|
|
Post by steckmom on May 9, 2008 18:33:50 GMT -6
Should I email the board and find out what kinds they like? You'd better have someone else do it, my guess is your emails now go right to a spam folder.  |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on May 9, 2008 18:37:34 GMT -6
Should I email the board and find out what kinds they like? You'd better have someone else do it, my guess is your emails now go right to a spam folder. There are infinite addresses people can have  |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on May 9, 2008 18:54:19 GMT -6
You'd better have someone else do it, my guess is your emails now go right to a spam folder. There are infinite addresses people can have I think they'd like it topped with the 2006 site selection report. Yummy! |
|
SouthernWolf
Junior
Dean Wermer; when is the parade?
Posts: 139
|
Post by SouthernWolf on May 12, 2008 14:23:59 GMT -6
 Welcome, Fasttimes.  I would love to hear your version of a successful mediation session. In your opinion, where would be a comfortable middle ground for NSFOC and the District? ;D Hi Rural!! Thanks so much for the welcome I love this movie!!! I am unsure where middle ground could be found. I would much prefer to see a confirmation vote on Eola site; but I know this is not going to happen. The perfect time for it would have been in March 2008 when we were still dinging around with soil samples etc. Of course hindsight is 20/20. The two sides are so far apart and its really a zero sum game due to the stated goals of both sides. SB build and open by Aug 2009 at all costs with anything that gets in the way of that totally unacceptable. Then NSFOC, build on BB as this is what you told voters and do not build on EOla as this IS NOT what you told voters. Two sides are miles apart and all the other stuff in the middle is relatively meaningless Someone else had an idea on this strand about dropping the suit for a full and public accounting (meeting notes, video etc) of all private Exec SB meetings to get a full understanding of everything that has transpired over the past few years and to utilize to help D204 avoid the same mistakes in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by rural on May 12, 2008 15:20:10 GMT -6
Hi Rural!! Thanks so much for the welcome I love this movie!!! I am unsure where middle ground could be found. I would much prefer to see a confirmation vote on Eola site; but I know this is not going to happen. The perfect time for it would have been in March 2008 when we were still dinging around with soil samples etc. Of course hindsight is 20/20. The two sides are so far apart and its really a zero sum game due to the stated goals of both sides. SB build and open by Aug 2009 at all costs with anything that gets in the way of that totally unacceptable. Then NSFOC, build on BB as this is what you told voters and do not build on EOla as this IS NOT what you told voters. Two sides are miles apart and all the other stuff in the middle is relatively meaningless Someone else had an idea on this strand about dropping the suit for a full and public accounting (meeting notes, video etc) of all private Exec SB meetings to get a full understanding of everything that has transpired over the past few years and to utilize to help D204 avoid the same mistakes in the future. So, Fasttimes, in your opinion, from this point on, it's an all or nothing situation for either side? There is no middle ground? No room at all for mediation? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on May 12, 2008 15:36:26 GMT -6
The curious part of me wants to see this whole thing smack against the wall like a wet warm slab of bacon
|
|
|
|
Post by specailneedsmom on May 12, 2008 18:23:17 GMT -6
I think at this point it is clear that mediation is not going to bring any change to the situation. It is up to the judge to decide whether the SB and Admin have done anything illegal; unethical plus dumb acts do not equal illegal acts (especially in Illinois). The SB has no interest in communicating with people who dislike and mistrust them and visa versa. Dr. D. has no interest in communicating with anyone and we have two more years of him, unfortunately. Exactly ten years ago I moved to this area for the schools. My one child is done and my other child is far enough along that the changes that will be made won't affect him. But if my horizon was different I would be looking for a better run system. Even if every one of the changes being made in this district were good, there will be a period of adjustment that will not be easy on the kids. I think in several years, when a new SB is elected and a new superintendent who respects both the children and the community is hired, stability will return to the district and things will improve. The near term will be confusing for everyone. One more thing I'd like to add, in fairness to the SB and Admin, is that NCLB has taken a toll on everyone and has negatively impacted us more than we can imagine. Because we are a diverse and inclusive community we have been viewed as a failing system and that stinks. That is not the fault of the SB or the Admin. It is the fault of the government sticking their nose into things they shouldn't.
|
|
SouthernWolf
Junior
Dean Wermer; when is the parade?
Posts: 139
|
Post by SouthernWolf on May 14, 2008 6:53:02 GMT -6
To Rural:
unfortunately, yes I dont see much of a chance for mediation/negotiation. This may change a little if the NSFOC gets past the 5/23 court date. I am sure the SB is hanging their hopes on a dismissal. If that does not happen, there may be a sliver of hope for settlement. At that point, it would really depend on how much the NSFOC would be willing to alter their stated goals because we all know the SB is not going to stop building at this point unless they are forced to by a court.
Regards
GF
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on May 14, 2008 7:16:12 GMT -6
Our undercover sketch artist sat in on the mediation talks. Here's how it went:  |
|
|
|
Post by sashimi on May 14, 2008 7:38:31 GMT -6
Sean Collins filed his response to the District's motion to dismiss yesterday (I just finished reading it). It is brilliant!
Sean demolishes the District's argument that it would have been UNREASONABLE for voters to rely on the statements made by the Board and District (that the school would be built on BB) because they were just "extrinsic, extraneous and rhetoric" (following the precedent that District is trying to use to support its motion to dismiss).
Despite the picture the District is now trying to paint, these facts are clearly different than normal"rhetoric" from an elected official that prior courts have found can not reasonably be relied on by the public (the facts here involve "factual" statements published on the District's websites, stated in front of the Illinois Legislature and the DuPage County Court in the condemnation case, repeated hundreds if not thousands of times in town meetings to induce the yes vote, and even sent home in taxpayer funded pamphlets placed in our kid's backpacks).
You never know with these things, but one thing is clear yet again...the District's lawyers are outmatched!
In response to:
To Rural:
unfortunately, yes I dont see much of a chance for mediation/negotiation. This may change a little if the NSFOC gets past the 5/23 court date. I am sure the SB is hanging their hopes on a dismissal. If that does not happen, there may be a sliver of hope for settlement. At that point, it would really depend on how much the NSFOC would be willing to alter their stated goals because we all know the SB is not going to stop building at this point unless they are forced to by a court.
Regards
GF
|
|
|
|
Post by sashimi on May 14, 2008 7:46:52 GMT -6
One last opinion...
The District had made a huge tactical mistake arguing to the Judge that it is completely permissible for the District and Board to lie and make misrepresentations to the voters.
One, I do not believe that this is what the prior case law states (outside of normal campaign rhetoric that is not single issue oriented). More importantly, from any sort of equitable perspective, I do not think that any Judge is going to accept the rationale that a school district can use tax payer dollars to specifically, unequivocally and repeatedly make a representation to induce a vote and then turn around and say..."it was okay to lie".
|
|
|
|
Post by rural on May 14, 2008 8:01:27 GMT -6
If you had read the motion to dismiss carefully enough, you would understand that the district never said it mislead or delivered untruths. According to the circumstances at the time, everything in those documents was true. Unfortunately, circumstances changed.
|
|
|
|
Post by sam2 on May 14, 2008 8:07:46 GMT -6
Sean Collins filed his response to the District's motion to dismiss yesterday (I just finished reading it). It is brilliant! Is there a link to this motion? I couldn't find one on this board. Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by capecod on May 14, 2008 8:30:07 GMT -6
I have a question off topic and it probably was discussed before; but yesterday I was talking with a neighbor and he told me that WVHS was still going to be crowded because they are removing the Freshman Campus. Does anyone know if this is true?
|
|
|
|
Post by rural on May 14, 2008 8:33:05 GMT -6
That is correct. For the first two years until MVHS is all four years, WVHS will be tight. This would be the case regardless of which property the school was built on.
|
|
Welcome, Fasttimes. 