|
|
Post by fence on Apr 13, 2008 9:01:16 GMT -6
What? I think that our latte liberals need to get over themselves. Calling "elitism" amongst residents in this district is nothing short of laughable. Chad and Jennifer, get over yourselves - the world doesn't need another martyr for so shallow of a cause. The plain truth is that everyone wants their own way. I guess we should know that there is no honor among theives. Fence, returning the name calling does not help. It makes it a little harder to defend my neighbors if I am attacked. A latte liberal Obama Mama |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 13, 2008 9:03:45 GMT -6
I wonder if MWGEN is happy that Mr. Martinson "translated" their letter to Dist 204. His claim that NSFOC "worked through highly paid lawyers and with lobbyists through back-door political channels to endanger our ability to do business in the state of Illinois" is pretty strong if not slanderous. Could this possibly have happened? Does this guy really believe that a politician can or would even try to dictate who we get our power from. They would have to be delusional to think they could pull that off. Maybe I'm naive, but this a really tall tale. I believe he's still stuck in scapegoat mentality. I honestly believe MWGEN's lawyers said.. Uh, if we have these problems there at a plant that ran infrequently, then guess what problems we have at our other generating stations that run 24x7x365 using dirtier fuel... The last thing we need are more neighborhoods near our plants going on an environmental witch-hunt all around the country and up through their parent company and other subsidiaries. It's a pandora's box that no power company wants to deal with (except one who has already made a voluntary settlement with the Federal EPA for hundreds of millions of dollars). |
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Apr 13, 2008 9:08:31 GMT -6
Got to agree with you on that doc. Not many people in this district seem to be trying to make anything work in a calm way. It's my way or the highway. That applies to NSFOC, n-fraud, the SB. I want proof from the SB that they are considering all options, not just wordspeak to the newspapers. Some people on here have had some nice discussions about possibilities and considering other options. But I have a hard time believing some numbers being thrown around. It would be nice to have an independent evaluator come in for that. I am really liking the idea of that citizen group formation but again, those idiot signs with the arrows pointing at each other keep coming into my mind. I think this district is too divided for that to even occur. But if we did have one rep from every ES maybe we would get something accomplished, I don't know. Sleepless, thank you for seeing that. We may not agree on everything but let me ask you this. But for the Grace of 5A instead of 5B, this could very well be your community being called rascists and Elitists by some, I hope you realize that. How would you feel then. And let's face ti with a SB election in April - who knows if boundaries are really a done deal anywhere any more-- I would hope everyone speaks out against these types of slanderous comments - they are a reflection on our entire community - and are an embarassment. Would you not agree Also does ANYONE beleive ALL options are back on the table. If another decision is made Monday, did they go back thru everything ? C'mon -- I don't believe revisiting BB or looking at MACOM are anywhere near the table - one of which I don't believe was EVER on the table - let alone now. This whole thing has got to stop. I can't stand the racist etc comments. We all know it is being thrown out there because people are desperate. Yes, if it was option 5B instead of 5A, my community could also be in TG's position. That is why I feel their pain. It's this labeling of everyone based on what one person said at the board meeting who just moved here. That gets translated into a buzz word "racist/elitist" which is used by another group to feed the flames to get what they want. It's all about agendas. Everyone has one and they aren't all the same. Hence the conflict. And doc, at this point, I don't even care where they put my kid. Go ahead and change the boundaries. I frankly would drive to Matea if it meant my kid will not have to go to school with 4999 other kids. As for all the options being on the table, I fear that is not true either. I have sent out emails to the SB pleading for them to consider everything again. It's the only way we can have rest in this community. |
|
acm
Frosh
Posts: 10
|
Post by acm on Apr 13, 2008 9:10:27 GMT -6
Personally, I don't feel the need to use an emotionally charged work like racism-- however I do feel that I've seen evidence that the NSFOC is driven by boundries, and a desire to send their kids anywhere but WVHS. I can understand wanting to stay where you are. I can understand being upset with how boundries shake out. What I can't understand is how they find their methods to be above board. And I tend to agree with the feeling of "elitistism" and a feeling that a small group are using what ever power then can and manipulating facts to get what they want. The press has manipulted comments on both sides to fuel the fire-- after all, it sells papers. In response to the "vote no" question, I think the vote came so soon after the sting of the island situation that while someone may have felt the need for the HS, they couldn't put pen to paper on something that put their kids in a tough spot (separation from friends and familiarity-- NOT physical spot of WVHS) at a critical point in their development. I don't think it was widely discussed that it could be addressed at the MS boundary level. There was a real feeling of why does the district not view our kids in the same light as anyone else? This is why we rallied to try to eliminate this from happening in any community.
All in all, our district is in sad shape right now. If we could just let the professionals and elected officials work toward resolve and provide non emotionally charged feedback to them I think we can then work toward moving past this mess. Are the SB members infallable, no. Have all of their decisions been perfect, no. Do I believe they are trying to do the best for the community, YES. They have taken on a full time volunteer job on top of their full time jobs and lives. I think it is important to keep that in mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by friend on Apr 13, 2008 9:11:46 GMT -6
I am absolutely disguted by this comment and first and foremost apologize to the entire rest of the 204 community as this is NOT a representative comment of all of the Hill community. I am embarassed to be a part of the Hill community today after this dispicable comment- part of a temper tantrum to get what someone wants. I am sorry people in position of leadership have decided to voice this kind of opinion -- it is mindboggling.
From my experience at Owen, NOT everybody represents what I think about this new HS. It was very clear when a "small group" of people wanted to be split without involving the knowledge of the whole school. At the time, there were signs posted near the school about a meeting at Starbucks, indicating what some thought were a homeowners meeting. As it was not unusual to see signs out about upcoming subdivision events. Even still......the majority of Owen is bused into that school daily. Most of those parents, unless they are walkers,volunteer or attend school functions, do not even drive into that neighborhood.
Point being..........what happened at Owen with the latest boundaries was because of a "small group of people" that represented Owen that did not include me. And I was not included because I was not informed!
I have learned that when people speak they speak for themselves, NOT for a representation of a particular school.
Dr.D has once again has initated a new label in this community........"a small group of people." That label has stuck, but I believe that label could belong to anybody in District 204
So, how is this new HS situation any different to start? A group of people were told one thing and something else happened. People reacted and then other people reacted to them and so on.
In my opinion. The "small group of people in the district" could be anybody! Just depends who you talk to.
[/quote]
|
|
|
|
Post by friend on Apr 13, 2008 9:13:28 GMT -6
Ooops! I did not frame the 1st paragraph correctly. I was commenting on DrWho's comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by entitled on Apr 13, 2008 9:15:10 GMT -6
MWGEN could not assure our governmental leaders, as well as our school leaders that the land could ever be "clean".
I am pleased that my elected official forced the issue using what ever means necessary to get an honest assessment from MWGEN.
|
|
|
|
Post by entitled on Apr 13, 2008 9:17:00 GMT -6
What? Fence, returning the name calling does not help. It makes it a little harder to defend my neighbors if I am attacked. A latte liberal Obama Mama If you don't want to be labeled, then don't label others. What do you mean be "latte liberals"? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 13, 2008 9:19:04 GMT -6
I prefer to be called a triple-shot espra$$hole.
|
|
|
|
Post by cb on Apr 13, 2008 9:19:50 GMT -6
MWGEN could not assure our governmental leaders, as well as our school leaders that the land could ever be "clean". I am pleased that my elected official forced the issue using what ever means necessary to get an honest assessment from MWGEN. What is "whatever means necessary"? Did she say you won't be able to do business in the state of Illinois as Mr. Martinson implies. That's ridiculous--she wouldn't have that power. |
|
|
|
Post by jill on Apr 13, 2008 9:21:17 GMT -6
Personally, I don't feel the need to use an emotionally charged work like racism-- however I do feel that I've seen evidence that the NSFOC is driven by boundries, and a desire to send their kids anywhere but WVHS. I can understand wanting to stay where you are. I can understand being upset with how boundries shake out. What I can't understand is how they find their methods to be above board. And I tend to agree with the feeling of "elitistism" and a feeling that a small group are using what ever power then can and manipulating facts to get what they want. The press has manipulted comments on both sides to fuel the fire-- after all, it sells papers. In response to the "vote no" question, I think the vote came so soon after the sting of the island situation that while someone may have felt the need for the HS, they couldn't put pen to paper on something that put their kids in a tough spot (separation from friends and familiarity-- NOT physical spot of WVHS) at a critical point in their development. I don't think it was widely discussed that it could be addressed at the MS boundary level. There was a real feeling of why does the district not view our kids in the same light as anyone else? This is why we rallied to try to eliminate this from happening in any community. All in all, our district is in sad shape right now. If we could just let the professionals and elected officials work toward resolve and provide non emotionally charged feedback to them I think we can then work toward moving past this mess. Are the SB members infallable, no. Have all of their decisions been perfect, no. Do I believe they are trying to do the best for the community, YES. They have taken on a full time volunteer job on top of their full time jobs and lives. I think it is important to keep that in mind. P- In regards to NSFOC, I'm not sure what options you would find more "above board". Maybe you can make some suggestions. The SB has the benefit of having all the information and the facts. Why the silence? They poured gasoline on the fire by staying silent. Finally, I appreciate the that they all work full time jobs. I've watched other districts work through these issues by forming school and community member committees that ultimately report back to the SB. I think they bit off more than they can chew. Why? I don't know. We're not reinventing the wheel here. If they needed additional resources, they should've asked. |
|
|
|
Post by fryfox on Apr 13, 2008 9:22:01 GMT -6
These comments will surely be great for the TG/WE kids going to Waubonsie in a year. At least Mrs. Streder and Mr. Martinsen won't have to worry about the rift, their kids will be "safely" tucked away at Metea.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 13, 2008 9:22:49 GMT -6
I am absolutely disguted by this comment and first and foremost apologize to the entire rest of the 204 community as this is NOT a representative comment of all of the Hill community. I am embarassed to be a part of the Hill community today after this dispicable comment- part of a temper tantrum to get what someone wants. I am sorry people in position of leadership have decided to voice this kind of opinion -- it is mindboggling. From my experience at Owen, NOT everybody represents what I think about this new HS. It was very clear when a "small group" of people wanted to be split without involving the knowledge of the whole school. At the time, there were signs posted near the school about a meeting at Starbucks, indicating what some thought were a homeowners meeting. As it was not unusual to see signs out about upcoming subdivision events. Even still......the majority of Owen is bused into that school daily. Most of those parents, unless they are walkers,volunteer or attend school functions, do not even drive into that neighborhood. Point being..........what happened at Owen with the latest boundaries was because of a "small group of people" that represented Owen that did not include me. And I was not included because I was not informed! I have learned that when people speak they speak for themselves, NOT for a representation of a particular school. Dr.D has once again has imitated a new label in this community........"a small group of people." That label has stuck, but I believe that label could belong to anybody in District 204 So, how is this new HS situation any different to start? A group of people were told one thing and something else happened. People reacted and then other people reacted to them and so. In my opinion. The "small group of people in the district" could be anybody! Just depends who you talk to. [/quote] sorry , I had heard about the Owen situation -- and I agree - however on this statement "I have learned that when people speak they speak for themselves, NOT for a representation of a particular school. " when one is in a position of power / authority, they have a responsibility to those they represent. Would you not agree. Just because a small group along with you SB member violated your ability to be represented, does mean it's right for someone to consider to speak when they have another role either. These people take oathes to represent their constituencies - obvously they mean nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 13, 2008 9:23:03 GMT -6
Finally, I appreciate the that they all work full time jobs. I've watched other districts work through these issues by forming school and community member committees that ultimately report back to the SB. I think they bit off more than they can chew. Why? I don't know. We're not reinventing the wheel here. If they needed additional resources, they should've asked. They have certainly been offered help on more than one occasion by many people willing to roll up their sleeves and dive right in, bringing with them resources and data. *crickets* |
|
|
|
Post by jill on Apr 13, 2008 9:25:21 GMT -6
Finally, I appreciate the that they all work full time jobs. I've watched other districts work through these issues by forming school and community member committees that ultimately report back to the SB. I think they bit off more than they can chew. Why? I don't know. We're not reinventing the wheel here. If they needed additional resources, they should've asked. They certainly been offered help more more than one occasion by many people willing to roll up their sleeves and dive right in, bringing with them resources and data. *crickets* I heard some of those people speaking at the SB meeting. Whew...my eyes glazed over. I was so proud of THE RESIDENTS in our district during that meeting. |
|
