Brach/Brodie Trial is Over

[wvhsparent]

I sat thru part of the jury selection process. The BB guys were going to town on the jurors. The SD did not do much.
From what I could tell the jurors were all from areas well away from 204.

[doctorwho]

wvhsparent said:

I sat thru part of the jury selection process. The BB guys were going to town on the jurors. The SD did not do much.
From what I could tell the jurors were all from areas well away from 204.

I had heard 4 jurors were from Naperville - but none were 204

[bob]

doctorwho said:

wvhsparent said:

I sat thru part of the jury selection process. The BB guys were going to town on the jurors. The SD did not do much.
From what I could tell the jurors were all from areas well away from 204.

I had heard 4 jurors were from Naperville - but none were 204

That's not good. In my opinion, I would have kept anyone in 203 off the jury. Why do I have the feeling that this was lost at jury selection?

[lacy]

dpc said:

Does anyone know how much the district has spent on legal fees related to the lawsuit and trial? These costs must be factored in as well in determining the ultimate price of the BB land even if it is a sunk cost. The taxpayers deserve to know every penny being spent on this piece of land.

I believe that the taxpayers are due a full and independent accounting of the district's financial situation at this point. How much interest has been generated on the referendum funds? What are the legal fees to date? What is the current cost to build a school with the amenities of NVHS and WVHS?

I don't want to hear that they can pay for this land with any "excess" interest without knowing these other pieces of the puzzle.

[bob]

Lacy that is all available through a FOI request or a simple phone call.

[lacy]

wvhsparent said:

dpc said:

At a minimum, I think it's time to fire the SD's attorneys and possibly consider suing them for malpractice. They are getting rich off of this fiasco and they helped lead us into this mess. Anyone else agree?

No

They did exactly what the SD/SB told them to do..........I do recall at least one SB member is an attorney too..... ........He knew what to do too.....and failed

Not only that, but he painted one rosy picture after another. The land wouldn't be difficult to aquire, the "excess" built into the referendum would cover any overage in the cost of the land, we could get quick take (thank goodness we didn't), and on and on. I'm glad that he didn't comment for once.

[wvhsparent]

lacy said:

dpc said:

Does anyone know how much the district has spent on legal fees related to the lawsuit and trial? These costs must be factored in as well in determining the ultimate price of the BB land even if it is a sunk cost. The taxpayers deserve to know every penny being spent on this piece of land.

I believe that the taxpayers are due a full and independent accounting of the district's financial situation at this point. How much interest has been generated on the referendum funds? What are the legal fees to date? What is the current cost to build a school with the amenities of NVHS and WVHS?

I don't want to hear that they can pay for this land with any "excess" interest without knowing these other pieces of the puzzle.

I am assuming that that info will be brought up at the special meeting.
If not someone needs to bring it up at the meeting. As soon as I know when this mtg is, I plan on attending. I suggest the rest of you attend also.
They might consider holding it at one of the HS auditoriums as the crowds might be huge.

[lacy]

bob said:

Lacy that is all available through a FOI request or a simple phone call.

And it should be published and printed for all taxpayers in the district to see. They should provide that to us.

[bob]

lacy said:

bob said:

Lacy that is all available through a FOI request or a simple phone call.

And it should be published and printed for all taxpayers in the district to see. They should provide that to us.

It is provided, you just thave to ask for it. I have done it plenty of times.

[bob]

Maybe the interest from the bonds will cover the lawyers fees. Plus we can get our money back for the 25 acres about $6 million.

[gatordog]

southsidemom said:

Don't forget to congratulate people who called Senator Holmes and said no to quick take. Also congratulations to people who wanted a PLAN B all along! They were smart enough not to believe in the good land fairy. Oh and of course congratulations to M2 for having the wisdom to have no comment for a change.

SSM,
First of all...QT has been a dead issue for some time now. For the record, your "crediting" the citizens calling in saying "no" is misplaced, it didnt work. Sen Holmes was a co-sponsor for the QT bill.

Primarily, QT was undone by a completely disfunctional State Govt, incapable of getting much of anything done for the people. Silly of us to think the state govt would actively intervene to help. Granted, Sen Holmes was a bit wishy-washy and in my opinion was too late to come on board to be effective. Even so, given the climate in Springfield, even if she did actively push, who knows if it would have work. I am not sure if Daniel Webster and Henry Clay rolled into one could have gotten a fair consideration of this bill's merits in the General Assembly.

It still remains to be seen whether our not QT would have saved money in the long run. Time will tell. We still have costs from of losing an entire summer season of construction if we had been able to start in the spring. We will have temporary housing costs if there is delayed MVHS opening. There may be on-going increased transportation costs if a less central location chosen. With all that said, the book is closed on QT. But it is premature to rush to judgment and say "whew...thank goodness we saved so much money by not employing QT". The verdict is not in on that at this time. All this is an academic exercise at this point...Lets move on.


And SSM, dont worry about lack of plan B. Since fair market value for a plot of land suitable for a HS has been set at $30 million....I think a fair number of landowners will have renewed interest in pitching there property to the SB. Choices we shall have (and choices the SD should consider....if we have to spend upwards of that money....it wont break my heart at all to deal with a church, a long-time area developer, a local farmer, etc. as opposed to a distant trust of lawyers)

[southsidemom]

we4 said:

southsidemom said:

We all know that it makes more sense to send White Eagle ( a neighborhood that sits in Aurora) as opposed to the 20 or so students that Ashwood would produce. But we all also know that it would generate a bunch of clubhouse meetings.

I know this is off topic, but regardless of the meaning of the post, I am a bit offended. It may have been a joke and we all know that meaning is lost lots of times in messaging. Does your subdivision really need to be brought into this? Another topic, ok. I guess it still bothers me that way back when, many people bad mouthed (or typed) WE or Tall Grass residents without really knowing them or just knowing a few that made the subdivision seem bad. Back on topic....thanks.

Funny how noone seems to take offense to the Ashwood subdivision being singled out. This was not my idea...I responded to a post by BOB.....just so you understand the source of the topic re: subdivisons being singled out.

[wvhsparent]

if no 3rd HS it would be a fair assumption that Both WE and Ashwood could be reassigned to WVHS

[wvhsparent]

FYI - it appears that the special meeting is set for Fri at 5pm. I will try to be there, but have to work til 6pm...so I will be late.
Is anyone else planning on going?

[bob]

I'll be the one wearing the Christopher Cross concert T holding a boom box blaring Ride Like The Wind.