|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 15, 2007 19:00:31 GMT -6
No- I'm not asking anything - Why should he just up and donate the land after all the $$$ he has already given. I'm just wondering why such a smear campaing against him? bc - None of us got this email smearing PL. Seems KK and mustangpride are the only ones that got it. Maybe they know. I for one don't believe PL sent it. Let's play the speculation route. Is it entirely possible that KK/SC are simply masking the origin of this letter and are putting it out in another "Let's show someone as the victim" type of thing? (Specifically this time as Macom as the 'victim'). The pattern is getting awfully familiar. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 15, 2007 19:02:11 GMT -6
Let me just pose this final question - Why would a SD (or PAC committee) accept donations from a developer (whom this district is fighting against further housing developments) just to pass a referendum? Would they be better in not accepting their money or is there a future tie in there? I believe that there was a link between Macom and our SD. BC, the SD did not accept money from Macom so STOP SAYING that. That is a lie, plain and simple. You are also omitting the fact that Macom did not give money to last year's yes referendum committee. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 15, 2007 19:03:06 GMT -6
Let me just pose this final question - Why would a SD (or PAC committee) accept donations from a developer (whom this district is fighting against further housing developments) just to pass a referendum? Would they be better in not accepting their money or is there a future tie in there? I believe that there was a link between Macom and our SD. Because their money spends the same as everyone else's, that's why. If there were illegal donations then you would have a very valid concern. Right now you're asking the board members here why someone else may have done something with their own money that they are legally allowed to do. GO ASK THEM. |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Apr 15, 2007 19:05:13 GMT -6
I have never said the SD acceptd money. However, the groups they used ( I was there) to pass referendums did. (The Biedron/Siebold group) No, they did not donated last years, major breackdown between the two groups. However, they have in the past - over $10,000.
|
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Apr 15, 2007 19:11:18 GMT -6
I have never said the SD acceptd money. However, the groups they used ( I was there) to pass referendums did. (The Biedron/Siebold group) No, they did not donated last years, major breackdown between the two groups. However, they have in the past - over $10,000. In the last two years, Macom has donated $25,000 to Oswego to get schools built. Schools sell homes. |
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Apr 15, 2007 19:17:25 GMT -6
And he should just give you 80 acres for free??? An elementary school (which usually is donated for new subdivisions) is 25 acres. (Ex: Peterson - un-occupied) so- ok ask him for the 25 - that has been the standard around here for many years. I had dealings with PL many years ago when WE was first trying to get the elementary school built here instead of Ashbury. Truly, the bottom line is what is important to him. There were three properties that abutted the proposed land for WE Elementary school on the original platt for the subdivision that were designated for the school (we were told at various meetings that these would not be sold to homeowners). Guess what, PL decided to offer the three lots as a three for the price of two and broke ground "in the dead of night" before anyone could make a stink! It is all about the bottom line with him, everything he does has an ulterior motive -- I've seen him in action! |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Apr 15, 2007 19:42:07 GMT -6
I have no doubt that he has an ulterior motive. However, when I helped with the campaign back with Niedron & Siebold, we were given quite a packet of information about those who would oppose the referndum. After that referendum was when I learned that Macom contributed quite a large sum of money towards the passage of it.
There is a direct link between Biedron, the SD and the donators. Why? I was fuming when I learned that Macom donated.
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Apr 15, 2007 20:00:02 GMT -6
I have no doubt that he has an ulterior motive. However, when I helped with the campaign back with Niedron & Siebold, we were given quite a packet of information about those who would oppose the referndum. After that referendum was when I learned that Macom contributed quite a large sum of money towards the passage of it. There is a direct link between Biedron, the SD and the donators. Why? I was fuming when I learned that Macom donated. ok bc, I now understand that you think the SD is in Macom's pocket. It sure doesn't appear that way to me, Macom seems very adversarial towards the SD with the negative comments re:WV and the big ads against BB, but again, that's my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Apr 15, 2007 20:24:32 GMT -6
I'm having deja vu, let's see... an impending election day and last-minute thick & creamy FUD flying.
Next time, I suggest that CF<whatever> actually circulate the phoney email on the date that they claim, so that their candidate's press release that refers to the alleged email that hasn't really been sent yet doesn't make the candidate look so foolish.
|
|
|
|
Post by movingforward on Apr 15, 2007 20:28:33 GMT -6
And he should just give you 80 acres for free??? An elementary school (which usually is donated for new subdivisions) is 25 acres. (Ex: Peterson - un-occupied) so- ok ask him for the 25 - that has been the standard around here for many years. I had dealings with PL many years ago when WE was first trying to get the elementary school built here instead of Ashbury. Truly, the bottom line is what is important to him. There were three properties that abutted the proposed land for WE Elementary school on the original platt for the subdivision that were designated for the school (we were told at various meetings that these would not be sold to homeowners). Guess what, PL decided to offer the three lots as a three for the price of two and broke ground "in the dead of night" before anyone could make a stink! It is all about the bottom line with him, everything he does has an ulterior motive -- I've seen him in action! EXACTLY! Neighbors in WE have heard a negative tone regarding the SB from PL over the years. Seems to me he views them as an obstacle and a necessary evil! |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 15, 2007 20:28:46 GMT -6
I'm having deja vu, let's see... an impending election day and last-minute thick & creamy FUD flying. Next time, I suggest that CF<whatever> actually circulate the phoney email on the date that they claim, so that their candidate's press release that refers to the alleged email that hasn't really been sent yet doesn't make the candidate look so foolish. Maybe this one went to another subset of the TG yahoo board members...which seemed to be the pattern of recipients for a few of the FUD emails in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Apr 15, 2007 20:29:08 GMT -6
I have no doubt that he has an ulterior motive. However, when I helped with the campaign back with Niedron & Siebold, we were given quite a packet of information about those who would oppose the referndum. After that referendum was when I learned that Macom contributed quite a large sum of money towards the passage of it. There is a direct link between Biedron, the SD and the donators. Why? I was fuming when I learned that Macom donated. ok bc, I now understand that you think the SD is in Macom's pocket. It sure doesn't appear that way to me, Macom seems very adversarial towards the SD with the negative comments re:WV and the big ads against BB, but again, that's my opinion. Why wouldn't Macom, or any developer for that matter, donate to help the school district be as good and well-thought of as possible? Everytime Naperville ranks high as kid-friendly, more homes are sold. Having good schools is part of being kid-friendly. I don't see a problem with Macom donating money for the betterment of the community, I do have a problem when Macom stirs up controversy for its own financial gain. |
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Apr 15, 2007 20:30:44 GMT -6
I had dealings with PL many years ago when WE was first trying to get the elementary school built here instead of Ashbury. Truly, the bottom line is what is important to him. There were three properties that abutted the proposed land for WE Elementary school on the original platt for the subdivision that were designated for the school (we were told at various meetings that these would not be sold to homeowners). Guess what, PL decided to offer the three lots as a three for the price of two and broke ground "in the dead of night" before anyone could make a stink! It is all about the bottom line with him, everything he does has an ulterior motive -- I've seen him in action! EXACTLY! Neighbors in WE have heard a negative tone regarding the SB from PL over the years. Seems to me he views them as an obstacle and a necessary evil! That's because regardless of his donations, they are not in his "hip pocket." |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Apr 15, 2007 20:35:51 GMT -6
I see that out newset member is plehman! Maybe he can clear this all up for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 15, 2007 21:13:12 GMT -6
[/color]
Here is an example on how poorly written this is.
M2 states from this meeting, meaning that after the meeting the SB generated 15 questions. Not during the meeting.
LP response is that the only one question was asked.
The SB didn't formulate the questions until after the meeting with LP.
Also LP's two false statements, what was actually false.
What is the difference between a comment attributed and a quote from?
Finally, how did I get a smaller type size?
|
|
