|
|
Post by rew on Apr 24, 2008 4:52:26 GMT -6
I did feel, as I was listening to public comment at the meeting, hmmm, the public is at such a disadvantage, no one really knows what they are addressing. How can you take public comment when no one knows what the land is, what the price is and what the alternatives are?
On the other hand, hasn't MM said that land deals are the one thing the SB has complete control over? He kept refering to the public comment as a courtesy.
|
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Apr 24, 2008 5:17:55 GMT -6
I actually think the judges comments are quite interesting. He suggested remediation. Isn't this what you guys have wanted all along? A chance to be heard? I think you will have a heck of a lot more power with a neutral guy who will say, "Now, Dash, let's let the other side voice their opinions." I know some feel this is a waste of time, but many of you have said this is the most important reason you feel the way you do is that you haven't been heard. A chance to say, hey, we are not the evil ones in this deal like you make it out to be. We have some valid concerns about how you are running the district. We want to sit down and talk with you. I'm not sure if communication is that important with the NSFOC group however, so they may choose the more aggressive approach. As far as BB or nothing goes, there probably isn't a lot of room for discussion. There will be a lot of eyes on this group to see their next chess move.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 24, 2008 5:42:44 GMT -6
I actually think the judges comments are quite interesting. He suggested remediation. Isn't this what you guys have wanted all along? A chance to be heard? I think you will have a heck of a lot more power with a neutral guy who will say, "Now, Dash, let's let the other side voice their opinions." I know some feel this is a waste of time, but many of you have said this is the most important reason you feel the way you do is that you haven't been heard. A chance to say, hey, we are not the evil ones in this deal like you make it out to be. We have some valid concerns about how you are running the district. We want to sit down and talk with you. I'm not sure if communication is that important with the NSFOC group however, so they may choose the more aggressive approach. There will be a lot of eyes on this group to see their next chess move. Let me tell you a personal experience: When you write a formal and respectful business letter to both the Board of Education and the District Super and Deputy Super methodically spelling out concerns and even information that seems to be 'in error' (note, not an accusation of lying but rather an open door to say Hey, this is wrong and OBVIOUSLY it was not an intentional error on your part but it's wrong nonetheless... and by the way, here is the accurate information complete with govt. sources, etc etc) and the replies back amount to either No response at all or a quipy attempt to re-frame the 'error' which in and of itself is yet another 'error'... and this is repeated with many things brought up over the course of time... IN ADDITION offering time and time again to sit down in person with them to go over this information and offering to re-check their data FOR FREE in a form of PEER REVIEW to ensure that they are armed properly with all of the complete and accurate information to make a very important financial decision where literally kid's lives will hang in the balance as the decades move on.... And you get 0 response to those offers... ... I think it's pretty clear who really doesn't have any interest in sitting down and talking or working things through. They either already had their decision and course of action (since this could cause a deviation from that) or they have a problem with using money wisely and accepting help from FREE resources. If I would have asked them for a $100,000 CONSULTING fee instead do you think they would have said YES? No.. that leads back to supposition #1.. predetermined outcome and this would deviate from that. |
|
|
|
Post by JB on Apr 24, 2008 5:53:16 GMT -6
I actually think the judges comments are quite interesting. He suggested remediation. Isn't this what you guys have wanted all along? A chance to be heard? I think you will have a heck of a lot more power with a neutral guy who will say, "Now, Dash, let's let the other side voice their opinions." I know some feel this is a waste of time, but many of you have said this is the most important reason you feel the way you do is that you haven't been heard. A chance to say, hey, we are not the evil ones in this deal like you make it out to be. We have some valid concerns about how you are running the district. We want to sit down and talk with you. I'm not sure if communication is that important with the NSFOC group however, so they may choose the more aggressive approach. As far as BB or nothing goes, there probably isn't a lot of room for discussion. There will be a lot of eyes on this group to see their next chess move. I'd be all for this if the following happened 1). SB stopped all construction, and legal parties suspended their lawsuits. 2). Mediation was open to the media, and public observers. 3). Mediators came from out of district. 4). Anything that can be supported by data actually is, ie transportation costs, net present value analysis It would be interesting to see the SB's reaction to such an offer. |
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Apr 24, 2008 5:55:21 GMT -6
I don't know how remediation works. How much power does the middle guy have? I agree, you aren't going to get the Dash to say, "OK, we'll build on BB" which is what the NSFOC wants. But I do think that a lot of us, regardless of which "side' you are on, wants the SB to be respectful and accountable for some of their actions. Maybe this would help. Then again, maybe it wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Apr 24, 2008 5:57:53 GMT -6
I actually think the judges comments are quite interesting. He suggested remediation. Isn't this what you guys have wanted all along? A chance to be heard? I think you will have a heck of a lot more power with a neutral guy who will say, "Now, Dash, let's let the other side voice their opinions." I know some feel this is a waste of time, but many of you have said this is the most important reason you feel the way you do is that you haven't been heard. A chance to say, hey, we are not the evil ones in this deal like you make it out to be. We have some valid concerns about how you are running the district. We want to sit down and talk with you. I'm not sure if communication is that important with the NSFOC group however, so they may choose the more aggressive approach. As far as BB or nothing goes, there probably isn't a lot of room for discussion. There will be a lot of eyes on this group to see their next chess move. I'd be all for this if the following happened 1). SB stopped all construction, and legal parties suspended their lawsuits. 2). Mediation was open to the media, and public observers. 3). Mediators came from out of district. 4). Anything that can be supported by data actually is, ie transportation costs, net present value analysis It would be interesting to see the SB's reaction to such an offer. Excellent idea. Again, let's not take up the court's time. Let's try to solve this like civilized people. At least offer it, and if the SB says, no, we don't want to sit down, then we all know it's time for some or all of these SB members to leave. ETA: At least if the NSFOC offers to be civilized and the SB denies it, then we can see the true colors of each party. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 24, 2008 6:02:22 GMT -6
I don't know how remediation works. How much power does the middle guy have? I agree, you aren't going to get the Dash to say, "OK, we'll build on BB" which is what the NSFOC wants. But I do think that a lot of us, regardless of which "side' you are on, wants the SB to be respectful and accountable for some of their actions. Maybe this would help. Then again, maybe it wouldn't. The only reason to not build on BB, according to them, is 'cost'. You can not do a cost comparison with any other land until you know the damages and lawsuit amounts we will get hit with by LEAVING the site. This then puts a monkey wrench on their 2009 opening. 2009 is/was still possible at BB today if we rolled over and said OK as it is with AME because all of the pre-work is DONE. If any of that is in error, please feel free to correct. |
|
|
|
Post by slp on Apr 24, 2008 6:03:19 GMT -6
I actually think the judges comments are quite interesting. He suggested remediation. Its 'mediation', not 'remediation' ! |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 24, 2008 6:03:56 GMT -6
The SB/Admin is wedged. A Crowbar is coming. The result will be damage to the taxpayers and the district if they do not remove themselves from the corner they put themselves in.
Personally, I think they are in denial about the predicament.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 24, 2008 6:04:24 GMT -6
I actually think the judges comments are quite interesting. He suggested remediation. Its 'mediation', not 'remediation' ! Well, making it less lethal to the taxpayers is not a bad thing  |
|
|
|
Post by slp on Apr 24, 2008 6:06:47 GMT -6
Its 'mediation', not 'remediation' ! Well, making it less lethal to the taxpayers is not a bad thing good point. Perhaps the judge wants mediation AND remediation! ha! |
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Apr 24, 2008 6:10:16 GMT -6
I actually think the judges comments are quite interesting. He suggested remediation. Its 'mediation', not 'remediation' ! Thank you for pointing that out, O Wise One. definition of remediation: the correction of something bad or defective Maybe that was a subliminal typing thing. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 24, 2008 6:30:48 GMT -6
Its 'mediation', not 'remediation' ! Thank you for pointing that out, O Wise One. definition of remediation: the correction of something bad or defective Maybe that was a subliminal typing thing. then the right word might have been resignation (s)  |
|
|
|
Post by rural on Apr 24, 2008 6:36:27 GMT -6
I don't know how remediation works. How much power does the middle guy have? I agree, you aren't going to get the Dash to say, "OK, we'll build on BB" which is what the NSFOC wants. But I do think that a lot of us, regardless of which "side' you are on, wants the SB to be respectful and accountable for some of their actions. Maybe this would help. Then again, maybe it wouldn't. This may help answer your question about mediation: Career: Mediator A Day in the Life Being a professional mediator is all about conflict resolution, and so the job demands a person with excellent reasoning, problem-solving, and peace-making abilities. When two parties have a dispute and wish to avoid the legal intricacies of litigation, they may call in a mediator to facilitate an equitable solution. While many are suspicious of lawyers and attorneys, mediators are more often attributed with qualities of wisdom, trustworthiness, and neutrality. Unlike lawyers and judges, who evaluate, assess, and decide for others,mediators help participating parties evaluate, assess, and decide for themselves. Parties wishing to avoid the delays, high costs, publicity, and ill will brought on by litigation look to mediators as a more peaceful, inexpensive, and expedient alternative. The mediator’s job is to listen, sort through differences between the two parties involved in a dispute, and find common ground upon which to ascertain a solution. A good mediator is honest, neutral, and encouraging; listens well; and has excellent communication skills. Helping two parties arrive at a mutually agreeable solution also takes a fair amount of creativity. Mediation is considered a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Although ADR sounds like a terrible syndrome, it’s in fact a more Zenlike approach to conflict resolution, with mediators as the master practitioners. Corporations, government agencies, community organizations, schools, neighborhoods, and even families will turn to mediators when they seek mutually acceptable answers to their problems. Examples of conflicts they work to resolve include labor/management issues, health care disputes, environmental/public policy issues, and international conflicts. www.princetonreview.com/cte/profiles/dayInLife.asp?careerID=204 |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 24, 2008 6:36:33 GMT -6
I don't know how remediation works. How much power does the middle guy have? I agree, you aren't going to get the Dash to say, "OK, we'll build on BB" which is what the NSFOC wants. But I do think that a lot of us, regardless of which "side' you are on, wants the SB to be respectful and accountable for some of their actions. Maybe this would help. Then again, maybe it wouldn't. I want the SB held accountable for their actions, but for those with horrible commutes they shouldn' have, for those who do not trust that site, and for the district who now has a site that serves a small fraction ( sorry, but true - < 20%) of the district - an I'm sorry does nothing for. This is a forever situation for them .. so no, I do not see how anything will be accomplished. The last chance for mediation in my opinion was when M2 said, ALL options are on the table, then 48 hours later behind closed doors, without looking at ANY other option, went ahead with close to the same plan. Not even all the SB members got to be a part of the decision making, tell me how someone else will be ? |
|
