Dist. 204 plans to discuss Metea land

[EagleDad]

bob said:

Wait, no 09 Referendum?

That is great news.

Sure, no '09 school = no '09 referendum.

At this point I'll believe an '09 school on a new site that needs to be re-surveyed, re-designed, and re-bid out to contractors when pigs fly.

[dan75]

eagledad said:

bob said:

Wait, no 09 Referendum?

That is great news.

Sure, no '09 school = no '09 referendum.

At this point I'll believe an '09 school on a new site that needs to be re-surveyed, re-designed, and re-bid out to contractors when pigs fly.

Unfortunately, I agree with that sentiment.

[Arch]

All bacon flights are canceled for the day. There's a bus headed to a bridge that's for sale leaving within the hour

[blankcheck]

Great News Bob? How about get real! We all know there will be another referendum.

Are they trying to somehow "sugarcoat" the inevitable?

[momto4]

eagledad said:

bob said:

Wait, no 09 Referendum?

That is great news.

Sure, no '09 school = no '09 referendum.

I thought the ref had to do with when the teachers' contract is up, not so much having to do with the opening of the new building? I think it's great if the ref can be put off a year.

[bob]

momto4 said:

eagledad said:

Sure, no '09 school = no '09 referendum.

I thought the ref had to do with when the teachers' contract is up, not so much having to do with the opening of the new building? I think it's great if the ref can be put off a year.

I believe it has to do when the cap comes off.

[d204mom]

bob said:

eagledad said:

Yep we're off this hook for damages - this week (and for the next 3).

I can't say I would blame BB for wanting a little blood after being dragged through this for 3 years and they being told "oops, we're not interested, we changed our mind".

But it was their choice to go to trial. The risk of the trial to BB was that the jury would come at a price too high for the SD. That's what happened.

Hold on a minute. If I recall from the counter-motion, the Brodie Trust sent a letter to the district in December of '05 stating their willingness to negotiate in good faith. At that point they had turned down 257K/acre but were willing to talk.

They claim that the district did not repond to that offer to negotiate, instead we slapped them with the condemnation suit.

There are two sides to every story.

13. Notwithstanding the legally deficient nature of the Plaintiffs November 22, 2005 "offer," the Hazel S. Brodie Trust made a written response thereto by letter dated December 19, 2005 which indicated a willingness to negotiate with the Plaintiff on a fair and meaningful basis. The Plaintiff, however, ignored the Hazel S. Brodie Trust's willingness to negotiate and promptly proceeded to file its condemnation complaint on December 22, 2005 without engaging in any negotiations.

[d204mom]

bob said:

eagledad said:

Yep we're off this hook for damages - this week (and for the next 3).

I can't say I would blame BB for wanting a little blood after being dragged through this for 3 years and they being told "oops, we're not interested, we changed our mind".

But it was their choice to go to trial. The risk of the trial to BB was that the jury would come at a price too high for the SD.

And one more thing.

How was there a risk that

the jury would come at a price too high for the SD.

? The judge set the cap at 33M or $600K/acre. During their Quick Take lobbying, the district then promised to all of the senators and representatives and heck, even us, that they could and would be willing to pay that much. If we could just get Quick Take. This continued into July.

Why would the Brach/Brodie trust think that there was a risk that the price would be too high? Jury award came in under $33M cap, including damage to remainder.

[EagleDad]

Nothing says loving like a condemnation suit.

If the SD walks from BB, I would support damages in addition to the legal fees. Government entities should not be able to condemn private land, not like the price, and walk away at their will.

To the SB: talk this out with BB - If you can get them down to say 25 million, buy it and sell off the 10 acres on 75th for 5 Million (won't be that hard). I will want to see due diligence on adequate BB negotiatieons before moving on. If you don't they are going to slap you hard for damages.

[sam2]

With respect to the '09 referendum, I was always under the belief that it was to pay for the higher costs associated with operating the new school. I believe that was the premise and I believe that is consistent with the opening of Nequa. Please correct me, if I'm wrong. I don't think an operating referendum can possibly pass before there is a school to operate and '09 looks unlikely for a new school.

[d204mom]

That's why I'm confused about the Daeschner comments in the Scullen letter as well.

It clearly states 2 things:

- he believes the school will open in Sept 09

- he believes the op ref can be pushed off until '10 or later

Where are we coming up with the dough to run the new school? Unless it's by shortchanging all the kids in the district.

[gatordog]

eagledad said:

If the SD walks from BB, I would support damages in addition to the legal fees. Government entities should not be able to condemn private land, not like the price, and walk away at their will.

This is a political stance, one that I agree with in principle.

However, this would be a legal question. For judicial system to determine. It has nothing to do with what you, I, or anybody politically supports.

If SD leaves BB, all there is for us is to to have "rooting interest" one way or the other. Our cheering section was pretty down after watching the last courtroom "game"

[we4]

d204mom said:

Where are we coming up with the dough to run the new school?

From the money tree. ;D

When visiting my brother, we used to play a game with the kids called "Find the Money Tree." They would run around looking for the Money Tree. The game would entertain them for a while.

[Arch]

I thought we were going to actually operate in the black with AllDay K after the first year.

Maybe that's going to generate our budget surplus

No wonder they were all on board for that thing.

[EagleDad]

I am wondering if by an '10 referendum Daeschner mean having the referendum vote in Feb '10 (ie.e. 6 months into the '09/'10 school year).