|
|
Post by momto4 on Aug 6, 2007 13:13:25 GMT -6
Senator Linda Holmes has apparently agreed to move quick take (HB1926) out of executive committee tomorrow 8/7 - provided the school district agrees to move Ashwood Park to Neuqua Valley.
The school board will not make this move. The boundaries have been set and the district will not keel to the wishes of developers and special interest groups. The ripple effect of moving this one subdivision would put us right back into the boundary wars.
If Linda hears from a number of people today who support quick take as is (without the boundary change), she may be willing to move the bill out of executive committee without changes.
There is not much time to do this. Please contact Senator Holmes' office today and send this information on to others who also want the new high school opened on time to reduce overcrowding throughout the district.
815-609-3711 Plainfield office
217-782-2115 fax
|
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Aug 6, 2007 13:41:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Aug 6, 2007 13:41:44 GMT -6
Well, I told myself I'd sit on the sidelines for a while, but this has my dander up. I am sharpening the EagleDad pitchfork  . I called senator Holmes in her Springfield office (217-782-0422) and spoke to her in person. She confirmed she is looking to alter the boundaries! I told her that opening or attempting to open the boundaries by hijacking them for one agenda is the surest way to undermine Quick Take. I urged her to get QT out of exec committee tomorrow and focus on the needs of the third high school, not Macom Corp. I urge everyone else to call her in Springfield and let he know your feelings regardless of what they are: 217-782-0422 |
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Aug 6, 2007 13:48:19 GMT -6
Sorry, I was given the wrong number. I couldn't find the right one from work... |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Aug 6, 2007 13:55:32 GMT -6
Anyone have her district's boundaries?
I don't blame her. She does have the power to get something out of it. It's all about politics.
If you don't like her political move, she does have to face an election. I might just have to donate some money to her Republican candidate , next time.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Aug 6, 2007 14:31:40 GMT -6
Anyone check her election filings to see if Macom or any other of the land holders donated to her campaign?
|
|
|
|
Post by chicoryowl on Aug 6, 2007 14:45:41 GMT -6
I called her Springfield and Plainfield office. I didn't understand why the person on the phone in Plainfield asked me about boundaries. Now I do, obviously. I told the person on the phone initially that I supported the boundary changes that were going to be made once the third high school was built.
I called back and clarified that I didn't support any boundary changes being made in order for QT to be passed. I told the person that I didn't want to see our district go to battle again. And that while I strongly support QT, that's a price that's too high to pay when this is slated to go to trial shortly.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Aug 6, 2007 14:59:59 GMT -6
NO F-ing WAY!!!!!!!!!!!
I really hope that the SB is not considering that!
You can also call Randy Hultgren at 217-782-8022 and let him know the same.
NO BOUNDARY CHANGES FOR QT!!!!!!
Of course I prefer no QT period....but that is not the issue at hand!
|
|
|
|
Post by movingforward on Aug 6, 2007 15:17:07 GMT -6
Anyone check her election filings to see if Macom or any other of the land holders donated to her campaign? In addition to Macom, I think she is being influenced by the wallets buying the multi-million dollar homes in Ashwood Park.. She was recently at a 'meeting' where residents from Ashwood Park were in attendance. I am sure this has something to do with her sudden interest in the boundaries. I agree with WVHS parent. NO to Quick Take if it means selling out to Lehman or slimy politics. We can wait until until September . |
|
|
|
Post by justme on Aug 6, 2007 15:31:07 GMT -6
NO F-ing WAY!!!!!!!!!!! I really hope that the SB is not considering that! You can also call Randy Hultgren at 217-782-8022 and let him know the same. NO BOUNDRY CHANGES FOR QT!!!!!! Of course I prefer no QT period....but that is not the issue at hand! I agree. I am also for no QT. Just a FYI... a friend told me at a party this weekend that the parents of 3 first grade girls who attended Graham Elementary, and who live in Ashwood Creek or Park, asked the SB to "grandfather" their little ones into Graham. They also asked to be "grandfathered" into the track that Graham follows, ie Crone & NV. My friend said that the SB granted their request!  My theory on this is that the SB is already planning one of the boundary "tweeks" to be moving the Ashwood area to NV. Why else would they "grandfather" in 1st graders? |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Aug 6, 2007 15:35:25 GMT -6
OK gang, word on the street has it that Holmes is reconsidering opening the boundary issue - apparently the community spoke loudly and with a common voice today. Based on that, I'm putting the safety tip on the farm implements and giving her a chance.
Hopefully the vote to get QT out of executive committee will go on tomorrow with Linda's support, and not get sidetracked in the old ugly boundary debate. Good luck to Senator Holmes, and we'll be watching and pulling for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Aug 6, 2007 16:35:43 GMT -6
NO F-ing WAY!!!!!!!!!!! I really hope that the SB is not considering that! You can also call Randy Hultgren at 217-782-8022 and let him know the same. NO BOUNDRY CHANGES FOR QT!!!!!! Of course I prefer no QT period....but that is not the issue at hand! I agree. I am also for no QT. Just a FYI... a friend told me at a party this weekend that the parents of 3 first grade girls who attended Graham Elementary, and who live in Ashwood Creek or Park, asked the SB to "grandfather" their little ones into Graham. They also asked to be "grandfathered" into the track that Graham follows, ie Crone & NV. My friend said that the SB granted their request! My theory on this is that the SB is already planning one of the boundary "tweeks" to be moving the Ashwood area to NV. Why else would they "grandfather" in 1st graders? Sounds like an urban myth to me.........unless one of said parents or someone in the SD wishes to confirm. Lots can happen in 8 years.......... |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Aug 6, 2007 16:41:04 GMT -6
I agree. No Boundary change for QT.
ETA: the grade school does not determine your HS so the kids going to Graham doesn't mean they go to NV
|
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Aug 6, 2007 17:34:46 GMT -6
FYI on the bill number, I received this from a friend -
House Amendment 01 - talks to the gun safety and then Senate Amendments (see below ) talk about Quick Take.
09500HB1926ham001 LRB095 09066 NHT 33038 a
1
AMENDMENT TO HOUSE BILL 1926
2 AMENDMENT NO. ______. Amend House Bill 1926 on page 1, line
3 8, by replacing "The" with "Subject to appropriation, the"; and
4 on page 1, line 14, after the period, by inserting the
5 following:
6 "The State Board of Education shall seek the guidance of a
7 national organization offering gun safety courses and
8 materials in developing the weapons safety program.".
09500HB1926sam002 LRB095 09066 NHT 37874 a
1
AMENDMENT TO HOUSE BILL 1926
2 AMENDMENT NO. ______. Amend House Bill 1926 by replacing
3 everything after the enacting clause with the following:
4 "Section 5. The School Code is amended by adding Section
5 16-6.5 as follows:
6 (105 ILCS 5/16-6.5 new)
7 Sec. 16-6.5. Immediate possession of lands for school
8 purposes. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Article
9 or the provisions of any other law, a unit school district
10 shall, upon written motion, be vested with the fee simple title
11 to the real property that is the subject of an eminent domain
12 proceeding filed pursuant to Section 10-22.35A and Section 16-6
13 of this Code and be authorized to take possession of and use
14 such property immediately for the construction of a high school
15 building and facilities ancillary thereto if all of the
16 following conditions are met:
09500HB1926sam002 - 2 - LRB095 09066 NHT 37874 a
1 (1) The school district has an equalized assessed
2 valuation for calendar year 2006 of at least $4,500,000,000
3 and an enrollment for the 2006-2007 school year of at least
4 28,000.
5 (2) At least 58% of those voting in a general primary
6 election held prior to November 2006 approved a proposition
7 for the construction of the high school building and the
8 issuance of $124,660,000 general obligation bonds for the
9 purpose of paying the costs thereof.
10 (3) The eminent domain proceeding was filed on or
11 before December 23, 2005 for the acquisition of a vacant
12 parcel of land containing approximately 55 acres in a
13 county contiguous to a county with 3,000,000 or more
14 inhabitants.
15 (4) The circuit court in which such proceeding is
16 pending entered its order, on or before November 17, 2006,
17 denying defendants' traverse motion and motion to dismiss.
18 (5) The school district waives its right to dismiss the
19 complaint or to abandon the proceeding as to all or any
20 part of the property so taken.
21 (6) The school district deposits the sum of $600,000
22 per acre with the county treasurer, who shall invest the
23 deposit in an interest-bearing account for the benefit of
24 the parties to the action.
25 (7) The school district shall have filed a stipulation
26 in the pending eminent domain action binding itself to
09500HB1926sam002 - 3 - LRB095 09066 NHT 37874 a
1 cooperate with the owners and any developers of the
2 remainder property to (i) cause a water main and sanitary
3 sewer line to be brought to the western boundary of the
4 remainder property, subject to the developers of the
5 remainder property bearing the additional cost for any
6 oversizing of the sanitary sewer line required by the
7 developers' use of the remainder property, (ii) design and
8 construct its stormwater management facilities to accept
9 up to 12 acre feet of stormwater from the northern portion
10 of the remainder property, (iii) design, permit, and
11 construct a full-access intersection providing shared
12 access to the school district property and the remainder
13 property on the north side of the properties, provided that
14 the owners grant the school district easement rights over
15 the remainder property for that purpose and subject to
16 recapture from any developers of the remainder parcel for
17 50% of the cost of off-site intersection improvements and
18 100% of the cost of improvements on the remainder property,
19 and (iv) grant such cross-access easement rights as
20 required by local development authorities to permit access
21 to the remainder property.
22 In the order of the circuit court vesting the fee simple
23 title to the real property with the school district, the owners
24 shall be given the authority to immediately withdraw the sum of
25 $300,000 per acre for the 55 acres of land being acquired. The
26 amount withdrawn by the owners shall be credited against any
09500HB1926sam002 - 4 - LRB095 09066 NHT 37874 a
1 future award of just compensation in the eminent domain
2 proceeding. The balance of the deposit and accrued interest
3 shall be held by the treasurer until entry of a final judgment
4 by the circuit court determining the just compensation to be
5 paid for the property. Upon entry of the final and appealable
6 judgment order, the circuit court shall hear and determine all
7 rights in and to such just compensation and shall order the
8 treasurer to disburse the just compensation, after credit for
9 the amount previously withdrawn, to the owners and any excess
10 deposit to the school district and direct the refund of any
11 excess amount withdrawn from the deposit by any of the
12 interested parties, as the case may be. Interest accrued on the
13 balance of the deposit shall be disbursed to the owners and the
14 school district in the same proportion as the principal balance
15 is disbursed to the owners and the school district. In the
16 event the deposit and all accrued interest are insufficient to
17 satisfy the award of just compensation determined in the final
18 and appealable order, then the school district shall pay such
19 deficiency, together with judgment interest accruing from the
20 date of the final and appealable order within 30 days. In no
21 event shall the amount of the deposit be admissible as evidence
22 in the eminent domain proceeding. Appeals may be taken from any
23 findings or judgment by the court as in other civil cases. The
24 school district shall not require an appeal bond in the event
25 of an appeal by the owners.
09500HB1926sam002 - 5 - LRB095 09066 NHT 37874 a
1 Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon
2 becoming law.".
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Aug 6, 2007 18:16:30 GMT -6
OK My head hurts.......
My show stopper is that line stating the school district shall deposit $600,000/acre with the County Treasurer.........
|
|
.
