|
Post by refbasics on Feb 20, 2008 11:02:03 GMT -6
Mark Metzger stood at our PTA meeting weeks before the referendum vote and stated that they would get the land, no matter what. They could handle the jury's price. We questioned them pretty intently because we were doubtful, but he was insistent. ----------- i heard MM say at a scullen PTA meeting that the land would NEVER be above $300K/acre.. that we had the $$ for it.. but we shouldn't talk about it too much cuz we don't want to 'show our hand'! everybody at that meeting very skeptical about what he was, very confidently, saying! ... a better way of saying this... is he said it with a LOT of bravado- which, i know, we have all seen in him over the last couple years! what do i know about this info he gave us?.. i'm not a lawyer, not an expert on eminent domain, and don't have real estate experience.... my only experience is in detecting 'bravado'... then i get nervous! i suppose we could try to dig up the scullen PTA minutes for that meeting!
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 20, 2008 11:03:08 GMT -6
Oh, I'm not missing the point at all. I think the crowd did boo him (I myself groaned). But why direct any anger at him? He didn't cause this debacle, the SB and the administration did. Unless of course there's some meaning in your statement "All I'm saying is there is risk taken when you do." What do you mean? They treat areas differently based on how much they like us and if 100% of the people have behaved according to their standards? This is interesting (and I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be legal). So please explain. I don't disagree with you at all. Last night was unfair to many. I wish everyone could get what they want, but we can't. Nobody said it would be fair for all. SB and Admin has some fault in this, but its not totally their fault. Its an impossible task to make everyone happy. Some SB members may have an personal agenda, but I know 2 of them and I respect their integrity and believe they are working in the interest of the entire SD. I can't speak for the rest. I'm sure we'll use our votes next year. yep- I am hoping 80% of Watts shows up at the polls again next time also- except this time it will be an angry voter set. unlike last time...
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 20, 2008 11:03:21 GMT -6
The log was a govt document, data signed for upon submission. That is how that process works. And they proved there was oil there, did they not? Thus, a spill. Did they disclose the ground water report? Prove it got shipped off. I posted where you can go to verify and prove it's unaccounted for. As of 2003, there was still a full tank of DFO on the premises. Are you saying that in a place that CONSUMES DFO that they would send some away? To where? They had purchase contracts, not the ability to be a reseller. Arch, I live within a half mile radius of MWGEN. We are on well water. Our water has been tested twice within the past 5 years and has come back clean. There is no contamination of ground water. I will be very surprised if Phase II testing comes back with anything significant that can't be easily remedied. In addition, we lived here in 1993. I think if there was a spill of the magnitude of which you are inferring, some of it would have gotten in our water supply, and it did not. There's the 'bathtub' around the tank, but if there was a spill, it would have had to be cleaned up from there. This is why we are asking where the 5 samples were located on the map that indicated DFO in them.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 20, 2008 11:05:54 GMT -6
No, I agree that the board had an idea already what they would do. But if the Watts thing was listed in the questions Dash had, they would have had to address it, at least. The exact same EMF questions that somehow "didn't make Daeschner's list of questions" last night also "didn't make Daeschner's list of questions" at the 1/22 meeting. And Bruce Glawe addressed Watt's issue with distance at the 1/22 meeting by lumping together Watts/Cowlishaw/Owen for a special screwing. He must have forgotten where JS's bunco group meets. This is perfect, because he is broadcasting how he thinks and operates. Like I already mentioned, it's documented who knew what and when.
|
|
|
Post by refbasics on Feb 20, 2008 11:11:05 GMT -6
I don't disagree with you at all. Last night was unfair to many. I wish everyone could get what they want, but we can't. Nobody said it would be fair for all. SB and Admin has some fault in this, but its not totally their fault. Its an impossible task to make everyone happy. Some SB members may have an personal agenda, but I know 2 of them and I respect their integrity and believe they are working in the interest of the entire SD. I can't speak for the rest. I'm sure we'll use our votes next year. yep- I am hoping 80% of Watts shows up at the polls again next time also- except this time it will be an angry voter set. unlike last time... ----------- not only will it be an angry voter set... but the SD won't be able to tell us our taxes are 'going down', and the cost per pupil is great.. cuz now we have 3 high schools to add in to the calculation! (2 'great' arguments gone!)
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Feb 20, 2008 12:35:21 GMT -6
4 students dies in a bus accident in MN today. With all the busses in 204 and the traffic issues, wonder how long this will take to happen here.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 20, 2008 12:49:56 GMT -6
OK this thread is done.
start a new one.....
|
|