Unity

[rural]

What testing needs to be done on farmland? Other than the P1 study? All areas around the perimeter of the MWGEN site were tested clean. Maybe the PCBs jumped the fence.

[doctorwho]

Apr 26, 2008 22:28:55 GMT -6 rural said:

What testing needs to be done on farmland? Other than the P1 study? All areas around the perimeter of the MWGEN site were tested clean. Maybe the PCBs jumped the fence.

Or followed the pipelines - but hey, that's just crazy talk

[rural]

Interesting proposal. How far down are the pipes and how soon does the clay layer start?

[momof156graders]

The school board lied to voters to get their referendum passed. We voted they got the money, and spent it on something we did not vote for. The administration and school board has misled, distracted, not communicated, been unbelievably reckless. I am not for lawsuits in general, but if our only voice is in the voting booth, that voice was taken away. Now I am for the only option I see left.
Unfortunate, but maybe "suing ourselves" is the only option we have to stop the reckless behavior of this board.

[rural]

Apr 26, 2008 23:10:13 GMT -6 momof156graders said:

The school board lied to voters to get their referendum passed. We voted they got the money, and spent it on something we did not vote for. The administration and school board has misled, distracted, not communicated, been unbelievably reckless. I am not for lawsuits in general, but if our only voice is in the voting booth, that voice was taken away. Now I am for the only option I see left.
Unfortunate, but maybe "suing ourselves" is the only option we have to stop the reckless behavior of this board.

What about the reckless behavior of the NSFOC? Are you prepared for the consequences if they prevail? (Something I highly doubt, but I'm taking liberties for this example.)
I've posted this on the green board, and I'll post it here, as well. I'm sure I'll catch flak for it, but it's my opinion and I'll stand by it:

Unfortunately, I see this situation as AME or bust. At this point we own the AME land. There is no getting out of that.

Worse Case Scenario if NSFOC gets its way:

We are financially unable to buy BB unless we are able to sell AME first. (Maybe the church would buy it back?)

If we can't sell AME, then there are no funds to buy BB and build a school.

End result: No BB. No School. Still liable for BB lawsuits.

ETA: How does that tail you've been chasing taste once you've caught it?

[sashimi]

Rural...the tail tastes fine to me in that I can not live with the philosophy that it is okay to break the rules or ignore the law to justify the means. And I believe in getting a third high school...just not this way and not at the expense of those who relied on the District in casting their vote!.

This is because I believe in our constitutional rights and think it is a slippery slope to say it is acceptable to accept the violations of these rights because some (even if it is a majority..which I question in this case) like the results.

Rural...one of the (many) reasons that the Board specifically excluded the EOLA site before the 2006 referendum (in addition to the environmental concerns) WAS BECAUSE THE BOARD CONCLUDED THAT THE REFERENDUM WOULD NOT PASS if it chose the Eola site for the location of the third school. They may have been right, they may not have, but this was the decision that the Board made...to tie the referendum to the BB LAND!

If you have any doubt of this...let me know and I can send you a list of dozens of documented representations (pre and post vote) where the Board and District affirmed that the referendum was to build a third high school ON THE BB LAND.

I agree that the Board should have never tied the referendum to a specific land location (especially given that it did not own the BB land). However this decision was intentional because of the failure of the first referendum (and was based on its consultant's instruction on how to reverse the first vote).

I can swallow the tail because I can't stand the taste of the alternative.

[jftb]

Apr 26, 2008 21:44:48 GMT -6 voiceofreason said:

There is another group of individuals who are disgruntled. The teachers and staff of 204; they were under the impression that the site for MVHS was 'tested' and safe. They only learned that NO testing whatsoever was performed on the AME site as the EPA has not been on site. (Teachers at last NSFOC meeting discovered this) The employees of 204 have been deceived and are looking elsewhere in light of the fact that Dr. D's new initiatives on Special Education and Contract renewal on the horizon.

I can only speak for myself, but with the 204 pay scale, beautiful buildings, great resources, and awesome families, I'd be happy to throw my resume in the ring for any open position. Contract renewal or no, this is still one of the highest paying districts in the region. Hundreds of spring graduates will probably agree.

[cb]

Apr 27, 2008 8:02:31 GMT -6 jftb said:

Apr 26, 2008 21:44:48 GMT -6 voiceofreason said:

There is another group of individuals who are disgruntled. The teachers and staff of 204; they were under the impression that the site for MVHS was 'tested' and safe. They only learned that NO testing whatsoever was performed on the AME site as the EPA has not been on site. (Teachers at last NSFOC meeting discovered this) The employees of 204 have been deceived and are looking elsewhere in light of the fact that Dr. D's new initiatives on Special Education and Contract renewal on the horizon.

I can only speak for myself, but with the 204 pay scale, beautiful buildings, great resources, and awesome families, I'd be happy to throw my resume in the ring for any open position. Contract renewal or no, this is still one of the highest paying districts in the region. Hundreds of spring graduates will probably agree.

Great. Just what we need. More fresh out of college teachers in our schools. That should improve our test scores.

[Arch]

Apr 26, 2008 23:24:28 GMT -6 rural said:

Apr 26, 2008 23:10:13 GMT -6 momof156graders said:

The school board lied to voters to get their referendum passed. We voted they got the money, and spent it on something we did not vote for. The administration and school board has misled, distracted, not communicated, been unbelievably reckless. I am not for lawsuits in general, but if our only voice is in the voting booth, that voice was taken away. Now I am for the only option I see left.
Unfortunate, but maybe "suing ourselves" is the only option we have to stop the reckless behavior of this board.

What about the reckless behavior of the NSFOC? Are you prepared for the consequences if they prevail? (Something I highly doubt, but I'm taking liberties for this example.)
I've posted this on the green board, and I'll post it here, as well. I'm sure I'll catch flak for it, but it's my opinion and I'll stand by it:

Unfortunately, I see this situation as AME or bust. At this point we own the AME land. There is no getting out of that.

Worse Case Scenario if NSFOC gets its way:

We are financially unable to buy BB unless we are able to sell AME first. (Maybe the church would buy it back?)

If we can't sell AME, then there are no funds to buy BB and build a school.

End result: No BB. No School. Still liable for BB lawsuits.

ETA: How does that tail you've been chasing taste once you've caught it?

Worst case: Kids are alive and we do split shifts and pay higher taxes. Yup, I can live with that and so can my kids.

Are you prepared for a worst-case at Eola? It's a yes/no question.

[sashimi]

Interesting story in the Daily Herald today about the cost of rising gas prices impacting school budgets.....

[rural]

Apr 27, 2008 8:33:03 GMT -6 Arch said:

Apr 26, 2008 23:24:28 GMT -6 rural said:

What about the reckless behavior of the NSFOC? Are you prepared for the consequences if they prevail? (Something I highly doubt, but I'm taking liberties for this example.)
I've posted this on the green board, and I'll post it here, as well. I'm sure I'll catch flak for it, but it's my opinion and I'll stand by it:

Unfortunately, I see this situation as AME or bust. At this point we own the AME land. There is no getting out of that.

Worse Case Scenario if NSFOC gets its way:

We are financially unable to buy BB unless we are able to sell AME first. (Maybe the church would buy it back?)

If we can't sell AME, then there are no funds to buy BB and build a school.

End result: No BB. No School. Still liable for BB lawsuits.

ETA: How does that tail you've been chasing taste once you've caught it?

Worst case: Kids are alive and we do split shifts and pay higher taxes. Yup, I can live with that and so can my kids.

Are you prepared for a worst-case at Eola? It's a yes/no question.

Since I will be sending my own children to this site, I would say yes. Mostly because I feel the odds are close to impossible. Same reason I don't think twice about being stopped at rr crossings when I'm sitting right over the pipelines. Do you begin to sweat and worry? I don't. Fearmongering doesn't work on me, Arch. You should know this by now.

[Arch]

Apr 27, 2008 10:22:01 GMT -6 rural said:

Since I will be sending my own children to this site, I would say yes. Mostly because I feel the odds are close to impossible. Same reason I don't think twice about being stopped at rr crossings when I'm sitting right over the pipelines. Do you begin to sweat and worry? I don't. Fearmongering doesn't work on me, Arch. You should know this by now.

It's not fearmongering. I tell fellow motorcycle riders all the time to wear gear. Some listen. Some don't.

I got tired of making trips to the hospital for those who kept choosing not to and I refused to attend any of their funerals too; and haven't.

[rural]

Apr 27, 2008 7:30:09 GMT -6 sashimi said:

Rural...the tail tastes fine to me in that I can not live with the philosophy that it is okay to break the rules or ignore the law to justify the means. And I believe in getting a third high school...just not this way and not at the expense of those who relied on the District in casting their vote!.

This is because I believe in our constitutional rights and think it is a slippery slope to say it is acceptable to accept the violations of these rights because some (even if it is a majority..which I question in this case) like the results.

Rural...one of the (many) reasons that the Board specifically excluded the EOLA site before the 2006 referendum (in addition to the environmental concerns) WAS BECAUSE THE BOARD CONCLUDED THAT THE REFERENDUM WOULD NOT PASS if it chose the Eola site for the location of the third school. They may have been right, they may not have, but this was the decision that the Board made...to tie the referendum to the BB LAND!

If you have any doubt of this...let me know and I can send you a list of dozens of documented representations (pre and post vote) where the Board and District affirmed that the referendum was to build a third high school ON THE BB LAND.

I agree that the Board should have never tied the referendum to a specific land location (especially given that it did not own the BB land). However this decision was intentional because of the failure of the first referendum (and was based on its consultant's instruction on how to reverse the first vote).

I can swallow the tail because I can't stand the taste of the alternative.

I'm sorry, do you really believe that the SB was on any other course than the BB course at the time of your vote? That secretly they were planning on pursuing the AME sight all along, since before the referendum? What did the ballot you cast specifically say? Others in this community were able to see the forest for the trees. I don't understand how an area of such success and intelligence could have made such a foolish vote.

[we4]

Apr 27, 2008 10:26:19 GMT -6 Arch said:

Apr 27, 2008 10:22:01 GMT -6 rural said:

Since I will be sending my own children to this site, I would say yes. Mostly because I feel the odds are close to impossible. Same reason I don't think twice about being stopped at rr crossings when I'm sitting right over the pipelines. Do you begin to sweat and worry? I don't. Fearmongering doesn't work on me, Arch. You should know this by now.

It's not fearmongering. I tell fellow motorcycle riders all the time to wear gear. Some listen. Some don't.

I got tired of making trips to the hospital for those who kept choosing not to and I refused to attend any of their funerals too; and haven't.

You ride, Arch. Me too. And I always wear a helmet and jacket and boots and long pants. You cannot be 100% safe on a motorcycle, but you can take precautions to get as close to 100% as possible.

Sorry, back on track. I just get excited when I hear of fellow riders.

[Arch]

Apr 27, 2008 10:37:10 GMT -6 we4 said:

Apr 27, 2008 10:26:19 GMT -6 Arch said:

It's not fearmongering. I tell fellow motorcycle riders all the time to wear gear. Some listen. Some don't.

I got tired of making trips to the hospital for those who kept choosing not to and I refused to attend any of their funerals too; and haven't.

You ride, Arch. Me too. And I always wear a helmet and jacket and boots and long pants. You cannot be 100% safe on a motorcycle, but you can take precautions to get as close to 100% as possible.

Sorry, back on track. I just get excited when I hear of fellow riders.

We could put forth numbers and stats showing the # of miles driven per year, the number of riders and the # of accidents equate to a statistically insignificant chance of having a fatal injury or even a crash.

While numbers sliced a particular way may show a particular outcome the fact of the matter is that each and every time you get on the things, there is a built-in danger that can result in death. Period. It can even come if you do everything right.

It just takes something as stupid and simple as someone else dropping the ball for a fraction of a second to turn a good day into a very bad day. Things beyond your own control...

Looping back around to the site... Putting a school WITHIN the PIR of the pipelines is the same thing (in my mind) as stunting at 90 MPH with a t_shirt, no helmet, shorts and flip flops. You may come back to a complete stop many times doing this but on that one off chance that a june bug pops you right on the throat or forehead while doing it, you're toast because you do not have adequate protection. With respect to pipelines, the biggest and best protection against them if something happens is DISTANCE. That DISTANCE is determined by a formula. The distance for those pipes is out beyond 650 feet to not be killed or SERIOUSLY injured or lose property. We will be within 220 feet of them.

That is not calculated safety, that is blatant disregard for proper safeguards. *THAT* is why that land is unacceptable to me.