|
|
Post by Avenging Eagle on Mar 15, 2008 11:36:19 GMT -6
I have been forwarded a letter written by Shawn Collins discussing the problems with the MWGEN site, and I was asked to post it on our boards: The message also says that the letter was sent to the school board yesterday. savefile.com/files/1441469 |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 15, 2008 12:04:38 GMT -6
Wow.
|
|
|
|
Post by steckmom on Mar 15, 2008 12:13:45 GMT -6
Mr. Collins has quite a signature.
What is the point of this letter? I think the SB knows the stance and hasn't Arch already supplied them with this info?
ETA: I guess it gets the info out to the public at large.
|
|
|
|
Post by jwh on Mar 15, 2008 12:18:18 GMT -6
You sure you aren't the author of that, Arch?
|
|
|
|
Post by sushi on Mar 15, 2008 12:28:16 GMT -6
I know I will catch flak for this, but seriously, if this is 1/2 true then people all along the power lines in Ashbury and TG better give their homes away. Seriously.
|
|
|
|
Post by fence on Mar 15, 2008 12:40:17 GMT -6
I'm sorry, but I just don't get how anyone can be for this location. If you attend, you just have no idea what you'll be getting, from both a health or PR perspective. And if you don't attend, it is just a poor fiscal investment that can impact the health and safety of kids, not to mention our district PR and our wallets should we need to fix or abandon it down the road.
I am not for this lawsuit, but in spirit, I don't support this site because I am for the old philosophy that one should err on the side of caution. Especially when we're using kids and health in the same sentence.
It's likely that a strong argument will be made both confirming and refuting the safety of this site, which means statistically, we can have no winner. So why someone thinks this district just bagged the big one with this site is totally bizarre.
Who convinced us that our only choice was to accept risk in order to solve the problem of crowded hallways? Why are we so dismissive of the problems with this site? Because we question the motives of the people bringing them up? Does that mean that they have no basis? Or because we are honestly feeling positive that these issues have no basis? Without being an expert in public health, that's a pretty big gamble.
I look at it this way, if I were advising a friend or relative, I'd say don't build your house there.
Not because I was 100% positive that it was unsafe, but that I couldn't be 100% positive that is WAS.
|
|
|
|
Post by fence on Mar 15, 2008 12:41:27 GMT -6
Yes really, seriously. That's why those houses are less expensive and alot of people would never in a million years buy one. Seriously - because they don't come without risk. That's the point. I know I will catch flak for this, but seriously, if this is 1/2 true then people all along the power lines in Ashbury and TG better give their homes away. Seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 15, 2008 12:44:09 GMT -6
You sure you aren't the author of that, Arch? I'm sure. I already stated multiple times I am not in the NSFOC group and have given them no money. That was true then and it's true now. |
|
|
|
Post by steckmom on Mar 15, 2008 12:47:11 GMT -6
I'm sorry, but I just don't get how anyone can be for this location. If you attend, you just have no idea what you'll be getting, from both a health or PR perspective. And if you don't attend, it is just a poor fiscal investment that can impact the health and safety of kids, not to mention our district PR and our wallets should we need to fix or abandon it down the road. I am not for this lawsuit, but in spirit, I don't support this site because I am for the old philosophy that one should err on the side of caution. Especially when we're using kids and health in the same sentence. It's likely that a strong argument will be made both confirming and refuting the safety of this site, which means statistically, we can have no winner. So why someone thinks this district just bagged the big one with this site is totally bizarre. Who convinced us that our only choice was to accept risk in order to solve the problem of crowded hallways? Why are we so dismissive of the problems with this site? Because we question the motives of the people bringing them up? Does that mean that they have no basis? Or because we are honestly feeling positive that these issues have no basis? Without being an expert in public health, that's a pretty big gamble. I look at it this way, if I were advising a friend or relative, I'd say don't build your house there. Exactly. That is the big picture. Issues such as motives, entitlement, nsfoc, nsfocfraud, boundaries, albatross, school in the backyard, etc. are irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Post by concerned2 on Mar 15, 2008 12:48:10 GMT -6
Yes, Sushi you will be catching flak for your comment. I am very tired of your neighborhood bashing. The power lines that run threw the neighborhoods are not the same as those by the site and people make the choice to live by them. I choose not to live by them and those houses by them were a lot less and are harder to sell. I wonder why?  So does that mean we should put a school by them? What the heck is your point? |
|
|
|
Post by sushi on Mar 15, 2008 12:50:09 GMT -6
My point is that I would be in a hotel room right now if I lived by them if you believe that report.
No intent to neighborhood bash. The point is (beating the horse) you live under them, swim next to them, but won't go to school next to them. Can't have it both ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 15, 2008 12:55:27 GMT -6
My point is that I would be in a hotel room right now if I lived by them if you believe that report. No intent to neighborhood bash. The point is (beating the horse) you live under them, swim next to them, but won't go to school next to them. Can't have it both ways. Most people have a garbage can in their kitchen and in their bathroom and some even keep it in their garage piling up for a week before they take it to the curb. Yet, they would not want to do anything near a landfill. Hypocrites. |
|
|
|
Post by sushi on Mar 15, 2008 12:58:44 GMT -6
Dangerous if there's hazardous waste in their trashcan.
|
|
|
|
Post by fence on Mar 15, 2008 13:00:09 GMT -6
That doesn't make any sense. Compared to the number of residents in this district, a very small number chose to live near the power lines. I would venture a guess that if they chose to live in that location, they are willing to make some trade-offs, or really don't feel that there is risk. But they're not the one's who are concerned about the safety of the site. The problem is that people would NOT take that risk with our homes, but seem to want to take that risk for the school. THEY'RE the ones who can't have it both ways. I wouldn't select a homesite near power lines, wouldn't advise a friend or family to do so, nor do I support building a school in an enviornment like that. And I think that's where most people are coming from. Saying that some individuals chose to build near powerlines is totally irrelevant. My point is that I would be in a hotel room right now if I lived by them if you believe that report. No intent to neighborhood bash. The point is (beating the horse) you live under them, swim next to them, but won't go to school next to them. Can't have it both ways. |
|
|
|
Post by concerned2 on Mar 15, 2008 13:01:05 GMT -6
People can make those safety choices for themselves, not a SB for thousands of children who don't have a choice.
|
|
