Dist. 204 plans to discuss Metea land

[slp]

eagledad said:

eagledad said:

I'm starting to pull for BB at this point. Wouldn't mind if Kilander screwed 'em to the wall.

I should also add that given everything I am hearing about our current legal representation it seems likely that this would be the outcome.

If they do walk away from BB and still have outstanding legal issues, I don't think it's too much to ask that they dump Rick Petesch, and Whitt Law. They shouldn't be allowed to make more profit in billables while debating how much of $5 Million - $10 Million of the taxpayer money to piss away.

couldn't agree more. Good legal representation would never have allowed this issue to go to a jury. Going to a jury is a roll of the dice.

[bob]

We certainly did not recognize in 2005 that what we would be facing is a seller that would never, even to this day, state a price at which they'd be willing to sell us the land, unlike what they did with the 25 acres. It wasn't anticipated on many levels.

Thanks for proving your argument that the SD never negotiated with BB.

[bob]

IIRC, the story was that Holmes had both sides in the office, they were close to a deal and Brodie back out last second. I believe it was around the QT affair, in summer.

[wvhsparent]

So in other words...she did not negotiate a price. Close does not count.

[d204mom]

bob said:

We certainly did not recognize in 2005 that what we would be facing is a seller that would never, even to this day, state a price at which they'd be willing to sell us the land, unlike what they did with the 25 acres. It wasn't anticipated on many levels.

Thanks for proving your argument that the SD never negotiated with BB.

I didn't understand your question - it didn't make any sense.

My position was that the district did not negotiate before they filed the condemnation suit. The Brodie side sent the district a letter stating they were willing to negotiate in December of 2005. I don't have that letter but there is a reference to it in the motion to dismiss.

My understanding is that letter stated that the Brodie trust was willing to negotiate UNLESS the district filed another condemnation suit. Basically, file the lawsuit and we will NOT negotiate with you.

The district DID NOT respond to that letter, instead they filed the condemnation suit. Now I would take that as kind of an insult if I were the Brodie trust.

And low and behold, the Brodie trust kept their word and refused to negotiate after the lawsuit was filed. They have stated to the paper that if we dropped the lawsuit they would be willing to negotiate.

Landowners move to force Dist. 204's hand
By Melissa Jenco
Daily Herald
11/20/2007
Helm said if the district abandons the condemnation suit, the Brach-Brodie trust would be
willing to negotiate a price just like it would with any other interested buyer.

[bob]

We certainly did not recognize in 2005 that what we would be facing is a seller that would never, even to this day, state a price at which they'd be willing to sell us the land, unlike what they did with the 25 acres. It wasn't anticipated on many levels.

Well if the seller wouldn't name a price, how can you negotiate?

[d204mom]

bob said:

We certainly did not recognize in 2005 that what we would be facing is a seller that would never, even to this day, state a price at which they'd be willing to sell us the land, unlike what they did with the 25 acres. It wasn't anticipated on many levels.

Well if the seller wouldn't name a price, how can you negotiate?

With the Brodie trust it's always been about dropping the lawsuit and Metzger knows it. He thought we could beat them in court and he was wrong. Now even in defeat, he won't drop the lawsuit. And then he goes and says antagonizing things in the paper (Hail Mary pass). Sadly, ego rules.

[d204mom]

Here is the reference to the letter that the Brodie trust wrote to the district expressing their willingness to negotiate. I sure would love to see that letter. I have only heard that the contents express that they were willing if and only if the district did not file suit. Anybody know if this covered under the FOIA? Or maybe if I just asked the Brodies nicely?


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.

[slp]

How could you not want to negotiate with someone named Hazel?

[wvhsparent]

I'll go back and review the submitted documents to court, to see if that Brodie letter is there.

[bob]

So they sent a letter 3 days before we filed saying they would negotitate when they knew the SD was filing anyways. Nice PR move. It is not like the SD decided on 12/18 to ED the land .

[d204mom]

bob said:

So they sent a letter 3 days before we filed saying they would negotitate when they knew the SD was filing anyways. Nice PR move. It is not like the SD decided on 12/18 to ED the land .

Funny you should pick that date bob. No I don't think it was 12/18. I think it was 12/19.

Wonder what was discussed in Executive Session at the special board meeting called?

Agenda says "Administrative Recommendation: That the Board of Education goes into Executive Session to discuss the following:

1. Land Acquisition"

board.ipsd.org/204boardfiles/boardfiles_view_list.asp?MeetingDate=12/19/2005&BoardMtgType=special

[d204mom]

Maybe they called the special board meeting in anticipation of recieving some information - like a letter from Brodie.

But you are right it could just be a huge coincidence.

[bob]

d204mom said:

bob said:

So they sent a letter 3 days before we filed saying they would negotitate when they knew the SD was filing anyways. Nice PR move. It is not like the SD decided on 12/18 to ED the land .

Funny you should pick that date bob. No I don't think it was 12/18. I think it was 12/19.

Wonder what was discussed in Executive Session at the special board meeting called?

Agenda says "Administrative Recommendation: That the Board of Education goes into Executive Session to discuss the following:

1. Land Acquisition"

board.ipsd.org/204boardfiles/boardfiles_view_list.asp?MeetingDate=12/19/2005&BoardMtgType=special

Yeah, it wasn't publically known they would file. .

[d204mom]

So your claim is that since everyone knew (I didn't - was it in the paper or something?) that the district was going to file the condemnation suit on 12/22 that they rightly ignored the Brodie offer to negotiate that they likely had in their possession during that meeting? That's your stance? OK.

That just doesn't make any sense. I'm not seeing the justification for the eye roll.