|
|
Post by entitled on Apr 13, 2008 10:51:23 GMT -6
A lawsuit by people who are willing to stand step on thousands of children for what they believe in to get what they want. If that makes you feel better to put these people down for standing up for what they believe in. C'est la vie. Just maybe, they kept a few thousand children safe. The unknown is what makes this situation so combustible! |
|
|
|
Post by entitled on Apr 13, 2008 10:56:18 GMT -6
Arch. do you think the SB will buy God's land, I mean the AME's land? Do we need to be disrepectful and ridicule a church? Is that what the mentality of this community/situation has come to? |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Apr 13, 2008 11:03:33 GMT -6
"Our stance was always that our 80 acres was not negotiable, to the school district or anyone," Forest said Friday. "But the church is very saddened for the children of District 204 and disappointed for them. We've put all of the options on the table so equality and justice can prevail over selfishness and discontent. That is God's will."
Entitled,
I don't think anyone here is putting down the church in any way. I was upset after reading the above comment. I think it was out of line and uncalled for.
Again, I hope to see our school board decide that it's time to put this fire out!
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 13, 2008 11:03:54 GMT -6
Arch. do you think the SB will buy God's land, I mean the AME's land? I fear they are delusional enough to think they can make it work. |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 13, 2008 11:04:39 GMT -6
A lawsuit by people who are willing to stand step on thousands of children for what they believe in to get what they want. If that makes you feel better to put these people down for standing up for what they believe in. C'est la vie. Just maybe, they kept a few thousand children safe. The unknown is what makes this situation so combustible! If their lawsuit did not include the BB or nothing language, I would agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, they are precluding anything but BB, so I can't have your generous view of these people. The lawsuit says it all. ETA: Well 75% I don't agree the children are in danger on AME, but everyone here knows my opinion on this. |
|
|
|
Post by drdavelasik on Apr 13, 2008 11:04:41 GMT -6
Arch. do you think the SB will buy God's land, I mean the AME's land? Do we need to be disrepectful and ridicule a church? Is that what the mentality of this community/situation has come to? Wouldn't be the first time. Found this post on one of the other blogs: It is a blessing that St. John AME has extended themselves to the school district in light of how poorly the school board President treated the church during his re-election bid. A church member addressed this at a school board meeting last year. She felt the school board passively allowed the church to be attacked and ridiculed. St. John has provided a true example of forgiving our trespassers. Apparently the paper also printed quotes from a nonexistent person. The is no Greg Forest as a Trustee of St. John. Hmmmmm Good job Herald!!!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by snerdley on Apr 13, 2008 11:12:49 GMT -6
A lawsuit by people who are willing to stand step on thousands of children for what they believe in to get what they want. This is complete bull-sh*t. First, I'm not a member or supporter of NSFOC, but the checkbook is out now. The district and SB sold the community on BB. Then they got hold of our money and drastically changed their direction. D*mn straight people are mad - and they're getting madder by the minute thanks to the antics of Chad Martinsen and Jeannette whatever. So they were shopping AME in 2005 and 2006 - wasn't that during the same period they were selling the public on BB and spending our taxdollars to sue BB and telling us not to worry they could afford the land?! Were they shopping AME while they tried to secure quick-take legislation? Something stinks to high heavens now and somehow I don't think GOD is on their side. I used to think the Lisa Madigan angle was a long shot, but the more we learn the more I think we need involvement from a higher authority. I am placing a call to Darlene Rushetti (sp?) first thing tomorrow morning. We desperately need her help. |
|
|
|
Post by snerdley on Apr 13, 2008 11:14:36 GMT -6
"Our stance was always that our 80 acres was not negotiable, to the school district or anyone," Forest said Friday. "But the church is very saddened for the children of District 204 and disappointed for them. We've put all of the options on the table so equality and justice can prevail over selfishness and discontent. That is God's will." Entitled, I don't think anyone here is putting down the church in any way. I was upset after reading the above comment. I think it was out of line and uncalled for. Again, I hope to see our school board decide that it's time to put this fire out! Add to that Chad's instructions to pray. Mr. Martinsen, I just returned from church and in my most humble opinion I do not believe that Jesus would approve of your antics. He didn't preach hate. |
|
|
|
Post by drdavelasik on Apr 13, 2008 11:17:24 GMT -6
A lawsuit by people who are willing to stand step on thousands of children for what they believe in to get what they want. This is complete bull-sh*t. First, I'm not a member or supporter of NSFOC, but the checkbook is out now. The district and SB sold the community on BB. Then they got hold of our money and drastically changed their direction. D*mn straight people are mad - and they're getting madder by the minute thanks to the antics of Chad Martinsen and Jeannette whatever. So they were shopping AME in 2005 and 2006 - wasn't that during the same period they were selling the public on BB and spending our taxdollars to sue BB and telling us not to worry they could afford the land?! Were they shopping AME while they tried to secure quick-take legislation? Something stinks to high heavens now and somehow I don't think GOD is on their side. I used to think the Lisa Madigan angle was a long shot, but the more we learn the more I think we need involvement from a higher authority. I am placing a call to Darlene Rushetti (sp?) first thing tomorrow morning. We desperately need her help. Now even I knew that! |
|
|
|
Post by WeBe204 on Apr 13, 2008 11:17:32 GMT -6
I have always thought the pace at which the district was moving was a strategy in its own way. The speed allowed the district to move ahead of the public. Because let's be honest not everyone sits on this blogs or hyper-focuses on the issues. That advantage is now gone. I am sure each person on this board has sensed a heightening of awareness by the general public.
There is a discipline called organizational behavior.
I can not imagine that this administration and board have not taken at least an under grade class in these concepts. Much like the build smart guidelines, the board/admin has ignored even the most basic tenants of this discipline. The whole community is an excellent case study in what happens when buy in is achieved (second ref) and when it is not new location selection. What ever side you are on had "buy in" been achieved we would be fine. Yes, it takes time and meetings etc. But it is crucial. One of the many reasons why I personally felt 2009 was never an option. NEVER!!!
I rarely hate people. I hate situations. I sometimes hate the things people so. But I can tell all of you as a new resident of this area and a new resident of IPSD I hate this situation. And I will always believe this is a reflection on absolutely horrid change management capabilities of this administration and school board.
Anyone from the outside looking in can see this is the case. This is one of the largest school district in IL and it does get noticed. Our stories are now in the Tribune. To be very honest I am very surprised that the leadership of Aurora, Plainfield, Naperville, and Bolingbrook have not stepped in since this situation is tarnishing the image of each city.
|
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 13, 2008 11:20:47 GMT -6
This is complete bull-sh*t.First, I'm not a member or supporter of NSFOC, but the checkbook is out now. The district and SB sold the community on BB. Then they got hold of our money and drastically changed their direction. D*mn straight people are mad - and they're getting madder by the minute thanks to the antics of Chad Martinsen and Jeannette whatever. So they were shopping AME in 2005 and 2006 - wasn't that during the same period they were selling the public on BB and spending our taxdollars to sue BB and telling us not to worry they could afford the land?! Were they shopping AME while they tried to secure quick-take legislation? Something stinks to high heavens now and somehow I don't think GOD is on their side. I used to think the Lisa Madigan angle was a long shot, but the more we learn the more I think we need involvement from a higher authority. I am placing a call to Darlene Rushetti (sp?) first thing tomorrow morning. We desperately need her help. Exactly my reacation when I first read their Complaint. |
|
|
|
Post by snerdley on Apr 13, 2008 11:21:05 GMT -6
If that makes you feel better to put these people down for standing up for what they believe in. C'est la vie. Just maybe, they kept a few thousand children safe. The unknown is what makes this situation so combustible! If their lawsuit did not include the BB or nothing language, I would agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, they are precluding anything but BB, so I can't have your generous view of these people. The lawsuit says it all. ETA: Well 75% I don't agree the children are in danger on AME, but everyone here knows my opinion on this. This bothered me as well - but the district spent alot of money selling the public on BB. They never had a plan B. Isn't that what they told us? But was that just more lies? I was never a fan of BB - but I think the best thing is to go back to the original plan (we aren't saving any money now). In addition, that would make the 3 lawsuits go away. I fear that the BB suits will bankrupt the district. Either that or take the whole thing back to the voters. Those are the only 2 viable options at this point. I'm joining the fight now. They have pushed me over the edge. |
|
|
|
Post by entitled on Apr 13, 2008 11:24:37 GMT -6
If that makes you feel better to put these people down for standing up for what they believe in. C'est la vie. Just maybe, they kept a few thousand children safe. The unknown is what makes this situation so combustible! If their lawsuit did not include the BB or nothing language, I would agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, they are precluding anything but BB, so I can't have your generous view of these people. The lawsuit says it all. ETA: Well 75% I don't agree the children are in danger on AME, but everyone here knows my opinion on this. Many have expressed the desire for the SD to proceed on the land that was expressly marketed to the community before the vote. These plaintiffs put their desire in a legal question to the courts. I know that I am unqualified to determine if the land is safe or not (but apparently, our SB thought at one time it was not), however I don't believe in taking a risk with children, anyone's. I agree there are numerous motives and maybe all aren't noble. But if one believes in democracy, then the right to challenge authority is offered by the courts. I applaud anyone who stands up for what they believe and pursues it in a civil manner. |
|
|
|
Post by WeBe204 on Apr 13, 2008 11:25:33 GMT -6
Apparently the paper also printed quotes from a nonexistent person. The is no Greg Forest as a Trustee of St. John. Hmmmmm Good job Herald!!!!! I have heard and seen this comment a few times over the last 24 hours. Has it been verified? If so, we really are on a crazy train. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 13, 2008 11:26:00 GMT -6
This is complete bull-sh*t. Exactly my reacation when I first read their Complaint. the BB one? |
|
