LTE 1/3/08 - Naperville Sun

[we4]

www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/opinions/letters/723302,6_4_NA03_LETTERS_S1.article

January 3, 2008

Common sense needed in D204

As I watch the pedestrian bridge construction begin across Route 59, I cannot help but wonder if the school board members of District 204 will use this one last opportunity to exercise some common sense and good judgment and allow those children south of Route 59 (and only a half mile from Neuqua) to attend that high school rather than ship them miles away at greater expense and inconvenience to all.
If the school board members can avoid merely serving their own interests this time around and serve those of the entire community, it would truly be a much-needed step in the right direction.

I hope our District 204 school board members can see past their individual needs and exercise some common sense.

Dave McCammon

Naperville

[we4]

we4 said:

www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/opinions/letters/723302,6_4_NA03_LETTERS_S1.article

south of Route 59

Can you be south of Rt 59?

Is it the job of newspapers to proof read the LTEs and make sure are factually correct? Not changing opinions but getting geographical information correct. Just curious. Could have been a typo but could have been corrected easily with an email or phone call if the writer really meant south of 95th St.

[wvhsparent]

I am resisting saying something that would not be very nice........

[d204mom]

He could have meant west of 59 and quickly typed south. Regardless, I understand the point of his letter. If this guy lives half a mile from NV and the bridge allows a clear walking path, then he has a right to gripe if his kids are not assigned there. If it's due to school board members looking out for their own elementary school area first - then I think he's got double right to gripe.

[forthekids]

d204mom said:

He could have meant west of 59 and quickly typed south. Regardless, I understand the point of his letter. If this guy lives half a mile from NV and the bridge allows a clear walking path, then he has a right to gripe if his kids are not assigned there. If it's due to school board members looking out for their own elementary school area first - then I think he's got double right to gripe.

I can't help being bothered by this "walking path." If a kid in Tall Grass lives closer to 95th St., they are not going to walk all the way down to 103rd to cross over at the bridge. This means you are going to have these kids running across Rt. 59 during a peak traffic time. In my opinion, the bridge does not make Tall Grass "walkers."

[d204mom]

One more point, this letter writer does not mention a site change.

It leads me to believe he's assuming that the school is still going in at BB and Fry is going there?

I know everyone disagrees with me, but I think the site change will still be big news to a lot of people in the district. The north site, an even bigger surprise.

He could be planting seeds for the future boundary war, but you'd think he'd mention it if that were the case.

And like everyone keeps saying, boundaries and the site are not "legally binding" so even if the school is at BB, at this rate boundaries would still be up for grabs until the school opens.

[warriorpride]

forthekids said:

d204mom said:

He could have meant west of 59 and quickly typed south. Regardless, I understand the point of his letter. If this guy lives half a mile from NV and the bridge allows a clear walking path, then he has a right to gripe if his kids are not assigned there. If it's due to school board members looking out for their own elementary school area first - then I think he's got double right to gripe.

I can't help being bothered by this "walking path." If a kid in Tall Grass lives closer to 95th St., they are not going to walk all the way down to 103rd to cross over at the bridge. This means you are going to have these kids running across Rt. 59 during a peak traffic time. In my opinion, the bridge does not make Tall Grass "walkers."

Right. This guy probably lives near it. Just like many others, he wants the outcome to go "his" way, regardless of what it means to everyone else. Geralizing for a very large subdivision or ES area is very difficult.

[d204mom]

forthekids said:

d204mom said:

He could have meant west of 59 and quickly typed south. Regardless, I understand the point of his letter. If this guy lives half a mile from NV and the bridge allows a clear walking path, then he has a right to gripe if his kids are not assigned there. If it's due to school board members looking out for their own elementary school area first - then I think he's got double right to gripe.

I can't help being bothered by this "walking path." If a kid in Tall Grass lives closer to 95th St., they are not going to walk all the way down to 103rd to cross over at the bridge. This means you are going to have these kids running across Rt. 59 during a peak traffic time. In my opinion, the bridge does not make Tall Grass "walkers."

Good point.
But I still understand that people just want to go to the closest school to them.

[gatormom]

d204mom said:

forthekids said:

I can't help being bothered by this "walking path." If a kid in Tall Grass lives closer to 95th St., they are not going to walk all the way down to 103rd to cross over at the bridge. This means you are going to have these kids running across Rt. 59 during a peak traffic time. In my opinion, the bridge does not make Tall Grass "walkers."

Good point.
But I still understand that people just want to go to the closest school to them.

Well didn't work for BB so I don't expect it to work for any other site. Not everybody was going to go to their closest school. Not everybody was getting the best deal for their area.

[d204mom]

warriorpride said:

forthekids said:

I can't help being bothered by this "walking path." If a kid in Tall Grass lives closer to 95th St., they are not going to walk all the way down to 103rd to cross over at the bridge. This means you are going to have these kids running across Rt. 59 during a peak traffic time. In my opinion, the bridge does not make Tall Grass "walkers."

Right. This guy probably lives near it. Just like many others, he wants the outcome to go "his" way, regardless of what it means to everyone else. Geralizing for a very large subdivision or ES area is very difficult.

The one thing I think you can generalize is that people want to go to a high school that's close to them.

How is that so hard to understand?

How about if the school was going in at AME and you were still assigned to WV or NV? You'd be unhappy about it, right?

[warriorpride]

d204mom said:

One more point, this letter writer does not mention a site change.

It leads me to believe he's assuming that the school is still going in at BB and Fry is going there?

I know everyone disagrees with me, but I think the site change will still be big news to a lot of people in the district. The north site, an even bigger surprise.

He could be planting seeds for the future boundary war, but you'd think he'd mention it if that were the case.

And like everyone keeps saying, boundaries and the site are not "legally binding" so even if the school is at BB, at this rate boundaries would still be up for grabs until the school opens.

Or maybe he's smart enough to not be guessing at the site (and related boundary discussions) until the site is determined.

If people don't know what's going on with BB and MV, that's their problem. The SD/SB has released updates on the issues with obtaining BB & efforts related to obtaining land for BB.

I also think that the majority of people will be OK with wherever it's built, regardless of some wanting to paint a picture of fires burning & garden implements being carried, under certain outomes.

[warriorpride]

d204mom said:

warriorpride said:

Right. This guy probably lives near it. Just like many others, he wants the outcome to go "his" way, regardless of what it means to everyone else. Geralizing for a very large subdivision or ES area is very difficult.

The one thing I think you can generalize is that people want to go to a high school that's close to them.

How is that so hard to understand?

How about if the school was going in at AME and you were still assigned to WV or NV? You'd be unhappy about it, right?

I am not against "walkers" going to their walking HS. The BB boundaries had that for a sliver of McCarty, I think. I'm just saying that to speak for a very large area isn't fair. Like MW, for example. I could imagine that some in the far north MW area might approve of going to an AME location, while I can see the far south MW area being more unhappy.

[d204mom]

gatormom said:

d204mom said:

Good point.
But I still understand that people just want to go to the closest school to them.

Well didn't work for BB so I don't expect it to work for any other site. Not everybody was going to go to their closest school. Not everybody was getting the best deal for their area.

I get it that you were not assigned to the closest school so you don't have any empathy for people in your same situation.

Some areas are currently in that situation today due to someone's idea when NV opened that the split had to be N/S instead of E/W.

Yet some people from these areas still understand and empathize with others getting the short end of the stick.

Imagine that.

[warriorpride]

d204mom said:

gatormom said:

Well didn't work for BB so I don't expect it to work for any other site. Not everybody was going to go to their closest school. Not everybody was getting the best deal for their area.

I get it that you were not assigned to the closest school so you don't have any empathy for people in your same situation.

Some areas are currently in that situation today due to someone's idea when NV opened that the split had to be N/S instead of E/W.

Yet some people from these areas still understand and empathize with others getting the short end of the stick.

Imagine that.

I don't really recall a lot of empathy being asked for until a northern site came up. I didn't see a lot of empathy for BD and GOM with the BB site. There were just asked to take one for the team.

[d204mom]

warriorpride said:

d204mom said:

The one thing I think you can generalize is that people want to go to a high school that's close to them.

How is that so hard to understand?

How about if the school was going in at AME and you were still assigned to WV or NV? You'd be unhappy about it, right?

I am not against "walkers" going to their walking HS. The BB boundaries had that for a sliver of McCarty, I think. I'm just saying that to speak for a very large area isn't fair. Like MW, for example. I could imagine that some in the far north MW area might approve of going to an AME location, while I can see the far south MW area being more unhappy.

I don't understand your example.

I'm not talking about an ES attendance area I'm talking about where people live. The letter writer did not say "FRY" he mentioned a geographical area.