|
|
Post by mandmmom on Mar 15, 2008 20:48:40 GMT -6
I'm sorry, I simply don't believe you. Are you suggesting the SB/District put our kids in danger at the BB site? Are you saying there is NO SAFE parcel in 204 for a third high school? I disagree until I see more complete information than your measurements with your MG reader. Again that would only apply if one considered these levels unsafe. The exposure would be minimal as would exposure on the Eola site. There are safe parcels all with levels of EMF's that will have areas over 2MG. I actually think at this point the NSFOC group should consider the rest of the citizens in the district may demand that they pay for the tests at the Brach Brodie site. After all I do think it would become their responsibility to prove the safety of the site before they forced us to purchase it. That at this point would include Phase II etc. As you clearly pointed out why would we trust a trained professional that is willing to give you these readings for free. No our SB has wasted tons of $, so this is their expense to pay for the tests at BB...I am on board for 204 to vote on the AME site....b/c we already voted on BB..... |
|
|
|
Post by rj on Mar 15, 2008 20:51:14 GMT -6
That is a no brainer. That would eliminate the hazards.
I would add that the SB should leave the boundaries as is, that way we can watch the TG and WE parents that are adamant this all about the safety back peddle when their kids still go to WV. ;D (< sarcasm)
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 15, 2008 20:54:13 GMT -6
I'm sorry, I simply don't believe you. Are you suggesting the SB/District put our kids in danger at the BB site? Are you saying there is NO SAFE parcel in 204 for a third high school? I disagree until I see more complete information than your measurements with your MG reader. Again that would only apply if one considered these levels unsafe. The exposure would be minimal as would exposure on the Eola site. There are safe parcels all with levels of EMF's that will have areas over 2MG. I actually think at this point the NSFOC group should consider the rest of the citizens in the district may demand that they pay for the tests at the Brach Brodie site. After all I do think it would become their responsibility to prove the safety of the site before they forced us to purchase it. That at this point would include Phase II etc. As you clearly pointed out why would we trust a trained professional that is willing to give you these readings for free. I say great - test BB also - I have no issue with that at all. Check it for ALL the same hazards as AME ( remember that appears to have been farmland also )- and let's do a point by point comparison of real and potential issues. oh as far as payment - let's ask BB to take it out of the millions we already owe them - they can then prove site safety for all potential buyers - assuming they don't try and force the SB to buy the land they commited to ( and filed condemnation on ) , that would be a kicker wouldn't it ? Or I think the SD-SB should pay for it - heck what's one more bill-- they are the ones that tried to sell me and eeryone else here on what a great site it was- burden of proof should lie with them to prove what they told us ( BB the safest site) was true. Maybe it can be added to the suit. (hmmmm- didn't the SB do a comparison already ? That's right now we are told no due diligence was done on the last one) Oh and btw - let's have that testing done by someone not associated with or hired by MWGEN. A totally independent group from outside of Illinois. Excellent idea - I am all for it. |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Mar 15, 2008 20:56:27 GMT -6
BB attorneys won't let anyone near their site. Who are you kidding?
ETA:
Can you imagine the phone conversation.
SD: Yeah, we've reconsidered. We may actually be interested in your land. Um, well, first we want to do an independent evaluation of whether the land is toxic or not. If it is toxic, we'll publish it on our website, then the papers will splash the news in their headlines, and we will walk away from this negotiation. So, can we have access to the site to take just a few soil samples and take some meter readings?
BB: Click.
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Mar 15, 2008 21:06:51 GMT -6
Just one other question for Hillmom.
What were the readings your personal MG reader measured at the Eola and Molitor site?
Can you share?
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Mar 15, 2008 21:08:43 GMT -6
BB attorneys won't let anyone near their site. Who are you kidding? ETA: Can you imagine the phone conversation. SD: Yeah, we've reconsidered. We may actually be interested in your land. Um, well, first we want to do an independent evaluation of whether the land is toxic or not. If it is toxic, we'll publish it on our website, then the papers will splash the news in their headlines, and we will walk away from this negotiation. So, can we have access to the site to take just a few soil samples and take some meter readings? BB: Click. If you are correct, how the hell did Hillmom get on the property to take a reading with her ghostbuster machine. I'm sorry, I'm more than skeptical. Why would one believe an EMF reading would be so high on BB? |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Mar 15, 2008 21:13:06 GMT -6
Same way NSFOC got their picture of the Eola site, I'm sure, without permission.  |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 15, 2008 21:17:12 GMT -6
BB attorneys won't let anyone near their site. Who are you kidding? ETA: Can you imagine the phone conversation. SD: Yeah, we've reconsidered. We may actually be interested in your land. Um, well, first we want to do an independent evaluation of whether the land is toxic or not. If it is toxic, we'll publish it on our website, then the papers will splash the news in their headlines, and we will walk away from this negotiation. So, can we have access to the site to take just a few soil samples and take some meter readings? BB: Click. If you are correct, how the hell did Hillmom get on the property to take a reading with her ghostbuster machine. I'm sorry, I'm more than skeptical. Why would one believe an EMF reading would be so high on BB? So if we take these as fact - then the SB-SD promoted the purchase of an unsafe site. Is that what is being said ? |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Mar 15, 2008 21:18:36 GMT -6
The readings aren't so far fetched when you think about it. I'd have to check the google map. Are there powerlines along 59, if not, then they must be buried. Just think the equivalent of those big powerlines buried just a few feet underground. That would mess with the numbers.
But like I said, I don't know if there are powerlines along 59 or not at BB.
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Mar 15, 2008 21:21:46 GMT -6
The readings aren't so far fetched when you think about it. I'd have to check the google map. Are there powerlines along 59, if not, then they must be buried. Just think the equivalent of those big powerlines buried just a few feet underground. That would mess with the numbers. But like I said, I don't know if there are powerlines along 59 or not at BB. While you are looking stuff up, look for power plants, compromised soil samples, underground gas lines. Please, report back. And, don't use a ghostbuster machine. |
|
|
|
Post by hillmom on Mar 15, 2008 21:24:23 GMT -6
Just one other question for Hillmom. What were the readings your personal MG reader measured at the Eola and Molitor site? Can you share? Truthfully I didn't bother because they are already published by environ. The only reason I took other readings was to prove that the arguing about the readings at the Eola site is ridiculous. Again my opinion is all of these readings are not of concern. I could probably get the NW corner because there is a right in right out lane there. Comed has been patrolling more over there becasue of all the trespassers that were taking pictures for the NSFOC site. |
|
|
|
Post by hillmom on Mar 15, 2008 21:26:40 GMT -6
BB attorneys won't let anyone near their site. Who are you kidding? ETA: Can you imagine the phone conversation. SD: Yeah, we've reconsidered. We may actually be interested in your land. Um, well, first we want to do an independent evaluation of whether the land is toxic or not. If it is toxic, we'll publish it on our website, then the papers will splash the news in their headlines, and we will walk away from this negotiation. So, can we have access to the site to take just a few soil samples and take some meter readings? BB: Click. If you are correct, how the hell did Hillmom get on the property to take a reading with her ghostbuster machine. I'm sorry, I'm more than skeptical. Why would one believe an EMF reading would be so high on BB? It's called public easement - pedestrians can walk along 59 & ogden!!! |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Mar 15, 2008 21:27:29 GMT -6
Just one other question for Hillmom. What were the readings your personal MG reader measured at the Eola and Molitor site? Can you share? Truthfully I didn't bother to measure EMF at Eola and Molitor because they are already published by environ. The only reason I took other readings was to prove that the arguing about the readings at the Eola site is ridiculous. Again my opinion is all of these readings are not of concern. I could probably get the NW corner because there is a right in right out lane there. Comed has been patrolling more over there becasue of all the trespassers that were taking pictures for the NSFOC site. LOL! You just lost TOTAL credibility with me! You didn't bother despite the fact there is a lawsuit that brings EMF levels into discussion? Can you bring your ghostbuster machine out to Eola and Molitor tomorrow, sneak on the property as you did at BB and report to us? Please? ETA: In all seriousness. If you really have a tool to measure EMF levels, WHY ON EARTH wouldn't you go to the Eola and Molitor site and take a measurement prior to posting your findings on BB? |
|
|
|
Post by mandmmom on Mar 15, 2008 21:32:45 GMT -6
Just one other question for Hillmom. What were the readings your personal MG reader measured at the Eola and Molitor site? Can you share? Truthfully I didn't bother because they are already published by environ. The only reason I took other readings was to prove that the arguing about the readings at the Eola site is ridiculous. Again my opinion is all of these readings are not of concern. I could probably get the NW corner because there is a right in right out lane there. Comed has been patrolling more over there becasue of all the trespassers that were taking pictures for the NSFOC site. I am sorry, but you would have been a little more credible if you took the readings at AME....and then your comment about the trespassers at AME....you sound like you are 1 sided....I would have listened a little more if you weren't so 1 sided in your comments....but I guess not many people in 204 can remain neutral...that is why an independent party (not in IL) should be doing this...too many feelings on both sides that get in the way... |
|
|
|
Post by hillmom on Mar 15, 2008 21:35:51 GMT -6
The readings aren't so far fetched when you think about it. I'd have to check the google map. Are there powerlines along 59, if not, then they must be buried. Just think the equivalent of those big powerlines buried just a few feet underground. That would mess with the numbers. But like I said, I don't know if there are powerlines along 59 or not at BB. There are powerlines along ogden - they are the wooden kind which since we are doing an EMF lesson tonight produce higher levels of EMF's because there is more currency flowing thru because the voltage is lower. larger powerlines - the big ugly ones by eola actual produce less EMF because the current thru the line is lower because it is a higher voltage line. The height also has a factor in producing lower levels because it dissipates faster. There is also a small power transformer on the property, street lights at the corner, underground cabling. The real point is all this EMF stuff is a scare tactic. Next thing you know we are going to have to have all the doorways widdened so our kids can go to school in plastic bubbles! |
|
