|
|
Post by sushi on Feb 28, 2008 9:54:54 GMT -6
Doc, Sorry I missed you at the meetings. I do think the commute you describe is a valid complaint. I said in my prior post there were some valid complaints. Most are not; most are self-serving.
I think if you look at archives I have stated again and again that the SB has made many mistakes, most based on assumptions. They should have known better. I don't for one second believe any decisions were made because they wanted to punish anyone or rile up any area. I do believe they had to make some areas sacrifice, some a lot more than others.
We have to relieve the crowding in our highschools. There is no land left. I don't believe that a public official in this day of public information would knowingly endanger any child in this schooldistrict. These people are our neighbors!
|
|
|
|
Post by sushi on Feb 28, 2008 10:07:19 GMT -6
Mandmmom, there are people in my neighborhood as well that are whining. I have relatives and friends in TG. The only history I have with TG is at the meetings which you did not witness last go round (lucky for you). MANY neighborhoods left a bad impression by their behavior. TG was one of them, so was BD (those two standout). It was VERY ugly. That is my history.
I was trying to point out to others that it is very easy to criticize the SB but they have put up with a lot of hateful behavior from people in this district. I myself wrote a few early e-mails I wish I could take back. It really is time to move on and make lemonade out of these lemons.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 28, 2008 10:08:53 GMT -6
What majority? If there was really a majority the SB wouldn't be looking for ways around a referendum vote-- they wouldn't have help up on the survey for AC because they feared the repercussions of this decision. Do you really believe this site where we are spending our $150M would pass a referendum vote ? I believe the SD & SB don't even have that faith. I agree....I don't think they would be able to get a Yes vote now....I would love for the SB to take that challenge. OK so you are informing all that the ref would not pass today and you would rather have super-overcrowded schools (Both MS and HS) instead, because that's the 2 choices you have. 3rd HS or no 3rd HS. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 28, 2008 10:15:16 GMT -6
Doc, Sorry I missed you at the meetings. I do think the commute you describe is a valid complaint. I said in my prior post there were some valid complaints. Most are not; most are self-serving. I think if you look at archives I have stated again and again that the SB has made many mistakes, most based on assumptions. They should have known better. I don't for one second believe any decisions were made because they wanted to punish anyone or rile up any area. I do believe they had to make some areas sacrifice, some a lot more than others. We have to relieve the crowding in our highschools. There is no land left. I don't believe that a public official in this day of public information would knowingly endanger any child in this schooldistrict. These people are our neighbors! my guess is you would recognize me right away if you knew who I was - I am kinda hard to miss at 6'3" and 235.... you say there is no land left -- do you for a NY minute honestly think that MACOM got a fair review? And I still will stay on record that when all costs are recorded - if they are all accounted for and they really pay the kind of money to get a partial school open Fall 2009 - there will be no savings @ AME compared to BB. If there are any they will be minimal for a ( by their own admission) lesser site. |
|
|
|
Post by 204family on Feb 28, 2008 10:18:54 GMT -6
I agree....I don't think they would be able to get a Yes vote now....I would love for the SB to take that challenge. OK so you are informing all that the ref would not pass today and you would rather have super-overcrowded schools (Both MS and HS) instead, because that's the 2 choices you have. 3rd HS or no 3rd HS. Unfortunately, it looks like we're going to have overcrowded schools regardless. As it stands today, my kid has 27 kids in K class. My neighbors daughter will be attending WV next year...she'll also be packed in. The kid at Scullen---well they always have the trailers. I'm scratching my head trying to find the positives. It's a little hard. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 28, 2008 10:25:02 GMT -6
OK this will a little nudge back to the principle of the Metea.
I was part of his Principle's advisory Committee at WVHS. From that interaction, he is a man who has a plan. He is willing to listen to new ideas, and is not afraid to try.
I like your idea doc of the principle from WVHS gold moving up to green. How's the NVHS Gold's Principle?
|
|
|
|
Post by 204family on Feb 28, 2008 10:29:01 GMT -6
Mandmmom, there are people in my neighborhood as well that are whining. I have relatives and friends in TG. The only history I have with TG is at the meetings which you did not witness last go round (lucky for you). MANY neighborhoods left a bad impression by their behavior. TG was one of them, so was BD (those two standout). It was VERY ugly. That is my history. I was trying to point out to others that it is very easy to criticize the SB but they have put up with a lot of hateful behavior from people in this district. I myself wrote a few early e-mails I wish I could take back. It really is time to move on and make lemonade out of these lemons. Completely agree that it's time to make lemonade. Also agree that people were pretty nasty and borderline ignorant. While it was not intentional I believe emotions were driving the bus. They could not be objective after the beating they took. Anymore than we could be objective in TG. IMO, they got it in their head that they had to prove their love for Aurora and WV by building a school in the north in Aurora. As I drink my lemonade, I will reflect that it would've been a great asset to build a school in naperville in a more central location. You just can't put a dollar on the attraction that a school built in Naperville has. Go ahead, hate me. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 28, 2008 10:29:15 GMT -6
OK so you are informing all that the ref would not pass today and you would rather have super-overcrowded schools (Both MS and HS) instead, because that's the 2 choices you have. 3rd HS or no 3rd HS. Unfortunately, it looks like we're going to have overcrowded schools regardless. As it stands today, my kid has 27 kids in K class. My neighbors daughter will be attending WV next year...she'll also be packed in. The kid at Scullen---well they always have the trailers. I'm scratching my head trying to find the positives. It's a little hard. Scullen issue will be resolved in 09 and HS in 11. Both of these temporary issues are independant of the site chosen. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 28, 2008 10:32:23 GMT -6
As I drink my lemonade, I will reflect that it would've been a great asset to build a school in naperville in a more central location. You just can't put a dollar on the attraction that a school built in Naperville has. Go ahead, hate me. FYI The BB site would have been Aurora too. |
|
|
|
Post by 204family on Feb 28, 2008 10:34:08 GMT -6
As I drink my lemonade, I will reflect that it would've been a great asset to build a school in naperville in a more central location. You just can't put a dollar on the attraction that a school built in Naperville has. Go ahead, hate me. FYI The BB site would have been Aurora too. Sorry, I was daydreaming about Macom. And that I'll admit is really, really selfish. I love when the kids can walk to school.  |
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Feb 28, 2008 10:39:56 GMT -6
As I drink my lemonade, I will reflect that it would've been a great asset to build a school in naperville in a more central location. You just can't put a dollar on the attraction that a school built in Naperville has. Go ahead, hate me. Like where? I'm starting to think that people need to learn that within 204 boundaries, Aurora, Naperville, Bolingbrook (and Plainfield?) are really not all that different. For years people moved into all parts of 204 knowing that if they stuck around for HS their children would attend HS at WV in Aurora, the only HS in the district. Yet the district was still a highly desirable place to live and have children educated as it is today. |
|
|
|
Post by sushi on Feb 28, 2008 10:39:59 GMT -6
The Macom site is has it's own problems. If the ref had passed the very first time, wed've had more options for location. All water under the bridge. It really is time to move forward and get positive for the kids sakes. The whiners look bad and other kids in the district will resent the whiners when they get to school with them. This could be a deep division for a long time if the parents don't stop and get on board.
|
|
|
|
Post by researching on Feb 28, 2008 10:40:53 GMT -6
The Scullen trailers may be resolved then but the Scullen graduates from Fry will know NO relief. They will simply move to an even more crowded WV. Let's not sugar coat it.
Back on topic...why appoint a principal to a school that 1-land hasn't been purchased, 2-ground hasn't even been broken, 3- environmental issues involving the land haven't been resolved, 4- won't even open until 2009 at the earliest? This whole thing is ridiculously odd to me.
One last comment...it seems to me that those who complain the most about "whiners" in this district are usually part of the admin, SB, or PTA presidents. Can they even be remotely objective? Gee, my Kool-aid tastes fishy.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 28, 2008 10:40:58 GMT -6
OK this will a little nudge back to the principle of the Metea. I was part of his Principle's advisory Committee at WVHS. From that interaction, he is a man who has a plan. He is willing to listen to new ideas, and is not afraid to try. I like your idea doc of the principle from WVHS gold moving up to green. How's the NVHS Gold's Principle? Don't know them -- I do think if either school ends up with Rudy Keller - they will be happy. |
|
|
|
Post by sushi on Feb 28, 2008 10:46:20 GMT -6
The Scullen trailers may be resolved then but the Scullen graduates from Fry will know NO relief. They will simply move to an even more crowded WV. Let's not sugar coat it. Back on topic...why appoint a principal to a school that 1-land hasn't been purchased, 2-ground hasn't even been broken, 3- environmental issues involving the land haven't been resolved, 4- won't even open until 2009 at the earliest? This whole thing is ridiculously odd to me. One last comment...it seems to me that those who complain the most about "whiners" in this district are usually part of the admin, SB, or PTA presidents. Can they even be remotely objective? Gee, my Kool-aid tastes fishy. People know me on this board - not connected in any way to Admin, SB or PTA. This is the way I think, sorry. As I said, naming the new principal is a PR move to help people move forward and try to get the district excited about the new school. The board believes the site will be found safe to build on. |
|
