|
|
Post by momof3 on Apr 17, 2007 7:55:55 GMT -6
The responses in the paper when this offer was made public by Lehman were overwhelmingly against this site. There was no 'groundswell' of support whatsoever. Even my staunch VOTE NO neighbor told me the offer was self-serving and should not be considered. Of course, we are WVHS area and most folks are anti-Macom anyway.
Seems there is only one group keeping this issue alive - Macom. IMO it's a dead horse being resurrected for selfish purposes.
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Apr 17, 2007 7:56:38 GMT -6
I think Macy has a problem that her kids won't go to NV. Lacy has never mentioned having kids so I don't know what her ax is in this thing. MV is going to have, I think 3 out of 5 of the top grade schools as feeders. 4 of the top 5 - Watts, Fry, Owen, WE |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 17, 2007 7:57:27 GMT -6
Remember what Macy or Lacy said to a WVHS student to counter that argument, YOU ARE STUCK THERE.
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Apr 17, 2007 7:59:31 GMT -6
I think Macy has a problem that her kids won't go to NV. Lacy has never mentioned having kids so I don't know what her ax is in this thing. MV is going to have, I think 3 out of 5 of the top grade schools as feeders. Wrong assumption.  It's the lack of information the district provided on the Macom dealings and the way in which decisions have been made that I have issues with. |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Apr 17, 2007 8:00:14 GMT -6
Remember what Macy or Lacy said to a WVHS student to counter that argument, YOU ARE STUCK THERE. I never said any such thing. Stop putting words in my mouth. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 17, 2007 8:03:19 GMT -6
I think Macy has a problem that her kids won't go to NV. Lacy has never mentioned having kids so I don't know what her ax is in this thing. MV is going to have, I think 3 out of 5 of the top grade schools as feeders. Wrong assumption. It's the lack of information the district provided on the Macom dealings and the way in which deci sions have been made that I have issues with. Yeah we should have broken that Confidentiality Agreement and get sued for it. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 17, 2007 8:05:30 GMT -6
I am sorry it was Lacy, I always get you two confused and it wasn't to WVHSSTUDENT. It was making a 7th grader feel bad about going to WVHS.
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Apr 17, 2007 8:16:17 GMT -6
The responses in the paper when this offer was made public by Lehman were overwhelmingly against this site. There was no 'groundswell' of support whatsoever. Even my staunch VOTE NO neighbor told me the offer was self-serving and should not be considered. Of course, we are WVHS area and most folks are anti-Macom anyway. Seems there is only one group keeping this issue alive - Macom. IMO it's a dead horse being resurrected for selfish purposes. One other thing - I believe pl states in his post that this email was sent to the DH and The Sun. Apparently they didn't pick it up - dead horses don't sell papers. News sells papers. IMO, this isn't news anymore, the 15 minutes is up. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Apr 17, 2007 8:17:12 GMT -6
someone 11 responses managed to get in before the conspiracy started -- the mods must be slipping  I think the reason has been explained, there cannot be any free for alls because no moderators are available on a site where that is not allowed. the site was up for 90 minutes after the post - hardly a short time. Plenty of time today to respond and today is voting day. I would be interesting as to what in that post made a difference in your vote ? What news news did any of us learn, maybe I missed it. There was much banter back and forth as to where the email came from. It seemed there were many that believed KK sent the letter out. I agree that part of my guess was wrong - however, KK was the only one to know about this on 4/12, so I still say it's an inside job. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 17, 2007 8:18:34 GMT -6
There was much banter back and forth as to where the email came from. It seemed there were many that believed KK sent the letter out. I agree that part of my guess was wrong - however, KK was the only one to know about this on 4/12, so I still say it's an inside job. There are a handful of Karl Rove wannabe's behind the scenes coordinating seemingly unrelated things to a bigger picture agenda. Sticking with tradition, it seems that some have no clue about how they are being 'played' either. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 17, 2007 8:26:12 GMT -6
I am sorry it was Lacy, I always get you two confused and it wasn't to WVHSSTUDENT. It was making a 7th grader feel bad about going to WVHS. yeah that comment said it all-- and two of us that would be afftected here - (Arch and I ( I believe) already responded - that that was fine - BB was still the best for the district period, just not the best for some special interest groups who somehow feel WVHS is below them -which is really tiresome at this point besides being totally wrong. was also in the same run that included "...didn't buy into that school area - bought into NV so it doesn't affect me..." as opposed to buying into SD 204 -- no guarantees on which school- which is obviously the rub for a small group. I already have a WVHS graduate, if I have another so be it, will save me on buying parent support apparell. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Apr 17, 2007 8:30:50 GMT -6
I think Macy has a problem that her kids won't go to NV. Lacy has never mentioned having kids so I don't know what her ax is in this thing. MV is going to have, I think 3 out of 5 of the top grade schools as feeders. Wrong assumption. It's the lack of information the district provided on the Macom dealings and the way in which decisions have been made that I have issues with. You had issues with the SB before Macom ever came up. This is just your latest flashing point. |
|
|
|
Post by movingforward on Apr 17, 2007 8:33:41 GMT -6
Then you've never worked under confidentiality agreements. There is a reason these get put into place and you don't reveal information from them - there are legal ramifications of doing that. I work with them all the time and I do not understand how people can say , well why not just reveal this or that.... I have not seen this particular one, and there is no bolierplate for them, they are usually customized with what can be said, dates of coverage for the agreements, people involved etc. My breach of a confidentiality agreement at my corporation would result in immediate dismissal and potential legal reponsiblity as an individual not as an employee, so let's also please remember there was one in place. Also remember only one side appears to have stepped out from the confidentiality agreement ( and maybe what he as revealed wasn't covered - again haven't seen it but don't know) - but there are some touchy items there that may still be covered that can't be revealed - maybe the disposition of the family that lives on the property, maybe the impact of the power substation etc etc . The outrage is not that candidates contacted him, the outrage, just like the CFO connections is that the candidates talked around this fact and in fact hid these items from their agendas. Michelle Davis at least thought enough of it at one forum to spend her closing statement explaining the contact - she got the fact that people felt this should have been told to the voting public by those who had contact, not revealed by Paul Lehman himself in the papers. I am outraged that the district and current school board have not been open and honest with the taxpayers of this district who fund their very operations. I find it hard to believe that their was really a confidentiality agreement in place. Confidentiality was what I believe Crouse wanted so he and the SB could pursue BB only (and at all costs). How did this serve the best interests of the district? I think it's nothing more than an excuse to cover their butts at this point. Lacy, The confidentiality agreement was a Lehman requirement from what I have read NOT a school board requirement. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 17, 2007 8:37:34 GMT -6
I am outraged that the district and current school board have not been open and honest with the taxpayers of this district who fund their very operations. I find it hard to believe that their was really a confidentiality agreement in place. Confidentiality was what I believe Crouse wanted so he and the SB could pursue BB only (and at all costs). How did this serve the best interests of the district? I think it's nothing more than an excuse to cover their butts at this point. Lacy, The confidentiality agreement was a Lehman requirement from what I have read NOT a school board requirement. movingforward -- are you trying to show how smart you are ? you know everything in this area is the SB's fault...  |
|
pink
Frosh
Posts: 17
|
Post by pink on Apr 17, 2007 9:13:54 GMT -6
I was surprised to see how many on this board were convinced PL's letter was not authentic. It was interesting the first thing that came to mind was someone working for a SB candidate. Now we know PL wrote it so we are moving on to the next level of slaming. Have we lost sight of the fact that if BB was a done deal last fall (during their discussion with SB members) or a done deal now, we would not be having this conversation at all? Where are the open minds? Not here apparently... don't waste precious time responding to my comments, I will not be viewing them. Good luck to you all. It has been entertaining.
|
|
