|
|
Post by macrockett on May 29, 2009 14:31:59 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on May 29, 2009 14:33:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on May 29, 2009 15:16:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by refbasics on May 29, 2009 18:41:11 GMT -6
----------------------------------------- $24.50 to copy 98 pages! --- why doesn't the district just put it on the SD website... that would be easier, and less costly!  |
|
|
|
Post by sashimi on May 29, 2009 19:36:11 GMT -6
Bet a dollar that the District will not provide the employment contracts despite the recent Illinois Supreme Court decision.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on May 29, 2009 19:45:06 GMT -6
It's a way to generate revenue.. I said it before...
My copier spits out copies at less than 2 cents per page... It's a Brother MFC 7840W
Does D204 send it out to Office Max for 24 lbs copies hole punched and bound or something? You can get that for 25 cents a page or less.
I agree refbasics... put it into a PDF (or whatever native format it's already in) and stick it on the website in a FOIA'd area... just dump the files in there and anyone can sift through them.
That makes too much sense... and District 204 seems to not do things that make sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on May 29, 2009 19:45:31 GMT -6
Bet a dollar that the District will not provide the employment contracts despite the recent Illinois Supreme Court decision. Then someone can get all bent out of shape when they get 'sued'.  |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on May 29, 2009 21:04:13 GMT -6
It's a way to generate revenue.. I said it before... My copier spits out copies at less than 2 cents per page... It's a Brother MFC 7840W Does D204 send it out to Office Max for 24 lbs copies hole punched and bound or something? You can get that for 25 cents a page or less. I agree refbasics... put it into a PDF (or whatever native format it's already in) and stick it on the website in a FOIA'd area... just dump the files in there and anyone can sift through them. That makes too much sense... and District 204 seems to not do things that make sense. Sure as hell not giving out more information -- why do we need to know...we just need to sit down and shut up. |
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on May 29, 2009 21:21:51 GMT -6
Bet a dollar that the District will not provide the employment contracts despite the recent Illinois Supreme Court decision. We can only hope sashimi. Reminds me of a quote from that Clint Eastwood movie, "Go Ahead, Make My Day." And finally there is a bill working through the black hole called the Illinois Legislature that will put penalties behind the law. We can only hope... Also, I may know an attorney who will take the case for free if they do. |
|
|
|
Post by treehugger on May 29, 2009 22:47:18 GMT -6
Is there a specific time limit they have to get the information to you?
|
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on May 30, 2009 11:13:15 GMT -6
Is there a specific time limit they have to get the information to you? Seven days Treehugger: "The public body must either comply with or deny such written request within seven working days after its receipt. If the written request is denied, the denial must be by letter." |
|
|
|
Post by sashimi on May 30, 2009 16:01:56 GMT -6
Michael...that would mean that they owe you a response early next week....
Right now, there is no penalty if they do not respond. Even the new law pending in front of the Illinois house only provides for $100 to $1000 in penalties (plus reimbursement of legal fees necessary to secure a motion to compel). Right now, I believe if the district does not reply, you can report them to the Attorney General's office and they will pursue the FOIA (but the backlog is pretty long).
That being said, let's say that the district refuses to provide these contracts in spite of the recent Supreme Court edict and the Attorney General's clear guidance on the requirement that these employment contracts must be produced under FOIA. Are certain folks going to argue that suing the district for this information is tantamount to suing the residents of the District.
I really think that the district is arrogant enough not to produce the information. On a side note, don't you think the Naperville Sun and the Daily Herald have requested Dr. D's contract (seems natural in light of the recent Supreme Court case and the fact that Dr. D is leaving in year 2 of a 3 year contract).
|
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on May 30, 2009 20:46:31 GMT -6
Michael...that would mean that they owe you a response early next week.... Right now, there is no penalty if they do not respond. Even the new law pending in front of the Illinois house only provides for $100 to $1000 in penalties (plus reimbursement of legal fees necessary to secure a motion to compel). Right now, I believe if the district does not reply, you can report them to the Attorney General's office and they will pursue the FOIA (but the backlog is pretty long). That being said, let's say that the district refuses to provide these contracts in spite of the recent Supreme Court edict and the Attorney General's clear guidance on the requirement that these employment contracts must be produced under FOIA. Are certain folks going to argue that suing the district for this information is tantamount to suing the residents of the District. I really think that the district is arrogant enough not to produce the information. On a side note, don't you think the Naperville Sun and the Daily Herald have requested Dr. D's contract (seems natural in light of the recent Supreme Court case and the fact that Dr. D is leaving in year 2 of a 3 year contract). I guess anything is possible sashimi, but one thing is almost certain, they will either provide the information or deny the request very soon. Thereafter, if the request is denied, I would thing the Chicago Tribune and other media would be knocking on D204's door (perhaps the Chicago Tribune and other media are already aware of the request). I'm sure you read the opinion, as did I, and I'm not sure about you, but I detected a Court that is running out of patience. Seems to me all the lower courts would start to get in line as well. But as you say, the penalties are not in place at this point, and this is D204, and people in this District do have problems with other people exercising their Constitutional rights, attributing the worst motives in the process...how convenient. |
|
|
|
Post by kidsfirst on May 31, 2009 8:45:26 GMT -6
KZ's letter said the transportation docs would be ready on May 28th. Have you posted that yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on May 31, 2009 9:12:11 GMT -6
KZ's letter said the transportation docs would be ready on May 28th. Have you posted that yet? I received the letter in Friday's mail kidsfirst, so I haven't had a chance to make it over to the District office. Will do so Monday and depending on how fast I can pdf the contract (no easy task), I will put on line. I may start with the most important information first. |
|
