Salvation for D204's third HS site?

By Greg Forrest on April 12, 2008 4:51 PM

To Greg Forest AME Trustee regarding your statement: "We've put all of the options on the table so equality and justice can prevail over selfishness and discontent. That is God's will."

HELLOOOOOOOOOO anybody home? equality and justice would be treating your Eola location just the same (READ EQUAL) as was done on the BB location. Market it to THE ENTIRE D204 and allow folks to vote on the benefits (or lack there of) of this site for the entire district.

I can certainly understand your business reasons for rethinking your decision to sell your land. I think its a brilliant move. Nonprofit/tax free and with the proceeds, you can find another piece of land and build a state of the art facility and still have a significant cash reserve. But dont try and push this as some kind of "equalizer" UNLESS the board is prepared to treat Eola site just as they did for BB.

We've put all of the options on the table so equality and justice can prevail over selfishness and discontent.
______________________________________

Now a well respected church even recognizes the NSFOC's selfishness.

THANK YOU ST. JOHN'S AME!!!

I have made the decision to cease using my real name on the blogs in consideration of Greg Forest AME church trustee. Our names are just too dang similiar.

So from here on out (or at least until the AME wrinkle is fully resolved); I will be "Fast Times at Metea High"

Fast Times does not agree with Greg Forest church guys quote of equality and justice and God's will. That is unless the Eola site is treated exacly the same at the BB site for the ENTIRE D204 community. That is true Equality and Justice; Mr. Forest.

Hopefully this is true, and we can move foward with building our 3rd HS.

I'm sure there will be new false issues brought up by the NSFOC and their backers. (We can't move forward, what about all the legal fees..blah blah blah).

Regardless of what happens I applaud AME for putting the district's children's interests ahead of their own. What a novel approach don't you think nsfoc?

It's time for the residents of TG and WE to realize this is the way it's going to be. The sooner they start accepting the fact Waubonsie is a good school, the better their lives will be. Whenever my children have gotten the less desirable teacher, I've always found some way to put a positive spin on their teaching style and what my children might learn from him/her and they've embraced it every time and everything worked out. Good lessons for life. I'm not agreeing with their conviction that Waubonsie is less desirable - I'm only going with their feelings on this note.

I have to commend the Sun Editors here for their choice of words for the headline "Salvation for the Third High School" This is the way it should be. This should be a celebration for our district, the fact that the board found reasonably priced/safe land (within our budget). The tremendous harm the NSFOC has caused the district has to end here. Without a doubt, our children are cramped into the middle schools and high school will be a disaster. We need this third high school. Any argument from the NSFOC will undoubtably loose even the support of Linda Holmes at this juncture as the land Metea Valley is going on now is farm land (yes we've all eaten the dirt on this land and it's clean and safe) surrounded by a large subdivision. Nothing to twist here. They have really burried themselves, anything more from them would mean they start to burry eachother as well.

Can't wait to see how the NSFOC responds to this...likely a huge threat of lawsuit against the church..

So the SB was trying to buy the Eola land for years? All the while selling the district on BB so they could pass the referendum? Bait and switch anyone?

what are the damages from BB going to be? Can we afford them?

And who are the real selfish elitists? It seems to me there is a very vocal minority of people on the north side of the district who want Metea or nothing. And they're willing to say anything they can to get it.

It's very sad what has become of this district.

Here we go again with this bandwagon of clowns running our school district. Quote from Sun article this morning

"District 204's board will meet in closed session Monday to discuss its options now that Midwest Generation has decided not to sell 37 of the 87 acres of Eola Road property where it planned to build Metea Valley High School."

Irregardless of where you fall on the issue of the 3rd school the fact that this "team" continues to meet in isolation to decide for us what is best is totally unacceptable and the primary reason we are so divided in this district.

So much for the optimism that they've learned to involve parents. Its business as usual in SD 204 with ringmaster Metzger and his deputy Daschner.

I want my tax dollars to be used to fight to educate kids, not fight lawsuits. To better educate, it is imperative to ease overcrowding across the district which statistics indicate and I firmly believe will only get worse. Had the Broch-Brodie land been available at an affordable price, that land would have met the criteria. The next event found two parties now willing to work with D204 to make land available at a suitable price, a condition not available earlier. The Midwest Gen property was an operating site and the church was not ready to sell. Even though their kids would not attend the new school at the Eola site, a group fought and continues to mislead people regarding the safety of the Eola sight and unfortunately, Midwest Generation found itself being characterized in an ugly way even though they were trying to find a win-win situation for all. It now may be that the church is willing to sell the entire property we need and be an answer to many prayers in finding a solution to address some of the district's problems. My energy will go towards continuing to assist this positive cause, assist the students, teachers, and programs at Waubonsie Valley and possibility adding the great opportunity to do the same for Metea Valley. One of my students graduated from WVHS in 2007, one to graduate by 2010, and waiting to see where she will attend. Metea or Waubonsie are great opportunities either way. There was and is not a guarantee about where the high school was to be built or what the boundary lines were to be, it was and is about improving our ability to educate our children.

By SouthSide Resident on April 13, 2008 1:17 PM
Can't wait to see how the NSFOC responds to this...likely a huge threat of lawsuit against the church..

>>>
might be a threat of a lawsuit, but it might also be intimidation, slander, a fullpage ad blasting the church in the same fashion they blasted Midwest Gen. The NSFOC will show their true "colors" attacking the AME (does the NSFOC know what the "A" stands for?).

We are the NSFOC...we don't want our kids to go to school with their kids and we don't want the school district to buy land from them either.

The district needs to provide updated stats. I was recently told that the center of the student population was at 87th and Montgomery back in 2005 when the first referrendum was requested. I've been told that the growth in the population since then continues south and now the center is somewhere around 95th and 248 in the center of the senior development.

If this is true then the message from God may actually be to stop and relook at the location due to the population since that was what we were told byt the SB the rationale was for the 3rd school. I don't recall it being to spread the schools out so it looks pretty on a map or to have a school north of Waubonsie so it can be closed in 10 yrs. If thats the motive then we should have been told.

Emotions aside we need to SELECT A LOCATION WHERE THE POPULATION OF KIDS IS GROWING THAT IS CREATING THE DEMAND not where the board members or superintendant live. I totally understand why folks are moving out of this district. We've been exposed to lies and politics. Time for facts and leaders who we trust. My child will likely be a freshman or sophmore in whatever schools are here in 10/11 so I am very concerned and very disappointed at how this board and district continue to act.

Northern district folks did not support the referrendum (DuPage county voted NO in 05 and 06). The reason it passed was due to the South so cut off all the rhetoric about your support for the district. You only support them if you perceive a benefit for you.

Willie Horton a cowboy who robbed banks was once asked why he robbed banks. He said "thats where the money is". The board should build this school "where the kids are" and will be in the future".

IF there was a lawsuit in the future on the AME site Midwest Gen is not off the hook just because the SD bought the land from the church and not MWG. Lawsuits for environmental issues go back to the original user who polluted the site and so just because the Methodists own it now Midwest Gen is still on the hook if there are issues. That site appears to be a poor one with the gas lines alone but we'll have to see what the phase 1 and 2 studies reveal. IEPA will want to know as well. If I were Midwest Gen my next letter would be to the Methodists to let them know...

Its no suprise AME offers to sell the district the whole plot. They see a sucker and know if they don't they stand to loose a boatload of cash.

Its clear why that land was sold for $39K an acre to them. Thats all its worth with the hazards and contamination. They have an opportunity to profit and walk away from it. I wonder if they even knew about the hazards on the site until now and were probably praying for a way to exit out themselves.

They see the desperate superintendant and incompetent SB president treading water and do the right thing. Sell it and move on.

Unfortunately our crack team will see it as a divine gift and the AME leaders will laugh all the way to the bank. What a joke.

This land is the same land the Concord Vally homes are built on - so no problems there. It is a separate piece of land than what Midwest Gen operated on . And we have the most important historical data there is - families living day in and day out on safe farm land converted to residential land. There will be no need for phase 2 testing on this parcel as it is the same use as the BB land and there was no need for phase 2 testing there for the same reason. The only thing the NSFOC needs to worry about now are the injunctions that will be filed against them for their illegal activities over the past months - including, but not limited to: printing false information, encouraging illegal Racketeering by government officials, harassing, the list goes on. It's time to back off and it should start with your encouraging this to stop - Todd Andrews.

I believe the school board all along had this plan to build at Eola. They misled the voters. Here we are again with another lawsuit and a school board who ignores every taxpayer.

Now we have AME who bought land from MidwestGen. When is this school board going to give up this insanity and refocuse on what they sold to the voters. Go back and look at everything and deal with the BB openly and fairly.

Brach-Brodie = 3rd High School

Eola/AME = Trouble

"Northern district folks did not support the referrendum (DuPage county voted NO in 05 and 06). The reason it passed was due to the South so cut off all the rhetoric about your support for the district. You only support them if you perceive a benefit for you."
as posted by School Should Be Located Where the Growth is....

I'm not sure where you got your info.
Public records in regards to some of the larger subdivisions show that White Eagle voted 70% yes in 2006. One of the next highest was Stonebridge (from the "North") with 61% yes. St.Br. voted yes for a new district school even though at the time it did not appear like they would be attending it. They would most likely be staying at WV(and proud to do so:)! TG came in somewhere in the mid 50th some percentile even with the hopes of attending the new Metea. These are just some of the larger "yes" areas....you can check it out for yourself.

Let's no longer waste our time with the land at Eola.
No offense St. John's - we understand your desire to sell the land.
No offense SB members - we understand your desire to build a 3rd there; and because the cost was higher then expected.

BUT, now we have a new reality....

Cost will be a bit higher no matter where you go.

At this point, going to BB can save $$$$$
1) you stop the BB lawsuit - stop paying to defend it
2) you stop paying to defend the NSFOC
3) you stop the penalty from not buying BB

It just all stops. There is no more divide? Brookdale is not upset, because the land at Eola became problematic and has too many dangers to it. No matter who is selling it.

We can end this entire mess with one swoop decision that goes back to the original plan.

If cost is an issue - then look to other lands to buy. But, that will cost more money and you'll still be paying BB costs and other costs.

At some point, the decision is made for us.

The easiest healing and resolve could start this week; or further divide that tears up a community. This week the SB will decide.

A lot of chatter on other blogs that there is no Greg Forrest (and that the Herald has been duped). Can you confirm??

Let's no longer waste our time with the land at Eola.
No offense St. John's - we understand your desire to sell the land.
No offense SB members - we understand your desire to build a 3rd there; and because the cost was higher then expected.

BUT, now we have a new reality....

Cost will be a bit higher no matter where you go.

At this point, going to BB can save $$$$$
1) you stop the BB lawsuit - stop paying to defend it
2) you stop paying to defend the NSFOC
3) you stop the penalty from not buying BB

It just all stops. There is no more divide? Brookdale is not upset, because the land at Eola became problematic and has too many dangers to it. No matter who is selling it.

We can end this entire mess with one swoop decision that goes back to the original plan.

If cost is an issue - then look to other lands to buy. But, that will cost more money and you'll still be paying BB costs and other costs.

At some point, the decision is made for us.

The easiest healing and resolve could start this week; or further divide that tears up a community. This week the SB will decide.

Moderator Jim to To Moderator Jim: I think the confusion is that there is a poster here on this and other D204 threads by the name of Greg Forrest. Just a coincidence is that the Church guy I beleive is Greg Forest - with one r. The poster, Greg Forrest, with 2 rrs, changed his name to "Fast times at Metea High" to avoid the confusion. That may be what you're talking about. However, if you mean by other blogs, ones that are non-Naperville Sun blogs, and that there are people out there saying the Herald was duped I'd be interested in learning the names of those other blogs. Let me know...thanks.

I think AME knows that they can not sell their land to anyone for a good price (like SB offer price) once SB walk away from their land. Since we have too many issues with Eola site as reported by nsfoc
(underground gaspipe lines etc) and 3 pending lawsuits, SB should walk away from Eola site. Before doing that SB should use AME land offer as wildcard and negotiate with BB land owners for better price.

AME just thinks about money and their land value. If they were concerned about abour kids and God will, they should have offered their land when SB contacted them in 2004-05. Not now.

Mark M...so we should stop wanting the eola site so we don't have to face the expense of a lawsuit from NSFOC. If a small group of elitest (only nine are confirmed) from teh south part of the district think the tax payers are going to have to pay for this suit you are out of your mind. The attorneys for the district will ask for legal fee reimbursement when the case is tossed.

Daily Herald duped does make sense. Check the AME website, no such mention of a person. Secondly, you would think that a quote to the publication would be confirmed by an official that is listed on their website (they have many trustees and ministry officials).

In which case, who duped them? Must be those supporters who want Eola to happen.

And Mark Metzger did say "it's the first he heard." Thus, no official offer to sit down.

Maybe it's just a ploy to pull in negative sentiment some more. Many people love creating more of a divide by continued disucssion of the land.

Moderator Jim...

I do not think that the confusion is at all related to the fact that there is another Greg Forest posting on the Sun (but this may be why the name was chosen if this is a prank).

Can not state for certainty that these blog posting are accurate...but was hoping that you may have heard something one way or the other.

Moderator Jim to Anonymous: No, I don't think so. Greg was posting on these threads well before the news of the church offer. I don't see any prank there. I think people are getting a little paranoid. Wouldn't you agree?

By Eola and IPSD Supporter on April 13, 2008 12:27 PM
We've put all of the options on the table so equality and justice can prevail over selfishness and discontent.
______________________________________

Now a well respected church even recognizes the NSFOC's selfishness.

THANK YOU ST. JOHN'S AME!!!
.................................
I am betting they would be a lot more respected if they follow gods plan and donate the land to the school. It only cost their followers 2.9 mil and after all it is for the children. Why should they overcharge the D204 Taxpayers so the children can be having a safe site that was owned by Midwest Gen? How many other locations with these types of issues has Midwest Gen sold to SD’s around the country? I bet none, so why would we buy it just because AME played the fool and bought it from them first and are now saving the children by making a 600% profit on 83 acres. Nice!

By You can have shame if you don't have a conscience... on April 13, 2008 1:04 PM
Regardless of what happens I applaud AME for putting the district's children's interests ahead of their own. What a novel approach don't you think nsfoc?
...................................
Do you really think they wanted to walk away from millions of dollars in windfall profits during a down economy or did they just have our children's interests at heart? Say what you want.

By Love the one your with on April 13, 2008 1:07 PM
It's time for the residents of TG and WE to realize this is the way it's going to be. The sooner they start accepting the fact Waubonsie is a good school, the better their lives will be. Whenever my children have gotten the less desirable teacher, I've always found some way to put a positive spin on their teaching style and what my children might learn from him/her and they've embraced it every time and everything worked out. Good lessons for life. I'm not agreeing with their conviction that Waubonsie is less desirable - I'm only going with their feelings on this note.
.................................
Good positive message. Thank you.

http://www.stjohnamec.org/trustee_board.html

No listing of Greg Forest or any name like that on the AME site. Again, maybe it's just a member who is starting trouble. You would think that a listed official would confirm their intention?

By We can eat the dirt on this land - and we do! on April 13, 2008 1:17 PM
I have to commend the Sun Editors here for their choice of words for the headline "Salvation for the Third High School" This is the way it should be. This should be a celebration for our district, the fact that the board found reasonably priced/safe land (within our budget). The tremendous harm the NSFOC has caused the district has to end here. Without a doubt, our children are cramped into the middle schools and high school will be a disaster. We need this third high school. Any argument from the NSFOC will undoubtably loose even the support of Linda Holmes at this juncture as the land Metea Valley is going on now is farm land (yes we've all eaten the dirt on this land and it's clean and safe) surrounded by a large subdivision. Nothing to twist here. They have really burried themselves, anything more from them would mean they start to burry eachother as well.
.......................................
Why would this change the NSFOC's lawsuit or message? The SB still has not corrected the situation. Buy the land and write the district a blank check, because if you do and any of the lawsuits against D204 win then you are to blame for not even having a budget. The part of the budget for legal expenses is already out of whack and getting worse by the minute. Oh, but that's right, it's ok for the SB to spend millions on attorneys but no one else. Great message.

By Business as usual in 204 on April 13, 2008 1:44 PM
Here we go again with this bandwagon of clowns running our school district. Quote from Sun article this morning

"District 204's board will meet in closed session Monday to discuss its options now that Midwest Generation has decided not to sell 37 of the 87 acres of Eola Road property where it planned to build Metea Valley High School."

Irregardless of where you fall on the issue of the 3rd school the fact that this "team" continues to meet in isolation to decide for us what is best is totally unacceptable and the primary reason we are so divided in this district.

So much for the optimism that they've learned to involve parents. Its business as usual in SD 204 with ringmaster Metzger and his deputy Daschner.
..............................
Right on!

By Mark Thomas McCoy on April 13, 2008 1:53 PM
I want my tax dollars to be used to fight to educate kids, not fight lawsuits. To better educate, it is imperative to ease overcrowding across the district which statistics indicate and I firmly believe will only get worse. Had the Broch-Brodie land been available at an affordable price, that land would have met the criteria. The next event found two parties now willing to work with D204 to make land available at a suitable price, a condition not available earlier. The Midwest Gen property was an operating site and the church was not ready to sell. Even though their kids would not attend the new school at the Eola site, a group fought and continues to mislead people regarding the safety of the Eola sight and unfortunately, Midwest Generation found itself being characterized in an ugly way even though they were trying to find a win-win situation for all. It now may be that the church is willing to sell the entire property we need and be an answer to many prayers in finding a solution to address some of the district's problems. My energy will go towards continuing to assist this positive cause, assist the students, teachers, and programs at Waubonsie Valley and possibility adding the great opportunity to do the same for Metea Valley. One of my students graduated from WVHS in 2007, one to graduate by 2010, and waiting to see where she will attend. Metea or Waubonsie are great opportunities either way. There was and is not a guarantee about where the high school was to be built or what the boundary lines were to be, it was and is about improving our ability to educate our children.
...........................................
Where are your statistics to back up the overcrowding? Talk to the SB about spending on Attorneys to sue BB which caused this whole mess to begin with. What was the agreed price before they took BB to court? I bet it was lower! Keep backing the wrong horse and you will go broke. Put your money where your mouth is and help solve the problem. The problem was not started by the NSFOC and is not going to be solved by them either. Tell the SB to do the right thing for a change and follow through on the laundry list of broken promises, contracts, and referendums.

To We can eat the dirt on this land - and we do! on April 13, 2008 1:17 PM--

In regards to your statement, "yes we've all eaten the dirt on this land and it's clean and safe":

Speak for yourself. I don't eat dirt. And if you're referring to the fact that this land has been producing consumable corn and soy beans for years, then you're not aware that the majority of soy beans and corn grown in this area is used for livestock feed, or ethanol. So unless you're a cow, I don't think you've eaten it, either. But be my guest . . .

In addition to a potential 600% profit on the land in four years, AME also faced the loss of parking lot rental revenue if the HS is not built on the Eola site. Even before a shovel has been placed in the ground, the AME/MWG site design was known to provide insufficient parking. The SD planned to rent parking space from AME. No high school there, no parking rent.

"God's will" has certainly provided a clear vision for the leadership of AME (who lists on their website that they have a Trustee Board to oversee their real estate holdings) with incentive to sell their land. Desperate buyer looking to overpay, loss of parking lot rental revenue, ridding themselves of questionable land at a sizeable profit...how could they resist?

The below stats are from the IPSD website. I am so tired of people posting that we are not over crowded, and that enrollment is declining. Look at the facts, the declining is by a VERY small number. The ninth grade class at NVHS has close to 1,200 this year leaving the remainder at WVHS. The halls are crowded, and if you look at the current first grade class they are bigger than the current ninth grade class. Now for those of you to point out that I have not included the current kindergarteners numbers is because they do not include the children who the district gets in first grade from private daycares. Having classes of over 1,000 per school is not the best way to educate our children.
Who can really look at those numbers and deny that our children don't deserve a third high school!!!!

1 2203
2 2352
3 2258
4 2321
5 2225
6 2307
7 2362
8 2353
9 2144
10 2080
11 2050
12 1855

Regardless of your opinions please do not attack the church for simply being willing to discuss alternatives with our district in need of land.They don't deserve to be attacked on any level.

As we all know there are high emotions with this issue and it might be best for everyone to take a step back and give thanks for what we do have, instead of what we don't.I personally think this Blog brings out a lot of ugly in people that normally would never act this way. How about the next few blogs on totally different topics for a few days? A "Break from blogs" if you will...See you in a week or so!

Looks like Greg whatshisname is a Trustee of AMES church (Naperville Sun, point for you in that the Herald got his name wrong).

Also somewhat interesting (which did not make the paper) that Mr. Whatshisname resides in...................Stonebridge!

Yes...the same neighborhood that voted NO to the third high school (not as overwhelmingly as Brookdale, but No just the same). But now...it is God's will that the children of 204 have a new school asap right in Greg Whatshis name, Dr. D, Chad and the chick calling everyone who does not want a school at EOLA a racist's neighborhoods.

As an aside, is it the position of the Hill PTA that everyone who supports NSFOC is a racist since the chick calling everyone who disagrees with her a racist is the PTA President...(not making this up).

And it starts. The elitists of the NSFOC, Inc. are now slamming the church. Take a long look at the goal of NSFOC, Inc. Suing to protect their property values. Suing to keep their children out of Wabonsie.

One of your supporters (again, you have no legally designated members)is posting that the spokesperson for the church is not listed on their website as being a trustee. I am still waiting for the owners of NSFOC, Inc. to be listed on their website.

So let me get this straight.

Its okay to bully the school board, Midwest Gen, anybody from Brookdale or any other subdivision that opposes you, and the church.

$31 million is okay for BB but my god its outrageous for the church to sell the Eola land for $14 million less.

Its okay to pay $750k plus for a house in Tall Grass when it only cost the builder $250k to build it.

all i can say is NO matter where you build..just send all those whiny parents from NSFOC to WVHS. Let them have their way and build on Branch Brodie, they will drop their lawsuit and then set up the boundaries to send their kids to WVHS. It is a fine school and they need a reality check!

NSFOC and whoever else was involved did a good thing for the district. To buy land that needs to be remediate is not good enough to place kids and a school. Just remember fence that baby off.

The MGWEN portion of the deal was going for around 100/acre. Now if we buy more from the AME site it will cost 300/acre. 24mil.

BB at this point will in the end will cost us less. ALL the lawsuits will go away and please don't tell me that Brach and Brodie will not win even a small settlement. (I think they are going to serve our heads on a platter!!), transportation costs according to Bruce Glawe decrease 9% with BB, and when the enrollment numbers decrease it will be easier to keep the BB site full. Mark my words they will have to pull more out of WV and NV to keep the Eola site going, which means more busses. Now why would the SB take BB site off the table? To do so is being fiscally irresponsible.

MWGEN is and will always be an unsafe site to place a school. Why do you think the build smart guidelines were written???

The north voted no to the HS two times, now they call those in the south opposing the site, NOT THE 3rd HS, names. Just read the Sunday's Sun. Chad Martinson and the PTA president of Hill Jennifer Streder are back at their nasty name calling.

To all who claim that they voted for the BB property,

I personally voted for a third high school. I never saw mention of BB or any other property on the ballot. Perhaps the entitled 9 should sue the schools they attended since they clearly couldn't read the ballot. Maybe we need to go back to testing ability to read in order to be allowed to register to vote.

My understanding is that the 3rd high school is to ease overcrowding. This year there are 4500 students at NVHS. Next year there will be 4800 kids at NVHS. Since the Freshman center was built to hold 1200 and the main campus for 3000, maybe I need help with math. Under the math I learned 3000 plus 1200 equals 4200, yet there will be 4800 bodies in the place built for 4200--seems to me the overcrowding is here and we haven't even hit the bubble.

What are the facts?
1) If the school is built on Eola property will the SD lose out on state funding? If so, how much?
2) Has the SD provided busing costs for both properties? If so what do the number show?
3) The reality is the SD will incur legal fees from BB? What are the ranges?
4) Has the SD gotten "real world" market pricing for "new" Eola site? I'm all for somebody making a profit, especially a church but lets not overpay. If the market bears $50K why would we pay substancially more.. Lets be smart on how and where OUR money is spent.
It's so dissapointing to see the SB act in such haste to make a decision. Look what some extra time and patience did for the district... It saved us from buying tainted property...
While this whole ordeal is emotional for all. Let focus on the facts and the math. After sitting thru several board meetings is suspect they will do what they want without regard to either common sense or use business acumen

By Greg what'shisname on April 13, 2008 7:00 PM
Looks like Greg whatshisname is a Trustee of AMES church (Naperville Sun, point for you in that the Herald got his name wrong).

Also somewhat interesting (which did not make the paper) that Mr. Whatshisname resides in...................Stonebridge!

Yes...the same neighborhood that voted NO to the third high school (not as overwhelmingly as Brookdale, but No just the same). But now...it is God's will that the children of 204 have a new school asap right in Greg Whatshis name, Dr. D, Chad and the chick calling everyone who does not want a school at EOLA a racist's neighborhoods.

As an aside, is it the position of the Hill PTA that everyone who supports NSFOC is a racist since the chick calling everyone who disagrees with her a racist is the PTA President...(not making this up).
-----------------------------------------------------

are you kidding me? Did the hearld actually confuse Howard for Forest? I think I am going to call AME and see if they have any members/trustees named Greg Forest OR Greg Forrest.

WHile I like fast times at Ridgmont (I mean Metea) High, I would like my name back.

If true Maybe Hearld will print a correction? If not I guess the 89th lawsuit will hit due to slander/libel. JUST KIDDING Moderator Jim!! :)

Seriously, I would really like to know if Hearld got the name of Church guy wrong.

To Mark M: THANKS for posting the AME trustee list. I see Greg Howard BUT NO Greg Forrest or Greg Forest.

THanks
Fast times/ aka original Greg Forrest.

To Anonymous on April 13, 2008 4:02 PM--

"...so we should stop wanting the eola site so we don't have to face the expense of a lawsuit from NSFOC."

No, we should hold off on buying the Eola site until we know the expense of the lawsuits from BB. The Brodie Trust has filed a lawsuit for $40.2 million in damages; if they were awarded as little as 25% of that amount, that would be twice what the SB has budgeted. And Brach is still calculating its damages, their lawsuit is coming.

The NSFOC is not suing for money. That is a rumor spread by the virtuous, we-want-what's-best-for-the-district-especially-when-it-benefits-us-most anti-NSFOC folks. The total cost of the damages from the BB court case combined with the price of the Eola land could be millions more than the BB land alone.

The SB, however, does not think it prudent to wait a month or two to know the real cost of abandoning BB before buying another property. And, really, why should they care? It's not their money they're throwing away, it's YOURS.

By Anonymous on April 13, 2008 7:01 PM
And it starts. The elitists of the NSFOC, Inc. are now slamming the church. Take a long look at the goal of NSFOC, Inc. Suing to protect their property values. Suing to keep their children out of Wabonsie.

One of your supporters (again, you have no legally designated members)is posting that the spokesperson for the church is not listed on their website as being a trustee. I am still waiting for the owners of NSFOC, Inc. to be listed on their website.

So let me get this straight.

Its okay to bully the school board, Midwest Gen, anybody from Brookdale or any other subdivision that opposes you, and the church.

$31 million is okay for BB but my god its outrageous for the church to sell the Eola land for $14 million less.

Its okay to pay $750k plus for a house in Tall Grass when it only cost the builder $250k to build it.
.................................................
Yes that's ok. I think if they are in the game then they should stand up and take it. The pot shots that Midwest Gen, the Teacher, the PTA president, the SB, Brookdale, Stonebridge, anyone else who wants to slam WE, TG, NSFOC, BB, should face the same heat. If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. I have been on the blogs preaching this for a few days. Are you just surprised to get it coming back to you. Most wouldn't bother responding and I assure you that the SB, NSFOC, the Judges, the lawyers, and any other serious mind is not on or even worried about what we are saying on this blog. I just like to make fun of idiots for fun. It's ok with me that I overpaid for my house because I know that everybody is in this area because we attend NVHS the best darn school in the area. Why, because we support it and we are not just rolling over to the SB this time. By the way, how do you set the cost differential between the number one property in Naperville and the bottom of the heap regardless of location? I will repeat that the SB got us in this mess and they should get us out. If they couldn't afford to play the game with BB then they shouldn't have made promises they couldn't afford to keep. But it looks like they too have God on their side so that makes it ok right. Let's keep spending millions before anyone even has a chance to eat dirt (for those of you who would actually eat dirt on the Northside). Thanks to Bradshaw for that inflammatory comment (His great personal skills at work again). What an idiot. Almost as bad as Metzger and Dr. Dillweed. What is this, a race to see who can win dimwit of the year? And now the northern community wants to jump in. Just great. "The land is safe" is like saying pigs can fly. I know people say it but some of us have a little more common sense. Hello.

By Anonymous on April 13, 2008 7:03 PM
all i can say is NO matter where you build..just send all those whiny parents from NSFOC to WVHS. Let them have their way and build on Branch Brodie, they will drop their lawsuit and then set up the boundaries to send their kids to WVHS. It is a fine school and they need a reality check!
....................................................
You really are a vindictive SOB. In your own sweet way you just slammed WV. For the life of me I can't understand why. It is a great school that I would be proud to send my kids to. I just moved from your side to TG a few years back and just don't want the drive out of my way. If that's where we end up after the lawsuits settle then so be it. But don't use that as a threat or put down the great staff and students of WV. You need a reality check. How can that be punishment? Also, do you really think someone in high places is going to listen to your comments and act that dumb. Not.

By Anonymous on April 13, 2008 7:21 PM
To all who claim that they voted for the BB property,

I personally voted for a third high school. I never saw mention of BB or any other property on the ballot. Perhaps the entitled 9 should sue the schools they attended since they clearly couldn't read the ballot. Maybe we need to go back to testing ability to read in order to be allowed to register to vote.

My understanding is that the 3rd high school is to ease overcrowding. This year there are 4500 students at NVHS. Next year there will be 4800 kids at NVHS. Since the Freshman center was built to hold 1200 and the main campus for 3000, maybe I need help with math. Under the math I learned 3000 plus 1200 equals 4200, yet there will be 4800 bodies in the place built for 4200--seems to me the overcrowding is here and we haven't even hit the bubble.
.........................
If you read the lawsuit and you are so bright, tell everyone why the lawsuit was filed. Therein lies your answer. Idiot.

Earth to SB...the people in the north are not saying pigs can fly. The people in the north (and elsewhere in the district who want a 3rd high school) are saying that the experts, using objective and scientific data are saying that the site is safe and/or can be made safe. These are professionals. Not some idiot sitting at his computer who, by the grace of Google, thinks he is an expert.

Entitled Nine word of day: objectivity.

objectivity

noun
judgment based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University

To; What are the facts?
1) If the school is built on Eola property will the SD lose out on state funding? If so, how much?

Could you please stop with your lies. There will be not remediation necessary on this land. The only remediation necessary before was on a very small portion of the Midwest Gen land. This land is farm land - every piece of it - you've probably eaten corn from here. So yes, we will get all the state funding that Neuqua, Central, North and Waubonsie get.

By Earth To SB: No we're not surprised to get it back from the likes of the type of people that blog all day. Really if you weren't insane before this all started - you've come to that point for sure. Your posts are like poison spreading throughout our district. Take a step away from your computer - go for a run - you'll feel better after you get all those toxins out of your body- we'd all prefer you do that than continue with your posts.

The anticipated cost/acre for all of the AME land will closely equal the cost for BB! The board must go back to BB and do what the voters were told they were going to do to solicit a YES vote and build on BB.

The purchase of the entire acreage at AME will be above the fair market value of that land...is that fiscally responsible? NO!

Enough is enough. We need to do what the board themselves stated was the best for this district in their land evaluation reports and build on BB.

The Eola site will ALWAYS have a stigma as a hazmet issue and I fear a referendum will never pass in this district again if the board does not do what they presented to the voters in 2006. They will have lost all credibility especially in light of the debacle this has turned into if they build on any other site at this point.

This is about doing what is right and that is build on BB.

Dollars and Sense, Most of your blogs are well thought out and sometimes insightful but I do have 2 comments in reply to your latest entry. First, you are throwing around 25% settlement for the damages at BB. There is no case law supporting the damages for the loss of the retail property deal. Even if there was case law, it would be easy to prove that the developer backed out because of the poor retail environment and the probability of losing his shirt while trying to rent out the space. Even the IPSD attorneys would win that case. Only damages are related to loss of value during the time frame of the trial. If the jury said the property was worth $31m, they would only be entitled to the dollar value of what percentage decrease the land loss as a result of the trial or being tied up in the trial. If you are going to throw BB attorney costs on top of that number, please remember that those costs have to be paid whether the district bought the BB land or not. When the NSFOC posts their misleading numbers, they like to apply those ONLY to the cost of the Eola site and not to the BB site (as an addition to the $31m).

Second, the amended NSFOC, Inc. lawsuit opens up the suit to the possibility of a money relief award. The NSFOC supporters have claimed the purpose of adding nine plaintiffs was because they had to prove damages. Damages are only an issue if the relief is in the form of monetary relief. Unless of course they are claiming that sending their kids to WVHS is damage and I would love to hear how they say that and prove that. By the way, adding the plantiffs - individually as they have - opens up the money relief to those nine named individuals. No relief can be given to any supporters/donors in the manner in which the suit is amended (only nine with damages). This also explains why the NSFOC has never answered any questions as to the qualification of a "member." They would also have to prove the members damages and the members would be entitled to relief as well. I don't think the nine want to share...take their donations, yes...but share,no.

Hey there fast times at ridgemont (Eola) high, will you be in class Monday night. If you bring the pizza should I bring the beer? Just remember Mr. Hand will be there so bring enough for the whole class. Greg hope to see you at the meeting, maybe its time for a name change to Spicolli of ashbury.

I like the posts from Earth to SB. I also like that he is pro-nsfoc.He is doing a great job of pointing out what he and they are all about.Thanks Earth to SB you are helping the anti-nsfoc group more than you could ever know!!!!!Pleeease keep posting and don't lose that witty "charm" either :)With all that wit it's so hard to focus on your immense depth of knowledge and insight in regards to the situation at hand.

I have to know though....Were you the dork in the hazmat suit? Or the deranged lunatic that fell victim to his inner demons at the end of the last Board Meeting? Either one fits. It's all falling into place.....

Just to clarify, there is way more than Brookdale and Stonebridge in favor of the Eola site. I live in Oakhurst and while we are strong supporters of Waubonsie, we also are concerned about the overcrowding and would like to see this alleviated for our children. Please allow the School Board to do the job we have all voted them in office to do! I appreciate your frustration, but we must move forward for ALL STUDENTS of Dist. 204.

To The Blogs will Break You... on April 13, 2008 6:58 PM--

You're very right. The anonymous nature of blogs do bring out the worst in people, especially when emotions run this high. I've read things on this blog that I know would never be said if these folks were face to face.

The only thing I disagree with is your statement that the church does not deserve to be attacked on any level. I don't know if they deserve it, but they certainly should expect it. AME does not get a pass when doing business just because they're a church. They put themselves in the game; they're going to have to play it like everyone else.

To Earth to SB:

Who died and left you boss?? It seems that no matter what blog that is related to this topic, your name is there and so are your insults. Last time I checked there is such a thing as freedom of speech. Anyone who has an idea different then what you believe in, you insult them. You must be a fun guy to work with. Your mother never told you? "If you dont have anything nice to say then dont say it all."

By Anonymous on April 13, 2008 8:38 PM
Earth to SB...the people in the north are not saying pigs can fly. The people in the north (and elsewhere in the district who want a 3rd high school) are saying that the experts, using objective and scientific data are saying that the site is safe and/or can be made safe. These are professionals. Not some idiot sitting at his computer who, by the grace of Google, thinks he is an expert.

Entitled Nine word of day: objectivity.

objectivity

noun
judgment based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University
...............................................................

You really got him with that objectivity and personal prejudices crap. LOL. You are starting to beleive everything you say and hear, aren't you? I should spend more time looking for crap land so I can make a few bucks. What's the name of that Energy company again? And the Consultant/Expert again? And the SB/Experts again. Wow you are full of crap.

By Earth to SB is our new special best friend :) on April 13, 2008 11:34 PM
I like the posts from Earth to SB. I also like that he is pro-nsfoc.He is doing a great job of pointing out what he and they are all about.Thanks Earth to SB you are helping the anti-nsfoc group more than you could ever know!!!!!Pleeease keep posting and don't lose that witty "charm" either :)With all that wit it's so hard to focus on your immense depth of knowledge and insight in regards to the situation at hand.

I have to know though....Were you the dork in the hazmat suit? Or the deranged lunatic that fell victim to his inner demons at the end of the last Board Meeting? Either one fits. It's all falling into place.....
................................................
Dr. Dillweed is that you again. Stop writing me for help. Go back to Metzger, he has God's Will. You babies just can't stand that anyone would dare call you out. Maybe Pig's do fly up North. Don't look up.

By WV grad on April 14, 2008 5:42 AM
To Earth to SB:

Who died and left you boss?? It seems that no matter what blog that is related to this topic, your name is there and so are your insults. Last time I checked there is such a thing as freedom of speech. Anyone who has an idea different then what you believe in, you insult them. You must be a fun guy to work with. Your mother never told you? "If you dont have anything nice to say then dont say it all."
............................................................
And this is proof.

Although I understand your frustration, if I have to read through the negative BS coming from your side then I will let you read an equal amount of it from mine.

AME Land Was Midwest Generation Land
April 13, 2008

NSFOC has discovered that the 82.96 acres of AME land was purchased from Midwest Generation/Comed for $35,000 per acre in 2004. We were surprised to find out that this land was once part of the same Midwest Generation land that has hazardous contamination including PCBs. In addition, our school district is offering about seven times the price AME paid for the property. Is that fair and at worst, what does it mean legally?

The first concern is, again, that pollution does not fall within the fences of a power plant. Another question comes to mind: What is in those seven secret environmental reports not shared with the taxpayers - who are footing the bill for any cleanup and liabilities? So until the entire Eola site is tested for all possible contaminants, D204 should not consider the site as safe. The remediation costs are unknown, the wetlands mitigation requirements are not fully known, and the liability risks could be high due to these unknowns.

Now in 2008, based on figures already shared with the public, D204 may be offering an estimated $244,000 per acre for the same land previously owned by Midwest generation, or nearly seven times the value of the original AME purchase. Figure the commercial/industrial market rose even 10% per year from 2004 to 2008 (not the case but let's go on the high side for the benefit of our district). That would make the AME property worth $51,000 today. So why is D204 potentially going to offer almost five times the market value? Why would they offer anything over one times market value?

Truly, D204 is a motivated buyer because once again, they have a self-imposed deadline placed upon themselves. We strongly suggest that D204 reconsider their situation and re-open negotiations with the Brach-Brodie estate. There are simply too many unknowns at the Eola site. The knowns are already bad. Almost half the soil borings from environmental testing had contamination. The new school does not meet the Illinois Build Smart Program requirements due to proximity to railroads, high pressure gas pipelines and power lines.

This is an opportunity to save up to $60 million or more in damages and $18-20 million in bus transportation costs by going back to the Brach-Brodie site, and untold millions in environmental liability risks and safety risks at the Eola site. We hope D204 chooses the path of least risk.

There's more at http://www.nsfoc.org

Earth to SB is off his rocker. I automatically dismiss anything this blogger has to say because it is illogical and mean spirited.

To By Earth to SB on:

All of the statistics are easy to find and have been published multiple times. You may choose to believe or not. Much past the next six years is a matter left to statisticians. Looking beyond the statistics, I see people moving into our district due to the great schools, both public and private. And, great support from the community, parents, businesses, and churches.

The School Board has my support, I voted "yes" each time, live in Stonebridge, have argued and debated with them on some issues, believe NVHS is great school and rival of Waubonsie (in a positive way, brings our the best of both when the get together), and cherish the teachers, staff, and students at Waubonsie for the wonderful work they have done.

Thanks to the folks at AME for at least coming to the table; with the right attitude and energy spent in the proper direction, it will get done.

Notice I've signed my real name as I'm happy to represent my views and stand by them.

To: By anonymous on April 14, 2008 7:42 AM

Blah, blah, blah, whine, whine, whine.

to: anonymous on April 14, 2008 7:42 AM

The value of Real Estate has nothing to do with what someone paid for a property, what they did to a property or when they purchased a property. It's all about supply/demand. As such, you cannot "assume" any set % appreciation. You need to evaluate the property against other similar properties in the SD.

It appears that there are only 3 properties within the district boundaries (BB, Macom, Eola)and 1 property outside the district boundaries (Hamman) currently meeting the requirements.

BB = too expensive
Macom = many issues
Hamman = outside the SD boundaries + issues as well
Eola = right price, tons of controversy

The SD should make sure that we get multiple (2 or more) independent appraisals done for ANY property we are interested in purchasing to ensure we pay "fair market value".

fyi. the 2006 referendum would not have passed had it not been for the North voters. Please check your facts. Some of these neighborhoods were higher yes % than TG.

By Earth to SB on April 13, 2008 8:28 PM
By Anonymous on April 13, 2008 7:21 PM
To all who claim that they voted for the BB property,

I personally voted for a third high school. I never saw mention of BB or any other property on the ballot. Perhaps the entitled 9 should sue the schools they attended since they clearly couldn't read the ballot. Maybe we need to go back to testing ability to read in order to be allowed to register to vote.

My understanding is that the 3rd high school is to ease overcrowding. This year there are 4500 students at NVHS. Next year there will be 4800 kids at NVHS. Since the Freshman center was built to hold 1200 and the main campus for 3000, maybe I need help with math. Under the math I learned 3000 plus 1200 equals 4200, yet there will be 4800 bodies in the place built for 4200--seems to me the overcrowding is here and we haven't even hit the bubble.
.........................
If you read the lawsuit and you are so bright, tell everyone why the lawsuit was filed. Therein lies your answer. Idiot.

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

Words have meaning and words such as bait and switch have meaning. My kids aren't impacted by where the new school is built, they are only impacted by whether ir not it is built. BTW NSFOC types are the ones that thought it was okay for my kids to be bussed for an hour or more each way to either the BB or Eola site so that their children could stay at NVHS. I sat at a school board meeting where TG and WE booed anyone who wasn't of their opinion. So if you think I have no respect for "those people" I would say your are perceptive (not terribly persceptive, but a smidge).

The referendum asked for money to build a third high school, that is exactly what the SB is trying to do. You can bend and twist anyway you like, but the bottom line is that they are trying to do what they were elected to do. Also, at least one current member of the SB was not a member back in 2006. It's true, you and your attorney should not have any trouble disproving it if I am lying. Which means this is not the same SB that tried to make everyone happy back then. This is a SB that is trying to make the best of a bad jury decision--were you on that jury by any chance????? The SB is acting as good stewards--when one option was overpriced they sought a Plan B and found it, just as any good businessman would.

1. The St. John's AME property was and always has been farmland. It was growing crops less then 4 years ago. Who cares that it was owned by MidwestGen, that doesnt' mean it should automatically require Phase II testing. Because of this historical informaiton (that it was farmland) and the fact that when TSC tested the property with Phase I samples no Phase II testing is required according to the IEPA.

2. For those of you that keep saying that a 3rd HS should be built in the middle of the population that's nonsense. That means we should have 3 high schools all around 248th St. all within in 2 miles of each other. If you look at any school district they geographically place the schools at different points within the district. Not always where the population center is.

I find it interesting that those in favor of the Metea site at Eola don't care if this land is safe. Your behavior and half truths on this blog have been despicable. The school board has lied and it has been documented many times over. Mark Metzger should be proud of himself for his name calling and lieing to the taxpayers.

Don't even get me started on Daeschner he needs to pack his bags and go back to Kentucky. Oh Yeah, he can't do that because the School Board FIRED him. That is a FACT look it in their papers or even contact him they will tell you.

These are the people running this District - name callers and liers. Soon they will be gone and then maybe we can begin our heeling process.

to: Eola Poor Choice on April 14, 2008 11:44 AM

Who said that "pro-Eola" people don't care if the land is safe?

I've never heard anyone say that. Please correct me if I've missed something.

I think we should leave land safety issues to the EXPERTS who will generate unbiased reports based on their findings....NOT speculation.

By Anonymous on April 14, 2008 10:54 AM
By Earth to SB on April 13, 2008 8:28 PM
By Anonymous on April 13, 2008 7:21 PM
To all who claim that they voted for the BB property,

I personally voted for a third high school. I never saw mention of BB or any other property on the ballot. Perhaps the entitled 9 should sue the schools they attended since they clearly couldn't read the ballot. Maybe we need to go back to testing ability to read in order to be allowed to register to vote.

My understanding is that the 3rd high school is to ease overcrowding. This year there are 4500 students at NVHS. Next year there will be 4800 kids at NVHS. Since the Freshman center was built to hold 1200 and the main campus for 3000, maybe I need help with math. Under the math I learned 3000 plus 1200 equals 4200, yet there will be 4800 bodies in the place built for 4200--seems to me the overcrowding is here and we haven't even hit the bubble.
.........................
If you read the lawsuit and you are so bright, tell everyone why the lawsuit was filed. Therein lies your answer. Idiot.

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

Words have meaning and words such as bait and switch have meaning. My kids aren't impacted by where the new school is built, they are only impacted by whether ir not it is built. BTW NSFOC types are the ones that thought it was okay for my kids to be bussed for an hour or more each way to either the BB or Eola site so that their children could stay at NVHS. I sat at a school board meeting where TG and WE booed anyone who wasn't of their opinion. So if you think I have no respect for "those people" I would say your are perceptive (not terribly persceptive, but a smidge).

The referendum asked for money to build a third high school, that is exactly what the SB is trying to do. You can bend and twist anyway you like, but the bottom line is that they are trying to do what they were elected to do. Also, at least one current member of the SB was not a member back in 2006. It's true, you and your attorney should not have any trouble disproving it if I am lying. Which means this is not the same SB that tried to make everyone happy back then. This is a SB that is trying to make the best of a bad jury decision--were you on that jury by any chance????? The SB is acting as good stewards--when one option was overpriced they sought a Plan B and found it, just as any good businessman would.
..............................................................
Why oh why would a SB need to send out fliers for a location they did not own, set boundaries they did not intend to enforce, take an organization to court to steal this prime land, lose Causing the price to go up, not down, and then say it is the fault of the judge, jury, nsfoc, tg, we, etc.... "just as any good businessman"? Are you joking? A good business man would have ran from land like this Eola site. Why didn't a good business man buy EOLA Before? Any site that is owned by a power company gets extra scrutiny. Why risk it? As far as TG and WE wanting your kids to be bussed for an hour, that's absurd. Your fancy SB set the boundaries not WE and TG as you can clearly see. Just keep blaming like all losers do. If you don't like your situation take it up with the SB. By the way, why would the SB tell the public it could afford the land if it could not? They even stated the inflated rate. Is deal Eola or bust? Turn a blind eye to the SB and they will poke your other one out just to spite you. Why shouldn't we have enough pride in NVHS to want to stay? Are you blaming anyone in WV for wanting to go to Metea if it goes to Eola? I think not you hypocrite.

By Safe Land on April 14, 2008 11:54 AM
to: Eola Poor Choice on April 14, 2008 11:44 AM

Who said that "pro-Eola" people don't care if the land is safe?

I've never heard anyone say that. Please correct me if I've missed something.

I think we should leave land safety issues to the EXPERTS who will generate unbiased reports based on their findings....NOT speculation.
............................................................
Your experts said the Eola land was in need of remediation. What part of that sounds safe to you? Yet all those in favor of the site continually say it is safe. Safe land does not need remediated. Enough said.

We don't even know what the records show or do not show for the other parts of the Eola property and nobody wants to address this 50+ year old Gas Pipe. Let's wait and see what comes out of it.

If we have a stalemate, bring on the trailers. Are you ok with that?

3rd high school?
Not needed, ever. Huge waste of taxpayer money. Get a couple portable classrooms. This is the end now. Massive foreclsoures, homes for sale on every corner, seniors and working people out on the street but district 204 wants to raise your taxes again and again and again...wasting your money on attorneys, lobbyists, hotel stays, dinners, trips to Springfield...

Nevermind the school isn't needed.
A classic case of group think gone wild at taxpayer expense and long term damage to the community.

By Earth to SB on April 14, 2008 11:55 AM

Why oh why would a SB need to send out fliers for a location they did not own, set boundaries they did not intend to enforce, take an organization to court to steal this prime land, lose Causing the price to go up, not down, and then say it is the fault of the judge, jury, nsfoc, tg, we, etc.... "just as any good businessman"? Are you joking? A good business man would have ran from land like this Eola site. Why didn't a good business man buy EOLA Before? Any site that is owned by a power company gets extra scrutiny. Why risk it? As far as TG and WE wanting your kids to be bussed for an hour, that's absurd. Your fancy SB set the boundaries not WE and TG as you can clearly see. Just keep blaming like all losers do. If you don't like your situation take it up with the SB. By the way, why would the SB tell the public it could afford the land if it could not? They even stated the inflated rate. Is deal Eola or bust? Turn a blind eye to the SB and they will poke your other one out just to spite you. Why shouldn't we have enough pride in NVHS to want to stay? Are you blaming anyone in WV for wanting to go to Metea if it goes to Eola? I think not you hypocrite
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven't called anyone any names and would ask the same courtesy of those who are in their right minds (though your rants do give pause).

I don't care who goes to Metea, WVHS, or NVHS. Nor am I blaming anyone for anything. All I am doing is stating the fact that the majority of the district voted for a new school and a new school needs to be built.

If I were to blame anyone it would be the greed of the BB trustees and the idiocy of the jury.

By Anonymous on April 14, 2008 12:39 PM
............................................
You are right. I should refrain from calling people names. How would you suggest I frame a hypocritical statement without using the word hypocrite? Would another word capture the same impact without offending you? I like your play on words that suggest others are not in their right mind (Me or Others). This is the same as name calling. You just insulted many bloggers with that statement of fact. In fact, your statement that a "Majority" voted for a 3rd HS was factual but lacked intellectual honesty. Sorry, I just don't have a more politically correct way of saying the obvious. I guess those that criticize my writings are correct. I am pretty harsh. These blogs bring out the best.

"Love your neighbor as yourself"
I know this post will probably just get passed over, but I have to say it: "I'M SORRY"
...for getting caught up in this bashing of 'You don't get it.'

We are all so upset and believe our stance is the right one.
-Site is safe, site is not safe
-BB will be cheaper, Eola will be cheaper
-Transportation costs will be more at Eola, Transportation cost will be cheaper at Eola for the savings to all the residents that commute now.
and so on, and so on, and so on.....

As I sat in church this past weekend, I heard these words:
LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.....

I take this moment to officially stop looking at these blogs and posting on them....
If I feel I need to take a stance, I will take it by going directly to the people in charge....addressed by my real name.
Good luck to all of you.

Hi,

I keep reading the ballot read a third high school not a location. You are correct. The only problem I have is that in 2006 there was a long drawn out emotional process regarding boundaries and the site as to where the high school would be located. If I did not know those things in advance I would have voted no. Call me selfish, I don't care, I am just the type that wants to know everything about where my money is going to be spent. For example, when I go to buy a house and there is a empty field behind it, I want to know what is eventually going to happen to that land. If I do not have an honest answer, I will not buy there. If I had known that the land would be Eola, I would have most defenitly voted no. I can almost guarentee that a lot of people would have done the same. Look at Brookdale the majority voted no because they were not happy with the way their middle school was going to be split. I would have voted no as well if I lived in that neighborhood. I don't care what any of you bloggers say everyone has a stake in this and has their own personal agendas. NOBODY WILL SACRAFICE THEIR CHILDS HAPPINESS FOR THE DISTRICT!!!! Give me a break. Yes, I do believe a new high school needs to be desperatly built but I want it done right. If it takes a extra year so be it. Also, I do have a child who will be affected and is attending a over crowded school. I would rather my child be in a trailer than have the site at Eola. Bring on the split shifts, I would rather have that than Eola.

to: Earth to SB on April 14, 2008 12:24 PM

Sorry I wasn't more specific as I can see you take things very literally.

I don't believe anyone has made any recommendation for remediation of any land other than the Peaker Plant portion of the MWG-Eola land.

Subsequent to the studies, there hasn't been any recommended remediation of any farmland at Eola. This includes the portion of MWG-Eola that is (or was) farmland as well as the AME-Eola land, which is (or was)also farmland.

Please correct me if I am mistaken.

I do not think the fine folks who filed this law suit understand how much the remaining people within the school district are angry at them.

We live where we are not be affected by boundaries. There are those in the North who voted for the new HS knowing they would still go to WVHS, they just did not want the kids to go to a HS with a population of 4000+. There are those in the deep south who will continue to go to NVHS, they just did not want the kids to go to a HS with a population of 4500+. There are those out in the eastern portion who were ok to go to WVHS that voted for a third HS,... they just did not want the kids to go to a HS with a population of 4000+.

Now I know there are those who say that perhaps we do not need a third HS. Maybe,... maybe not? But I voted for a third HS to give our kids a better opportunity in a HS with a population of 2500-3000 (still very big).

Now since our fine folks who sued the SD and have intimidated others have created a lot of animosity. Yes, they created it. Many were indifferent before, but are now very angry at these fine folks.

"Also somewhat interesting (which did not make the paper) that Mr. Whatshisname resides in...................Stonebridge!"

Looks like Stonebridge just "out-riched" TG and WE.

God I love class warfare (pun intended).

The new school does not meet the Illinois Build Smart Program requirements due to proximity to railroads, high pressure gas pipelines and power lines.

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

Neither does Waubonsie. I don't hear anyone screaming to shut it down.

By Anonymous on April 14, 2008 3:59 PM
The new school does not meet the Illinois Build Smart Program requirements due to proximity to railroads, high pressure gas pipelines and power lines.

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

Neither does Waubonsie. I don't hear anyone screaming to shut it down.
...................
That's because nobody wants it shut down because this is a "Build Smart Program", not a have you built smart program. I am betting it was established after WV was created. Also, what is the issue with WV that disqualifies it from the program. Be specific.

Even if what you say is right, why would we not try to build smart now?

to Earth to SB:

I am not sure what "intellectual honesty" is, but I am sure that you are seeing a whole team of pyschologists.

By Me on April 14, 2008 4:27 PM
to Earth to SB:

I am not sure what "intellectual honesty" is, but I am sure that you are seeing a whole team of pyschologists.
..........................................................
So much for the BS you just tried to feed the blogs about name calling. I come out and call you the name like hypocrite and you just insult. Does anyone care about the difference? You are just a hypocrite. You wouldn't know what intellectual honesty is because you have none apparently. Thanks for playing.

Oakhurst is just as biased about the Eola Site as Brookdale and Stonebridge. Adding them as another neighborhood who supports the Eola site really doesn't add credibility that the site is best for the district. It just proves that people living near it like it regardless of the "bait and switch" situation.

Eola supporters - quit complaining that NFSOC supporters are blasting the church. They are merely blasting those who speak like the church is doing us a favor. Wrong, the church is acting in their best business interests of obtaining more money and dumping cruddy real estate while they can. There's no "supply and demand" price increase with this land. The SB is the only potential customer. Their price should be dropping!

Support for this lawsuit is more than just worrying about the contamination. Switching from AME land to church land obtained from AME doesn't solve it all. It is also about spending our money as promised and wisely. Someone has to develop a real cost analysis between the two sites capturing ALL cost differentials.

This whole process has been incestuous! We have school board members living in neighborhoods who personally stand to gain or lose from the boundary options and site selections! We have Mr Dash who suspiciously bought in the closest neighborhood to the new school before the site was even brought out to the District residents or approved.

By Me on April 14, 2008 4:27 PM

You must be just as crazy as Earth to SB. You keep responding.

to- nosuchthingasneutral on April 14, 2008 4:54 PM

We don't know with any certainty what the AME-Eola farmland is worth on the open market as it has not been marketed as such.

Unless you are a licensed appraiser with insight into property values I'm not sure you're qualified to make any remarks (other than a purely uneducated opinion) as to its worth.

So much for the BS you just tried to feed the blogs about name calling. I come out and call you the name like hypocrite and you just insult. Does anyone care about the difference? You are just a hypocrite. You wouldn't know what intellectual honesty is because you have none apparently. Thanks for playing.

By Anonymous on April 14, 2008 4:55 PM
By Me on April 14, 2008 4:27 PM

You must be just as crazy as Earth to SB. You keep responding.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Not all the "anonymous" are the same person. The second entry proves that. Since some replies to ETSB are from me as "anonymous" and others are from "anonymous" but not me. You are probably talking to multiple people who have each answered once or twice--most people don't have entire days to spend on the computer like ETSB does.

To Real Estate 101:

I am not a real estate agent. Got me there. I do have an opinion (and happen to be highly educated in a more scientific field than real estate, but who cares, right?) and experience in buying real estate in Naperville. Land near high wires and contaminated soil is lower priced than normal due to a smaller demand.

Fact:
Every school board member with the exception of Vickers should be replaced. What a joke:

Finally, the TRUTH.

1) SB members wanted a school up North
2) They ignored the costs that will be associated with BB
3) Proving that cost did not matter to them
4) They all benefit personally at the expense of the entire district
5) At the meeting there were 5 against buying the land for every 1
6) What happened should be personally liable due to the facts.

There has to be some responsibility to NOT go against the voters in such critical mass. There has to be some accountability for ignoring the cost in NOT buying BB.

If tonight's meeting was an indication of the support of the SB, there were only 20% who would vote for them today. And of course, 80% that would not want them there. That's of the people affected.

Maybe the remaining people not affected will be upset at the waste of monies this SB did and rid ourselves of their service.

Amazing. They should be ashamed of themselves. How can you look at 5 voters who are asking you to stop and then 1 who is telling you to move ahead and actually feel you are representing the district.

I only hope a judge can hear the case to decide. Afterall, there is multiple lawsuits coming the way of the SB, what's one more they may figure.

Well, they decided to go ahead and buy all the AME land. WITHOUT AN APPRAISAL.

Once again a mockery was made of the public input. Once again there was no urge to slow down. Wasn't it just last Friday when MM made it sound like they were going to go review all their options? Voila, less than 72 hours later and we've made a no-appraisal purchase of AME.

What a bunch of buffoons. District 204 is screwed.

Sidley Austin is licking its chops right now. It's gonna have our taxes for lunch.

I find it interesting that many of you keep pointing out that Dr. D wants to put a high school right next to his neighborhood. For the record, his two daughters are already in high school and in no way would they benefit from the third high school other than alleviation of overcrowding. If I am correct, one daughter will have already graduated, and the other will be a junior or senior by the time the third high school opens (if it opens on schedule).

I would also like to say that I am a north sider, and I voted yes on the ref because I felt we needed a new high school. I honestly thought the BB location was strange, and ill placed. It seemed too close to the other two existing high schools, and in a place where traffic in the morning is close to impossible. When I voted, I also did not believe that the high school would only be built on the BB property, I realized that it was a suggestion as to what was available.

I want a third high school built before my children have to attend it. I want it built somewhere safe. I want it built in the most cost effective way. I don't really care where my kids go to high school, as long as they have good teachers, ample opportunities, and a positive student body. After reviewing the information that has been published, I believe that the Eola site is safe. If it were put up to another vote today, I would still vote yes for the high school, regardless of where it will be built.

I don't understand why NSFOC are arguing about where MY children will go to school. If their children will not ever set foot on the property, why do they care so much about what is in the soil? It seems to me that this is much less an issue of what but where. As their title presents, they want a school in their neighborhood. Well guess what, so do I!!!!! However, I would never be so selfish as to derail the efforts of a school board or the needs of an entire community so that my children can save a few minutes in the morning by driving 1 mile instead of 6.

By Earth to SB on April 14, 2008 7:17 AM

And this is proof.

Although I understand your frustration, if I have to read through the negative BS coming from your side then I will let you read an equal amount of it from mine.

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

Earth, thank you for finally admitting you are full of BS.

Who buys a piece of property for $19M that the current owner paid $3.2M 4 years ago without an appraisal? You got it the idiots we have running our school board.

Thanks to Christine Vickers for letting us know. I think we finally have concrete evidence of their lack of fiduciary responsibility and a way to purge these members from our board.

Who would have imagined that Vickers would be the only sane one at the meeting tonight?

Was I the only one appauled that after 90 minutes of community input the board pushes the sale through to hit the 2009 deadline, give Daschner his bonus and get this done before the BB liability bill is due and before we vote 4 of these bums out of their seats.

Once again these clowns are an embarrassment to our district and their spending spree continues. Whats next Mark? Are you buying a garbage dump for the special ed school Daschner is proposing? Oh ya I forgot never, never, never.

That's true, I do have a charmed life. It is nice to be able to do what I want and when I want. You sure did give it a good run for your money though didn't you crazy guy?:)

To We can eat the dirt on this land - and we do! on April 13, 2008 1:17 PM--

In regards to your statement, "yes we've all eaten the dirt on this land and it's clean and safe":

Speak for yourself. I don't eat dirt. And if you're referring to the fact that this land has been producing consumable corn and soy beans for years, then you're not aware that the majority of soy beans and corn grown in this area is used for livestock feed, or ethanol. So unless you're a cow, I don't think you've eaten it, either. But be my guest . . .

*****a lot of local corn goes to a distributor in Ottawa IL to be shipped to China for use as an alternative fuel. You should see all the trucks lined up to sell their corn to them.

Here are my awards after coming home from the SB meeting tonight. I was lucky enough to have a prime seat in the "Annex" downstairs.

Winner of the "Best point made all night" award: Anyone talking about the potential BB judgments. In my opinion, this is the only legitimate play the NSFOC has made to date. There were a number of very well spoken people on this subject.

Winner of the "Good to put a name with a face" award: Greg Forrrrrest. Greg, people in the annex from both sides of the aisle applauded you (which I did) for the way you presented your case even though only half actually agreed with you (which I do not). Kudos! Speaker of the night, IMHO.

Winner of the "Most Ironic" award: NSFOC supporters. They sue all of us then have the gall to say we need healing in the district. UFB.

Winner of the "Hey, that guy sounds like a blogger" award: Arch and Real Costs. I can't prove it, but two guys who spoke sounded a heck of a lot like posts these bloggers have made. I'm probably wrong, but these handles definitely popped into my head during those presentations.

Winner of the "Oh God, you've got to be kidding me" award: No, not AME...the SB. No land appraisals? Ugh. Guess I have to side with NSFOC on this one.

Winner of the "The best way to get out of a hole is to stop digging" award: Alka Tyle. If you stayed to the very end of the meeting you know what I'm talking about. She gave a ton of great talking points to the NSFOC lawyers. She's so clueless that she probably didn't notice Glawe trying to cover her never-ending string of gaffes.

Winner of the "Darth Vader" award: NSFOC. On the way out of the meeting, I heard the NSFOC threat machine winding up. Uh oh!

And to finish up, Earth to SB is still an idiot.

D204 to buy church's land for $19M

April 14, 2008
By Tim Waldorf twaldorf@scn1.com
The deal is done.

Indian Prairie School District 204’s school board approved Monday the purchase of 84 acres along Eola Road in Aurora from St. John’s African Methodist Episcopal Church. Metea Valley High School will be built on the land. The purchase should allow District 204 to open the 3,000-seat high school in the fall of 2009, as planned.

St. John's intended to build a new church on roughly 34 acres of the property, but decided to sell the the entire 84-acre site to the district after Midwest Generation decided not to sell 37 acres of adjoining property selected for the school site last week. District 204 will purchase the property for roughly $19 million.

The board voted 6-1 in favor of the action. Board member Christine Vickers cast the lone no.

The church purchased their land from Common Weath and Edision (which once owned Midwest Generation) in 2004 for $35,000 per acre. 4 years later our fabulous school board is swooping in and purchasing the same property for 668% more! That's right 2.9M in 2004 to 19M in 2008. District 204 is paying approximately $230,000 per acre. WOW!!! I would have loved to see that one coming and done a little investing myself. No matter if you are for or against this site you have got to take a step back and see this church isn't doing this for the "goodness of district 204 children" they are doing it for pure PROFIT and we are falling for it. You also need to step back and take a long hard look at why an organization that didn't want to sell any of the land decided to sell a portion and now all - did they see the enviromental reports and decide not to build or just decide to take the extra buck and find a site with less potential for harm? Hey, maybe we should offer them the 25 acres at Broch Brodie for $519,000 per acre! Nah...they're to smart for that!

Done deal - Great Job SB!!!!!!! I wish you continued success in what you have been trying to achieve!! HOPEFULLY there will be no more obstacles / "groups" trying to stop you. Thank you for all of your hard work!!!!

By Jim Jandick on April 13, 2008 10:37 PM
Hey there fast times at ridgemont (Eola) high, will you be in class Monday night. If you bring the pizza should I bring the beer? Just remember Mr. Hand will be there so bring enough for the whole class. Greg hope to see you at the meeting, maybe its time for a name change to Spicolli of ashbury.
--------------------------------------------------

Excellent! Another fan of one of the great comedies of all time!! Too young to see it, but I managed to sneak in way back in the day and now own it on DVD from the Wal-Mart 5dollar dump bin special.

Sorry I missed you at tonights meeting. I left at the break around 10 after the heat day/temperature discussion. LOVED the comments by Ms. Clark regarding A/C for all the schools that currently lack it. Since we have been talking "justice and Equality" it only makes sense for all buildings to have it OR NONE. I went up to her at the break and thanked her for her comments/support on the heat/AC thing. Interestingly enough I mentioned this at the end of my comments and didnt even realize it was on the agenda for tonite. I TOTALLY 100% disagree with her on the EOla site, but whats new.

Kudos to Ms. Vickers. my views probably align the closest with hers out of any of the board members. Allthough I dont think even she wants to continue the precedent of what was done for BB with folks evaluating site and location. Its allful tough to be out on an island and she voted her convictions. I commend her for that and was damn proud to see that.

I am absolutely flabbergasted that we cant take 72 hours and get the property appraised. I am sure this deal has been in the works for weeks. NO WAY do you have everything ready to go from Friday to Monday if it wasnt being worked on over the past several weeks. That leads me to WHY did we not do it by the numbers (get the appraisers to review it) and/or why couldnt the board do it this week to attempt to eliminate a potential concern of the taxpayers. Something does not smell right on this entire process. I wonder if they are saving the 91M budget surplus to pay for potential BB damages and suits.

Would be interested to hear your thoughts. Jim, I am happy for you; looks like they are going to whirlind the 3rd HS and try and have it ready by 2009 (barring any injunctions from any of the 3 pending lawsuits). I know you want the smaller schools as quick as possible. I am very sad for the folks that urge discretion and caution given all the outstanding variables. I fear they will come back to bite us as a district once again. I am most sad for the democracy advocates (such as me). It looks like we will never know if the will of the voters is being serviced with this decision by the SB. You have to give the board credit, they got their 2nd ref based on BB and ramrodded the Eola site in six months after they dropped BB. I think Eola was always their top choice, but it was just not available at the times they checked in 05, and 06.

I sure hope this doesnt affect other non new school referendums that come along in the next few years before the board completely turns over in 2011 (most likely all new board after 2011 elections)

By Anonymous on April 14, 2008 10:10 PM
By Earth to SB on April 14, 2008 7:17 AM

And this is proof.

Although I understand your frustration, if I have to read through the negative BS coming from your side then I will let you read an equal amount of it from mine.

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

Earth, thank you for finally admitting you are full of BS.
.............................
Why would I have to admit it when I have you and others to do it for me just like this great SB.

How about that NSFOC? We are building on Eola!!! Awesome.

Gonna print some more flyers??

By Awards from the SB meeting tonight on April 14, 2008 10:41 PM
Here are my awards after coming home from the SB meeting tonight. I was lucky enough to have a prime seat in the "Annex" downstairs.

Winner of the "Best point made all night" award: Anyone talking about the potential BB judgments. In my opinion, this is the only legitimate play the NSFOC has made to date. There were a number of very well spoken people on this subject.

Winner of the "Good to put a name with a face" award: Greg Forrrrrest. Greg, people in the annex from both sides of the aisle applauded you (which I did) for the way you presented your case even though only half actually agreed with you (which I do not). Kudos! Speaker of the night, IMHO.

Winner of the "Most Ironic" award: NSFOC supporters. They sue all of us then have the gall to say we need healing in the district. UFB.

Winner of the "Hey, that guy sounds like a blogger" award: Arch and Real Costs. I can't prove it, but two guys who spoke sounded a heck of a lot like posts these bloggers have made. I'm probably wrong, but these handles definitely popped into my head during those presentations.

Winner of the "Oh God, you've got to be kidding me" award: No, not AME...the SB. No land appraisals? Ugh. Guess I have to side with NSFOC on this one.

Winner of the "The best way to get out of a hole is to stop digging" award: Alka Tyle. If you stayed to the very end of the meeting you know what I'm talking about. She gave a ton of great talking points to the NSFOC lawyers. She's so clueless that she probably didn't notice Glawe trying to cover her never-ending string of gaffes.

Winner of the "Darth Vader" award: NSFOC. On the way out of the meeting, I heard the NSFOC threat machine winding up. Uh oh!

And to finish up, Earth to SB is still an idiot.
.................................................
WTF, thanks for the honerable mention. You are the biggest idiot for thinking of me after that great blog. Funny how you make the case for the NSFOC and still feel that this SB is competent. Only an idiot would do that.

"The thing that becomes more clear to us tonight is that this situation has become more complicated, not less," reads a statement NSFOC member Jasmine Grassi distributed to the media following the vote. "This school board has become more secretive, not less. This community has become more divided, not less."

BINGO !!!! WE have a winner! I would totally agree, the situation has become more complicated, the school board has been forced not to put all the info. on the front page of the newspaper, and YES the community has become more divided.

All because of an idiotic lawsuit against them and all of us over where a select few would prefer the high school to be LOCATED.WHO the HELL cares where it goes? The safety of the land(which wasn't even the impetus of the suit) is evident and just another desperate attempt to throw anything out there with hopes something sticks!

Thanks nsfoc for pointing out the poisons your group has spread over our district! More divided indeed! Great job nsfoc.SLOW DOWN for what? So there is no land available and kids continue to remain crowded and stuffed into schools? AS it is, we're looking at over five years since this issue became a priority.

I am sorry but there will NEVER be a time when EVERYONE is happy ALL of the time. Now would be a good time to accept this life lesson that you obviously haven't learned.You'll do the kids a favor by teaching them this as well. "You can't always get what you WANT but you just might find you'll get what you NEED".It's a character builder, friends.

The majority voted for a third high school and that is what we should and will get!

I can't believe this happened so quickly. Kudos to the SB for turning what looked like certain defeat into absolute victory. They delivered a knockout punch to the NSFOC obstructionists. Property has been acquired and the timeline will be met. Unbelievable.

I can't wait to see what the NSFOC tries to say and do now. It still has absolutely no legal leg to stand on and the AME can't be browbeaten like Midwest Gen.

By the way, who will pay Collins' attorney fees?

By You Can't Always Get What You Want.... on April 15, 2008 7:29 AM
.....................
Why don't you go polish your turd!

By Mark on April 15, 2008 7:41 AM
I can't believe this happened so quickly. Kudos to the SB for turning what looked like certain defeat into absolute victory. They delivered a knockout punch to the NSFOC obstructionists. Property has been acquired and the timeline will be met. Unbelievable.

I can't wait to see what the NSFOC tries to say and do now. It still has absolutely no legal leg to stand on and the AME can't be browbeaten like Midwest Gen.

By the way, who will pay Collins' attorney fees?

............................
Probably you and I as taxpayers after all that ammo last night. His fees are paid by the NSFOC now but just watch him earn his money.

By Mark on April 15, 2008 7:41 AM
I can't believe this happened so quickly. Kudos to the SB for turning what looked like certain defeat into absolute victory. They delivered a knockout punch to the NSFOC obstructionists. Property has been acquired and the timeline will be met. Unbelievable.

I can't wait to see what the NSFOC tries to say and do now. It still has absolutely no legal leg to stand on and the AME can't be browbeaten like Midwest Gen.

By the way, who will pay Collins' attorney fees?

__________________________________

I'm sending some money to NSFOC today to join their cause. I guess I'll be helping to pay Collin's fee.

Too many lies from this school board. Glawe states the Macom property was $300,000 an acre? What? Did he bother to read the district's own land report? I realize he's stated he's never been to the Eola site so I'm not holding out much hope that he bothered to do any due diligence on behalf of the residents of 204.

to: nosuchthingasneutral on April 14, 2008 8:59 PM

I guess the people who bought in TG didn't feel that way.

Mark on April 15, 2008 7:41 AM

They may have won the battle but not the War.

Na na na na
Na na na na
Hey Hey Hey
Goodbye NSFOC

Re: fast times at ridgemont high

Mark great post but more impressive great speech last night. You had the room in applause, the whole room!!! At the intermission I was looking for you to thank you personally but lost sight when everyone got up at the same time. As you know Mark my position for a quick high school opening is for the district at large, my children will be out of the district before there will be much enrollment impact at the high school level.

With regard to the three lawsuits the ones by the bb estate are the ones still looming on the horizon and of course cause for concern, the nsfoc suit is probably just a nuisance suit in my opinion. Mark as for speed (72 hours) of north property, I agree with you this has probably been in negotiation for several weeks or more. The 91M surplus is a bonus at this point in time, but with the big run-up in real estate in the last few years long gone and expenses associated with the third high school, it is only a matter of 3-5 years before another referendum may be needed (again just my opinion).

For those that may have missed the last 30 minutes of the meeting last night there was much discussion about the districts tech/communications/software needs and how these needs will be met in the next 4-5 years. It was too bad there were only a handful of concerned 204 family members by this point in the meeting.

For the many who spoke up about the lack of communication from the board to 204 residents, this is what I have observed. Since attending these meetings (the most recent boundary meeting in Feb) I have tried to attend all meeting bell to bell. When this practice is used it is much easier to get a feel for what happens and how important info. is communicated. The other benefit from this is that staff and board members start noticing that there is someone new at their meetings (especially after the 3rd-4th time). But the most important advantage I feel to going to these meetings is the outflow of info in an organized fashion which at a latter date can be compared to "How others view the district" i.e. reporters,bloggers, editorials, etc. When digesting this info. it seems much easier to come to a more complete understanding of the district and how it functions in our community at large.

I hope that with the purchase of the eola school property all of us as a district can find some closure to this very emotional and at times painful issue.
Sincerely Jim Jandick

I would like to thank everyone who came out to get the board to slow down. We had over 500 supporters on the 2nd floor alone. You showed up in great numbers and one on the School Board heard us which is better than none.

Do not feel discouraged and remember this is not over. We will keep pushing forward. Again, they may have won the battle but not the war.

Thank you to the church for selling us the remainder of the land that they own. I am sure that the profit they made from the sale will be enough to buy a nice piece of land, and build a beautiful church for them to worship in. NSFOC I remind you that on the ballot you voted on it CLEARLY STATED DO YOU SUPPORT A THIRD HIGH SCHOOL? No where did it say do you support a third high school based on the property or boundry lines. Your willingness to read between the lines cost you, and it is now costing the rest of the district as well as we have to defend ourselves against you. For the sake of the entire district do us all a favor and drop your lawsuit and try to begin the healling process to reunite the district. Oh and by the way entitled nine, WELCOME TO WARRIOR LAND, ENJOY YOUR STAY HERE!!!!!

The SB voted on purchasing property that has had no appraisal done! How can anyone with a 3rd grade education think this is acceptable?

The church purchased their land from Common Weath and Edision (which once owned Midwest Generation) in 2004 for $35,000 per acre. 4 years later our fabulous school board is swooping in and purchasing the same property for 668% more! That's right 2.9M in 2004 to 19M in 2008. District 204 is paying approximately $230,000 per acre. WOW!!! I would have loved to see that one coming and done a little investing myself. No matter if you are for or against this site you have got to take a step back and see this church isn't doing this for the "goodness of district 204 children" they are doing it for pure PROFIT and we are falling for it. You also need to step back and take a long hard look at why an organization that didn't want to sell any of the land decided to sell a portion and now all - did they see the enviromental reports and decide not to build or just decide to take the extra buck and find a site with less potential for harm? Hey, maybe we should offer them the 25 acres at Broch Brodie for $519,000 per acre! Nah...they're to smart for that!

By Earth to SB
.................................................
WTF, thanks for the honerable mention. You are the biggest idiot for thinking of me after that great blog. Funny how you make the case for the NSFOC and still feel that this SB is competent. Only an idiot would do that.

And thank you for providing me with endless entertainment...for showing that whenever someone dangles a little red meat in front of you, you can't help but take the bait.

ETB, you don't disappoint. Let's see if you bite again...you're dumber than Alka Tyle.

To Anonymous on April 13, 2008 10:37 PM--

I understand all the points you're making regarding the damage claims. I've heard them before, and I'm sure the Brody attorneys are aware of them, too. All the same, Brody is still suing for $40.2 million. I threw out the 25% scenerio as an "if" statement, meaning that our SB is so unprepared for a BB damage victory that "if" a jury awarded Brody even 1/4 of what they are asking, this would exceed the amount the SB has budgeted by 100%. A significant victory by BB could devastate our school district.

At the SB meeting last night, Alka T. admitted the final damage judgments from BB were an unknown the SD would just have to risk. She said it would take 1-3 years for the damage suit to move through the courts, and 204 couldn't wait for this to be resolved if a 3rd HS was to be built before all available land was gone.

I understand her point and appreciated her candidness in talking about this, but the argument is now moot. The SB voted 6-1 last night to buy AME's 84 acres, so we'll have to pay whatever a jury awards BB in the future.

As to the second part of your statement regarding the NSFOC, I've heard all this before, too. It's always surprised me how NSFOC supporters don't care about the amended complaint but anti-NSFOC folks have been having a field day with conspiracy theories. I do think you're wrong about there only being nine people eligible for damages. There are 10 plaintiffs listed on the amended lawsuit--the NSFOC and nine individuals. And the original and amended complaint both define who the "members" of the NSFOC are.

I have also been to their meetings and spoken to them and their attorney. Never once have they discussed pursuing monetary damages outside of attorney fees as part of their strategy. It has always seemed to me that to do so would betray the very people who support them, and the NSFOC would not get very far without supporters. So while it makes good anti-NSFOC press, I have never seen how it would benefit the NSFOC to do this.

Having said that, the SB buying the AME land last night has to change things for the NSFOC. I don't know what options there are for them at this point or if a damage complaint is their only recourse now. But if they did pursue damages, it wouldn't be based on having to send their kids to WV. My guess is it would be based on a loss of property values as a result of being redistricted away from NV. They could very well see a reduction in the value of their land as a result of the new boundaries, but I don't think the SB has a legal obligation to protect its residents property values when making decisions for the district.

We'll just have to wait and see.

By Steam on April 15, 2008 9:08 AM
Na na na na
Na na na na
Hey Hey Hey
Goodbye NSFOC
.......................
You really are as dumb as this looks! NSFOC still has a lawsuit and BB still has lawsuits pending. Too bad you think the SB made it go away.

We have been and will happily continue to attend WVHS. I just can't believe the people who are applauding the SB. My one and only concern is responsible spending of our tax dollars. Dr. D's quote " This would not happen without these great people" these great people are getting a 700% return on their 2004 purchase of the land. Anyone in Dist 204 experience a 700% return on real estate bought in 2004? Bradshaw quote " We're no strangers to the real estate market" The SB might not be a stranger to the real estate market, they have been complete suckers in the real estate market. They admitted they didn't get an appraisal on the property, are you kidding me? Propery less than a 1/4 mile away is going for less than 1/2 of what are real estate wizards are willing to pay the church. If the original contract with BB would have been negotiated as most real estate is(an option at a price) all this turmoil the SB has created would never have happend.

This SB needs to be accountable for their actions and it is up to all the citizens of 204 to expect that. They have acted irresponsible at almost every turn in this effort to build a 3rd school. The insanity has to stop.

I'm now considering supporting NSFOC

As the board stated last night - they have done all the appraising they need to do - they can probably be considered experts in this area on that. For the past 2 years, they've been busy negotiating and working with appraisers on available property throughout the district. Without a doubt - they know the value of this property and are saving the district millions. What in the world are you guys going to use to make you lives miserable once this is over. As my mother always said, "some people need controversy to live" and I'd say this is the TG residents or NSFOC way of life- or whatever they're calling themselves.

Did anybody notice that the NSFOC had written statements prepared before the meeting for the press? They lay out facts and opinions in such a manner that the people "infer" that it is the school board's fault. They will claim they just lay out the facts and it isn't their fault if someone "infers" them a certain way (think full page ad attacking Midwest Gen).

Did the NSFOC infer that the referendum actually said BB? Fools.

Kudos to the SB for deciding to buy the Eola land. The appraisal might have come in higher since there are so few available sites that fit the 80 acre requirement. The jury verdict for the BB land is probably the main reason the appraisal would come in so high.

Lotto winners on our dollars.

Brookdale and supporters of the SB should be ashamed of yourselves.

"We voted for a 3rd H.S." "not where it will be built" OK, here's a challenge to anyone who showed up at that meeting last night in support of the Metea being built?

1) How does it feel to have 5 parents for ever 1 who opposes you.
2) How does it feel to teach your kids that it's better to 'trick' and get what you want, then work for it.
3) Eola has no support- and it's being built based upon 6 people's desire, plus the superintendent who answers to them.
4) Entire families have been in turmoil, sick - literally sick.

Last night felt like an evening of humor.

Overcrowding? I didn't hear any parent moon about needing the school up by 09? Not one. Every supporter was some brookdale resident that wanted out of Waubansie.

In the end, you can't win. We all know when you lie, you have to keep lying to cover your tracks. And we all know that when you take the easy way out, something gives.

How did it feel to listen to all those toxic issues and want your kids to go there.

hmmmmmm

how can the Church make that decision from Friday to Monday so quickly? Maybe it had to do with the realization that the land is dangerous - and Midwest Gen was not going to sign of on it due to potential hazard.

now, how can the Church be doing the community a service selling land that is potentially dangerous....

you would think the Church would ensure the land is 100% safe before selling

I like how the NSFOC is claiming 500 supporters atteh meeting and outnumbering non-supporters 5 to 1. I can't trust your count since you have NEVER been hoenst in representations about the NSFOC. Sorry but you have gone out of your way to kill your credibilty.

I was there. Most of my neighbors chose not to attend because they believe the school board will look past the lunatics and do the right thing. We voted for the school board and voted for the referendum. We do not feel we need to intimidate the school board for them to do the right thing - build the 3rd high school.

to: Awards from the SB meeting tonight

LOL.

Thanks for the laugh!

First I'd like to send a "shout out" to Fast Times at Metea High(aka Greg Forrrrest)I had a chance to finally meet him after blgging against him and others regarding this issue. I never used a common name in the past but let's just say I have posted quite a bit every day for the past 2 months. I took it upon myself to introduce myself to him and let him know I have always been respectful to him and other bloggers I have disagreed with. ;) ;) (code to GF)
________________________________

To 204 Parents:

I know we will agree to disagree on many points. These issues have much of our school district divided and for that I am most concerned and saddened. I have attended 90% of the IPSD school board meetings since 2005 and although my opinions and views may differ I know we are all concerned about IPSD. I also do not blame it on the NSFOC or the SB or the north or the south or any particular neighborhood. I just think with change comes division in what people's beliefs are and what side of the fence they are on.

- I feel the handling of the BB was done to the best of the SB's ability many do not.
- I feel we need a 3rd HS others do not.
- I feel the Eola property is fiscally the best option many do not.
- Yes, I am also concerned the way the SB handled many issues. However, my reasons will probably differ from your reasons. Each of us have our own opinions on things.

I hope and pray that the division of our school district and neighborhood against neighborhood and name calling will some day end. I hope that time will heal wounds. I hope that all of our children will embrace their HS and continue to make our school district and the schools within it the best they can be.

After giving this much thought I think we DO NEED to make a change that I believe everyone will agree upon. While I have supported the school board in the past and feel they do have all of our childrens and parents best interests in mind, I think going forward something needs to be done. What I am hearing and fear is that no one will trust a school board member again. I hope this isn't true and anyone who serves on the school board will be concerned about every child and parent in the district.

I think of all of our HOA's and how a property manager is always involved to guide our HOA's. I think going forward we need someone to guide our school board and be an unbiased voice of reason. I am sure there are consultants out there that guide school boards and are far more knowledgable then anyone could hope to be regarding school board issues. This person would not live in the district, and would research all issues and be a voice of reason when issues come up that cause future division in our school district. This person would also not answer to the SB or the Superintendent. They would be paid by IPSD and have everyone's best interests in mind.

I know many that are unhappy about the decision last night and feel that the SB is out of control and reckless and I respect your opinion. While I have supported the SB there are things I think they could have done differently. Therefore, the only way this will be resolved going forward and for future school board's is to hire this type of consultant that has the knowledge and background that all of us will respect, while remaining unbiased.

I know each of us, no matter what our views are, care about IPSD and our children. Therefore, I belive this is the only way we can continue foward and start to bring together all of us again in District 204. I regret we haven't had a person like this in the past but I feel we need one in the future.

To: Fast Times at Metea High on April 15, 2008 12:57 AM

LOVED the comments by Ms. Clark regarding A/C for all the schools that currently lack it. Since we have been talking "justice and Equality" it only makes sense for all buildings to have it OR NONE. I went up to her at the break and thanked her for her comments/support on the heat/AC thing. Interestingly enough I mentioned this at the end of my comments and didnt even realize it was on the agenda for tonite.
_____________________________________________
;) ;)

While you and I disagree on many things I think as we sat together last night we agree on this issue.

Why the heck didn't they pass the A/C for the elementary schools? Was it not part of the school improvements in the 2006 referencum? Not sure if someone knows this or not? If it was just an issue that was brought up, fine. However, if it was something that was planned for why aren't they doing it?

Instead their solution was install screens in the windows for more circulation, and if the temps got too hot in the classrooms (not sure what that temp is) they would dismiss early in the afternoon.

How the heck is that going to work? Are they going to sound the tornado siren? Call all the parents? What about homes that have 2 parents that work?

To Anonymous on April 14, 2008 10:33 PM--

Thanks for the info. I knew it was being used for ethanol, but I had no idea it was going to China.

If "We can eat the dirt on this land - and we do" really wants to sample our local corn, she now knows where to find it.

By What about my neighborhood school? on April 14, 2008 10:02 PM
I find it interesting that many of you keep pointing out that Dr. D wants to put a high school right next to his neighborhood. For the record, his two daughters are already in high school and in no way would they benefit from the third high school other than alleviation of overcrowding. If I am correct, one daughter will have already graduated, and the other will be a junior or senior by the time the third high school opens (if it opens on schedule).

I would also like to say that I am a north sider, and I voted yes on the ref because I felt we needed a new high school. I honestly thought the BB location was strange, and ill placed. It seemed too close to the other two existing high schools, and in a place where traffic in the morning is close to impossible. When I voted, I also did not believe that the high school would only be built on the BB property, I realized that it was a suggestion as to what was available.

I want a third high school built before my children have to attend it. I want it built somewhere safe. I want it built in the most cost effective way. I don't really care where my kids go to high school, as long as they have good teachers, ample opportunities, and a positive student body. After reviewing the information that has been published, I believe that the Eola site is safe. If it were put up to another vote today, I would still vote yes for the high school, regardless of where it will be built.

I don't understand why NSFOC are arguing about where MY children will go to school. If their children will not ever set foot on the property, why do they care so much about what is in the soil? It seems to me that this is much less an issue of what but where. As their title presents, they want a school in their neighborhood. Well guess what, so do I!!!!! However, I would never be so selfish as to derail the efforts of a school board or the needs of an entire community so that my children can save a few minutes in the morning by driving 1 mile instead of 6.

---------------------------------
Thank you!! I completely agree.

While I have disagreed with NSFOC in the past I have always respected their opinions as fellow parents and never called anyone names or disrespected them in any way. I as well have many friends all over the district including many that are members of the NSFOC. We can disagree on issues but it doesn't mean we can't be friends and/or our kids can't be friends. We are all fellow parents of this wonderful school district.

I wish however last night that a few people wouldn't have stormed out while saying things under their breath and kicked and punched doors. I understand your frustration but that was not a way for anyone to conduct themselves. It took away from those that took the time to speak their views in a civial, courteous and intelligent mannor against the school board and the Eola site. Even though I was wearing a white shirt I applauded almost everyone that spoke last night.

Classic Rhetoric at its finest:

Blogger: You're an idiot.
Earth to School Board: No. YOU'RE an idiot.

Blogger: You're a hypocrite.
Earth to School Board: No. YOU'RE a hypocrite.

Blogger: You're not logical.
Earth to School Board: No. YOU'RE not logical.

Blogger: You have hidden motives.
Earth to School Board: No. YOU have hidden motives.

Monty Python:
M: Ah, Is this the right room for an argument?
A: I told you once.
M: No you haven't.
A: Yes I have.
M: When?
A: Just now.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: You didn't
A: I did!
M: You didn't!
A: I'm telling you I did!
M: You did not!!
A: Oh, I'm sorry, just one moment. Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?
M: Oh, just the five minutes.
A: Ah, thank you. Anyway, I did.
M: You most certainly did not.
A: Look, let's get this thing clear; I quite definitely told you.
M: No you did not.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: You didn't.
A: Did.
M: Oh look, this isn't an argument.
A: Yes it is.
M: No it isn't. It's just contradiction.
A: No it isn't.
M: It is!
A: It is not.
M: Look, you just contradicted me.
A: I did not.
M: Oh you did!!
A: No, no, no.
M: You did just then.
A: Nonsense!
M: Oh, this is futile!
A: No it isn't.
M: I came here for a good argument.
A: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
M: An argument isn't just contradiction.
A: It can be.
M: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A: No it isn't.
M: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
A: Yes it is!
M: No it isn't!
A: Yes it is!
M: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
(short pause)
A: No it isn't.
M: It is.
A: Not at all.

Man, I love Monty Python. I think the theme song for this debacle should be "Spam"

NSFOC(Tall Grass)You made complete fools of yourselves. You fought hard and wound up with nothing but animosity now and forever from this district. This will never be forgotten. Enjoy lower property values and the perception that you have created that Waubonsie is so undesirable. It's now even less desirable because of the fact that your snobby neighborhood will be going there. I am also sure that you will be welcomed with open arms. You made your bed, now sleep in it.

NSFOC(Tall Grass)You made complete fools of yourselves. You fought hard and wound up with nothing but animosity now and forever from this district. This will never be forgotten. Enjoy lower property values and the perception that you have created that Waubonsie is so undesirable. It's now even less desirable because of the fact that your snobby neighborhood will be going there. I am also sure that you will be welcomed with open arms. You made your bed, now sleep in it.

God bless Pastor Jesse Hawkins and the prudent not-for-profit AME congregation for making their business transaction AND at the same time for protecting their flock from being exposed weekly to harmful soil which is highly unlikely to exist on their new land acquisition. Where do I get an application to become a member of this flock? I trust this prudent leadership. Something I can NOT say for the current D204 school board. Time to purge and then move on.

Respectfully,

Denny

When is the next NSFOC meeting? I'm ready to continue the fight and hold the board accountable. I watched them last night ignore the community once again and it was clear that they decided at their dinner meeting to move ahead.

The public comment periods are a complete waste of time and they do them because they have to not because they want to hear any of us.

Thank God NSFOC is out there since the lemmings who got up there and said that they totally trust the board to do whatever they see fit are Cretans.

It’s really sad that the only thing this board listens to are law suits and had they done their elected duty there would be no suit.

I was warned before moving into this district to watch out that the board is not to be trusted and to stay in 203. I did not listen but now see what the truth was. We love the neighbors, teachers and the kids. The board and administration though are a joke and embarrassment.

When is the next NSFOC meeting? I'm ready to continue the fight and hold the board accountable. I watched them last night ignore the community once again and it was clear that they decided at their dinner meeting to move ahead.

The public comment periods are a complete waste of time and they do them because they have to not because they want to hear any of us.

Thank God NSFOC is out there since the lemmings who got up there and said that they totally trust the board to do whatever they see fit are Cretans.

It’s really sad that the only thing this board listens to are law suits and had they done their elected duty there would be no suit.

I was warned before moving into this district to watch out that the board is not to be trusted and to stay in 203. I did not listen but now see what the truth was. We love the neighbors, teachers and the kids. The board and administration though are a joke and embarrassment.

I'm really enjoying reading all of the commentary regarding the entertaining(and nutty) rants of Earth to School Board. Has he nothing better to do but post nasty replies to almost every post that opposes his point of view? Earth to School Board: get a life - or a job.

To Awards from the SB meeting tonight on April 14, 2008 10:41 PM--

Your post is hysterical! Thanks for pointing out the humor in this comedy of errors.

Do you mind if I contribute two awards of my own?

Winner of the "Oh, grow up!" award: Jennifer Streder. The school board chastised her for "name calling" during her 3-minute comment. Kudos, SB! Really, how old is Ms. Streder--10?

Winner of the "Worst comparison to make a point" award: The pro-Eola speaker who said "the NSFOC is making a mole hill into Mount St. Helens". Someone should have told her Mount St. Helens blew up.

I had children at home clamoring for the pizza I had promised, so I had to leave before the meeting ended. I'm really interested in how Alka T. won her award. Do share, please. I'd love to hear about it.

Thanks again for a great laugh!

To: Anonymous at 9:56

You dont like the band "Steam" ?

OK...How about the Little River Band.

Have you heard about the lonesome loser
Beaten by the School Board every time
Have you heard about the lonesome loser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on tryin'

Oooooooh-hooooooo-hooooooo
Oooooooh-ooooooh-hoooooooo

Sit down, take a look at yourself
Don't you want to go to NVHS
Someday somebody's gonna see inside
You have to face up, you can't run and hide

Unlucky in Schools
Least that's what they say
He lost his head
And he litigated his heart away
He still keeps searching
Though there's nothing left
Staked his kids and lost
Now he has to pay the cost

By Anonymous on April 15, 2008 10:28 AM
I like how the NSFOC is claiming 500 supporters atteh meeting and outnumbering non-supporters 5 to 1. I can't trust your count since you have NEVER been hoenst in representations about the NSFOC. Sorry but you have gone out of your way to kill your credibilty.

I was there. Most of my neighbors chose not to attend because they believe the school board will look past the lunatics and do the right thing. We voted for the school board and voted for the referendum. We do not feel we need to intimidate the school board for them to do the right thing - build the 3rd high school.
...........................................
Funny. The only venum spewed last night was from the SB Soccer moms. The only intimidation tactics were from them as well last night. As far as the NSFOC, they have been the only one telling you the facts. The blogs stating a 5 to 1 ratio was on the money. The north does not represent the district. There were more people from the north speaking on behave of the NSFOC than for the EOLA site. Stick that one where the sun don't shine sweetheart.

To Anonymous on April 13, 2008 10:37 PM--

I'm repeating my reply to you. I forgot to enter my name and it posted previously as by Anonymous.

I understand all the points you're making regarding the damage claims. I've heard them before, and I'm sure the Brody attorneys are aware of them, too. All the same, Brody is still suing for $40.2 million. I threw out the 25% scenerio as an "if" statement, meaning that our SB is so unprepared for a BB damage victory that "if" a jury awarded Brody even 1/4 of what they are asking, this would exceed the amount the SB has budgeted by 100%. A significant victory by BB could devastate our school district.

At the SB meeting last night, Alka T. admitted the final damage judgments from BB were an unknown the SD would just have to risk. She said it would take 1-3 years for the damage suit to move through the courts, and 204 couldn't wait for this to be resolved if a 3rd HS was to be built before all available land was gone.

I understand her point and appreciated her candidness in talking about this, but the argument is now moot. The SB voted 6-1 last night to buy AME's 84 acres, so we'll have to pay whatever a jury awards BB in the future.

As to the second part of your statement regarding the NSFOC, I've heard all this before, too. It's always surprised me how NSFOC supporters don't care about the amended complaint but anti-NSFOC folks have been having a field day with conspiracy theories. I do think you're wrong about there only being nine people eligible for damages. There are 10 plaintiffs listed on the amended lawsuit--the NSFOC and nine individuals. And the original and amended complaint both define who the "members" of the NSFOC are.

I have also been to their meetings and spoken to them and their attorney. Never once have they discussed pursuing monetary damages outside of attorney fees as part of their strategy. It has always seemed to me that to do so would betray the very people who support them, and the NSFOC would not get very far without supporters. So while it makes good anti-NSFOC press, I have never seen how it would benefit the NSFOC to do this.

Having said that, the SB buying the AME land last night has to change things for the NSFOC. I don't know what options there are for them at this point or if a damage complaint is their only recourse now. But if they did pursue damages, it wouldn't be based on having to send their kids to WV. My guess is it would be based on a loss of property values as a result of being redistricted away from NV. They could very well see a reduction in the value of their land as a result of the new boundaries, but I don't think the SB has a legal obligation to protect its residents property values when making decisions for the district.

We'll just have to wait and see.

By Tall Grass Snobs on April 15, 2008 11:47 AM
NSFOC(Tall Grass)You made complete fools of yourselves. You fought hard and wound up with nothing but animosity now and forever from this district. This will never be forgotten. Enjoy lower property values and the perception that you have created that Waubonsie is so undesirable. It's now even less desirable because of the fact that your snobby neighborhood will be going there. I am also sure that you will be welcomed with open arms. You made your bed, now sleep in it.
.....................
How about one big FU. After those comments I will move before I let my kids go to your selfproclaimed Craphole. Nobody in TG and WE said it was a bad school. We can see NV out our windows and have great pride a school our kids attend, unlike most of you who can't wait to exit WV. I hope you choke on the NSFOC's and BB's lawsuits, and the Dist. gets F'd after this inciteful blog. You wonder why this dist. isn't what it used to be. It's people like you.

GO NSFOC and others..,

The fights over baby. They are grading the land next week. Go find something constructive to do with your money. Maybe spend time with your kids instead of on the lunatic blogs.

Warning to SB and Turner Construction (general contractor for MV and also the new Yankees stadium).....Please make sure you provide heavy security around the stadium and the whole site in general during the building process. We don't want our rivals down south sneaking in a jersey and burying it somewhere in the stadium.

Thank you.

AND THE BIGGEST EVIDENCE THAT THE SB IS WRONG...

AND THE BIGGEST EVIDENCE THAT AME LAND IS WRONG...

(if voted on today, there would be no MVHS)
this is WHY the SB could never stop and have a vote.

this is why they must rush to build it.
this is why they must claim the urgency.

because the site and school is being built against the wishes of the voters.

that, no one can argue with.

NSFOC won the last battle with Midwest Gen dropping out

the SB won this battle by buying land from this church

If anyone thinks this is over they are wrong. Three lawsuits rage on. If anything this has only entrenched the North - South divide. People are PO-ed enough to fight on.

The school may even get built. But if the board ever changes hands, the school can just as easily be shut down and the building and land sold.

If the North thinks they can ram this down everyone's throats, the South feels equally strongly about rejecting it and eventually reversing course.

Bottom line - this school district is destroyed - by the School Board and its ham handed approach to things.

http://ipsdweb.ipsd.org/Land/Phase_1_Report_For_St_John_AME.pdf

Case closed.

To By What about my neighborhood school? on April 14, 2008 10:02 PM
"I find it interesting that many of you keep pointing out that Dr. D wants to put a high school right next to his neighborhood. For the record, his two daughters are already in high school and in no way would they benefit from the third high school other than alleviation of overcrowding. If I am correct, one daughter will have already graduated, and the other will be a junior or senior by the time the third high school opens (if it opens on schedule)."
__________________________________________________________________
It's not about his daughters. It's about his property value and his neighbors.

The lots and homes near the high wires in TG (about 2% of the neighborhood ) were sold for less. They even made a bunch of them smaller and have two car garages to appeal to those who wanted to pay alot less and still live in TG

Still don't get it doesn't matter if Dash's daughter will be graduated - his house property and his neighbors goes up

Dear, Saga continues on April 15, 2008 1:23 PM

I love when people on this blog act as if they're speaking for everyone.

I am from the South and I think the 3rd HS at Eola is a good idea.

GET IT?

So you can no longer say the South feels equally strongly about rejecting it. I think it's more like 200 people from the South. Not the ENTIRE South. And WE DON'T CARE IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT!!

Is that Right?

AME purchased the land from Midwest Generation/Comed for

$35,000 per acre in 2004. And now sell it to SD 204 for nearly

$244,000 per acre in 2008. Is that TRUE, AME?

I never thought church would take advantages of our communities and schools.

If this is true, wow, canNOT believe it!

Is that Right?

AME purchased the land from Midwest Generation/Comed for

$35,000 per acre in 2004. And now sell it to SD 204 for nearly

$244,000 per acre in 2008. Is that TRUE, AME?

I never thought church would take advantages of our communities and schools.

If this is true, wow, canNOT believe it!

By Mark on April 15, 2008 10:21 AM
Lotto winners on our dollars.

Brookdale and supporters of the SB should be ashamed of yourselves.

"We voted for a 3rd H.S." "not where it will be built" OK, here's a challenge to anyone who showed up at that meeting last night in support of the Metea being built?

1) How does it feel to have 5 parents for ever 1 who opposes you.
2) How does it feel to teach your kids that it's better to 'trick' and get what you want, then work for it.
3) Eola has no support- and it's being built based upon 6 people's desire, plus the superintendent who answers to them.
4) Entire families have been in turmoil, sick - literally sick.

Last night felt like an evening of humor.

Overcrowding? I didn't hear any parent moon about needing the school up by 09? Not one. Every supporter was some brookdale resident that wanted out of Waubansie.

In the end, you can't win. We all know when you lie, you have to keep lying to cover your tracks. And we all know that when you take the easy way out, something gives.

How did it feel to listen to all those toxic issues and want your kids to go there.

------------------------------------------------------
Do you even realize how stupid you sound? Hundreds upon hundreds of people have contacted the school board in support of the Eola site. But I guess I can't expect NSFOC supporters get there facts straight now.

And for the record.... the Eola site will be just as safe as Waubonsie so stop trying to play that card. The school board admitted last night that there are current schools on far worse of land than the Eola site is.

By MV Fan on April 15, 2008 12:58 PM
Warning to SB and Turner Construction (general contractor for MV and also the new Yankees stadium).....Please make sure you provide heavy security around the stadium and the whole site in general during the building process. We don't want our rivals down south sneaking in a jersey and burying it somewhere in the stadium.

Thank you.
________________________________

Why would anyone risk thier lives trying to bury a jersey on that site? They might hit one of the gas lines and blow themselves up.

Saga continues,

Your post seems as though this isn't about the school for the kids anymore but more like a personal vendetta or plot for revenge.Scary and ugly. Please don't forget that it was the nsfoc that filed a lawsuit against all of us based on LOCATION. Many nsfoc folks actually seemed surprised when thousands of people were upset with them for this action against us. Your anger will eat you alive. Move on and get help.This is not worth making your families and lives miserable. All kids will continue to receive outstanding educations in less crowded environments. This is a win for everyone...especially your kids.

No one makes "quick" decisions with their own money - I wonder if it's been fun for the district to pursue spending other people's money on a land purchase that is in Dashner's back yard! In an instant his property value goes up by 25% - no more toxic eyesore and now no church to have to share land with (what luck)! Does anyone else smell conflict or interest?!

By Crazy Bloggers on April 15, 2008 1:41 PM
Dear, Saga continues on April 15, 2008 1:23 PM

I love when people on this blog act as if they're speaking for everyone.

I am from the South and I think the 3rd HS at Eola is a good idea.

GET IT?

So you can no longer say the South feels equally strongly about rejecting it. I think it's more like 200 people from the South. Not the ENTIRE South. And WE DON'T CARE IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT!!

***** THANK YOU!!!!! *****

By TSC Reports for Eola on April 15, 2008 1:31 PM
http://ipsdweb.ipsd.org/Land/Phase_1_Report_For_St_John_AME.pdf

Case closed.

________________________

I just read through this report. It says NOTHING to quell my worries on the safety of the site.

Enough already!! There is a war in Iraq and genocide in Darfur, and yet we continue to boil over with anger over the site of high school #3 in our affluent little suburban corner of the world. Can we PLEASE regain a little perspective and try to take some positive steps here? This is all, quite frankly, a bit scary.

By jim on April 15, 2008 9:56 AM

We have been and will happily continue to attend WVHS. I just can't believe the people who are applauding the SB. My one and only concern is responsible spending of our tax dollars. Dr. D's quote " This would not happen without these great people" these great people are getting a 700% return on their 2004 purchase of the land. Anyone in Dist 204 experience a 700% return on real estate bought in 2004? Bradshaw quote " We're no strangers to the real estate market" The SB might not be a stranger to the real estate market, they have been complete suckers in the real estate market. They admitted they didn't get an appraisal on the property, are you kidding me? Propery less than a 1/4 mile away is going for less than 1/2 of what are real estate wizards are willing to pay the church. If the original contract with BB would have been negotiated as most real estate is(an option at a price) all this turmoil the SB has created would never have happend.

This SB needs to be accountable for their actions and it is up to all the citizens of 204 to expect that. They have acted irresponsible at almost every turn in this effort to build a 3rd school. The insanity has to stop.

I'm now considering supporting NSFOC
_________________________________________

Jim....You are so right. We still don't know what the damages will be and the SB is willing to pay an exorbidant amount for this land?And they tell us to trust them, that they know what they are doing!! Absolutely incredible. Who buys property without an appraisal? People who aren't spending their own money, that's who. Vickers was the only logical board member at that meeting. AME is just raping this district. Great people, huh...selflessly giving...give me a break!! They were just afraid that the SB was going to walk away from the rest of the land they had negotiated, and then no one would want their land and they would walk away from a 20 million dollar windfall.

The drama last night produced one heroine: Christine Vickers. She was the lone board member who saw reason to pause and in good conscience could not rubber stamp the only deal on the table and move forward. It takes moral fiber, integrity and courage to pause. The other elected board members were as plastic as bad or expired visa card.

You had to be there tonight, at the D204 school board meeting, to feel the personal insignificance or what it's like to feel invisible and ignored by the school board. After taking approximately 4 hours out of a busy evening schedule to sit or be heard by hundreds of neighbors, but the LEAST by your own elected school board, is outrageous. I don't think the school board would have noticed us if we were naked! It's a consistent witness of a sad comedy or errors of how the school board is reckless with our hard earned tax dollars. This is my 5Th consecutive school board meeting and their reaction is consistently arrogant towards the majority.

This attitude of arrogance, superiority and bureaucracy smells really bad. I'm convinced after attending these school board meetings that the public comment section of the agenda is merely a formality. ...I'm sorry but the train must go on... After hearing many individual pleas, it was maybe a few nanoseconds before Dr. Dash redirected all attention to plowing forward. He made no comment, not even to confirm or deny the accuracy of any public statements made - and neither did the board leadership. No compassion was displayed for the community they were elected to serve. He should be removed from office because he and Metzker have lead one of the best places for a family to live in to become one of the most divisive. Taxpayers and local and state officials should take notice and do something to intervene.

The sheer arrogance, ineptness and recklessness displayed by Dr. Dash and the majority of the school board needs now to be investigated. More than ever is it logical to suspect personal gains and agendas are involved. Only Christine Vickers, hearing enough from the public and lacking compelling evidence from her fellow board colleagues, displayed the courage and decided to take pause for good cause and not be a YES person.

Today we are a divided place to live where not too long ago we were voted as one of the best places for families in America. It's the school board which is causing the divisiveness among neighbors because they are cutting corners, misinforming the public and unwilling to be forthright with relevant and pertinent data for moving forward with hard earned tax dollars towards an unrealistic, costly and risky opening of August 2009.

The school board may be able to do what it wants but not necessarily as long as it wants. They have lost the ability to be effective because their pride and personal agendas have taken over. The need is for an immediate intervening mediator to help negotiate the best move forward plan which should also consider how to bring into harmony this once great and desirable to-live-in community. Public trust is broken.

In retrospect, I can't think of single fact or statement that could have been made by any attendee to cause Dr. Dash and Metzker to blink and think. Not a nanosecond was wasted, it seemed. Public trust is broken.

The irony: While Pastor Jesse Hawkins is no doubt thanking the Lord and also visualizing his walking of AME's 'unappraised' land profit straight to a nearby bank, it is during a time of unquestionable difficulty in the real estate market that such uncanny profit is made on seemingly questionable land. One might pause to think why has such visible land has been left undeveloped for so long when little available acreage remains in D204 land? Is it a precious find? No, it's questionable land which has contamination which needs remediation and therefore is less attractive unless, of course, you have a large pool of unending tax dollars to spend to remediate it!

God bless Pastor Jesse Hawkins and the prudent not-for-profit AME congregation for making their business transaction AND at the same time for protecting their flock from being exposed weekly to harmful soil which is highly unlikely to exist on their new land acquisition. Where do I get an application to become a member of this flock? I trust AME's business accumen and prudent leadership. Unfortunately, I do NOT trust the current D204 school board.

To TSC Reports for Eola on April 15, 2008 1:31 PM--

http://ipsdweb.ipsd.org/Land/Phase_1_Report_For_St_John_AME.pdf

Case closed?

You wish. This report states results for only 35 acres of the AME land. The SB purchased 84 acres--what about testing on the additional 49? This, too, was previously MWGen land.

The figures that the church purchased the land in Feb of 2004 for $35,000 per acre total of 2.9M and are now giving it away to help the children of 204 for a mere 19M is 100% TRUE! It is public record - check for yourselves at the county court house. How selfless of them - these wonderful people...I do hope they are able to find a new piece of land with the 17.1 million they will make on this deal! Oh, and its considered farm land so they have only paid about $2800 in taxes the entire time they have owned it! Wise up people you are getting hosed by your own elected officials no matter what your stance on the site this is STUPIDITY at best!

Excerpt from the Superintendent's 4/15/08 statement:
***St. John's decision to sell its entire parcel means construction can move
forward in a fiscally responsible manner with the school still scheduled to open
in August 2009. St. John's price of $225,000 per acre is significantly less than
the $518,250 price per acre for the Brach-Brodie land.***

True but significantly more than what the SB should pay, due process would have allowed for fiscally sound decision.

***We are excited for our students and all the opportunities to come for them as we
ease overcrowding at the middle and high schools and move forward with Metea
Valley High School.***

No, the SB is excited to have met a self imposed deadline that now has the potential to jeopardize the distrct for many years to come.

We, the community - both for and against, have not had the opportunity to speak as one, thus we have lost more than the SB & superintendent realizes.

For all to read and consider.

Adversity does not test character, it reveals it.

enough said.

Anonymous on April 15, 2008 12:28 PM

Clearly you were not at the meeting last night or you would have seen how respectful we were unlike Lisa Churchill who was up there spitting while she attacked verbally at those opposed to the Eola site; calling us racist and elitist. Funny how all you Eola supporters showed your true colors along with the SB except CV who had the balls to stand up to the bullies you all really are.

You would have seen that we are a very ethnically diverse group who believe this SB has run rough shot over us and are costing us millions of dollars. NSFOC has brought this to light and after last night many people have personally witnessed what the rest of us have been saying all along.

Bruce Glaw should be embarrassed of his actions. He lied and got caught with the FACTS to back it up. This is our SB, a bunch of liers and name callers just like you and your 30 white-shirt ladies.

People now understand that NSFOC are the ones bringing to light the FACTS backed up by sources that can be verified unlike you and the SB.

Based on last nights actions by you and the school board many who were on the fence before have already contacted NSFOC and want to know what they can do to help. Thanks for helping them see who the true villains are here - YOU and the SB.

NSFOC Supporter

Anonymous on April 15, 2008 12:43 PM
By Tall Grass Snobs on April 15, 2008 11:47 AM
NSFOC(Tall Grass)You made complete fools of yourselves. You fought hard and wound up with nothing but animosity now and forever from this district. This will never be forgotten. Enjoy lower property values and the perception that you have created that Waubonsie is so undesirable.......
****************************
Frankly, the only things that will not be forgotten by me and many are the handling of this referendum/3rd h.s. by administration and the SB over the last few years and, peole like you, who have to incite hate against people who won't blindly support everything they say and do. You obviously can't support anything you are saying or feeling with information or facts, or you wouldn't result to insults...unless you are simply the hater you are trying to make everyone else out to be.

Throughout this whole thing, the only people who have raised questions in my mind about WV being an undesirable place are exactly people like you, who seem to take some perverse joy in inflicting the school on people as if it's some kind of punishment. I don't get it. How does that support a school you are supposedly so endeared to? Have you ever really stopped to think about how awful it sounds? You are truly insulting the students and staff of that school. Also, if it is loved so much by its attendees, why is it mostly those who were slated to continue at WV when Metea was at BB that are now jumping up and down at the prospect of going to Metea at Eola? It certainly makes no logical sense, so instead of name calling, maybe you can shed some light on this phenomenon. If you love your school, shouldn't you want to stay? Or, does simply make one a racist/elitist, like the people at NV who love their school and want to stay? According to some logic I've seen out here, I guess it would. Maybe that explains why so many, like you, want to leave WV and then decide to indirectly slam it instead.

No matter what, my kids will be fine wherever they go to school, I have never said or thought otherwise. I have no problem saying it is my preference to go to NV because it is 1 mile from my house. I also have no problem saying I think the SB has been untruthful to the public (more confirmation of that just last night) and inept in its actions over the last few years regarding the referendum, and specifically the handling of BB. I will not be bullied by your hate.

While we wait for all of the dust to settle, please stop creating more animosity by referring to anyone or any organization as a bunch of fools. Over the last three years, just about all of us have been made one by some action or other of the SB. And if you don't feel that way yet, remember that three outstanding lawsuits make this very far from over - you just may be next.

If you were on the fence before - and last night made you upset - your only hope is to join NSFOC. Believe me...the school board is not listening to you as an individual. But NSFOC sure knows how to get under their skin!! I was on the fence before, afraid to get involved...but I did join and I now feel the company of hundreds of other supporters. They have a very strong foundation (better organized than I originally thought and what a group of professionals!) and will not stop moving ahead. It might not be today or tomorrow...but they will hold this school board - and this District - accountable one day. Join NSFOC...it's not over.

To CanNotBelieveIT on April 15, 2008 1:48 PM--

Yes, it's true. The school board did not have the land appraised prior to setting a price. They simply made AME an offer they couldn't refuse.

Hallelujah! God's will be done!

to: big picture issues

"No matter what, my kids will be fine wherever they go to school, I have never said or thought otherwise."

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

I believe you. Really, I do. Unfortunately, the people at NSFOC are happy to go to BB which is much farther away than NVHS for the bulk of their supporters, but are not happy to go to WVHS. What conclusion are we to draw from that?

TG was fine with the Eola site when first chosen in January. In fact they submitted boundary proposals to the SB to go along with the Eola purchase. (In those proposals, they kept themselves at NVHS and sent other, further neighborhoods to WVHS.)Never in their proposals or statements was there any concern about enviromental danger. Nowhere listed. Anywhere.

Their objection then was that they were a "walking" neighborhood.

Next, their boundary proposal is rejected and they are headed to WVHS. Suddenly, they are concerned about safety. They oppose the new site on environmental grounds. Never was it listed that they felt the price of Eola was not fair, or that AME was getting too much profit. They had no such concern before. Nowhere listed. Anywhere.

Now, the environmental issue has been removed. Suddenly, they are concerned about the profit being made by the AME and true value of the land and they are unhappy about it.

Now let us suppose that something happens to lower the net price of the land (which, by the way, I doubt). What will be the new issue that they latch on to?

To: Did Last Night Make You Upset on April 15, 2008 3:50 PM

"If you were on the fence before - and last night made you upset - your only hope is to join NSFOC. Believe me...the school board is not listening to you as an individual. But NSFOC sure knows how to get under their skin!! I was on the fence before, afraid to get involved...but I did join and I now feel the company of hundreds of other supporters. They have a very strong foundation (better organized than I originally thought and what a group of professionals!) and will not stop moving ahead. It might not be today or tomorrow...but they will hold this school board - and this District - accountable one day. Join NSFOC...it's not over."
____________________________

I have always treated everyone in the school district with respect and the views of the NSFOC, while I do disagree with them.

My question to you is what will more people and more money do for the NSFOC? Is this so they can file more lawsuits? So they can fund Mr. Collins and pay him even more? When does the madness end, when and only when the NSFOC gets their way? I'm not trying to start an arguement I just really am curious?

I support our SB 100% and could not be happier with their decision last night. The NSFOC makes me sick to my stomach - spoiled rotten "adults????" who cannot accept the fact that sometimes we cannot always get our way!! I would also like to add that NSFOC is a group that does not reflect ALL of TG and WE. I am not a homeowner in either subdivision, but know many families that live there. MANY of them are thorouly disgusted and embarrassed by the group and do not even want to tell people where they live!! I think NSFOC need to "call it a day" and close up shop!

Count me as a South Sider who is perfectly fine with the Eola site. The Saga continues, please stop speaking for me when you say that if "the North thinks they can ram this down everyone's throats, the South feels equally strongly about rejecting it and eventually reversing course".

My biggest problem with NSFOC is that they refuse to admit the primary issues which have driven them to sue the district.

1) Some of the membership does not like the boundaries.
2) Some of the membership does not want a third high school.
3) Some of the membership does want either.

Why is it so hard to simply come out and say that ?

"I dont like the boundaries!"
"I dont think we need a third high school!"

I would have a great deal more respect for your position if you did. I would disagree with it, but at least I would appreciate your honesty.

anybody up for it ?

When Midwest Gen backed out, I thought "wow this won't be good for ever getting a referendum passed in the future for anything at Metea-Brach Brodie. There is just too much division in this community." The referendum was only for the land and building. Now that the SB has decided on Eola(which I think they did vindictively-the costs of the 2 sites are pretty close without even the BB lawsuit and the damages are such a huge gamble for us, the taxpayer. But... the SB probably crossed their collective arms, except Vickers, and said "no one is going to tell us what to do!"), I wonder if there will ever be a referendum passed to equip Metea at Eola. I know I for one will NEVER approve another referendum this SB puts forth. Sad to say...it should be about the kids, but it's not. There is just too much division, and hate in this community and we can thank our SB. And it's not just the TG and WE people. Most of the people I've talked to at NV think this SB is a disaster. The SB put their egos above all else.

By a drowning man will grab anything that floats on April 15, 2008 4:22 PM
TG was fine with the Eola site when first chosen in January. In fact they submitted boundary proposals to the SB to go along with the Eola purchase. (In those proposals, they kept themselves at NVHS and sent other, further neighborhoods to WVHS.)Never in their proposals or statements was there any concern about enviromental danger. Nowhere listed. Anywhere.

Their objection then was that they were a "walking" neighborhood.

Next, their boundary proposal is rejected and they are headed to WVHS. Suddenly, they are concerned about safety. They oppose the new site on environmental grounds. Never was it listed that they felt the price of Eola was not fair, or that AME was getting too much profit. They had no such concern before. Nowhere listed. Anywhere.

Now, the environmental issue has been removed. Suddenly, they are concerned about the profit being made by the AME and true value of the land and they are unhappy about it.

Now let us suppose that something happens to lower the net price of the land (which, by the way, I doubt). What will be the new issue that they latch on to?
_________________________________

Shawn Collins was contacted well before the boundary proposal from TG was submitted to the administration. He was contacted before the site was selected.

Do not post false information. I've had enough of it posted by the district lately.

I hate to see AME being bashed for their windfall. This church did not set out to bilk us out of millions, it was caused by NSFOC. This would have never happened without their campaign to keep themselves out of WVHS. Personally I hope AME finds suitable land (did they hear Macom has some land available?)and flourish because they did a good thing for our community. I would also guess that as a church they will use some of their windfall for charitable causes, not use their "extra cash" to bully others.

I feel for those in Tall Grass who may not agree with NSFOC. I do believe your property values have gone down as a result of the south WV bashing over the years - I'm a believer what goes around come around. I also believe that your property values have decreased even further because of the association of NSFOC with TG. Who in this area wants to brag "I'm moving into Tall Grass!"

I hope everyone can get over this before walking in the doors of WV because my kids will be there waiting for you hoping for a positive HS experience.

To: anonymous 1 on April 15, 2008 4:41 PM

I wonder if there will ever be a referendum passed to equip Metea at Eola. I know I for one will NEVER approve another referendum this SB puts forth. Sad to say...it should be about the kids, but it's not. There is just too much division, and hate in this community and we can thank our SB.
___________________________________

If this is how you feel then you will only be hurting your children. 2 years ago they already warned us there would be another referendum in 2009. Should the public choose not to support that referendum it will hurt IPSD's operating budget and all the schools will suffer for it. Again, try to think about all the kids and not just your own.

To: My Biggest Problem 4:35 pm

WRONG!! What you don't seem to understand is that although our children are not slotted to go to the toxic Eola sight - WE are all financially responsible for a BAD outcome! Do you understand that??!! If it costs more to build the school than planned (due to it's obvious issues) WE ALL PAY! If one child becomes sick and comes down with a rare disorder and the parents of that child sue the DISTRICT to get healthcare and compensation - WE ALL PAY! The board is needlessly building another school on the other side of RR tracks from the majority of the 204 population - If one bus/ train accident occurs - WE WILL ALL PAY!! If gas prices continue to soar and we are bussing children so much farther to school - WE ALL PAY! If 204 sustains a black eye by any of the above misfortunes - WE ALL PAY! And that includes the property values of ALL THE HOMES IN 204 (not just mine)

Let's all say it at once - sue the NSFOC. For every day the construction is delayed past the mid April date that was set prior to the NSFOC and their illegal tactics; the nine owners of the NSFOC will be charged for the additional construction fees added because of the delay. The best defense is an offensive position at this juncture and we're ready to move forward here. Start drawing up the papers.

I was at the last 2 SB mtgs. Last week, a woman asked about the Build It Smart program, asking if in fact the district was giving up the opportunity for state funding by violating the safety design principles of the program. Immediately after she spoke, one of the SB members (CV I believe) asked about it, and Dr. Daeschner COMMITTED to providing information about the Build It Smart program, including how it applied to the Eola site.

Last night, the same woman got up during public comment and asked for Dr. Daeschner to provide the committed information.

(Crickets)

What a PERFECT opportunity for Dr. Daeschner to show that he's listening to the public! That he's interested in the safety of the children in his district! That he cares about his fiscal responsibility!

The posted information on the District website does NOT address the Build It Smart program, so Dr. Daeschner has still not honored the commitment he made.

Very disappointing.

And did anyone else notice that Dr. D. got REALLY choked up when stating that MVHS would be open by August 2009? It literally took him 10 seconds to choke out the utterance "2009." Bad timing, or guilty conscience?

Hey Anonymous on April 15, 2008 4:34 PM

yeah, keep the TG Riff Raff out of NVHS.

Hey, don't ever say the southside supports you. We don't. If getting rid of you eases the class size, we're all for it, bottom line, thats it. We don't care about TG or WE. We care about the high schools having less students than they currently have.

and with the way that you have acted, Good Riddens.

Add me to the list - I voted "yes" both times, but I will NEVER EVER vote for another referendum again, and neither will my spouse, nor two of my childrent who recently gained rights to vote. That's 4 NO votes if 204 ever needs more funds. And many many people I know will never vote "yes" again! Enjoy the new school!!

By anonymous on April 15, 2008 5:11 PM
To: My Biggest Problem 4:35 pm

WRONG!! What you don't seem to understand is that although our children are not slotted to go to the toxic Eola sight - WE are all financially responsible for a BAD outcome! Do you understand that??!! If it costs more to build the school than planned (due to it's obvious issues) WE ALL PAY! If one child becomes sick and comes down with a rare disorder and the parents of that child sue the DISTRICT to get healthcare and compensation - WE ALL PAY! The board is needlessly building another school on the other side of RR tracks from the majority of the 204 population - If one bus/ train accident occurs - WE WILL ALL PAY!! If gas prices continue to soar and we are bussing children so much farther to school - WE ALL PAY! If 204 sustains a black eye by any of the above misfortunes - WE ALL PAY! And that includes the property values of ALL THE HOMES IN 204 (not just mine)

sounds like you have financial issues. you're right we all pay. I can't pay all of it myself, but I can pay my fair share. If its an extra $100 a month. I can pay it. Whats the big deal. Give up cigarettes or coffee or a latte. These same people who are complaining are the same ones in overpriced homes and driving overpriced cars. See when I bought my house that was included in the budget. Taxes going UP! not down! Here's a suggestion, move in to your own little town where you can do whatever you want.

Dear Mr. Dash

If your out there reading these blogs - I want you to know that I blame you for most of this. You came on board 10 months ago, bought a house near the toxic sight and began scheming.

You are suppose to be a paid professional, yet you have been secretive with the very people you work for! If you had provided due diligence along the process - we would ALL UNDERSTAND why Eola is the best site for 204's 3rd highschool! But b/c you are looking out for your best interests you declare instead of involve, you dictate instead of communicate.

to: anonymous on April 15, 2008 5:11 PM

> like paranoia (there might be some rare organism that is after me and my kids)
> fits and tantrums (I want what I want and I don't care who I have to trample to get it)
> self pity (why does everyone hate us?)
> anger issues (see fits and tantrums above)
> hearing voices (he said, she said)
> schizophrenia (changing your platform with the same frequency as you change your clothes)
> baldness (from pulling your hair out)
> hoarseness (from screaming but nobody listening)
> carpal tunnel (from keeping your hand in a fist for 3 months)

I think these are pre-existing conditions for you and the rest of NSFOC. I don't think you have a leg to stand on...but you undoubtedly will try.

The property is farmland..get over the "contamination" BS. Rare disorder - you're out of order.

Can we all get a little bit of perspective on the issues we are dealing with here? North vs. South sub-division vs. sub-division, name calling, false information or no information. -- reading through these comments, I am not sure if I am reading about the Civil War or a kindergarten class – “Mommy mommy, Tall Grass hit me”, “Mommy mommy the school board started it first”, “ Brookdale is beating up White Eagle”. One comment suggested that Tall Grass was a bunch of whining babies – guess what you are all whining babies. As a community we need to grow up and deal with our differences intelligently and civilly. Would most of you who have commented let your children read this blog? I certainly would not. How about we show some real leadership and work things out like adults. I know we have it in us.

I believe that the NSFOC should take full responsibility for the SB having to buy the AME property.

and regarding not supporting a future referendum. I already have the flyers ready.

TALL GRASS AND WHITE EAGLE UNDER THE DISGUISE OF THE NSFOC IS TRYING TO BLOCK THE IPSD OPERATING BUDGET, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT TO GO TO WAUBONSIE TO EASE OVERCROWDING AT ALL OF THE HIGH SCHOOLS. THEY WANT TO RUIN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR EVERYONE. SHOW SUPPORT, GO OUT AND VOTE.

VOTE TO SHOW TALL GRASS AND WHITE EAGLE THAT THE IPSD IS NOT OWNED BY THEM.

I think it would piss off most of my neighbors here on the South side of Naperville. Now I have to save face and say I hated to put White Eagle on the flyer, but hey, I learned this tactic from the NSFOC. It adds that needed DRAMA!

We wouldn't have a problem getting it passed.

Someone needs to call MSNBC, CNN, etc., and let them know that the economy has taken a turn all because of IPSD. The gas prices, the foreclosures its all because of the school district.

You overpaid for your house, you idiot, depending on when you bought. Don't blame the school district for your bad investment.

By MR on April 15, 2008 5:08 PM
To: anonymous 1 on April 15, 2008 4:41 PM

I wonder if there will ever be a referendum passed to equip Metea at Eola. I know I for one will NEVER approve another referendum this SB puts forth. Sad to say...it should be about the kids, but it's not. There is just too much division, and hate in this community and we can thank our SB.
___________________________________

If this is how you feel then you will only be hurting your children. 2 years ago they already warned us there would be another referendum in 2009. Should the public choose not to support that referendum it will hurt IPSD's operating budget and all the schools will suffer for it. Again, try to think about all the kids and not just your own.
___________________________________

MR

That's a part of the reason I'm so upset. 14,000 votes in the referendum of 2006. And to add, the superintendent and SB all all over the place quoted as stating they HAD to promise a location and boundaries to secure a passage.

There were also 10,000 opposed in 2006.

We will not pass another referendum again in 204 for many years to come.

Whose fault is that? NSFOC? They are fighting to hold district leaders accountable.

Dear anonymous on April 15, 2008 5:11 PM

You must be nuts.

You say "If one bus/ train accident occurs - WE WILL ALL PAY!!" What, are you kidding? How is the SD responsible for that?

That's like saying if you get in an accident on your way to work your employer is at fault for having their office located where you have to drive to work.

Accept responsibility for something and grow up. Life is not without risk and the things you're stating are not even remotely attributable to anyone or anything other than "stuff happens" and you can't always look to blame someone else for it.

The site is safe. You know it and I know it. Stop blowing smoke about nothing.

By MR on April 15, 2008 5:08 PM
To: anonymous 1 on April 15, 2008 4:41 PM

I wonder if there will ever be a referendum passed to equip Metea at Eola. I know I for one will NEVER approve another referendum this SB puts forth. Sad to say...it should be about the kids, but it's not. There is just too much division, and hate in this community and we can thank our SB.
___________________________________

If this is how you feel then you will only be hurting your children. 2 years ago they already warned us there would be another referendum in 2009. Should the public choose not to support that referendum it will hurt IPSD's operating budget and all the schools will suffer for it. Again, try to think about all the kids and not just your own.

________________________________

MR

The district has come out and stated that they will not go out for another referendum in 2009. They have stated publically it will be moved to a later date in either 2010 or 2011.

I will not vote in favor of it. The past two referendum (2001 and 2006) have been full of mistruth.

TO Anonymous on April 15, 2008 4:54 PM

Oh, we have no doubt that "Shawn Collins was contacted well before the boundary proposal from TG was submitted to the administration.".

That's how we expect the self-absorbed and self-righteous to act. You all probably have him on retainer for life so that you can sue somebody at a moments notice if you don't get your way.

Go see Judge Judy. She'll beat you over the head with the truth you selfish, selfish NSFOC people. You're too blinded and indignant to see the what you've done and then you have the gaul to try to cast blame on others for what you (NSFOC) have created - NOT the SB or the SD.

To Staying at WVHS on April 15, 2008 5:03 PM--

I agree and disagree with your post. I agree that AME did not set out to bilk us out of millions, but I disagree that their windfall was caused by the NSFOC. It was caused by the SB.

The school board admitted last night to not having an appraisal of the AME land done prior to making their offer. Anything below $518k/acre looks like a bargain to the SB after the BB debaucle. My understanding was the school board offered AME $225k/acre. I'm pretty sure this was what the SB was offering when AME was only willing to sell 35 of its 84 acres.

But when MWGen pulled out, AME saw its sweet deal for making a whooping 650-700% profit circling the drain, and knew the only way to save it was to offer to sell all their land. The high price the SB offered definitely motivated AME to sell. AME was able to take the money and run and claim they were doing it for equality, justice and the children of 204. That truly is a once in a lifetime opportunity.

Rather than blaming every single problem this school distict has on the NSFOC, you may want to think about what the district has gained due to the NSFOC. If the NSFOC had not made such a stink, MWGen would have been happy to sell the peaker plant area to the SB. Metea would now be stuck with a fenced off, PCB infested peaker plant area and 4 other severely contaminated "hot spots" on its campus. Now we have an entire campus with no hot spots that is a pinch further from the RR tracks and power lines. Of course, the pipe problem still exists, but two out of three ain't bad.

So give credit where credit is due. You should be thanking the NSFOC, not blaming them.

To It only going to get worse for the NSFOC on April 15, 2008 5:19 PM:

Knock yourself out. When it comes time to pony up for the expenses, I'll bet you have a hard time finding volunteers. Lawsuits cost $$. Running your mouth is free.

To: You are nuts @ 6:30

Please check this out - It is heartbreaking and YES the school district was liable for this bus/train accident here in Illinois!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_River_Grove_level_crossing_accident#Litigation

If you look on the "Open Note” to the public on the NSFOC you will notice it says that the district never considered the church site before 72 hours ago. That just goes to show they have NOT a clue! The school district has approached them twice in the last 2-3 years. They WERE NOT ready to sell. This is not a new piece of land. This is a blessing. NSFOC, we wouldn’t be paying so much if it wasn’t for you. Instead of whining about the school board to close up and resign why don’t you get the hint and you guys fold up, give it up, and try to let the community repair the damage you have done.

to blame the nsfoc: go ahead and make your flyers up but before you do you had better get your facts straight , it is not tallgrass or white eagle who has sued the ipsd, it is not tallgrass or white eagle who does not want to go to wv,and it is not tallgrass or white eagle who is trying to ruin your school district! yes there are people here who are suing ipsd and yes there are those who oppose going to wv for their own reasons, but seeing as tallgrass alone has at least 1200 families here how dare you or anyone else choose to tell me what you think my opinion is.if there are twenty felons living in your subdivision does that make your entire subdivision felons? or if there are twenty people who win the nobel prize from your subdivision does that make your entire subdivision nobel prize winners? or are you so blinded by your hate of certain subdivisions you cant see this? all of you doing any subdivision bashing should be ashamed, to tell some one you paid to much idiot . or to say we dont want them at wv either, is this what your teaching the kids? I know its not what I teach my kids. go ahead keep bashing , keep fighting, because as far as I am concerned blame goes all ways. sb, nsfoc, anti-nsfoc, and the bloggers who probably never even gave tallgrass or the people who live in tallgrass a second thought before the referendum for the new school came up for vote YOU are the reason there is a huge divide in our community,as for me I am done, done with the blogs , the hate , all of it. you fight it out , spread your hate, do your name calling, what ever happens happens . wish you ALL well , tallgrass resident

ho hum on April 15, 2008 4:08 PM

I believe you. Really, I do. Unfortunately, the people at NSFOC are happy to go to BB which is much farther away than NVHS for the bulk of their supporters, but are not happy to go to WVHS. What conclusion are we to draw from that?

***********************
Thank you for believing me.
Can't speak for everyone, ho hum, but MV at BB is still closer than WV and quite frankly, much easier to get to. BB is not 5 miles north/west negotiating grade level RR track crossings, left turns and more stop lights. (East/west infrastructure over the tracks is honestly very poor south of Rt.34.) BB is a straight shot, 2.5 miles up Rt.59. It is also still very much in the vicinity of where I, and I imagine most people in this neck of the woods, have made our family "routines" - grocieries, dentists, doctors, hair cuts, restaurants, etc. I think that is very "normal" for people anywhere to do such things, not "elitist", as we have so many times been called. Also, this go around, Fry is the only school being split out of Scullen. I have not seen ANY neighborhood now, or in the past, happy or volunteering to go to schools farther away that generally complicate their lives and/or split their kids from their friends. It is illogical to think anyone would, right? So, I wish everyone would just take a step back and look at these very practical issues, take a walk in the shoes, and not be so quick to pass judgment and assume the worst.

To: Mean spirited and jealous bloggers - THIS IS NOT ABOUT NEQUA!

This law suit is not b/c we didn't get our way. REMEMBER the first time the boundaries were rewritten: Tall Grass and White Eagle were being sent to Metea! We were disappointed not to be going to NV. but it's about the same distance. So to all of you ignorant enough to think that this is about NV - it's not! We are fighting for BB so that our kids can go to MV not 8 and a half miles into another town!

I think a lot of you are just jealous - I hear a lot of "you overpaid for your house" and "you should just stop your whining" Is this how happy, healthy grownups talk and behave when hiding behind a computer screen?

We are doing this b/c it's the right thing to do!

To tallgrass 4/15 8:12 pm

Come on, you're not done with the blogs. You can't quit cold turkey. Take it slow - take a deep breath - just take a peek every now and then. You know you want too :) That's why you are reading this comment.

Great post tallgrass - I am going to do the same, enough of these hate blogs, enough of reading them, enough of prmoting this nonsense. There are 1200 families in Tall Grass, there are 850+ families in White Eagle, plus all the other families from Eagle Point, etc. who attend Fry and White Eagle Elementary. What do you haters know about all these families and people who come from every ethnic background, every race, and social and economic level ? You know absolutely nothing!! Many of these families and people put countless hours into NV, volunteering, cheering, and supporting the scholl. What is wrong with being proud of the great school that it is ? I am done with these blogs too!

to: big picture issues on April 15, 2008 8:18 PM

Actually according to Mapquest from TG it's more like 3.8 miles to BB and just about the same to WVHS. Nice try though.

"We are fighting for BB so that our kids can go to MV not 8 and a half miles into another town!"

Last time I checked 75th/Rt 59 is Aurora. Did Naperville annex this like they did Tallgrass which was Aurora? Tall GrassLet's not forget our roots.

I think a lot of you are just jealous - I hear a lot of "you overpaid for your house"

...Yeah, we're so jealous because we wanted to overpay for our house too. I'll have to ponder that one for a while. I just don't get you and your kind.

To anonymous on April 15, 2008 8:23 PM

I don't think "jealousy" is this issue here. (I always thought when someone accuses you of being jealous - it is usually a sign of insecurity on their part.) Anyways....I think anti-nsfoc are more disgusted with the "entitlement" attitude which then turns into the "whining". Oh, and 8-1/2 miles to another town? Oh, God forbid. Come on....are you for real?

For everyone who enjoyed the spectacle at the SB last night, come on down to Fry tomorrow where Curt Bradshaw will be getting crucified, if he has the cajones to show up.

By a drowning man will grab anything that floats on April 15, 2008 4:22 PM
TG was fine with the Eola site when first chosen in January. In fact they submitted boundary proposals to the SB to go along with the Eola purchase. (In those proposals, they kept themselves at NVHS and sent other, further neighborhoods to WVHS.)Never in their proposals or statements was there any concern about enviromental danger. Nowhere listed. Anywhere.

Their objection then was that they were a "walking" neighborhood.

Next, their boundary proposal is rejected and they are headed to WVHS. Suddenly, they are concerned about safety. They oppose the new site on environmental grounds. Never was it listed that they felt the price of Eola was not fair, or that AME was getting too much profit. They had no such concern before. Nowhere listed. Anywhere.

Now, the environmental issue has been removed. Suddenly, they are concerned about the profit being made by the AME and true value of the land and they are unhappy about it.

Now let us suppose that something happens to lower the net price of the land (which, by the way, I doubt). What will be the new issue that they latch on to?
........................................
Where have you been. Your chain of thought doesn't even make sense. We were all blind sided by the recent AME land deal just 72 hours ago. Safety was not an issue early on because the board did not disclose any information. It was up to the NSFOC to uncover the facts of this whole mess. Up until Monday night the SB didn't even acknowledge the Pipeline because it was not enviornmental. When we really started to think about what was happening to the entire district, Stopped, Thought, and Acted. Just as we would have expected the SB to do if they had any professionalism at all. They pricing could have been understood if it were a normal site without all the problems with the land. You are still stuck on stupid if you think the SB just are a bunch of brilliant land strategist. Do you really think they out smarted all of the legitamate developers in the area. No body was looking to buy Midwest Gens property. The church got taken for a ride and thought they would dump the dump. Wow did they. You have to give it to them. Very smart to "Save the Children from those other sites. Heaven help us if we spent top dollar for the top land in the center of the population base.

To big picture issues: "Can't speak for everyone, ho hum, but MV at BB is still closer than WV "

This is absolutely true for WE, but not necessarily true for Tall Grass, especially those on the west side of the development. Remember that the BB site is at the corner of Commons and 75th, not 59 and 75th and that WV is actually south of BB (most people aren't aware of this bizarre twist in our district's geography).

Here are some Tall Grass distance comparisons from Google Maps, starting points within Tall Grass taken from roughly the middle of the street to the destination via Google Maps shortest distance heading up Eola to WV rather than via 59 to Ogden:

Grassmere Rd to WV - 3.8 miles
Grassmere Rd to BB - 4.2 miles

Landsdown Ave to WV - 4.4 miles
Landsdown Ave to BB - 4.5 miles

Deering Bay to WV - 4.4 miles
Deering Bay to BB - 4.0 miles

Doing this exercise yourself may yield somewhat slightly different distances depending on your endpoints, but it'll only be differences measured in tenths of a mile. I don't feel that's something worth arguing over.

CONCLUSION: TG is equidistant to both BB and WV. WE is DEFINITELY closer to BB.

Lastly, whenever this northsider's family has activities at NV or Gregory, we always take the back way down Eola, work our way to 95th past Tall Grass, and then on to NV or Gregory. It's clearly the quickest in time and miles traveled each way as opposed to dealing with 59. It's also the logical route for a school bus to take.

To By Awards on 4/14 10:41pm
LOL very creative and funny!! It felt good to get a good chuckle in. Thanks for your kind words. Looks like I dont have much left to harp upon as it looks like the time to vote has passed :). WAIT!!! scratch that; I have my A/C project to repeat over and over on the blogs!!! GET READY FOR SOME SERIOUS A/C BLOGGING starting tomorrow!!
GF

I know many Tall Grass and White Eagle residents and I am proud to have them join the Waubonsie Warriors. We have issues as all schools do but two large communities with a track record of supporting their schools with volunteerism and generously contributing to the schools they attend will be a great asset to our HS. The academic performance of WE, Fry, Scullen and New Still will surely boost our schools scores and place us on a level playing field.

I am ashamed at the blogs from parents who state their kids will not welcome these kids into our community. I am ashamed of you and you should be ashamed of yourselves. Its hard to tell from these blogs how many of you hateful people are out there posting this trash but if you are leaving WV I am grateful for that since you are tarnishing the reputation of our fine school.

I for one will welcome our new families with open arms and show them the class that exists (or used to) at Waubonsie.

Finally, I do not favor lawsuits but do respect those who have fought for a cause they feel so passionately about and hope that your fight does not end when you join our Warrior family. We need to direct the pressure on the district to also invest in our school so that we have three state of the art schools. We have great academics but the environment needs their and our attention. Its clear the board is able to move quickly when they feel the passion to do so and so I am hoping they don't forget the Warriors since we need attention as well.

For all of you worried about the darn RR crossing stop. If you are worried about your child getting hurt on a bus then you need to think about your child....

1. Not playing football - HS kids have suffered everything from broken bones to paralysis playng this sport.
2. Don't let them on the gymnastic team or cheerleading team. Remember that poor Chinese girl who ended up paralyzed a couple of year ago.
3. Not running on the track team - have you seen the amount of deaths poll vaulters have from horrible head traumas or kids getting hit it the head with the discuss.
4. Not playing soccer - studies have shown that repeat pounding on the head with the ball has shown signs of the beginnings of brain damage in some kids.
5. Don't let the on the diving team - remember when Greg Louganis hit his head diving in the Olympics.
6. Don't let them wear their IPOD when crossing a 4 lane road, how many times have we've seen this.
7. Don't let them eat lunch at school, what if they start choking.
8. Don't let them use a cell phone, if you can't believe TSC on the Metea site how can you believe that cell phones are safe. The industry has been fighting that battle since the early '90s.
9. Don't even think of letting your teen drive. The risk of them getting in an accident and hurting themselves or someone else is extremely high. Ask your insurance agent they can tell you. Why do you think it's so damn expensive to insure them. Our HS parking lots are jammed packed. Those kids driving are a bigger risk to others than any school bus.
10. Do I need to go on....

The point here is that from the moment you step into the shower every morning you run the risk of getting hurt or possibly killed. That is how life is so if your constantly worried about something then keep your kid sheltered from life because just about anything can do us in.

And on that note time to hit they sack and thank God for a wonderful life, with a home for my family and most importantly a happy & healthy family at that. Lord knows their are many kids out there a heck of lot worse off than any of our kids. Pray for them they are ones who really need it.

By My biggest problem with NSFOC on April 15, 2008 4:35 PM
My biggest problem with NSFOC is that they refuse to admit the primary issues which have driven them to sue the district.

1) Some of the membership does not like the boundaries.
2) Some of the membership does not want a third high school.
3) Some of the membership does want either.

Why is it so hard to simply come out and say that ?

"I dont like the boundaries!"
"I dont think we need a third high school!"

I would have a great deal more respect for your position if you did. I would disagree with it, but at least I would appreciate your honesty.

anybody up for it ?
........................
Who was asking for your opinion anyway. Who cares what you think. The NSFOC is just a group of concerned parents who are fighting the battle with a SB out of control. This is what happens with no checks and balances in Government. They don't represent the D204 when they don't respect the parents in the district. Some 204 soccer mom stood up angerly and told every one that she and another lady collected over a thousand signatures about what was writen on the referendum. Do you agree that the referendum said "build a 3rd HS". That is just like the SB asking the Enviornmental experts did you find what you expected to find at this site. The answer is always yes to your BS question. If you asked the same people whether or not the referendum was accurately representing what the SB sold to the public or did the engineers find polution on the property the answer was NO and Yes. Instead of collecting names of soccer moms we showed up with over 500 bodies and could gain thousands of signatures of our memebers instantly. You proved only your bias. That is not a valid sample due to your flaw in the question. You hid the real issue of why you are being sued right now. Ignoring it or thinking you won is dumb. I will continue to support the NSFOC until our case is finished and we will not be bullied into dropping this inorder for this SB to continue screwing the good people of the district. Don't whine and Cry if any of the lawsuits are successful when your taxes go up and the school is not functional. I for one will never vote for another referendum in this district again. I would add that I will fight hard against any referendum that comes before us no matter what. This SB will not get anyother penny from me outside of this without a fight.

anonymous on April 15, 2008 8:23 PM

"We are fighting for BB so that our kids can go to MV not 8 and a half miles into another town!...We are doing this b/c it's the right thing to do! "

Anonymous, what do you expect us to take away from this post? You clearly don't want to go to WV because it's in Aurora. That's sad. And while it's refreshingly honest to hear someone finally admit that they don't want go to WV in Aurora, it's certainly an attitude that is going to draw some serious bashing.

I'll go easy on you this time around as I'm sure you're going to catch it from a lot of others. Oh...MV at BB is located in Aurora, you elitist. I apologize, I couldn't help myself.

By South Side Supporter of Eola on April 15, 2008 5:28 PM
Hey Anonymous on April 15, 2008 4:34 PM

yeah, keep the TG Riff Raff out of NVHS.

..........................
You are obviously not from our area. FU.

To: Jim J 4/15 9;08am

SORRY I missed you! I will catch you at the next SB. I have a few follow ups on my A/C project!!

Not sure if you were responding to Mark M's post or mine. It looked like you were responding to some of mine. I stayed through Action item F and left shortly after the break (around 10ish) as they were getting started with the technology action items. Place really emptied out about 9:30ish after the Metea action item was complete.

Yup totally know you are interested in HS 09 NOT for your personal reasons; but ONLY due to your opinion for the district at large. your kids will be out of the system. I did not mean to infer anything contrary to that by my comment of "smaller schools as quick as possible" Notice I did not say "over crowded" I said smaller. splitting hairs maybe, but it really is two different conversations in my opinion. If we want smaller schools at far less than capacity; that is a different conversation than "we need to allieviate overcrowding. one demands new schools. THe other has many options in which to choose from (expansion move to HS 10-12 and to Jr High 7-9 etc etc. Big difference in my opinion. All the info on the first 2 refs talked about overcrowding and trailers etc. not the need for multiple smaller schools to optimize learning experience. Intriguing comments from AK on this topic though at the meeting. Got me to thinking....

Hope all is well. Mr. Hand has got to get some pizza pretty soon (i missed dinner tonite)

I have read many times on these blogs that one of the complaints about the school board is that "they dont listen" or "They dont hear our concerns" or "they ignore us."

Can someone out there explain the difference between this and "they listen but they dont agree with us" or "they hear our concerns but believe that other factors outweigh them?"

How do you know which is which, since the end result is the same? i.e. you don't get what you want?

Make snide comments if you must, but I am seriously trying to understand your point of view and if perhaps I am missing something. Perhaps "Dollars and Sense" or Greg Forrest/Fast Times Matea Man can give a non-hysterical answer.

The Vast Majority of my neighborhood (ASHBURY) and all other southern neighborhoods fully support the Eola site. Period. This is NOT a north versus south issue; this is a NSFOC few versus ALL OTHERS issue.

To all the lovely ladies in WHITE SHIRTS from last night's school board meeting:
I need a cleaning lady on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays because we entertain nearly every weekend - when we are not at our second home. I live in Tall Grass. Must do windows and some laundry. Must clean up after dog. Please leave your flyers on our mailboxes the next time you are in our area cleaning our houses. Do not ring doorbells, please. We will call you if interested. We pay very well. We are equal opportunity employers. Much thanks.

to By anonymous on April 15, 2008 7:50 PM

Yes - the school district was responsible for part of the settlements due to this tragic accident - because their bus driver was at fault - the bus driver stopped the bus in the path of the train.

By You are nuts on April 15, 2008 6:30 PM
Dear anonymous on April 15, 2008 5:11 PM

You must be nuts.

You say "If one bus/ train accident occurs - WE WILL ALL PAY!!" What, are you kidding? How is the SD responsible for that?

That's like saying if you get in an accident on your way to work your employer is at fault for having their office located where you have to drive to work.

Accept responsibility for something and grow up. Life is not without risk and the things you're stating are not even remotely attributable to anyone or anything other than "stuff happens" and you can't always look to blame someone else for it.

The site is safe. You know it and I know it. Stop blowing smoke about nothing.
....................
Are you an idiot or are you just dumb. The difference is simple in one type of accident your children are either on a SCHOOL BUS or SCHOOL PROPERTY and the other I am in MY car. Anybody can see who is getting sued if their is an accident in a SCHOOL BUS or on SCHOOL PROPERTY. So no it is not the same. Your right, Life is not without risk and the probability of accidents just went up dramatically. Did you read the DOT report that was created during the first Boundary vote when TG and WE were originally going to be sent to WV? I bet not because the SB did not want it to be discussed because it did not suit their agenda. However, if you think that bussing two very large subdivisions through major intersections and accross an ever increasing train route is safer than what we deal with today, your crazy. No, I know that others are going to say, hey, we do that now and your not concerned. I would answer that it was not my fault that you accepted what the SB did to you and your children. Stand for something or fall for anything. The DOT told us that it would not recommend those changes and if there was state funding it would be pulled for the bussing if it caused problems. Well, looks like the call needs to go back into the DOT to look into this. I certainly do not take that Ahole Bradshaw's word for it.

For those who care, I have a few comments about the whole appraisal drama. First, per Daeschner's original land presentation to the board on January 22nd, we learned the following land values:

http://ipsdweb.ipsd.org/News.aspx?id=17332

Hamman, pristine farm land, mostly surrounded by residential, already annexed by Aurora but not annexed by IPSD, cooperative seller, price per acre of $155k.

Macom, former pristine land recently zoned residential, surrounded by residential and a future train station, already in the district and the city of Naperville, price per acre of $210k.

These land values were known to the board, along with the value of the Brach-Brodie piece at $527k/acre. However, Brach-Brodie isn't comparable because it has potential retail value that the other sites don't.

When a real estate appraiser prepares an appraisal, she uses 3-4 different methods, which I will briefly detail below.

The first method is to look at the last sale on the site, if it occurred in the last few years. In this case, there was a sale in 2004 for $6mn, according to Tim Waldorf's latest story. An appraiser would find how much commercial properties of this type have gone up (or down) over that period in the general Chicagoland area. In this case, I believe it is reasonable to say that prices rose maybe 25% in 2004, 25% in 2005, 0% in 2006 and have fallen about 10% in 2007 and 2008. Call the net increase 40%. The appraisal under this method would be about $8-9mn. Call it $9mn, just to be fair.

The second method of raw land appraisal is to compare it to comparables in the general area that have sold in the last year. I don't know about any actual sales in Naperville/Aurora, but we do know of two recent written offers to sell in a competitive bidding process. Those two offers are Hamman and Macom, which were priced at $155 and $210 per acre, as noted above. Macom is zoned residential, so it would be expected to have a significantly higher valuation. The Hamman land is probably pretty similar to Eola, except that it has less environmental issues. All three sites are close to railroad tracks and power lines. However, the tracks by Eola are near a busy junction, while the tracks near Macom and Hamman are on a line that is infrequently used -- at least for now. As we know, the Eola land is tangent to a former industrial site that needs at least some remediation. On the positive side for Eola, it is closer to the freeway and Dehl Road industrial businesses, which might make it more appealing to an industrial buyer. An appraiser looking at these comparables would probably value Eola roughly equivalent to Hamman. In that case, $155/acre * 83 acres = $12.8mn, but we'll call it $13mn.

The third method that appraisers use to value raw real estate is the income method, at least if the land is income producing. In this case, the land has been income producing because it has been a farm. I think it was a corn field, but someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that. I confess that I have no clue about farm lease rates. An appraiser would research them and would build a simple NPV model using market and forecast lease rates. I could easily believe that farm lease rates have doubled since 2004, because corn prices have skyrocketed. So let's just say that the 2004 sale of $6mn was the raw farm price for this land since it had no perceivable residential or retail value. Because corn prices have doubled or tripled, I'll give the benefit of the doubt and say that farm lease rates are up 250%, making the value under the income method something like $15mn.

Once the real estate appraiser has her value from the three methods, she averages them to come up with a final estimate. In this case, let's just say $9mn, $13mn and $15mn are our three values. The mathematical average works out to about $12mn. An appraiser has leeway to weight one method more than others in computing her average. If the use of the property were to be as a farm, I could see the appraiser giving the income method the most weight. But the school board isn't buying this land for a farm. With the recency of the bid process, I suspect an appraiser would weight that factor the heaviest and come back with a valuation range of something like $11-13mn.

I take Curt Bradshaw at his word when he says that the board members are experienced enough in real estate affairs to know what an appraisal would say without actually ordering one. Metzger is an attorney. Bradshaw and Glawe are bankers; they may have reviewed hundreds or even thousands of commercial real estate appraisals in their day jobs. However, I doubt the banks they work for would ever grant a loan without an appraisal. Securing an appraisal gives the buyer and her lender someone else to sue (along with the realtor and title insurer) in case there is some unknown problem with the property. The board chose to forego such assurance in this case.

An appraisal could have easily been ordered in October when the environmental testing was ordered. Even if it had been ordered after the original motion to purchase in January, the appraisal would be back by now.

To MR 4/15 10:48

HELLLO MR!!! great to hear from you!! I enjoyed our brief conversations post EOla action item (during my new Hot topic....A/C for all or A/C for none). I promise you I will beat this into the ground as much as I did on my "lets put in up for a vote" Unfortunatly the time for the confirmation vote has passed us by due to the SB decision last nite.

LOVED YOUR POST! Great stuff! Yes, we disagree on the Eola site, but thats nothing new. VERY intriguing idea about the permanent consultant!! Another blogger had an idea in a similiar train of thought about utilizing current public officials as part of the SB. Ie Mayor of Aurora, Mayor of Naperville, Transportation directors etc. etc. This would ensure geographic representation and coordinatoion of local government resources etc. I dove tailed on this. Moderator Jim asked us to develop a thread line and post it for his review. I sent some of my original thoughts to Democracy Advocate (he was able to find me and contact me directly and we exchanged personal email addresses). I think your idea should also be woven into it. Is that ok? I have not heard back from Democracy Advocate yet (we all have had some other stuff to pay attention to lately) so I dont know if he has submitted anything to Moderator Jim yet.

Baaaaaack the the A/C thing; yeah we totally agree on that. didnt sound like we had all of our ducks in a row on how the heck are we going to alert parents to a school closure due to HEAT! This is really scary. Not sure how the screens on some windows are going to help with buildings the size of schools. I WILL BE doing some more research on if A/C was on any previous refs and if not; WHY cant we utilize some of our 91M budget surplus to create equality for all kids/teachers/staff in ALL buildings; and if we cant use a little at the bottom of the 91M change Jar buried under crouse center; then we need to get a little referendum on tap in the near future for some A/C FOR ALL schools :)

Hope all is well.
GF

By Anonymous on April 15, 2008 7:58 PM
If you look on the "Open Note” to the public on the NSFOC you will notice it says that the district never considered the church site before 72 hours ago. That just goes to show they have NOT a clue! The school district has approached them twice in the last 2-3 years. They WERE NOT ready to sell. This is not a new piece of land. This is a blessing. NSFOC, we wouldn’t be paying so much if it wasn’t for you. Instead of whining about the school board to close up and resign why don’t you get the hint and you guys fold up, give it up, and try to let the community repair the damage you have done.
..............................................................

Now that you have stated that the DISTRICT will never forget what the NSFOC, TG, and WE have "Caused", I don't seem to care what happens to the rest of you. If it gets to rough I can always move. Until then I will fight with every penny. Who knows maybe someday the SB and the rest of the fine people of IPSD will learn not piss off the big dog. Maybe, your blog doesn't require all this venum but I feel like telling all of you to rought in HELL. By the way, it is several years till my kids are in your precious little HS system anyway so I have plenty of time to fight. If you don't like it get the F out of town. And WTF, do I look like the repair person to you? Only the community can heal the community. That's not my job and at this point, I don't see an end to the battle. Can't wait for the counter suit. No judge will hear that case. You can't sue someone for spite!

To "Matea either way" 4/15 3:25
Regarding your Quote:
We, the community - both for and against, have not had the opportunity to speak as one, thus we have lost more than the SB & superintendent realizes.
--------------------------------------------------PERFECT! BEAUTIFUL! nothing else need be said. This wraps it up and covers it.

To: By My biggest problem with NSFOC on 4/15 4:35 PM
Regarding your Quote:
"I would have a great deal more respect for your position if you did. I would disagree with it, but at least I would appreciate your honesty."

anybody up for it ?
--------------------------------------------------

Ok, I am up for it. I just sent an email letter to the School board on my position and how I feel. It is a long one (sorry).

To the Entire Board:

I wanted to thank you again for allowing me the opportunity to address the board at last night’s meeting. I also wanted to thank the board regarding the rhetoric levels and your call for the parents to “tone it down” and refrain from labels and “name calling” for lack of a better description. I have been highly critical of the recent decisions/direction the board has taken regarding the Eola site ever since the site switch was announced and the “new site” (Eola) was not treated like the BB site was in terms of voter evaluation of the site location. I would not be so outspoken if the 2nd referendum did not come with all the flyers, meetings, and related information “telling” voters where/when/how the new proposed school would be executed if “you” (the voters) approve the funds for this 3rd HS.

As I stated in my address to the board, I believe a precedent was set by the board during the 2nd referendum and a subsequent site switch post referendum to any other site; should be accompanied by the same level of voter/taxpayer participation as was allowed by the board for the BB location. Another benefit is that allowing the voters to “make the call” on the location removes any perception of “favoritism” whether real or imagined. I also believe that the majority of the district would be able to live with what the majority decided and the district could begin some kind of healing process post Metea. With your decision last night (6 to 1) to purchase Eola; we will never know if the true majority of the district was behind this new Eola site. It appears that unless something very unusual transpires in the next few weeks; the time for voting has ended.

I have been asking myself “where do we go from here” or more specifically “where do I go from here”? I have been very public about my call for “equality” and to treat Eola exactly as we did for BB with letters to the Editor and on the Blogs. I have also publicly stated that I will continue to support NSFOC both in spirit and financially until we have a confirmation vote on Eola. After that, I would heed the call of the majority (as should everyone else in my opinion). Since it appears the time for voting has ended, I have been asking myself should I let it go and allow (in my opinion) an injustice to continue unchallenged? As much as I want to let it go, I cannot. I do not teach my kids to “give up” rather I teach them to fight for what you believe in and to never give up at anything and above all else, give everything you do in life 100%. Therefore, I will continue to support NSFOC in their coming legal battle with our district until the very end and the doors open and welcome the first class at our new high school. A fool’s errand? Maybe. I am sure there are many that will think this and attempt to put labels on me. That is ok. I am doing what I feel is right until the very end.

That said, please don’t infer that my support for NSFOC means I do not support D204 and all the wonderful kids, teachers, and staff. I support education, full day Kindergarten (that was touchy for some was well) and am willing to spend whatever we need to (in a fiscally responsible manner) to ensure we have the best education system in all of Chicagoland. In my opinion; support for NSFOC and Support for D204 are NOT MUTUALLY exclusive as some have inferred.

To Ms. Vickers:

I wanted to thank you for initiating the “call to tone it down” at the meeting last night. This entire situation has gotten totally out of control. Any time we as a district feel the need to have off duty policemen at our public board meetings, I think we can all agree we are in deep trouble as a district.

Also, KUDOS to you for standing by your convictions! I know how difficult it is to be “out on an island” in comparison with your peer group regarding important issues. It is so much easier to “give in” and not have the dissenting voice be heard. From what I can ascertain, my thoughts regarding this 3rd HS most closely align with yours. If we want to have smaller High Schools (2500 instead of 4000) to hit the sweet spot of optimal learning; then tell the voters that and position it as such! If we want to solve over crowding in the common rooms and certain classrooms, that is a different discussion and we should also review expansion of existing facilities and a possible move to 7-9 Jr. Highs and 10-12 high schools in addition to the 3rd HS option. Know this; there are MANY folks who share your opinions. There are also many others in addition to the first group that want to see what location the majority of the district thinks is best for the 3rd HS for all of D204 . THANK YOU!!

To Ms. Clark:

While we are on opposite ends of the spectrum regarding the 3rd HS, I also wanted to thank you for your efforts to calm the rhetoric and for everyone to focus on the current speaker of record.

Additionally, I wanted to again thank you again personally for your probing questions and comments regarding Action item F “high temperatures in Elementary building Plan.” In regards to the A/C, I did hear the comment from one of the board members stating something to the effect of “we would need a referendum for that” This is not a quote by any means and I am not sure which gentleman brought it up. I am doing some more research on this topic and will follow up at a future board meeting. My current understanding is that capital funds are not allowed to be utilized for operating expenses. HOWEVER, operating funds can be used for capital projects in addition to normal operations. If this is accurate (again, I need to do a little research on the IPSD site and elsewhere if needed), then since we have a projected 91M budget surplus, we do have the means to bring AC to all buildings if the collective will of the board is in agreement with treating all teachers, staff, and students equally; regardless of which building they work/study in. There may be some reason that I am not aware of on why we would not want to break into the 91 million projected surplus. If there is, please let me know. If we need to add this A/C request to a future referendum, please let me know that as well and how I can help and where do I sign up to help with this process.

Thanks again

Greg Forrest

D 204 Parent/Taxpayer/Voter

Had the SB purchased the BB land, were you planning to write a story about what a huge windfall they were receiving, in the same manner that you've written about the profit that AME is receiving?

If you want to know why the land costs so much, it's partly to blame on the SB for the quick take proceedings. It's partly on the jury who came back with a price of $518,000 per acre. Once that happened, it distorted the asking price for every parcel of land in the area.

To Cleaning ladies from Brookdale?

Just to clarify, the wearing of white t-shirts by mostly residents of Oakhurst and Stonebridge, was done to respectfully show our support for Eola. Your very "mature" comments are exactly the reason the rest of Naperville is shaking their heads in disbelief. If you think the only supporters of Eola are Brookdale, you are gravely mistaken.

If you had tact, you and your group would realize that there is a mature way to present your case without conveying the feeling that your needs are more important than mine or without belittling others with differing opinions. You see, I grew up with money and was taught these lessons by well-bred parents. You obviously just earned your money last week, when your husband sold his garage.

You have lost our respect, by your actions, long ago and therefore no is listening to your tantrums anymore.

To:By The South Supports Eola on April 15, 2008 10:52 PM
The Vast Majority of my neighborhood (ASHBURY) and all other southern neighborhoods fully support the Eola site. Period. This is NOT a north versus south issue; this is a NSFOC few versus ALL OTHERS issue.
TG?WE/NSFOC I can't believe you're still crying out loud - you have not divided the community - you have put yourselves on a very lonely island. The majority wants this third high school bc we need it. Stop polluting district 204 and move if you must. We really are DONE with you all.

to Fast TImes/aka Greg Forrest

Mr. Forrest,

Thank you for your intelligent, thoughtful and respectful post. Although I disagree with your views regarding the third high school, I respect your reasoning and core values that drive your opinion. If we could all have the same approach as you I am certain we could resolve all of our differences in a respectful intelligent manner sans all the divisiveness that many in our district promote.

I feel your post should be used as the impetus for the difficult conversations that are before us.

Thank again.

TO: Google Maps Never Lies on April 15, 2008 10:11 PM
>>>CONCLUSION: TG is equidistant to both BB and WV. WE is DEFINITELY closer to BB.

TO: Check your odometer on April 15, 2008 9:13 PM
>>>Actually according to Mapquest from TG it's more like 3.8 miles to BB and just about the same to WVHS. Nice try though
******************

WE and TG are both huge subdivisions, so measurements are certainly going to vary - yes, by up to 2 miles. WE is definitely closer to both BB and WV because it is farther north than TG.

If you want to continue to argue exact mileage, ok, I will give you numbers based on exact addresses input to Mapquest, which gives distances based on main routes. Since no one has ever provided info on what routes Laidlaw used to make their calculations, I'll assume this is what is being used - not the back road, one lane traffic avoiders that do not have the infrastructure to support high traffic east/west over the RR tracks. I will assume main routes also, because these are the most direct, SAFEST routes, something the SB supposedly cares about.
TG (my house) to WV (main campus): 5.69 mi
TG (my house) to BB (intersection of 75th & Commons Dr): 3.7 mi

Just for fun, here's another mapquest for you:
TG (my house) to NV (main campus): 1.11 mi
Not sure yet how to mapquest the walking bridge over Rt.59........

So, for me anyway, BB is closer. There is no arguing about it. It was not the main point of my original blog anyway, (By big picture issues on April 15, 2008 3:45 PM) which was addressing the issue of name calling (elitist, racist, snob, etc) and asking why current attendees of WV seem to want to inflict attendance there as "punishment" to people of TG/WE, and why they can't seem to wait to leave a school they supposedly love so much. It doesn't make logical sense to me, so I was looking for an explanation. No one has addressed those issues, though. I guess it's because it's much easier to throw around Google map numbers and give advice about the best routes..........

I sincerely doubt anyone in TG actually wrote this but my comment would be the same to whomever wrote it, no matter where he/she lives: It's ridiculous. Please stop. This isn't helping anyone.

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

By Cleaning ladies who live in Brookdale? on April 15, 2008 10:52 PM
To all the lovely ladies in WHITE SHIRTS from last night's school board meeting:
I need a cleaning lady on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays because we entertain nearly every weekend - when we are not at our second home. I live in Tall Grass. Must do windows and some laundry. Must clean up after dog. Please leave your flyers on our mailboxes the next time you are in our area cleaning our houses. Do not ring doorbells, please. We will call you if interested. We pay very well. We are equal opportunity employers. Much thanks.

To DemocracyAdvocate on April 15, 2008 11:02 PM--

Wow, thanks for taking the time to put this post together. I really appreciate you passing on the information.

By a drowning man will grab anything that floats on April 15, 2008 4:22 PM
"TG was fine with the Eola site when first chosen in January. In fact they submitted boundary proposals to the SB to go along with the Eola purchase. (In those proposals, they kept themselves at NVHS and sent other, further neighborhoods to WVHS.)Never in their proposals or statements was there any concern about enviromental danger. Nowhere listed. Anywhere.

Their objection then was that they were a "walking" neighborhood.

Next, their boundary proposal is rejected and they are headed to WVHS. Suddenly, they are concerned about safety. They oppose the new site on environmental grounds. Never was it listed that they felt the price of Eola was not fair, or that AME was getting too much profit. They had no such concern before. Nowhere listed. Anywhere.

Now, the environmental issue has been removed. Suddenly, they are concerned about the profit being made by the AME and true value of the land and they are unhappy about it.

Now let us suppose that something happens to lower the net price of the land (which, by the way, I doubt). What will be the new issue that they latch on to?"

A Drowning Man...,
I absolutely agree. They had already contacted Mr. Collins as they were being assigned to MV. This was okay but when the decision was final and they would be going to WV the actual suit was filed. Everyone in the district knows this.
I actually agree with some of the financial questions these folks have(except attacking AME for having the nerve to make a profit on their land all the while being the very reason we had to go elsewhere in the first place) but the basis and core reason for their organizing and suing is horrific. As a district we take offense to their motives and thus cannot have any respect for their actions.
I continue to be amazed at the fact that I haven't heard ONE TallGrass resident speak out against the nsfoc. Are we to believe that everyone there supports the nine lawsuit filers?

anonymous 10:04
anonymous 10:26
anonymous 10:37
anonymous 10:55
anonymous 11:09pm
.and.
Earth to school board

Same hysterical tone. Same name calling. Same degree of actual thought and legitimate opinion buried in the vitriol-- if you can cut through the BS to find it. same shotgun approach to any and all who disagree.

The same person?

you be the judge.

To: tallgrass on April 15, 2008 8:12 PM

"it is not tallgrass or white eagle who has sued the ipsd, it is not tallgrass or white eagle who does not want to go to wv,and it is not tallgrass or white eagle who is trying to ruin your school district! yes there are people here who are suing ipsd and yes there are those who oppose going to wv for their own reasons"
_____________________________________

Let me clarify your words. It is the NSFOC and the individuals below who are suing the IPSD and all of us. Guess where the individuals below live? (gasp!!!) You guessed it..TG and WE!!!

NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS FOR OUR CHILDREN, JIM WALKER, ELISHA JOHNSON, DAN CARLSON, GINA CARLSON, KATHLEEN BRENNAN, BEV DUQUENNE, ERIN MILLINGTON and CHARLES MILLINGTON

(Sorry I had to post the names above it but it is public record so I'm allowed to)

By The South Supports Eola on April 15, 2008 10:52 PM

If you live in Ashbury, then you are uneffected no matter where Metea goes, BB or Eola. Metea could go on the moon and it wouldn't make a difference to your situation. But honestly ask yourself this question. If you lived in TG, would you support the Eola site and the changes it would bring to your neighborhood. No need to answer here, most people would say yes regardless just to save face. Just mull it over and answer it for yourself.

Re: Fast times at ridgemont high

To Greg Forrest sorry for calling you Mark(was trying to f/u on sales calls while blogging, so much for multi-tasking), your idea for a/c at the grade school level is a much needed project. This deserves renewed vigor on the part of parents,adm.,and the board. I will get in touch with moderator jim regarding your e-mail address. Thanks again for your courage at the meeting and your passionate, knowledgeable letter to our board members. Greg, it is folks like you that will bring the needed healing that we as a district family are in need of. I hope you will consider yourself a spokesman for this much needed cause.

To democracy/adv. Your insight on the land purchase at the north site was very informative as I too was concerned regarding the appraisal issue. The many other concerns that you have helped shed some very informative info. has not gone unnoticed by me Thanks Again.

To the folks that are very happy with the new eola location, I only hope that you have empathy "for those" that feel the bb location was not only a loss for them personally, but a loss for the district at large. As for me I personally will not be affected as my last child will stay at the same high school. The bb location however in my humble opinion was the best location for the third high school. When looking at location,boundaries (w/regard to middle school splits),& 2nd referendum expectations the bb property was the logical choice. It was a great disappointment that this property could not be obtained at a much more affordable price.

With the eola location now a reality I wish I could "jump for joy" at what should be a happy event. Instead the feelings are more like a drawn-out battle were a stalemate is final outcome. My thanks does go out to the teachers, staff, board, newspaper editor, and compassionate bloggers with regard to everyones valuable input.

The odds of getting hit by a train are 2 Billion to 1. Just thought I'd make people sleep better at night.

My Post

By Anonymous on April 15, 2008 7:58 PM
If you look on the "Open Note” to the public on the NSFOC you will notice it says that the district never considered the church site before 72 hours ago. That just goes to show they have NOT a clue! The school district has approached them twice in the last 2-3 years. They WERE NOT ready to sell. This is not a new piece of land. This is a blessing. NSFOC, we wouldn’t be paying so much if it wasn’t for you. Instead of whining about the school board to close up and resign why don’t you get the hint and you guys fold up, give it up, and try to let the community repair the damage you have done.
..............................................................
Post responding to my post by Anonymous 11:29
Now that you have stated that the DISTRICT will never forget what the NSFOC, TG, and WE have "Caused", I don't seem to care what happens to the rest of you. If it gets to rough I can always move. Until then I will fight with every penny. Who knows maybe someday the SB and the rest of the fine people of IPSD will learn not piss off the big dog. Maybe, your blog doesn't require all this venum but I feel like telling all of you to rought in HELL. By the way, it is several years till my kids are in your precious little HS system anyway so I have plenty of time to fight. If you don't like it get the F out of town. And WTF, do I look like the repair person to you? Only the community can heal the community. That's not my job and at this point, I don't see an end to the battle. Can't wait for the counter suit. No judge will hear that case. You can't sue someone for spite!

My response:
Not sure I deserved that, I never stated the district will never forget. Your response was mean and inappropriate.

Why is it public officials can never admit they are wrong, and SO many of us want to beatify them just for being public figures?

Newsflash! They ran for office because there was something in it for them! [Think the three tenets of Adam Smith]. They are not perfect, heroes, or saintly --- they are just your neighbors.

The SB needs to wake up, forget their considerable egos, and get their facts together.

They need to get a grasp on the lawsuits, rank & measure their probabilities and costs, and present it to the public (like a public company does every year). This is easily done and the result is a range of potential costs.

They need to relook the demographics and ensure the 3rd school is still needed.

They need to relook, based on the demographics, the size and nature of the school needed (if any).

All in all, they APPEAR to be so intent on steamrolling a few citizen's groups (those who voted against the school and those now suing them) that they are ignoring their responsibilities.

WAKE UP!

To Greg Forrest/Fast Times

You will continue to support NSFOC.

To what end? What is the goal? What is the desired outcome? Who will it benefit?

To stop construction after it starts? to increase costs of whatever school is built on whatever land? to delay the opening? what is the benefit from any of that?

For many, it will be simple vindictiveness. I suspect not so for you. So......why?

To teach a lesson? To whom? The SB? The SB are not a single entity. They are a group of individuals. And some may well be voted out in the next election, and more perhaps in the election that follows. Superintendents change. "Organizational memory" is a myth. It is based on the memories of the individuals involved in the organization. When the individuals change, the memory is lost.

Lets us imagine that the goal is to change the rules for future referendum votes. If rule changes have the effect of making referendums more difficult to pass, who benefits from that? Sometimes Greg, I believe people must be encouraged to look out for the greater good. To put the interest of the few aside for the benefit of most.

This doesnt mean they must be "tricked." And I do not think anyone was in this case. The SB had full intention to purchase BB. But it didnt work out as they hoped. However, they wrote the referendum to allow for that posibility. And now they are trying to look out for what they believe to be the best interests of the majority of the district. (Though even supporters and detractors should legitimately question how effective they are being in that endevour!)

So speaking pragmatically, in the real world where you and I both have to live, who benefits from continuing the fight?

To: Fast times/aka Greg Forrest on April 15, 2008 11:06 PM

I read your letter to the school board, Ms. Vickers and Ms. Clark. While we do disagree I always enjoy your posts and the curtious way in which you present your ideas and beliefs.

I agree let's get to the bottom of this A/C issue. Please let me know if you hear anything on the A/C issue from Ms. Clark.

I also remember reading the post regarding getting current public officials involved with the SB. While I think this is a wonderful idea I also have some reservations about this. You would hope that these individuals would be knowledgable about the IPSD issues but because they have their own responsibilities as a public offical I have to believe they aren't as up to date on the IPSD issues as they could be and leave that to the elected officials of the SB. While I am not discounting the idea I think the easier route short term would be to have the people in D204 rise up and say we do need a outside consultant to keep the SB accountable. Having said that I'm sure that your ideas of accountability would differ from mine giving our differences on the 3rd HS issue. However, I think as a district we realize something needs to be done. While I support the SB I hear many say they don't and will not until there is a change. Well what to does that mean? I fear that people have lost trust in the SB and because they have different ideas the SB does not have all the kids best interests in mind. I think the SB does but I hear many that don't. Therefore, this leads me to believe this is will be a long term problem not only for this SB but for all SB's to follow. I think we do need to push for a consultant short term that is unassociated with IPSD in any way and can be our expert and voice of reason for everyone in IPSD. I also think this is an issue that north and south, east and west, neighborhood vs. neighborhood will agree upon and maybe be part of the healing process. If the SB is threatened by this tough, let the parents rise up and over rule them. Finally, I'm not even sure if we could get something like this accomplished but I'd sure love to try.

I agree with you Civics. I believe that we should all start with the end in mind. The dogmatic rhetoric has lead to people taking sides in an all or nothing fashion. While I support the Eola site at this point, I do question the SB abilities and effectiveness in the process. Hindsight being 20/20, the manner in which they attempted to acquire the BB land was naïve and not well thought out. I point this out to illustrate that I am not a fan of our current administrations actions. However, I do question what the lawsuit will accomplish at this point. It seems to me that we have two sides fighting for the sake of fighting and not truly resolving the issues.

I also do not believe that the SB created the divisiveness in our district, we did. We may not be able to control every action of the SB on a day-to day basis – nor should we as they are our elected representation – but we can control how we react to any situation. I am enthusiastic that with your and Mr. Forrest’s comments that we may finally bring this issue to an intelligent level. I only hope that the rest of the district can join these efforts.

THIS POST IS FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT SAY YOU WILL NEVER SUPPORT ANOTHER REFERENDUM THAT THE SB PUTS TO A VOTE.

For the record I am not effected by the 3rd HS, but care deeply about our SD and our kids at all the schools. I have also always voted "yes" for referendums to support our SD. It's not about taxes to me it's about ALL our kids and their education!!

While I understand many people's frustration regarding the 3rd HS issue I think we should keep things seperate. Should a referendum come up for a vote I believe you have to look at that referendum on its merits and not tie it to the 3rd HS issue.

If you are frustrated by the SB and their actions fine I understand. However, if you choose not to support the IPSD regardless if it is the current SB or future SB you are only hurting the kids and all of our property values.

One of the main critera of how attractive an area is for resale value and to live, is based on how parents support the SB and how good the schools are. While all of our schools are very good, by not supporting referendums could have short and long term effects on the quality of our schools and effect teaching and learning.

Because people disagree with the SB does that mean they should hold the rest of IPSD responsible and hurt everyone including yourself and your kids?

To Civics at 9:57 am

Great post. Those who continue to say they will support the NSFOC, fight the school board and make life difficult for the new high school and all of 204 cannot see the forest for the trees. They are only hurting themselves and their children to continue this futile fight and in the end will continue to divide the district. While you may disagree with the board and the location of the new high school, at some point you must realize that you need to move on from this issue and do what you can, in a constructive way, to make 204 whole again and to make your child's school, whichever one it is, a better learning environment. Believe me, anger and threats of retribution will not help your child adjust to a new situation.

IT IS TG AND WE on April 16, 2008 9:38 AM

Clearly you did NOT do your homework. They do not live in TG and WE. Keep trying though you look hilarious.

By There is a funny smell in here at 9:26 am

You are exactly right! These posters are one and the same, originally known as Earth to SB. He has posted the most illogical, mean-spirited opinions of anyone on this board, lately resorting to using swear words to put down anyone who he does not agree with. I don't know how his posts continue to make it past the moderator as they are so hateful and demeaning to everyone on this board.

Wow, guess the white shirt moms are out again bashing everyone who doesn't agree with them. We already know you are the ones making things up we saw it first hand at the meeting. Lisa Churchill you are a disgusting person.

This is not about North and South this is about a School Board who never listens to the ones who voted them into office. Now, I didn't vote for them and will vote against them again. Thanks Michelle Davis for running I voted for you.

Now the NSFOC group that you want to bash so bad has brought many things to light that none of us would have ever questioned. Are school board flat out lied to us on Monday night and you still want to bash NSFOC? Those of you doing the bashing obviously weren't there to see the speakers of NSFOC talk and be respectful and ask the school board to slow down. People who weren't part of the NSFOC were also asking the school board to slow down. However, Mark Metzger's arrogance and Dr. Daeschner's arrogance did not listen to the taxpayers they had again voted on something that they wanted. At least, Vickers stood her ground and told us the truth and voted against the board. So now are you going to bash her too.

Pro-Eolaer's get a grip. It is the SCHOOL BOARD CAUSING THE ISSUES NO ONE ELSE!!

To Civics:

While site specific language was not included in the referendum you can admit that the campaign was was exclusively centered on the BB site. Additionally, all subsequent meetings leading up to the vote solicited the opinion(s) of all tax payers within 204. The referendum passed with the understanding that Metea would be built on BB. Now while I understand what precipitated the recent proceedings I cannot fathom how the SB & superintendent can make a unilateral decision knowing how personally and passionately the community took up their cause the first (or perhaps second) time through.

Again, I am unaffected by the decision however I share the feeling with those that oppose the Eola site as I feel as if I should have the same say on this site as I had with BB. Let the voters/taxpayers/stakeholders speak and let their will be done.

The SB, as stewards of the community, owe this to all of 204.

To The New Waubonsie will be BETTER than ever on April 15, 2008 10:23 PM--

Thank you for your optimistic outlook. I feel more welcome already!

Several of my friends and I have discussed this very thing. We're bummed Metea didn't pan out as planned, but if WV is our new HS, then fine. We plan to roll up our sleeves and be as supportive of Waubonsie as we would have Neuqua or Metea.

I'm passing your post on to others. I hope we meet more parents like you!

You and I may disagree on the Eola site (but I suspect not -- I actually dont care about the price and think BB is a better option). I think both can work however.

And we disagree on weather or not the SB is obligated (morally or legally) to request a new vote.

There will not be a vote. Contracts will be signed and money committed. Pre-construction work will begin at Eola before the end of April. Greg states in his various posts that he believes that battle is lost.

So my question to Greg (and others) is......where to from here? What is the pragmatic, tangible benefit to anyone of a continued fight ?

I really doesn't matter what any of us think about the Eola site (for or against) the SD is moving forward with it. So why do we continue to debate it?

Perhaps a new thread needs to be started.

It wasn't "campaigning" or bait and switch or anything of the sort. It was a true effort on the sb's part to try and secure the bb site. And bc of the greed of the BB estate, they priced themselves out of our range. Get over it and move on - this is benefiting no one and actually hurting yourselves and more importantly your families. It is what it is.

Hey NSFOC and your over priced mouth-piece Mr. Collins, Tall Grass and White Eagle.... don't go away mad.....just go away. The beauty of it was, you had 48 hours to pop your champagne corks when Midwest Generation bowed to the lobbyists & politicians, only to read the next day while you all were still hungover that the SB jammed in your rear end again. Shakespeare couldn't have written a better script himself for your supposed tragedy. I sit and read this crap while holding my sides in from laughter. It couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of people.

After 2009 when they will finally send your spoiled little brats back to Waubonsie, we at Neuqua will look forward to further embarrassing you on the athletic fields and as usual in the classroom. Good riddens to you all. Time to write another check to your boy for $204 yet? Lobby this NSFOC. Ba-bye now.

To: Eola Poor Choice on April 16, 2008 11:02 AM

"Those of you doing the bashing obviously weren't there to see the speakers of NSFOC talk and be respectful and ask the school board to slow down."
_____________________________________

I was there!! Would this be the same group that was respectful when they got up and cursed under their breath and some shouted things at the SB and kicked and punched doors open? Is this the group you're refering to as being respectful?

I agree some of the NSFOC/anti-Eola people were very respectful in addressing the SB. However, their actions later took away from their message. Ironically, this was the same way the same people acted when they couldn't stay at NVHS back in 2005-2006.

Does anyone have any unbiased (I know that's probably asking too much) insight on the potential damages costs at BB? While the SB understandibly would not want to put a number "out there" for the BB attorneys to jump on, I would hope that they have made an assessment. I don't understand some of NSFOC's numbers saying that it's potentially $60 million - I would think it would be around the $31 million jury decision less any proceeds they could get from selling the land now (which, while likely less valuable than its peak, should still be pretty valuable), but what do I know. Also, I would think that any rent that they are collecting for leasing it as farmland should reduce the damages as well.

Also, any chance the district has some sort of liability insurance policy that might cover some of this? This would obviously reduce the total cost of abandoning BB.

I'm concerned that SB officials' comments centering around "land" cost savings - I hope that we as taxpayers don't get hit with a huge bill for this in a few years. Note to "perspective" - you hit the nail on the head re: the SB's approach to trying to acquire BB - what a debacle. Unfortunately, that can't be undone and we have to move on and do what's best for the district. Here's hoping that extremes on both sides can get past their anger and work together as a community to do what's best for the district. Enough of this pettiness.

To: By Cleaning ladies who live in Brookdale? on April 15, 2008 10:52 PM
Are you kidding me? Did you really post this. My god, what is wrong with you who live in TG. You have no idea what real money is do you... without a doubt you've moved beyond tacky into trash.

By Anonymous on April 15, 2008 11:09 PM
By Anonymous on April 15, 2008 7:58 PM
If you look on the "Open Note” to the public on the NSFOC you will notice it says that the district never considered the church site before 72 hours ago. That just goes to show they have NOT a clue! The school district has approached them twice in the last 2-3 years. They WERE NOT ready to sell. This is not a new piece of land. This is a blessing. NSFOC, we wouldn’t be paying so much if it wasn’t for you. Instead of whining about the school board to close up and resign why don’t you get the hint and you guys fold up, give it up, and try to let the community repair the damage you have done.
..............................................................

"Now that you have stated that the DISTRICT will never forget what the NSFOC, TG, and WE have "Caused", I don't seem to care what happens to the rest of you. If it gets to rough I can always move. Until then I will fight with every penny. Who knows maybe someday the SB and the rest of the fine people of IPSD will learn not piss off the big dog. Maybe, your blog doesn't require all this venum but I feel like telling all of you to rought in HELL. By the way, it is several years till my kids are in your precious little HS system anyway so I have plenty of time to fight. If you don't like it get the F out of town. And WTF, do I look like the repair person to you? Only the community can heal the community. That's not my job and at this point, I don't see an end to the battle. Can't wait for the counter suit. No judge will hear that case. You can't sue someone for spite!"......
as posted by "anonymous" or ETSB to you and me.

Dimes to Donuts this guy doesn't even have kids (hope not for their sake) but IF he does I hope they don't go to the same school w/ my kids! Yikes!!!!

This blog is really entertaining. Most SUN blogs regarding our new school (which will be built, ha ha) usually are, but this one takes the cake.

I'll sum it up......as in up yours NSFOC!!!

And rightfully so.

Dear Anonymous on April 16, 2008 11:58 AM

Yo, what exactly are you fighting? Internal demons?

You SERIOUSLY need to take some meds dude.

Your little freak out hissy fit is HYSTERICAL!!! HA, HA, HA!!!!!!!

I don't understand how anyone can say they voted for a third high school on Brach Brodie. We didn't own that land yet! That is why the ballot read "Are you in favor of a third high school for the district..." (not a 3rd high school on BB). This is a very elementary concept yet people are SUING us over their inability to understand it. I heard several comments back then that if BB fell through (God forbid after all of the work done to obtain it)then they would unfortunately have to look at other properties. Were you only hearing what you wanted to hear?

To: By Eola Poor Choice on April 16, 2008 11:02 AM
You are the ones causing all the problems in this district and if you live in TG is seems TG has always been the problem. I have never attended a board meeting until the last 2. I voted for a 3rd HS and felt it is the SB job to choose the site and so on. Even though I was not happy about BB, thought it was too close to NV - I let the board members do their job - even though BB was not the right location. I've always liked Waubonsie and have had to listen all too many times from people in WE (thankfully, I don't know anyone from TG) say " oh, my, you're in Waubonsie district? What are you going to do when your children get to HS age?" Now, I am up for fighting for what's right. I am shocked by the law suit and the continued lies and propaganda that the TG people are spreading throughout the district. I truly believe with all my heart this is based on racial issues and/or socioeconomic and you all need to be put in your place. This is wrong what you've done to our community (to any community for that matter) and it sickens me. So, while my kids would rather keep the boundaries as they were (they will be separated from many of their friends with the new boundaries) I will stand up for what is right and that is to put an end to the underlying racism and classism that is the driving force behind the NSFOC. How ironic is it that an African Church held the key to make a statement on the racism and classism that drives this division in district 204.

To Civics and Anon 4/16 on 10:35am and perspective

you make some great points. Rather than try and tackle every tactical query (of which I am sure I dont have all the answers to,) I will attempt to summarize at a more strategic level in the humble mind of Fast times/Greg Forrest.

Yes, most of my goals and desired outcomes were wiped away on Monday when the board approved the land purchase (sans an appraisal).

hence my query to myself "where do I go from here?" I disagree with the process (and yes the decision the board made, but would like the voters to have same input as was allowed by the board on BB). SInce the process utilized is flawed (in my opinion) and we have no current recourse to correct the process, the only avenue left to challange an injustice (my opinion) is the lawsuit.

I guess what you are asking is; should I "let go" for the best intersts of the district and allow what I know to be an injustice (my opinion) go unchallenged from this point on? my answer is no, I'm sorry I cannot. Maybe if I were a better man and I could. I am not an overly religious man, but I have a feeling Jesus would be able to accomplish what you are asking me to do. I could however live with what the district as a whole decides for the betterment of the district (even if I disagree with the results). So, I cant get all the way there (where you want/wish me to go) but I am half way there.

So, it all boils down to when will I be able to "let go" when will it end for me personally? I think is your main question. It stated in my letter to the board that it will end for me when the doors open and the first class is welcomed into our new H.S. At that point, I then withdraw my support from the NSFOC and I move on from this topic.

Lastly, what is my end goal? it still is "put it up for a vote" (sorry last time I will beat this dog). if that delays construction, or costs us some more money, then so be it. I thought we just "saved" 8 million in the base price of the land cost? Knowing for sure (that Eola is the majority choice) is priceless (to me and many others) and in my opinion would help people have finality and possibly some healing. The only way I see this happening now, is though the lawsuit.

Luckly for me; I have a new project to keep me busy in the interim; My AC for all or AC for none project. I recieved some feedback from my note to the board already from Mr. Bradshaw and now understand the cost/scope and why we dont want to use any of the 91M.

For those of you saying you wont vote for another referendum until the board turns over; PLEASE "slow down, rethink and redo" Many refs would have absolutely nothinng to do with the 3rd HS (including any A/C ref that may come down the pike at some point in the future). All I ask is that you Please evaluate each ref individually. let's not cut off our nose to spite our face. THIS I KNOW FOR A FACT: THERE WILL BE A TIME TO VOTE YOUR FEELINGS ONCE AGAIN REGARDING the EOLA SITE: The place: voting booth. The time? APRIL 2009. I fully expect to see a bunch of candidates to pick from (or that is my hope at least).

and to answer your pending question civics: No I am not planning on running. maybe at some point in the future, but I think it best I cut my teeth on a PTA board and my A/C pet project for starters and work my way up to the "Big Time".

Any ideas? G. Forrest (officially got your name back now?), Jim Jandick, Dollars and Sense, Civics, Democracy Advocate...or any other civil bloggers out there........

Letter excerpt from Dr. Daeschner's most recent posting on IPSD website:
St. John's decision to sell its entire parcel means construction can move forward in a fiscally responsible manner with the school still scheduled to open in August 2009. St. John's price of $225,000 per acre is significantly less than the $518,250 price per acre for the Brach-Brodie land.

Some questions I have after reading this:

1. Does this purchase price per acre at Eola include the cost of wetlands mitigation?
2. With the change of the make-up of the land purchase, ie. no Midwest Gen land, how many acres of wetlands will have to be mitigated?
3. What is the estimate for, and what are estimation sources, for the cost of the wetland mitigation?
4. What are the cost consequences,if any, of insuring a piece of property that is designated as a "high consequence" area because of the three gas lines running directly through the property?
5. What is the consequence of building at Eola vis a vis the "Build Smart" program? Is the district losing out on state funding now that the site is solely AME land?

I have posed these questions to the Board. If there is significant cost associated with any, or all, of these issues, I believe they should be made known to the public as well. Per acre cost for the land in a sale transaction does not necessarily always represent the "true" cost of buying it. I don't think we can afford any further misleading information - on either side of the fence - in regard to cost for property chosen for the h.s. site.

Response record from SB to my questions (except C.Vickers) is not good, so does anyone have any ideas? Thanks.........

To The New Waubonsie will be BETTER than ever on April 15, 2008 10:23 PM--

AWESOME POST!! While my kids are tiny (I wont see you at the parents meetings and fundraisers until 2015 or so, I HOPE you are still involved and have kids in the school when my family and I arrive in WARRIORLAND!! Go Warriors!!

I think people are confusing the idea that they aren't being heard by the school board with the reality that they aren't getting their way. Just because the school board doesn't and didn't agree with your "reasoning" in regards to boundary selection doesn't mean you weren't heard.
I'm confident you were definitely heard. All of us heard you too.(p.s. I don't live in Brookdale).Ultimately they had to make hard decisions that somebody wasn't going to like because we all know you can't please everyone. The important things, like what the majority of the district voted for, was obtaining a new high school in order to benefit all of our kids from overcrowding in the two current high schools.
I voted for a third high that I thought my kids would never attend but would ultimately benefit from with smaller classrooms. I don't understand why someone would only vote yes if they thought it meant they would only go to a particular school albeit with the same offerrings, curriculum and basic proximity (a couple of miles is not a deal breaker for anyone ..we're talking 2 to 4 not 10 for Pete's sake)of the other schools.
I cannot understand how someone makes it "right in their mind" to sue over such a ridiculous principle.

The funny thing is, I think a lot of people would have supported people that chose to attend the meetings and honestly engage in the financial concerns in their investigative website had they not blatantly filed a lawsuit stating "Build on only BB or return the taxpayer's money". This solidified a stance that these folks didn't actually want to discuss the decisions and communicate options for the betterment of the district.

They wanted a school only if it was built in a certain location for their benefit. All of the other propaganda and obscure facts was just to disguise the true motive. They could have said build on land only deemed safe per stict guidelines or cease construction until after BB damages are disclosed or even file a motion for swift court action in regards to the BB situation given the time sensitive overcrowded situation our children are in currently.
This would have been viewed as looking out for our school district not attempting to work against it.Heck, why not use those Collins lawyer's fees to help represent us against the BB lawyers? I suspect lots of folks would have seen the merit in that and been more than happy to donate via paypal.

Unfortunately this lawsuit made it very clear to the rest of the district that these folks weren't interested in the best interests of anyone but themselves. The truth is they were heard and most of were disgusted by what they said.

To the blooger that posted the below blogs:

By Lobby this... on April 16, 2008 11:40 AM
Hey NSFOC and your over priced mouth-piece Mr. Collins, Tall Grass and White Eagle.... don't go away mad.....just go away. The beauty of it was, you had 48 hours to pop your champagne corks when Midwest Generation bowed to the lobbyists & politicians, only to read the next day while you all were still hungover that the SB jammed in your rear end again. Shakespeare couldn't have written a better script himself for your supposed tragedy. I sit and read this crap while holding my sides in from laughter. It couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of people.

After 2009 when they will finally send your spoiled little brats back to Waubonsie, we at Neuqua will look forward to further embarrassing you on the athletic fields and as usual in the classroom. Good riddens to you all. Time to write another check to your boy for $204 yet? Lobby this NSFOC. Ba-bye now.
----------------------------------------------------

This kind of stuff boils my blood and takes me to my base emotions of "fight or flight" And I never run...

If that is all we have left...to fight.... Then so be it. Civics/Jim J/MR; I'm sorry I am losing my composure here.

oh and to the blogger; please keep insulting everyone's "spoiled little brats" of who you do not agree with I Look forward to meeting up with you one day. I am a firm beliver in Karma, I hope you see some in the near future. I will hold the champagne bottle and it will be waiting for you :) Have a Bad Day

No Regards

Greg Forrest

Has anyone thought about the affects that the new school at Eola might bring to the whole community?
1)It was just reported on the school district website that 3 of the district's middle schools have earned state honors. Will this still be the case in years to come knowing that the feeders into these schools will be juggled? How do the existing teachers at the middle schools feel about the planned changes and will they stick around?
2)The 2 existing high schools are successful in partial part due to the freshman campus philosophy that the district has adopted. Will this change in philosophy affect Metea and Waubonsie at a future date? Still not convinced number-wise that no freshman campus at Waubonsie will work regardless of where the school is built.
3) We can expect school starting times to change with the opening of Metea on Eola. Assumption here is an attempt to alleviate traffic pattern problems with trying to get high schoolers travelling on Eola Rd to school early in the morning. How many working parents are prepared for this? Kindergarteners starting school potentially at 8am or earlier? Is it okay to have small children standing outside waiting for a bus in the dark in the winter months? What about the before and after school programs - looks like the YMCA is also affected since there may be no need for before-school care? That would be a big hit for them financially. High schools getting out later? What about kids that work after school and what about practice times for the athletes if school gets out later for them?
4) Traffic congestion can only be expected to increase along an already congested corridor. Since there is only one accessible route to the school at Eola, entry and exit along that road will be a nightmare. Does anyone know how hard it is to get to Granger during am and pm rush hours?

By Lobby this... on April 16, 2008 11:40 AM

Earth to SB, have you switched sides?

To: The New Waubonsie will be Better than EVER.

Thank you so much for this post. I am very optimistic about my kids attending WVHS starting in 2009 and have no ill feelings at all about attending WVHS. I am a White Eagle resident and am not a part of the lawsuit but I understand and sympathsize with those that filed it.

I agree that WVHS will continue to be a great school and I would hope become even better with the involvement of many fine parents that volunteer from White EAgle and Tall Grass.

While I am not upset in ANY WAY about my kids attending WVHS, I am upset with the process and with how the school board handled this entire 3rd high school situation. For that , I am upset and understand why many residents feel 'taken'.

I think our school board has treated residents unfairly and seem to have only cared about what residents had to say BEFORE they had our money. It has been very clear that they no longer give respect to citizens when they speak an opinion different from the boards.

Bruce Glawe admirably spoke out against the nasty emails he received regarding WVHS so why did no board member (except Chris Vickers) also speak out against the horrible unsubstantiated comments towards White Eagle and Tall Grass? The board should have said that no name calling should be tolerated and set a tone. They never did this and I have a problem with that.

I hope we can all move on and heal and most of all hope that our kids can continue to excel and make great new friends at their schools.

Even though I found "Lobby This" post kind of funny I feel I have to point out that WV and NV both equally excel at athletics and academics. The top 100 kids at both schools are identical in
test scores, GPA'S,awards, AP credits,etc. Both will send kids to Notre Dame, Northwestern, Michigan,U of I and many other top notch Universities in the fall(just the ones I know of personally so far).
Athletics are also very equal.This would only make sense as many of the kids from both schools played on travel teams together through the years. Both schools dominate in the UEC and have each taken their share of titles in all sports. Different years will yield different results but both are always competitive. I look forward to welcoming new parents and kids to our high school.You are in for a pleasant and rewarding experience.You will look back and wonder why you ever wanted it any other way. Truly!

to clarify I meant Lobby THis was "funny" as in odd not humorous..

To: By Lobby this... on April 16, 2008 11:40 AM

(Indirectly To: Greg Forrest on April 16, 2008 1:09 PM)

Lobby this...Your post also makes me sick, have some more class. While I am a "north" person I at least treat people with respect. Negative comments no matter who there are from or directed to hurt all of us in IPSD and make us all look bad. What was your kid beat up by a TG or WE student at NV? Did they get better grades then your kid? Come on grow up.

While I disagree with people on this blog I at least treat them with respect. I even went up and introduced myself to G. Forrrest at the Monday SB Meeting to tell him I respected his opinions and his blogs even though we may disagree. That is how we should be treating our fellow neighbors and fellow parents!!!
_______________________

G.Forrrest - I'm still with you on the A/C issue. Hope you also read my other blog regarding the consultant at MR on April 16, 2008 10:15 AM.

To: Get the facts straight 4/15 10:53 a.m.

THIS IS WHY IT IS CALLED AN ACCIDENT!! No one "plans" to have one, but it does happen. So to put yourself or a large group of school children in situations like this everyday, 2 times a day for 50 years - to save 2 million dollars, makes no sense at all whatsoever!

Bus drivers do have sick days and they do have "fill ins" who don't know the details of the routes".

How heartless of you not to understand this. My guess is that your kids won't ever be traveling over RR tracks to school - let alone twice a day, everyday for 4 years!

Shame on you! These lost lives are not lost in vain. History is here to teach us!

And those real estate wizards that you are defending thought they knew what BB was worth, but they were wrong. Now they are doing the same thing again by not appraising land before they buy it - I don't know anyone who can afford to do that - And you can't call that an accident.

To Opposed Northener at 1:12 pm

Traffic will increase at any location where the new high school is built and would have been just as bad, if not more so, at BB given it's proximity to all the retail in the already congested area. The problems you highlight would be the same if the school had been built at BB - the freshman center issue, congestion, possible later start times.

Any teacher who leaves because the feeder schools will change and Eola is the chosen site either found a better paying job somewhere else or just decided it was time to move on. I don't think we should anticipate any teacher leaving over a change in the high school location - and if they do, good riddance, they obviously would not have been part of the solution. All of our current middle schools will still be good, if not better, in my opinion.

To Greg Forrrest - I'll support your A/C initiative and you running for school board, even though we disagree on the Eola site.

Greg Forrest,

No need to appologize to me. Lobby This.... is a first class jackass and should be getting under EVERYONES skin. Expect to see him burning in the same "circle of hell" with ETSB when their time comes.

to Fast Times/aka Greg Forrest

I understand your position Greg. I have been in situations where I felt that was my only course of action. While I stated earlier that I think the acquisition process of the BB land was handled poorly, I also knew there was a good possibility going into this that the land would not be able to be acquired. I am for democracy (although my kids would probably disagree) in all situations, but I feel as though we had our chance when we voted for the referendum in 2006. We all knew we did not have ownership of the land and the referendum was not worded to be site specific. I also believe that the SB had every intent on obtaining the BB land through the condemnation process and that it was not an intentional bait and switch tactic. I try not to confuse incompetence with intent and effort. To that end, I am not asking for you to stop fighting, but rather to redirect your fight on the aspects of the third high school that can be enhanced for the betterment of the district. You have a tremendous amount of talent – my opinion – and we as a district could benefit from your constructive energy.

BTW – I support your position on the AC – let me know if I can help in anyway.

Also, I get your frustration with some of incredulous comments by the target bloggers. One piece of advice I was given as a young man – “never get into a battle of wits with unarmed men” I am sure you know you are better than that.

Kind regards

By Anonymous on April 16, 2008 12:49 PM
To The New Waubonsie will be BETTER than ever on April 15, 2008 10:23 PM--

AWESOME POST!! While my kids are tiny (I wont see you at the parents meetings and fundraisers until 2015 or so, I HOPE you are still involved and have kids in the school when my family and I arrive in WARRIORLAND!! Go Warriors!!
----------------------------------------------------
I take a bow to the blogger "new Waubonsie". KUDOS to you! I wish all parents everywhere were like you (inlcuding myself as I just lost it on my prior blog)

My oldest kid loved the field trip to the planetarium last year (havent seen it personally yet)

GO WARRIORS!! you just restored some of my faith and optimizum for our future as a district. .

A question no one seems to have answered. If the school is not open by Aug. 2009 is the referendum null and void?

To opposed Northerner

I read the email about the 3 award winning middle schools and felt both pride and sadness. We are being pulled from our wonderful Granger to be placed in the new middle school which will be the lowest performing MS in the district on day one with little hope of ever overcoming that stigma. Of course because I voiced my concerns I was labeled a clueless, racist, snob by MM.
If the SD/SB does not think it such an issue to have a label of high performing middle school then are we celebrating them?

Anyway, I am going to accept the decision that has been made. I plan to support my new middle school comparing it to my Granger experience every step of the way. It shouldn't be a problem if the school is equal to Granger in every way. If it isn't, I'll be there fighting for ALL of the kids that attend.

I will also be there to support our "New WV" and look forward to working with all the good, positive families who attend, no matter where they live.

To: The New Waubonsie will be Better than EVER.

Our family is very sentimental about leaving Waubonsie. It's been truly wonderful being part of the Warrior community. After reading your post, I'm now depressed about leaving.

It's a fantastic place.

Greg Forrest

Do not tell me that you simply cannot get mentally past the "injustice" of it all! That you MUST continue the fight! I think that is a cop-out!

I am vehemently opposed to NSFOC. Even though the ironic truth is I have a great deal of sympathy for what I believe to be one of their primary motivations: "I want to go to a closer school."

But they make MY blood boil. Why? Because I believe (my opinion) they are are disenguous. Their website is (in my opinion) full of lies and half truths. I do not respect their "intellectual honesty" which for me, is the only thing I have to make judgements with.

So what do you think my letter to the SB last week said? It said "Please buy BB. I think it is the best choice." I asked them to assure themselves that they did not become blinded by whatever emotions they might feel toward those opposed to the Eola site, or the representatives of the BB trust. I asked them to buy BB for my (typically) pragmatic reasons -- uncertainty over the impact and costs of the three pending lawsuits and therefore uncertainty over the true financial benefits -- if any -- of Eola. And an attempt to heal the division within the district.

Now I tell you it made me sick to think of the smug satisfaction that would result among the NSFOC if this had happened. (Or by some strange quirk still does happen.) And it makes me worry that it would encourage anyone who did not agree with the SB to sue.

But I would swallow hard, and live with it, so I sent my letter. Not because I am as generous and forgiving as Jesus, but because I am the ultimate pragmatist. And I think it would be the pragmatic solution.

So Greg. Think hard again. And tell me....Why keep fighting? Who benefits? And if the answer is "nobody," then....why are you doing it?

Please take a look at all of the people and reputations that were damaged by your organization

1. Tall Grass Community
2. White Eagle Community
3. Linda Holmes
4. Midwest Generation
5. Dist 204
6. City of Naperville
7. Future members of NSFOC (add name here)

I hope it was worth it

To MR:
Thanks!! yes I saw your reply. you make some very good points (similiar ones I made to Dem Adv). No one will want to "do more work" and familiarize themselves with our district needs as it would take away from their other responsibilities. Not sure if the current board would be super receptive to the addition of a permanent consultant that we pay (when they are volenteers). BUT! it never hurts to ask or pose the question :)

Its these ideas on a seperate thread to maybe us "armchair" warriors could flesh out; that Moderator Jim was intrigued by.

I didnt catch waht sub in the north you are from (not asking you to say it on the blog) I have a freind/co-worker who lives in harris farm and he keeps ribbing me to come over and have a beer to keep an eye on the Eola land with him on his porch :) I like excuses to drink beer!!

I am going to follow up at the board meeting at the end of April (possibly first one in May) on my AC project.

Lets keep in touch off the blogs:

MODERATOR JIM: I approve for you to share my email address with MR 4/16 1:43pm

Take care!!
GF

To-anonymous on April 16, 2008 1:44 PM

Stop the DRAMA. Any bus traveling up 59 has a better chance of being T-Boned by someone at 75th street than getting hit by a train enroute to the new HS.

Yes, accidents do happen. But, if you were truly as "scared" as you're blogs claim you are you'd never leave your house.

Enough already.

To perspective and the other anon bloggers who indicated support for A/C.

THANK YOU!! Much appreciated. Hopefully the "majority of the voters will agree with us" on a future referendum!!

To perspective: Thanks! Thats good advice to live by. Outside of work, family, and all the kiddie spring sports that are upon us: T ball, soccer etc; I plan on spending my D204 time on our little AC project!!! If something comes down the pike and NSFOC asks for my help with something in addition to my financial support; I will squeeze that in somewhere as well (until Metea opens up).

The board looked like they had a very good improvement process plan for WV and NV from the 4/14 meeting. unfortunately both are on academic watch for this school year. Jim J is looking into this as many schools unexpectedly got wacked with this. something may be amiss with the test or test process. It looks like their plan is well documented and key learnings could immiadiately be institued for the opening of Metea so our new school is way ahead of the game and can take advantage of the programs being worked out at WV and NV. This is good news.

Take care all
GF

I don't say much on these blogs, and when I do, it's usually some variation on the theme of "Please don't say mean things! Please don't bicker! Please be part of the solution!" I must say that I am cautiously optimistic about the future of our D204 community at this point. While the inevitable element of venom is still present--on both sides of this issue--I do see several bloggers on this post taking steps in attempting to heal the wounds that run deep. My own personal list of "Blogging All-Stars" includes:

*Greg Forrest
*Perspective
*Civics
*MR
*Warrior Pride
*Lily
*It doesn't matter what we think
*The Future?
*The New Waubonsie will be BETTER than ever

My most sincere thanks to you and others who are trying to put their personal feelings aside and our childen's best interest at the forefront of this issue. I love this school system; I taught in an IPSD elementary school for six years and am now a parent to two first graders in this district, so my #1 priority is all of our children as well. If someone wants to slam me for my Pollyanna outlook, so be it...guilty as charged. Cheers to the future!

By Anonymous on April 13, 2008 7:01 PM - the one looking for Greg whatshisname or NSFOC people to publicly display themselves.

Your low hypocritical IQ is starting to show:

You hide behind the label of anonymous and want everyone else to come out in the open so you can harass them.

You need to find something else to do other than blog and hide all day long. Go earn a living and then see how well you like to see your hard earned tax dollars go to waste.

To: By Lobby this:

You are a rude, ridiculous person. My kids are at Neuqua and thank God I don't know any idiots like you. All the kids will be fine. Hopefully we will have a new SB though. Also, if you got an education like 204 gives our kids, you would know it's "riddence not riddens" (second time you've spelled it wrong, so I guess it must not have been a typo).

To the New Waubonsie will be better:
You are the kind of parents we need in this district....what a kind and welcoming message to people who feel like they have been mistreated. Lobby this needs to hang out with you for a few etiquette lessons.

"In any bunch there are always going to be a few bad apples"

I just wanted to take the time to introduce myself. I am a male and live in the "north". I am also one of the "inside members" of the pro-Eola group. Please don't confuse this with the NSFOCfraud group although I am sure there is some overlap. I was also at the Monday SB meeting wearing a white shirt, in fact I have attended every SB meeting since 2005 when there have been issues regarding the 3rd HS. I also applauded some anti-Eola speakers on Monday to show them respect. I voted "yes" to the 2005 and 2006 referendum and do not live in a neighborhood that starts with the letter "B". I have also blogged dozens of times each week for the past two months using different names, although I will now stick with "MR".

I want everyone to know that I nor the people that I know that are part of the "pro-Eola insiders" have ever personally attacked someone in the blogs or in person. While we are happy regarding the SB decision it is also a bittersweet victory in that we realize we have a SD that is divided. Please also don't label one or a few comments by people as how a whole group feels. I have never done this with the NSFOC membership or supporters and I hope you don't do this with the pro-Eola supporters. Like I said above there are always a few bad apples in a bunch. I would also venture to say that many comments on these blogs are just to get a reaction out of people, nothing more.

I can personally tell you that I would have been ok if MVHS was at either site, Eola or BB. However, I feel I should be honest in my actions the past two months. When the lawsuit by the NSFOC was filed I changed my mind and didn't want the school to be built on the BB site. The NSFOC lawsuit upset me because it had to be BB or nothing. In my mind, I personally saw and felt that the SB did everything they could to get the BB property. I also didn't want to pay as much as the BB Trusts wanted at $500,000+ per acre. Lastly, I just wanted a 3rd HS no matter where it was. Those were the only reasons for my tireless efforts for the pro-Eola site. It was nothing more then that. It wasn't so I could have a HS closer or that I thought it might raise my property values. I personally don't care about my taxes when it comes to benefiting my childs education. I'm being honest and I hope those that are against the Eola site can respect my views and honesty and not insult me after they read this blog, but I'm sure some will. I would also venture to say my reasons are the reasons of many that have supported the Eola site, however, there is no way for me to know that for sure. Everyone on both sides of the HS issue has their own reasons and motivations for doing what they do.

I truly understand both sides of the HS issue and that is why I'm posting to say while you may think people in the "north" are celebrating and jumping for joy I think overall we would have been fine either way. We built our houses here or bought thinking we were going to go to WVHS and I know a lot of parents that are upset their kids won't be attending WV. Just like I can relate to those parents that thought their kids would always go to NV and then MV (at BB) only to be switched again to WV. I'd be mad as well!! Remember the majority of us in the "north" voted yes to the referendum (excpet for one neighborhood).

I just wanted to bring up these issues because I think all of us have more in common then we differ. We all love our neighborhoods, our community and our school district...even if we think they don't do what we feel is right. Do I think there are problems with the SB, YES. I'm sure my reasons are different then yours or anyone I ask no matter where they stand on the HS issue. Having said that, I still support them but I don't think they are perfect and some things need to change. (see my previous posts)

I've talked to many people that I don't agree with on the HS issue. I think maybe all of us should take the time to talk to each other, regardless if we agree with each other or not. Sadly, we can't wait for the SB to bring us all back together, we are going to have to do it on our own. Just Monday night I introduced myself to Greg Forrrrrest (aka Fast Times, aka "one r") and even though we differ on HS issues we found common ground on other issues and if given the task I think him and I could work well together.

I hope time does heal all wounds and one day we can get back us supporting our school district and all of the schools that make up our school district, no matter where they are or where we live. I will also miss WV and I wish all of the new kids and their parents the best of luck at WV. I hope I will still be welcomed back to watch games and support the Warriors and one of D204's schools.

I'd also like to say that I am still honored to be fellow parents with all of you in D204 even if sometimes we disagree.

By Anonymous on April 13, 2008 7:01 PM - the one looking for Greg whatshisname or NSFOC people to publicly display themselves.

Your low hypocritical IQ is starting to show:

You hide behind the label of anonymous and want everyone else to come out in the open so you can harass them.

You need to find something else to do other than blog and hide all day long. Go earn a living and then see how well you like to see your hard earned tax dollars go to waste.

To Anonymous on April 16, 2008 2:08 PM--

No.

to MR

EVERYTHING you said but insert my name!

Except I live in the south and am not impacted either way.

And I am probably more blunt, and less diplomatic than you!

Thanks for a great post.

Did anyone else notice that the price that the AME church is getting for the land, $225,000 is the exact same price as the district offered to Broch-Brodie? Can you blame AME? They knew what the district was willing to pay to get the land.

By anonymous on April 15, 2008 5:11 PM
To: My Biggest Problem 4:35 pm

WRONG!! What you don't seem to understand is that although our children are not slotted to go to the toxic Eola sight - WE are all financially responsible for a BAD outcome! Do you understand that??!! If it costs more to build the school than planned (due to it's obvious issues) WE ALL PAY! If one child becomes sick and comes down with a rare disorder and the parents of that child sue the DISTRICT to get healthcare and compensation - WE ALL PAY! The board is needlessly building another school on the other side of RR tracks from the majority of the 204 population - If one bus/ train accident occurs - WE WILL ALL PAY!! If gas prices continue to soar and we are bussing children so much farther to school - WE ALL PAY! If 204 sustains a black eye by any of the above misfortunes - WE ALL PAY! And that includes the property values of ALL THE HOMES IN 204 (not just mine)

-------------------------------------------------------
I have been against NSFOC since the beginning because I have heard all of the hate talk coming from their mouths. Clearly you are right there with them. These people to the north are our neighbors, freinds, and collegues. How dare you presume to say that they are on the "other side of the railroad tracks". At this point I think they have more dignity and respect.

Greg Forrest

I took some time a few days ago to look at the two high school report cards to understand this 'academic watch' issue.

Near as I can tell, it is a categorization which rates "Adequate yearly Progress" which is part of "No Child Left Behind." It is based on state achievement tests like the Prarie State Achievement Examinations PSAE, and probably the ISATs. It is measured separately for various groups, White, African American, Latino, Special Needs. In order to get an overall 'passing' score, the school must have a sufficiently high % of students taking the tests, and must get a 'passing' score in each of the sub-categories.

NVHS has 'passing' scores in all but the 'special needs' category. WVHS has passing scores for White, but not African American, Latino, or special needs.

So since each school has at least one sub-category of students who are not making "adequate Yearly Progress" the entire school is placed on "academic watch" status at a federal level.

You can figure this all out for yourself by spending a few minutes reading the school report cards on the district website. The AYP measures are listed toward the end of the reports and you can sort of figure out what they mean by reading the footnotes among other things.

Hope that helps. Anyone welcome to correct me if any of this info is wrong.

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) :)

By Cleaning ladies who live in Brookdale? on April 15, 2008 10:52 PM
To all the lovely ladies in WHITE SHIRTS from last night's school board meeting:
I need a cleaning lady on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays because we entertain nearly every weekend - when we are not at our second home. I live in Tall Grass. Must do windows and some laundry. Must clean up after dog. Please leave your flyers on our mailboxes the next time you are in our area cleaning our houses. Do not ring doorbells, please. We will call you if interested. We pay very well. We are equal opportunity employers. Much thanks.

--------------------------------------------
You are an arrogant bastard!!

I can not beleive you would be so cruel to your own neighbors.

And for the record...... No one wants to go near your filthy house!!! Clean your own damn toliet!!

Thank you!!!!

It is a breath of fresh air to read your post. My child will be attending WV at some point in the future (based on the decision this Monday), and I would like to thank you for your warm and welcoming words. I caught myself getting more and more negative as this saga unfolded, and as the level of negativity and bashing increased on these blogs, in press and in person towards subdivisions, including ours. And, your post, in the midst of this negativit, brought tears to my eyes (and I am not a sentimental person most of the times).

Thank you and we are looking forward to meeting more parents like you.

A new WV family.

Regarding parents who think their kids wont go to MVHS. They will for sports and other events. They may if WVHS is closed. They will as the enrollment shrinks and more kids need to be bused to fill out the new building. Oh, they most definitely will. And they will pay the damages, and the wetlands cost, and the lawsuits from perceived illnesses, and God help us all...a pipeline incident or derailment. All 204 taxpayers are going to pay eventually.

As Frank Sinatra said in a famous interview:

"If you don't know the guy on the other side of the world, love him anyway because he's just like you. He has the same dreams, the same hopes and fears. It's one world, pal. We're all neighbors."

To MR: Rock and roll!! Loved your latest post!!

To Civics: I understand where you are coming from. Yes you are the ULTIMATE PRAGMATIST. From a practical risk adjusted stand point the BB location would be the "safe play" However, you have to realize that most folks dont coldly calculate every tactical detail AND YES most actually do inject some of their own biases and "wants" into their decision making process and into their votes. This is why I wanted to let everyone speak their piece on the location switch (top 3 choices from the SB meeting if you were there and heard me during my 3 minutes). Given all that has happened, I realize there would be many that used to support BB but would not due to the lawsuit or perceived greed from BB trusts. Others that did not the first time, but do now, others still that feel another site is better and other still that dont really care about the potential damgages we could owe BB and want Eola hell or high water or some other site they think is better for the district. I could go on and on and on... Is this the best process? HELL NO! is it the best we could do given all the gaffes and bad history on this issue? my opinion is yes. If we knew what the majority wanted (regardless of WHY they wanted it), then we could move forward with the results and get back to some kind of normalcy.

As for your concern of "what is to gain" why continue? you keep asking the question: if you think my first answer was a cop out, then let me phrase it another way in what is going through my mind Maybe nothing to gain maybe everything to gain. The point is its too early for me to give up. I liken it to way back in the day and a group of us played on a travel baseball team (all 14 and 15 year olds in an experiment for top young players) and we played in the B division of the U-19 americn legion against 18/19 year olds. This is 8th and 9th graders playing against Juniors Seniors and 1st year college players that decided to play back home in the summer and not in the college summer leagues.

We got our a** kicked most of the time. Summer league, Pro rules, no 10 run rule. I was a pitcher. when I was getting lit up and we were losing 12 to nothing; did I walk away cuz the pragmatic thing to do was realize the game cannot be won and its pointmess to continue? NO, I did my best until I was either pulled by the coach or I got the last out and the game was done.

Any you know what? A couple games we actually came back and WON when it looked like there was no hope and any sane person would have packed it up and called it a day. We won 3 games all summer (I remember each and every one) we lost somewhere around 60 games. 3 and 60?.

3 years later. Same team in the A (top division) went 91 and 28 and placed third in the American Legion world series in Middletown, CT. 1988 Yakima Pepsi Beatles in the State of Washington.

So, for me the time has not arrived to give up. Does this mean I am going to spend my every waking hour fixiated on anything and everything that drives the lawuist forward? Not by a long shot. I will be spending my D204 free time on the AC project I mentioned in my 3 minutes to the board.

to: How dare you!!! on April 16, 2008 4:23 PM

Gee, haven't people been living in and around the Eola site for years? I wonder how many people have become "sick or come down with a rare disorder" as a result of their living in close proximity to the Eola site.

I vote that you can look into it to allay your misguided fears.

The site is safe, but I know you need "proof" so begin at the source of your fears...the ooooh so scary farmland along Eola road.

Most of us grew up in homes with lead paint, radon gas, asbestos, swam in rivers that were likely polluted with something, ate paste, chewed on pencils, and rode in cars that used leaded gas.

Somehow we managed to survive these terrible chemicals that were put directly in contact with us.

And your fearful of your kid coming in contact with what?....the land was F-A-R-M-L-A-N-D and your kid probably won't set foot on the soil anyway. End of story.

Did anyone notice NSFOC blocked out all of the plantiff names on their new amended complaint? So much for standing up for what you beleive in.

Hey, Fast--

Not to worry that you lost it with Lobby This. At least you save it for the truly deserving.

But that blog did raise an interesting thought with the words "we at Neuqua will look forward to further embarrassing you on the athletic fields and as usual in the classroom." I don't know about sports, but I think Neuqua will experience a significant 'brain drain' if TG, WE, et al., switch to Waubonsie. Waubonsie has always been a few percentage points behind NV in academic test scores. It varies from year to year, but I think it's usually in the 1-4% range. This shouldn't be too wide of a ditch to jump for our students.

Wouldn't it be interesting, and a hoot at that, if WV surpassed NV in academics once the boundaries changed? It could happen.

MR on April 16, 2008 3:18 PM

Thanks for your post. I am a supporter of NSFOC and continue to be. I am with NSFOC because I feel my vote was negated and it is unconstitutional. If the school board wanted to switch sites they should NEVER have marketed BB. My vote would have been different. I believe they led people to BB to get a YES vote only to get the money. It is wrong in my mind and I too feel the School Board needs to be replaced; they are a disgrace to D204. I should also note that I do not have kids that are impacted by this.

I still also firmly believe the School Board specifically Mark Metzger and Dr. Daeschner were the ones who caused this divide. NSFOC has not even been around long enough to do this. This division started with a condemnation lawsuit and an arrogant SB.

BB would have never been out of reach if it wasn't for the arrogance of the SB. Now we are faced with millions of dollars in damages that everyone seems to want to forget because of our lieing school board.

3 lawsuits would be dropped along with damages had they returned to negotiate a fair deal without a quick take action.

On a side note, if I was in AME's position I too would have taken us for everything. The SB should have looked at everything all properties again and they didn't and now they are over paying for it with my tax dollars.

To: SC

Thank you. I am honored to be a part of the optimistic group!

We need to move forward and embrace our changes for the sake of our kids!

From: a new White Eagle Warrior!

p.s. But, I still think our school board royally screwed up during the process and left many feeling burned. I understand that. That is a separate issue from WV and NV (and soon to be MV) being great schools and being excited to attend either, IMO.

For all of you current and future Warriors, here's some cultural diversity to add to the mix. Just got this from our elementary school's principal:

http://wvhs.ipsd.org/reaching_out.asp

Waubonsie Valley High School. Winner of the 2007 GRAMMY Association's Signature GOLD School Award and home of the best music program in the state of Illinois.

GO WARRIORS!

Civics on April 16, 2008 4:42 PM

Civics - yes, you have this right re: AYP. I am a teacher in a neighboring district, at a hs that also did not make AYP for the same reasons as WV. While the special needs students take a different test, the sub groups you listed take the same test - ISAT through 8th gr, PSAE (comprised of ACT and a Work Keys component) in hs. I am personally not a huge supporter of NCLB. I'm not a pessimist, but the goals are very aggressive and often not supported/funded by the feds. It is punitive to the schools and children that need the most help. As has been researched and documented, many reasons for the "gap" are related to socio-economic issues. The schools can, and should, still work to close the gaps, but I think it would also help to invest in some grass roots social programs to support the parents and kids in other ways they may need it (after school care, for example) - schools cannot and should not be expected to do it all. When the principal of WV spoke at the board meeting regarding some race-specific prep courses for PSAE, you also saw the challenge faced there. The NCLB legislation forces everything to be broken down by sub-groups, but when schools try to address things on this level many families say "why are we being singled out?" It takes very open dialogue and good home/school relationships to successfully navigate this.

While the SB might have best intentions at heart (not sure) I'm not sure I agreed with their choice of criteria to "balance academic achievement" among middle schools, as I'm not really sure what they mean by that. It is my concern that this is just trying to make numbers (AYP, etc.) look better on paper, and takes the pressure off to address learning needs and gaps as they currently exist. Will kids who need help get lost in the shuffle at a school out of the glare of not making AYP? Again, I'm not really sure what the rationale is behind this - I've never heard anyone on the SB or in Admin. speak to it beyond the generic catch phrase "balance academic achievement".

Thanks for helping everyone out on the AYP issue! You nailed it!

TO: Stop being dramatic 2:50

Per this attempt at communicating with me:

"Stop the DRAMA. Any bus traveling up 59 has a better chance of being T-Boned by someone at 75th street than getting hit by a train enroute to the new HS".

Not sure what "T-Boned" means when not used as a noun, as in t-bone steak. Would you enlighten me, I guess we don't talk that way over here.

I do leave my house, but am not accustomed to crossing RR tracks, ever. I prefer not to if I don't have to - Do you go out of your way to do so. Maybe you are a thrill seeker. Try skydiving, it's safer.

Anonymous on April 16, 2008 12:28 PM

I really am getting sick of people like you and I hope I never meet you in person. Oh yeah, did that Monday night when the White Shirts stood up there spewing venom. We had such a diverse group at this meeting and you call us racist! If you were at the meeting you would have seen the white shirts had 1 African American and the rest were you guessed it ......WHITE and you call us Racist.

Look in the mirror sweetheart your the racist. Give it a rest "Lisa Churchhill"!

To When Life Gives You Lemons... on April 16, 2008 4:53 PM--

I prefer "When life gives you lemons, stuff them in your bra", but it's essentially the same idea.

Count me in.

Good Evening all

the comments on this post (last day or so) have been the most positive I have seen since my son introduced me to blogging a month or so ago. I have some follow-up comments but still have some work to do. Greg I have just a bit of info. on the most up to date test scores.

Greg Forrest on April 16, 2008 5:12 PM

Hey Greg, I am ALL for A/C in our elementary schools.

to: Anonymous on April 16, 2008 7:38 PM

You never heard this term? Maybe it's an East Coast thing.

Definition from Wikipedia: Broadside collisions, commonly known as T-bone collisions, are where the side of one vehicle is impacted by the front or rear of another vehicle or a fixed object. Vehicle damage and occupant injury are more likely to be severe, but severity varies based on the part of the vehicle that is struck, safety features present, the speeds of both vehicles, and vehicle weight and construction.
_____________________________________________________
As for RR crossings. I cross the RR tracks west of 59 along 111th street, Montgomery Road, at Keating Rd and other East/West streets practically every day. It's really not a big deal.

50 blogs later, to some Anon. above - I do not think AME is making a statement....they are making a profit while they can.

Never mind the A/C, I want to be on the free lunch for all or free lunch for none committee. Is someone looking at that?

I have been doing some interspective thinking, and I have realized that I am a economic elitist and that is why I bought a big house in a fancy neighborhood in Naperville near Neuqua. And I don't care where they build Metea because I am unaffected by all the scenarios (so far). Not trying to cut down anyone else, but truthfully, I think I realized I did buy into my neighborhood at a hefty price for something. Lots of other areas would have been cheaper and closer to my job. I think I need sensitivity training.

To: Have a nice day at 5:13

"Most of us grew up in homes with lead paint, radon gas, asbestos, swam in rivers that were likely polluted with something, ate paste, chewed on pencils, and rode in cars that used leaded gas"

If you were exposed to these contaminants growing up it might explain why you are not getting it! We don't go backwards in time, it's called progress! We know now that lead paint causes learning disabilities, and asbestos causes lung cancer...

I'm happy to hear that you are healthy! But you are not living on the site in question, are you?

Try selling that land to a farmer!

to Anonymous on April 16, 2008 5:16 PM

They did this because if they are successful in stalling this project they as well as the NSFOC could be countersued by the SB. Since they were all personally named in the suit this could open up their personal assets in the case of a judgment against them as well as the NSFOC. So by taking their name out of the suit the only thing that can be sued is the corporate entity, thus keeping their personal assets out of the game.

To When Life Gives You Lemons... on April 16, 2008 4:53 PM--

Count me in too! We are a WE family, soon to be leaving great memories of NV behind (with two graduates) and looking forward to the new beginnings with a WV freshman in 2013.

While we don't agree with the SB or the process that took place, it has nothing to do with the school or the teachers or the kids who will follow in the footsteps of the class of 2008 and thus, we will be joining others in making WV the best school ever.

New WV Parent

By Anonymous on April 16, 2008 5:16 PM--

Did anyone notice NSFOC blocked out all of the plantiff names on their new amended complaint? So much for standing up for what you beleive in.
_________________________________

They must have taken a page out of your playbook, Anonymous.

It's obvious why they blocked out their names--to protect themselves and their families from harassment.

And they do stand up for what they believe; in fact, a few stood up at the last school board meeting and identified themselves. But you would have to get off the couch and actually attend a meeting to know this.

Re; Fast times at ridgemont high,Greg the info on those test scores is still not done. I know there was an article on how most districts did poorly on these tests when compared to the previous years. And for the first time I can honestly say there is one blogger I wouldn't mind taking a stand against "Lobby This". I find it hard to believe that someone would even consider writing such a piece ,you really are a work of art.Have you ever even considered who might be reading these blogs.

Well, it's obvious that Earth to SB has a new tag line: Eola Poor Choice, but still the same venom and poor spelling. I had hoped that he had disappeared forever. Maybe he'll crawl back under his rock once construction starts on the new school at Eola.

To: By Anonymous on April 16, 2008 7:38 PM

TO: Stop being dramatic 2:50

Per this attempt at communicating with me:

"Stop the DRAMA. Any bus traveling up 59 has a better chance of being T-Boned by someone at 75th street than getting hit by a train enroute to the new HS".

Not sure what "T-Boned" means when not used as a noun, as in t-bone steak. Would you enlighten me, I guess we don't talk that way over here.

I do leave my house, but am not accustomed to crossing RR tracks, ever. I prefer not to if I don't have to - Do you go out of your way to do so. Maybe you are a thrill seeker. Try skydiving, it's safer.

O.K. I don't want to get sucked into this poison but I have to - just this once. Are you kidding me, you can't figure out what t-boned could mean in this contex, and you don't cross rr tracks ever - and those who do are thrill seakers. Well, 2 things are obvious to me from this post. 1) now I understand why you weren't able to figure out that the BB property was not what you were voting for. 2) you obviously didn't come with good "pedigree" as your trying to seem as anyone from a good family would not feel the need to try and prove that they are - bc they just are - no need to prove anything. Empty cans are truly the noisiest.

Now I have to say that I, too, am hopeful that the new WV families are starting to embrace their new school. It is what is inside that matters so start making lemonade!

To When life gives you lemons:

Welcome to WVHS, I'm glad that your group is ready and excited to go to Waubonsie. Waubonsie currently has a great group of supportive parents. I would like to add that the school is not here for you and your group to make strictly "yours". Hopefully, we can ALL work together from ALL the subdivisions feeding into the school to continue the great things the parent boosters already have in place. Please check out the WVHS website, it has some great information on it.

By The Future? on April 16, 2008 10:30 AM
THIS POST IS FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT SAY YOU WILL NEVER SUPPORT ANOTHER REFERENDUM THAT THE SB PUTS TO A VOTE.

For the record I am not effected by the 3rd HS, but care deeply about our SD and our kids at all the schools. I have also always voted "yes" for referendums to support our SD. It's not about taxes to me it's about ALL our kids and their education!!

While I understand many people's frustration regarding the 3rd HS issue I think we should keep things seperate. Should a referendum come up for a vote I believe you have to look at that referendum on its merits and not tie it to the 3rd HS issue.

If you are frustrated by the SB and their actions fine I understand. However, if you choose not to support the IPSD regardless if it is the current SB or future SB you are only hurting the kids and all of our property values.

One of the main critera of how attractive an area is for resale value and to live, is based on how parents support the SB and how good the schools are. While all of our schools are very good, by not supporting referendums could have short and long term effects on the quality of our schools and effect teaching and learning.

Because people disagree with the SB does that mean they should hold the rest of IPSD responsible and hurt everyone including yourself and your kids?
...............................................
YES!

By Anonymous on April 16, 2008 10:35 AM
To Civics at 9:57 am

Great post. Those who continue to say they will support the NSFOC, fight the school board and make life difficult for the new high school and all of 204 cannot see the forest for the trees. They are only hurting themselves and their children to continue this futile fight and in the end will continue to divide the district. While you may disagree with the board and the location of the new high school, at some point you must realize that you need to move on from this issue and do what you can, in a constructive way, to make 204 whole again and to make your child's school, whichever one it is, a better learning environment. Believe me, anger and threats of retribution will not help your child adjust to a new situation.
................................................................

The lawsuits did not go away because the board just made one of the most reckless moves. You are kidding yourself if you believe the SB has the wherewithall to predict the outcome of the pending lawsuits. Remember, they are not very reliable in that area. Thanks for the comments.

By Anonymous on April 16, 2008 11:39 AM
It wasn't "campaigning" or bait and switch or anything of the sort. It was a true effort on the sb's part to try and secure the bb site. And bc of the greed of the BB estate, they priced themselves out of our range. Get over it and move on - this is benefiting no one and actually hurting yourselves and more importantly your families. It is what it is.

::::::::
The BB estate showed no greed. The judge and jury set the price since our wonderful SB tried to take their land. Did you think they were going to let that happen to them without a fight. Wouldn't you. If not please submit your address to the SB so they can start a condemnation lawsuit against you. Maybe then you will wake up. I would not wish that on anyone. What you work a lifetime for is not the SB's, or is it?

blocking out their names on the website posting of the amended site does not change the amended suit or their liability. Blocking out their names was typical NSFOC. They only share part of the information that suits their cause. I noticed that some of the names of the plaintiffs are women. I wonder if all the family assets (the house) are in the husbands' names to protect their assets in a counter suit.

If this is salvation, give me hell.

Let's see, there are those critics who are offended by the asking price because it came from a church. Now if memory serves me correctly the BB property is held in the name of a CHARITABLE trust and they originally paid how much for their land? But no one is outraged at how much profit they will make? And is there even ONE among any of these so-called critics who would not do EXACTLY the same thing if they held the deed to this land? Does the work hypocrite fit here?

Now let's see here, first Midwest Gen owns a plot of ground. Then Midwest Gen sells a piece of it to AME. Then the SB tries to buy a portion of what Midwest Gen still holds and a portion of what AME holds. Then the public outcry is deafening. So our thick necked and dim witted SB switches parcels and now proposes to buy all of the land from AME. So that makes it ok for Midwest Gen to sell to AME to sell to SD204 but it is not ok for Midwest Gen to sell to SD 204? This masterful piece of logic followed by some really state-of-the-art negotiations should make perfect sense to anyone with an intelligence rating of imbecile.

And after all the dust settles and the laughter dies down is there anyone who is going to be even remotely surprised when AME takes the money we pay them when they turn around and buy the remaining Midwest Gen property with the proceeds and all we have done in the end is facilitated one heck of an expensive land swap.

Walk into this one eyes open with your hand on your wallet. There is a lot more to this one than meets the eye.

big picture issues:

I looked into some of your questions before I even read your post, because they had come up before and I though they were very good questions. I can share what I found:

1. Does this purchase price per acre at Eola include the cost of wetlands mitigation?
No. But the total cost does. There are a total of 5.32 acres of wetlands to be mitigated at a cost of $124,400 per acre. That works out to about $7,800 for each acre bought.(http://ipsdweb.ipsd.org/Land/MvhsCostAnalysis.pdf)

2. With the change of the make-up of the land purchase, ie. no Midwest Gen land, how many acres of wetlands will have to be mitigated?
See above. It's less.

3. What is the estimate for, and what are estimation sources, for the cost of the wetland mitigation?
About $662,000. Don't know the source.

4. What are the cost consequences,if any, of insuring a piece of property that is designated as a "high consequence" area because of the three gas lines running directly through the property?
"High Consequence Area" (HCA) is a regulation that applies to pipeline operators and requires them to to "devote additional focus, efforts, and analysis in HCAs to ensure the integrity of pipelines." I don't know if it affects insurance underwriting. When I lived right smack on top of the same pipelines in Cambridge Chase (I truly did) it made no difference in my rates. (http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/FactSheets/FSHCA.htm)

5. What is the consequence of building at Eola vis a vis the "Build Smart" program? Is the district losing out on state funding now that the site is solely AME land?
It seems the answer is no. "Build Smart" is a book published by the Illinois Construction Development Board (CDB) to help site selection committees. (http://www.cdb.state.il.us/buildsmart.shtml). It does have some guidelines about undesirable sites, and encourages committees to factor those into their prioritization.

CDB also administers the School Construction Program, which gives grants to build new schools. The actual program rules say nothing about "Build Smart." There are certain environmental conditions which will disqualify a site. No mention of piplelines, train tracks, or power lines. (http://www.cdb.state.il.us/iladmincodes.shtml)

It also reads like you have to apply for the grant *before* your referendum. District 204 recieved grants in the past(http://www.cdb.state.il.us/schools/allgrants.pdf), but I don't know if that was part of this referendum. So this could really be a completely moot point. I would love to know either way.

Other interesting stuff on natural gas line safety, too. In the last five years there have been exactly 2 public fatalities and 7 injuries from transmission line incidents in total. The ten year data is about the same.(http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/reports/safety/CPI.html#_ngtranson) For comparison, 33 people a year die from dog bites or collisions with dogs. (http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm). Makes me feel a lot better.

That's what I know. Others know more I am sure.

While I'll be the first to admit that the actions of the SB and administration (and by administration I really mean Howie Crouse), in their zeal to get the third high school built, have been at times boned headed, misguided, and even dishonest (e.g manipulation of the boundary issue in order to get the 2nd referendum passed), I have to question the real motives of the NSFOC based on their recent "open letter". Note some of their issues:

NSFOC: "The same safety concerns that have always surrounded this site remain: high pressure gas lines, EMF radiation, highly polluted neighboring parcel."

Let's get real here. The EMF issue was addressed months ago when scientific tests showed that levels were at household levels or lower. Why do they continue to bring this up as as issue? Especially since at least one of our existing middle schools has high voltage transmission lines that are closer than these would be and there have been no related health effects in over 25 years. In addition, calling the neighboring land "highly" polluted is more than a slight exaggeration, as tests have shown only some diesel fuel and transformer oil. These were found only on the land no longer being acquired.

NSFOC: "The site purchased has not been appraised, has not been tested beyond a perfunctory level (according to test results released by the District), and was never considered prior to 72 hours ago.

Did I miss something? The land they are purchasing is immediately adjacent to the existing property that has been under scrutiny for years. It is closer to a residential area and was farmland as far back as records go. It is actually more desirable than the property pulled back by MidwestGen. We are getting it for almost the same price. Do we really need to spend additional months analyzing it? And, oh, by the way, we did consider it prior to 72 hours ago. We offered to buy it from AME several times over the last few years.

And finally,

NSFOC: "Also, without doing a fair market appraisal there is no way to know if the District overpaid for the parcel."

Ok, so instead of overpaying for the church property at $225k per acre, the NSFOC wants us to instead proceed with purchasing the BB property at $518k per acre. We will spend almost double on the land but we will be fiscally responsible to the taxpayers because we are not overpaying for it! As John Stossel says, gimme a break.

Dear Moderator,

I'm all for free expression, but I'm stunned that Earth to SB's latest foul rant would be approved for posting. Since when does the Sun -- or any daily newspaper -- allow such juvenile slop onto its blogs?

As for Earth to SB -- he's just rendered himself irrelevant. What a loser.

Response from editors: It's been removed.

Earth to SB: Clean up the language or you will be permanently banned from this forum. This is your only warning.

Hi D&S
YES a little freindly competition never hurt anyone :)

To all the mileage posters out there:
ok I must be a total lemming. My oldest child plays for a U-8 soccer team at Team Chicago and their indoor facilities are at Play USA (coming from the south; past WV and on Libery Road). I keep taking 59 to 75 to 34 and a right onto