Disappointment - Cont'd

[wolverine]

thebeefeater said:

What? If by "everyone else is screwed" you mean that we have a third HS that will allow for smaller schools with more opportunities for our children then you need a new definition of "screwed"

No, if you've been paying attention, "screwed" means longer commute times, increased transportation costs, and decreased involvement at these schools from parents and kids from these outlying areas.

So, you and your children will probably have even more opportunities - new school, and fewer people interested in wasting their lives in the car.

[d204mom]

momof156graders said:

From: Ed Dalton
Sent: Fri 2/15/2008 9:38 AM
To: Suzanne Hart
Cc: Mindy Munn
Subject: School District #204


Commissioner Hart,
Good morning. As per your request after last nights Board Meeting, I have attached my correspondence to School District #204 in regards to the maintenance of the pedestrian bridge that is to be built over Route 59.
As you are aware the bridge has not yet been built and the Park District was not informed by the School District that they intended to use this as a pedestrian route for their students’ verses busing the students to Neuqua High School as they currently do. With the information available to us we categorized the bridge as a secondary priority.
We are asked periodically by residents and both School District # 203 and #204 to add additional areas to our primary snow routes and all requests are evaluated and considered. We would welcome a request from School District #204 to have the bridge added to our primary snow removal route. We currently have crews clearing the parking lots at Frontier for the students to park so this request can be easily accommodated.

Ed Dalton
Parks Director
320 W. Jackson Avenue
Naperville, Illinois 60540
Tel: [phone]
Fax:[phone]
[e-mail]

If this is authentic... I can't believe that Birkett and Daeschner aren't embarrassed about the information they released. I wonder who had final say on the packet of info? Surely the buck stops with Daeschner.

[d204mom]

wolverine said:

thebeefeater said:

What? If by "everyone else is screwed" you mean that we have a third HS that will allow for smaller schools with more opportunities for our children then you need a new definition of "screwed"

No, if you've been paying attention, "screwed" means longer commute times, increased transportation costs, and decreased involvement at these schools from parents and kids from these outlying areas.

So, you and your children will probably have even more opportunities - new school, and fewer people interested in wasting their lives in the car.

$150 M is nothing to sneeze at... let's see what it gets us:

-crappier commutes district-wide / split ES / split MS
-school next to power lines
-school next to RR trax
-school on top of hazardous pipelines
-school on top of 'remediated' hazard
-eases overcrowding

This is the best they can do for $150 MILLION DOLLARS? We are paying top dollar for second rate. I don't get it.

[doctorwho]

wolverine said:

d204mom said:

thebeefeater said:

It took some doing but the DH found some of these extreme minority opinions to publish in the paper. Someone must have pointed them in the right direction. Wonder who that coulda been?

Farther east, an Owen family has no concerns that they would have the longest bus ride -- about 35 minutes -- to Metea Valley.

Angie Gaul said she and her children are "excited" about being able to open a new high school.

Her eighth-grader would be a sophomore going into Metea in 2009. She also has children in third and sixth grades.

"A new school means new opportunities and experiences and that's important," she said. "My two older kids have talked about friends they would move on with and friends they would leave behind, but they'll figure that out in time."

------------------
Oh, and by the way, Owen, Watts, Cow, Fry & Peterson aren't saying NO to a 3rd high school. They are saying find a way for more equitable boundaries. So I don't see the similarity between the Brookdale NO vote and today's conversation.

She's right. We still believe that the district needs a third HS - little arguement on that. Many people I know think the current location is bad for the district. Most are upset we're being shuttled cross district.

There is no correlation at all- but some would want you to believe so.
We were OK with Wv - MV(BB) or NV -- and different boundary options had us at each --

the ISSUE is going to the school furthest from our house - and taking the Brookdale method of travel to WV - we also would drive past WVHS to get to MV.

And the MS island - we were more than glad to give up our spot there to someone else gong to WVHS -it could have been addressed - but it sounds better this way now

[doctorwho]

d204mom said:

wolverine said:

No, if you've been paying attention, "screwed" means longer commute times, increased transportation costs, and decreased involvement at these schools from parents and kids from these outlying areas.

So, you and your children will probably have even more opportunities - new school, and fewer people interested in wasting their lives in the car.

$150 M is nothing to sneeze at... let's see what it gets us:

-crappier commutes district-wide / split ES / split MS
-school next to power lines
-school next to RR trax
-school on top of hazardous pipelines
-school on top of 'remediated' hazard
-eases overcrowding

This is the best they can do for $150 MILLION DOLLARS? We are paying top dollar for second rate. I don't get it.

neither do most people -- does anyone think that if this was actually what was placed in front of us for a vote ( even though we need a 3rd HS) - this would have a snowballs chance in Hades of passing ?

[confused]

sleeplessinnpvl said:

Did anyone check with the City? The Park District will not maintain the actual bridge. IMO, the SB still has the ultimate say on this if the City won't put it Priority One, right?

Based on how I read the memo, the City won't be waking up at 5 am to shovel the bridge. Therefore, the district has not notified the Park District that it has to be a priority one route because it's the bridge, not the walkway that is the issue. Am I missing something?

The way I read this, the park district WILL maintain the actual bridge and the walkway - it sounds like all they need is for the School District to request the bridge be priority one. From what this official says, it appears the SD has never done that, but the memo they released implied that they had.

[rew]

The SD/SB has implied many things that never quite turned out to be fact...

or better yet they presented as fact what turned out only to be implied?

[confused]

thebeefeater said:

archwinsome said:

I agree, his vote was admirable even though his neighbors were quite angry and came out to the tune of 4:1 to attempt to sink the entire referendum.

OK, so 1 out of 4 voted YES to the referendum. I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Fry that support these boundaries. I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Watts that support these boundaries, I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Owen that support these boundaries.

As far as I am concerned the BD people were overwhelmingly positive given the fact that I hear 0% of the people from these areas in support of the boundaries. Even though, they are not getting the short end of the stick from all angles.

I think it was 1/5 - last time I checked that is 20% (1/4 would be 25%). There probably are some people with real little kids who don't realize the true impact of these things and aren't overly upset. They probably wouldn't post, right? Even the 20% from BD who supported the ref, I'm sure were not happy.

The problem now is no one trusts the motivations behind these decisions. When they target people and don't use uniform logic, it tends to make people question the way everything has been done. Sorry if you just want to continue trusting and trusting, but many people just don't see the logic in this boundary proposal, with it's multiple splits, ridiculous commutes, and lack of academic balance. Their goal was to reduce transportation times overall, and they increased!

If you want to blindly follow, don't blame the rest of the district who don't.

[doctorwho]

confused said:

thebeefeater said:

OK, so 1 out of 4 voted YES to the referendum. I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Fry that support these boundaries. I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Watts that support these boundaries, I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Owen that support these boundaries.

As far as I am concerned the BD people were overwhelmingly positive given the fact that I hear 0% of the people from these areas in support of the boundaries. Even though, they are not getting the short end of the stick from all angles.

I think it was 1/5 - last time I checked that is 20% (1/4 would be 25%). There probably are some people with real little kids who don't realize the true impact of these things and aren't overly upset. They probably wouldn't post, right? Even the 20% from BD who supported the ref, I'm sure were not happy.

The problem now is no one trusts the motivations behind these decisions. When they target people and don't use uniform logic, it tends to make people question the way everything has been done. Sorry if you just want to continue trusting and trusting, but many people just don't see the logic in this boundary proposal, with it's multiple splits, ridiculous commutes, and lack of academic balance. Their goal was to reduce transportation times overall, and they increased!

If you want to blindly follow, don't blame the rest of the district who don't.

Add on top of it the fact that we are getting this site - BB had none of these issues of safety - that's why it was deemed the best site by far from the same SB you trust implicitly. This site already has a perception problem for this school before the first shovel is overturned... that's agreat way to start. Add to that 50% of the school that absolutely does NOT want to be there -- all they need to do now is make it the lowest performing school and they will have the hat trick from a perception standpoint that we have been hearing about for 2 years. You would think they would know better since that is one of the focuses they are trying to fix --

again the opperative word is fix - not move like they did with the commutes - and fixed nothing.


and telling people they are not getting the short end of the stick is based on YOUR prioirities, not ours.....

but we can rest easy now because all is right with the world- you have the closest ES - the closest MS and now the closest HS -- the district is surely better as a whole for that

[Arch]

doctorwho said:

rew said:

The SD/SB has implied many things that never quite turned out to be fact...

or better yet they presented as fact what turned out only to be implied?

you mean like " we can afford the worst case scenario @ BB " ?

Actually the quote was:

---------
Metzger said he isn't worried about getting locked into whatever price the jury sets.

"I don't believe there's much risk of it being an out-of-control number in the first place," he said. "Our data is better than their data. Even if it's the worst case scenario, we can afford it so it doesn't matter."
---------
Source: www.studentsfirst.us/news/contentview.asp?c=197819

[slp]

rew said:

CB acted in the interest of the district because he HAD to get VOTES. It was not a selfless act.

It is true; CB stated that he voted the way he did to get a 3rd high school built and he knew that to pass the referendum he had to vote down Option #6. He voted to PASS a referendum, which it did.

[momof156graders]

thebeefeater said:

momof156graders said:

No - the bus route for my personal neighborhood stopis now a 3 MIN RETURN time.
Route #: NVH229 NVHS Outbound (NVHS to Rollingridge and Junebreeze) To School depending which corner they stand on - several choices within 1/2 block the longest choice is 12 min.
Route #: NVH019 NVHS Inbound
So no - my commute time is not increasing by 4 minutes. It is increasing 10 fold! So yes, I take issue with that.

And what say you about the average bus time? 29 minutes now and 33 minutes to WVHS?

I am not sure what you mean by 29/33 min. bus ride. I said my children's personal situation has their current bus rout which has one way only 3 min. Changing to over a half hour each way. That is my problem.

[slp]

rew said:

Wouldn't that be great? If we could re- vote?

Now there's an idea.


And I guarantee you that if you presented Owen/Watts/Cowlishaw/ Fry/Gombert/ White Eagle with the option to be an island, split their middle school AND STAY at their current HS assignment, you'd have closer to 100% YES votes.

I'm all for another VOTE.

[slp]

rew said:

Wouldn't that be great? If we could re- vote?

Now there's an idea.


And I guarantee you that if you presented Owen/Watts/Cowlishaw/ Fry/Gombert/ White Eagle with the option to be an island, split their middle school AND STAY at their current HS assignment, you'd have closer to 100% YES votes.

AGREE!

[slp]

confused said:

thebeefeater said:

OK, so 1 out of 4 voted YES to the referendum. I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Fry that support these boundaries. I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Watts that support these boundaries, I want to hear from the 1 out of 4 at Owen that support these boundaries.

As far as I am concerned the BD people were overwhelmingly positive given the fact that I hear 0% of the people from these areas in support of the boundaries. Even though, they are not getting the short end of the stick from all angles.

I think it was 1/5 - last time I checked that is 20% (1/4 would be 25%). There probably are some people with real little kids who don't realize the true impact of these things and aren't overly upset. They probably wouldn't post, right? Even the 20% from BD who supported the ref, I'm sure were not happy.

The problem now is no one trusts the motivations behind these decisions. When they target people and don't use uniform logic, it tends to make people question the way everything has been done. Sorry if you just want to continue trusting and trusting, but many people just don't see the logic in this boundary proposal, with it's multiple splits, ridiculous commutes, and lack of academic balance. Their goal was to reduce transportation times overall, and they increased!

If you want to blindly follow, don't blame the rest of the district who don't.

Well said concerned!

ETA: I mean confused, sorry!