. Now please don't get confused, I am from the north reposting a post from the southside group and their response to this ugly situation created by the nsfoc."
_____________________________________________

This isn't a news flash, Senseless. I already know all about the SNWLC. I read their post last week and even responded to them with a "count me in." Please try to keep up.

The SNWLC reference may have been the first time you've seen it here, but it's not the first time it's been used. In fact, the lemon expression is getting as worn out as your personal favorite, "the referendum did not state BB".

FYI, my post was in reference to a Waubonsie resident using the lemon expression to explain how the north felt about being passed up as a location for a new HS twice by the school board, not the SNWLC one you posted. See Anonymous on April 20, 2008 3:39 PM above. Really, do I have to explain everything to you?

To anon 6:51 a.m 4/21/2008

Your house in the WVHS district did not go down when NVHS opened because its "intial property value" was based on going to WVHS and that's where you remained after NVHS opened. It's like it was a neutral factor when the general Chicago real estate area and property values were booming regardless of school district. BUT Tallgrass had an "intial property value" based on NVHS attendance (with that came a geographically close, new, state of the art school with a driven student body with excellent test scores). People liked those factors and Tallgrass was "hot" in real estate. Also with that package came nice neighbors with nice houses, walking paths, lakes, clubouse, pool, neighborhood events, a grade and middle school in the 'hood, and a general "Pleasantville " feeling.

This is a real estate market where there is a lot of supply and little demand. The loss of being able to go to NVHS will make TG homes/property somewhat less desirable than equivalent homes in River Run, Harmony Grove, Tamarack West, Stillwater, Burnham Point and Breckenridge who remain going to NVHS. Less desirable means less demand means less price to sell.

To Warrrior Pride on April 21, 2008 8:58 A--

"Actually I think they are saying the "lemon" if you will, was having to leave WV since it's such an awesome school. They will make lemonade when they are sent to the new school (Metea). Regardless, I think the saying refers to the idea of "making the best out of an unexpected situation" or "working with what you've been given".IMO."
_____________________________________

Thanks for a different perspective, but See Anonymous on April 20, 2008 3:39 PM above. She uses it in this context: ". . .there were 2 - not one but two times the north was looked over as a site for the second and third high school and WE DIDN"T SUE! Didn't like it - but wouldn't even cross our minds to sue our neighbors -no WE MADE LEMONADE with the lemons we were given - and what beautiful lemonade we made."

It sounds to me like she is suggesting that being passed over for a new school two times by the SB, which left them at WV, was being given lemons. Usually this saying is used to explain a situation one doesn't like but chooses to make the best of. You're a proud WV parent. Would you use this statement to express how you feel about attending WV? I wouldn't.

One More Point To No Sense on April 21, 2008 10:39 AM--

You state when repeating the "When Life Gives You Lemons" post, that:

"I am . . . reposting a post from the southside group and their response to this ugly situation created by the nsfoc."

Are you sure about that? You'd better read through the SNWLC's post again. The only thing they say is that they are "not happy about having to travel to Waubonsie since they bought homes close to Neuqua for a reason."

The NSFOC did not abandon the BB site, the school board did. The NSFOC did not change the boundaries, the school board did. The NSFOC's actions did not make these people unhappy, the school board's did. If anything, these women are talking about how they are choosing to respond to this ugly situation caused by the school board.

You're perspective is becoming as twisted as your lemons.

I still want to know if any objective appraiser (not neighbor, real estate lady,etc.) has ever said to a Tall Grass owner "your property value is lower if you go to WV" . I'm not buyin it folks. Your appraisal states district 204 schools.

To Anonymous on April 21, 2008 8:25 PM--

Thank you for a great post! Hopefully this will help others understand the impact redistricting will have on TG and WE and why these neighborhoods are reacting so strongly to it.

"This is a real estate market where there is a lot of supply and little demand. The loss of being able to go to NVHS will make TG homes/property somewhat less desirable than equivalent homes in River Run, Harmony Grove, Tamarack West, Stillwater, Burnham Point and Breckenridge who remain going to NVHS. Less desirable means less demand means less price to sell." ....posted by Anon.

Anon,
Do yourself a favor and stop working against yourself.Posting this only plants the so called "perception seed". I do not agree with you at all.I think your home will be less desirable if it isn't as nice or priced too high for the competition due to the market. Somewhere along the way you were fed that your home value was tied to going to NV. Your home value is based on the amenities of your home.The school district can have some impact on your home but not THE particular school.True.

To Anonymous on April 21, 2008 8:25 PM

Your house in the WVHS district did not go down when NVHS opened because its "intial property value" was based on going to WVHS and that's where you remained after NVHS opened. It's like it was a neutral factor when the general Chicago real estate area and property values were booming regardless of school district. BUT Tallgrass had an "intial property value" based on NVHS attendance (with that came a geographically close, new, state of the art school with a driven student body with excellent test scores). People liked those factors and Tallgrass was "hot" in real estate. Also with that package came nice neighbors with nice houses, walking paths, lakes, clubouse, pool, neighborhood events, a grade and middle school in the 'hood, and a general "Pleasantville " feeling.

This is a real estate market where there is a lot of supply and little demand. The loss of being able to go to NVHS will make TG homes/property somewhat less desirable than equivalent homes in River Run, Harmony Grove, Tamarack West, Stillwater, Burnham Point and Breckenridge who remain going to NVHS. Less desirable means less demand means less price to sell
____________________________________________

I'm a fan of this post. Are you a realtor or developer? You seem to have a good understanding of real estate.

Posted by Anon: "...not one but two times the north was looked over as a site for the second and third high school and WE DIDN"T SUE! Didn't like it - but wouldn't even cross our minds to sue our neighbors -no WE MADE LEMONADE with the lemons we were given - and what beautiful lemonade we made."

Great point however what you fail to note is that the voters of 2004 (for their own reasons) voted against a northern site. My opposition to the current events is that I was not given the option to vote for or against a northern site. If given the option I would vote against the Eola site however if the district as a whole voted for this site, I too would make lemonade.

According t D&S's post, the folks at River Run, Harmony Grove, Tamarack West, Stillwater, Burnham Point and Breckenridge must be supporters of the Eola site as well. They must be the ones wearing the white shirts at the last SB meeting.

D&S actually - if you're saying that not being in NVHS hurts ones property values - the same would be true throughout the district - not just applied to TG. This would imply that all property values went down when NV was built for the rest of the district that was not zoned in NV as the buyers went to the homes zoned for NV not Waubonsie- and no one sued over it - we accepted it. This is going on your argument that homes are worth more in NV district than Waubonsie. The mere building of Neuqua created this disparity and yes - took a lot away from the north - but again we didn't sue, even though I've been paying more in taxes I'm sure than you....

To Anonymous on April 22, 2008 5:21 PM and
To Anonymous on April 22, 2008 7:20 PM-

Okay, class, listen up. I'm not going to repeat this.

While I wouldn't mind taking credit for this post as I think it's intelligent and correct, this was originally submitted by Anonymous on April 21, 2008 8:25 PM who was responding to yet another Anonymous on 4/21/2008 at 6:51 AM. As I've said before, would it really kill some of you to use monikers? It would make all this Anon stuff a lot less confusing.

The author is only explaining what made TG desirable in the housing market over the last couple years and what part NV had in that. This does not apply to neighborhoods outside of the NV catchment area, just those within it. Read it again, Anon at 7:20 PM. He is saying the effect of NV on 204 neighborhoods outside of its area was neutral, so other's property values did not go up or down, they stayed the same. Nobody "sued" because there was nothing to "sue" about.

Also, it's annoying to hear so many of you throw around the term "sue" like it's such a casual thing, like you would do so over anything, anytime, anywhere just because you're having a bad day. It's not a casual thing. It's laborious, time-consuming, expensive and no fun at all. The NSFOC isn't doing this for jollies, they're doing it because they think the SB acted illegally and should be held accountable, like all of our elected officials are. It's fine if you don't agree with the lawsuit, but as taxpayers you should at least appreciate that we have a system of checks and balances in place. You might need it someday.

To Not Buying It Here or Anywhere Right Now..... on April 22, 2008 9:10 AM and Anonymous on April 22, 2008 2:06 PM--

Somewhere along the way you were fed that your home value was tied to going to NV. Your home value is based on the amenities of your home.The school district can have some impact on your home but not THE particular school.True.
__________________________________

No, false. Anyone who lives in the NV area knows this and has for years. You obviously don't live in the area, so how would you know? The minute the new boundaries went into effect, realtors started posting signs on their listings within the new NV catchment area that advertised this. If NV didn't matter to buyers, why would they do this? Did you know that two years ago NV was featured on the Oprah show as a state-of-the-art high school? Not Waubonsie, but Neuqua. This attracts buyers. Neuqua has consistently had higher overall academic achievement scores than Waubonsie. This attracts buyers. Anything that attracts buyers is going to increase the value of the homes it's connected to. This is why TG is resisting the redistricting to the extent that they are. They're already in 204. If the HS didn't matter, there wouldn't be a problem.

Nobody cares whether you buy it or not. That is how it is.

"No, false. Anyone who lives in the NV area knows this and has for years. You obviously don't live in the area, so how would you know? The minute the new boundaries went into effect, realtors started posting signs on their listings within the new NV catchment area that advertised this. If NV didn't matter to buyers, why would they do this? Did you know that two years ago NV was featured on the Oprah show as a state-of-the-art high school? Not Waubonsie, but Neuqua. This attracts buyers. Neuqua has consistently had higher overall academic achievement scores than Waubonsie. This attracts buyers. Anything that attracts buyers is going to increase the value of the homes it's connected to. This is why TG is resisting the redistricting to the extent that they are. They're already in 204. If the HS didn't matter, there wouldn't be a problem.

Nobody cares whether you buy it or not. That is how it is."...as posted by D&S....

So you are willing to base all of this on what the "realtor lady" down the street who got her license online says? COME ON!!! OPRAH....wow!! That makes it reality!!!PLEASE do not buy into the real estate value scam. In a year or two you'll see WV District!! Higher test scores!!! People are smarter than you give them credit for. They can see a sales pitch when they see one.

My property values have increased by over 100% since we bought in the area that feeds to WV.
Since all of TG is convinced they are why the test scores are so high (:) it shouldn't be concerning at all to move to WV and join the ranks of the students on their way to prestigious colleges.Then WV will have overall higher scores in a matter of a year or two.

It apparently didn't matter what the overall WV scores(a difference of 1 or 2 points by the way) were to the Harvard admissions team. WV Valedictorian is on her way there in the Fall.

I can tell you one thing. Anyone who reads the papers or blogs wouldn't touch that neighborhood with a ten foot pole.They are creating their own damage to their property values.I cannot understand why they can't grasp this.Truly.

To Anonymous on April 24, 2008 9:00 AM--

Like I said, it doesn't matter what folks outside of the NV catchment area think. They're not the ones rushing to buy and build houses in this area. But these things certainly matter to those who are.

Actually, Neuqua surpassed Waubonsie in overall academic achievement by 4 points in 07. That's pretty significant. It changes every year, of course, and some years it's been between 1 and 2 percent.

And a lot of WV and NV students are on their way to Ivy League colleges in the fall. So what? Again, the point difference only matters to those within the 204 community, not to anyone else. And if it doesn't matter to you, then fine. But it does matter a lot to others. And it matters a lot to some of the SB members, too.

I do realize that the new boundaries will reshuffle the WV student population. This reshuffling alone could narrow the academic achievement gap between NV and WV significantly. This is certainly what the SB is hoping will happen. I think that initially, TG, WE, et al. will see some drop in property values as a result of the change to WV. But after a couple of years most of that should rebound, especially when people realize that their fears of WV were unfounded, the test score gap closes, and WV begins to benefit from the volunteerism and increased fund raising that these new neighborhoods provide. I think Jeanette Clark is correct in that regard. And if you're in it for the long haul as we are, then its very likely that in another 10 years, enrollment will drop and level off, the SD will close Waubonsie, and we'll all be back at NV anyway.

By the way, if the Oprah reference bothered you, then this should send you right over the edge. I've been told that MTV is planning on shooting a 6-week reality show segment at NV next school year. They're scouting for student participants at this time. Like Oprah, it's only pop culture, but you have to admit it is fun for the kids to see their HS on TV.

If the HS didn't matter, there wouldn't be a problem...
as stated by an nsfoc supporter...

I agree. If the HS building didn't mattter there would be no nsfoc (or "problem" if you will).These people need to get a real Life's Purpose. Ridiculous!

By D&S on April 24, 2008 12:43 PM

Actually, Neuqua surpassed Waubonsie in overall academic achievement by 4 points in 07. That's pretty significant.
-------------------------------
Agreed. With 6 Title I schools feeding Waubonsie, the Neuqua scores should be significantly higher than 4 crummy points.

The only thing significant is that the Neuqua scores aren't higher......

To A Different Anonymous on April 24, 2008 10:31 PM--

"Agreed. With 6 Title I schools feeding Waubonsie, the Neuqua scores should be significantly higher than 4 crummy points.

The only thing significant is that the Neuqua scores aren't higher......"
_____________________________________

Very good point! And this is something I've been thinking about for the last couple of weeks. Wouldn't it be great if, with the reshuffling of student populations, Waubonsie was actually able to take the lead over Neuqua in academic achievement? I think it could happen.

Actually, wouldnt it be great if all of our schools tested really well, that the rivalries were all left on the athletic fields and that the mean spirited, petty people who have filled these blogs with hate and spite (regardless of neighborhood, socio-economic position, or ethnicity) would just move on to some other issue. Differences of opinion are a good thing, but the venom and hate that has filled these postings is sick.

To Confused and Confounded on April 26, 2008 6:29 AM--

Definitely.

All this arguing about school locations 'for the better of your children' and meanwhile your kids are popping meds they stole from your medicine cabinet and posting racy pictures of themselves on myspace.

lose the battle win the war people