Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

[d204mom]

Arch I hope you don't mind that I created a new thread for this one. This is the "reply" to the district's motion to dismiss. I found the attached letter interesting - it was probably posted before and I missed it - dated March 7. I wonder if that was shared with all of the board members before the vote to purchase AME?

winsome.cnchost.com/204/dismiss_motion/NSFOC-OppToMTD.pdf

[sashimi]

Just mind numbing that the District has chosen to go ahead with an artificial 2009 date (I believe enrollment actually goes down in 2009) in the face of this letter putting them on notice.

I can not believe the unbelievable peril that the District and Board has put us in if the District loses the NSFOC case (remember, the District is on record that there was no way that the condemnation case would come back above $300,000). We are talking about tens and tens and tens of millions of dollars of exposure (and probably no funds remaining to build a third school).

Mr. Collins OFFERRED to expidite the resolution of the case so that the District could have some certainty going forward. Seems that the responsible thing to do given the history over the past 2 years would have been to take a deep breath and plan on a 2010 opening, saving at least 5 million in expidited costs and allowing the District to resolve the 5 lawsuit (oops, I mean four) currently pending against it.

[d204mom]

You gotta love lawyers. My favorite "the district improperly concocts it's own alternate universe.."

Some of us have been feeling that it's opposite day in D204 but maybe it's even bigger than that!

[perspective]

I apologize in advance for my negativity, but as I said before I really do not care for him, but is this the best he can do?

I love the following line from Collins' reply. This goes hand in hand with his liar liar pants on fire defense of the suit. . .

"the district improperly concocts its own alternate universe . . . . "

Question, is there a proper way to concoct your own alternative universe? I wonder if his premise might be that the NSFOC suit concocts the alternate universe properly and the SB did not, therefore, we need to go to trial . . .

Yes, brilliant :-)

Kind regards,

[Arch]

I thought that line was odd too.. in addition there's an 'it' where there should be an "it's" in there as well.
Documents of this nature should be grammatically and syntactically correct.

Then again, it would be funny if these read like something from Parliament.

"My good counterparts of the opposition can come over here and Bite me. Yes, they can take Ogden east to Rt 59, head north to Diehl, turn right and continue just past Nike Park to Park street, come up to the second floor of the first rectangular building and munch away."

[rural]

May 14, 2008 19:07:33 GMT -6 Arch said:

I thought that line was odd too.. in addition there's an 'it' where there should be an "it's" in there as well.
Documents of this nature should be grammatically and syntactically correct.

Then again, it would be funny if these read like something from Parliament.

"My good counterparts of the opposition can come over here and Bite me. Yes, they can take Ogden east to Rt 59, head north to Diehl, turn right and continue just past Nike Park to Park street, come up to the second floor of the first rectangular building and munch away."

Hey, Arch, is that off mapquest?

[Arch]

May 14, 2008 19:54:41 GMT -6 rural said:

May 14, 2008 19:07:33 GMT -6 Arch said:

I thought that line was odd too.. in addition there's an 'it' where there should be an "it's" in there as well.
Documents of this nature should be grammatically and syntactically correct.

Then again, it would be funny if these read like something from Parliament.

"My good counterparts of the opposition can come over here and Bite me. Yes, they can take Ogden east to Rt 59, head north to Diehl, turn right and continue just past Nike Park to Park street, come up to the second floor of the first rectangular building and munch away."

Hey, Arch, is that off mapquest?

Google and google maps, to be precise.

[macy]

May 14, 2008 18:53:53 GMT -6 perspective said:

I apologize in advance for my negativity, but as I said before I really do not care for him, but is this the best he can do?

I love the following line from Collins' reply. This goes hand in hand with his liar liar pants on fire defense of the suit. . .

"the district improperly concocts its own alternate universe . . . . "

Question, is there a proper way to concoct your own alternative universe? I wonder if his premise might be that the NSFOC suit concocts the alternate universe properly and the SB did not, therefore, we need to go to trial . . .

Yes, brilliant :-)

Kind regards,

WOW! Are you the "Perspective" poster from the Sun blog?

Regardless, I disagree with your "perspective" on S. Collins. I'm pretty impressed so far with him. After all, he is a "nincompoop" according to our SB President. I think he's done pretty well for a nincompoop. Kudos to Shawn, the nincompoop, for his work so far!

Just curious. I don't mean to be nasty. I honestly welcome you to this board and welcome your thoughts.

ETA: If you are the "perspective" blogger from the Sun, please don't end all your posts with "kind regards". Even though it might seem like a nice gesture, on this blog it is completely not necessary and will come across as rather pompous.

In "our universe" (on this board) stupid closing statements are unnecessary and pointless. Just say what you think and don't worry about including the stupid closing remark.

And don't worry, I'm not a sniper or a stalker . I'm a regular poster on this board.

[perspective]

Marcy,

I am one in the same. Although I have never considered kind regards as pompous I will dispense with formality with respect to your universe.

In that context, I understand your disagreement, however, I am just saying that if that is the best he can do I would ask for my $204 back.

I do not know if you saw the Sun blog, but I have experience with him in the past and saw him snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. He, IMHO, is great at marketing, but poor with details -- not good for the people he represents. I think he went with whimsy in his response when he should have gone with laweyering. Great use of adjective and adverbs – something in my experience that seldom goes over well in any courtroom outside of the TV realm.

[perspective]

Sorry, meant Macy -- apologies for my poor detail orientation.

[Arch]

There's a button on the top right of any post you make that says 'Modify' if you ever need it.

[macy]

May 14, 2008 21:54:02 GMT -6 perspective said:

Sorry, meant Macy -- apologies for my poor detail orientation.

Don't worry, I've been called worse than Marcy.

[rural]

May 14, 2008 21:50:30 GMT -6 perspective said:

Marcy,

I am one in the same. Although I have never considered kind regards as pompous I will dispense with formality with respect to your universe.

In that context, I understand your disagreement, however, I am just saying that if that is the best he can do I would ask for my $204 back.

I do not know if you saw the Sun blog, but I have experience with him in the past and saw him snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. He, IMHO, is great at marketing, but poor with details -- not good for the people he represents. I think he went with whimsy in his response when he should have gone with laweyering. Great use of adjective and adverbs – something in my experience that seldom goes over well in any courtroom outside of the TV realm.

Perspective,

The idea that a closing on the end of a post is considered pompous on this board is ridiculous! I believe some on the board had a hard time with the ideas presented by the last poster that used a similar closing. This may be the root, perhaps not.

Regardless, closings add an aspect of personality to a post. If you are comfortable using it, I urge you to continue to do so and not be bullied into changing who you are by other posters.

Sincerely. ;D

[Arch]

Everyone is free to post in the style they wish and everyone is free to interpret those postings how they wish.

[snerdley]

May 15, 2008 6:59:50 GMT -6 rural said:

May 14, 2008 21:50:30 GMT -6 perspective said:

Marcy,

I am one in the same. Although I have never considered kind regards as pompous I will dispense with formality with respect to your universe.

In that context, I understand your disagreement, however, I am just saying that if that is the best he can do I would ask for my $204 back.

I do not know if you saw the Sun blog, but I have experience with him in the past and saw him snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. He, IMHO, is great at marketing, but poor with details -- not good for the people he represents. I think he went with whimsy in his response when he should have gone with laweyering. Great use of adjective and adverbs – something in my experience that seldom goes over well in any courtroom outside of the TV realm.

Perspective,

The idea that a closing on the end of a post is considered pompous on this board is ridiculous! I believe some on the board had a hard time with the ideas presented by the last poster that used a similar closing. This may be the root, perhaps not.

Regardless, closings add an aspect of personality to a post. If you are comfortable using it, I urge you to continue to do so and not be bullied into changing who you are by other posters.

Sincerely. ;D

I disagree with your statement regarding the last poster who used a similar closing.

That person held themselves out to have a scientific background and disputed in great detail some of the environmental points.

But then they also could put on a lawyer's hat and dispute in great detail some of the legal points.

A great deal of it came off as district spin. It looked to me as if someone was feeding them this information in an attempt to sway opinion. It just didn't have the feel of a real discussion. Just my opinion - and with regard to the closing - it didn't add anything and became kind of annoying to be honest.