|
|
Post by lacy on Oct 15, 2007 12:34:47 GMT -6
I think there are some John Q's who disagree with you. Why are you so "active" and defensive I might add? If you support a third high school, and there's a viable alternative that would cost less, why stay so "active" on here disparaging it? Let me think about this, oh yeah, I have a child in the system, that is why I am so active. I want that child to have the same quality educational experience my older child had. Defensive, no, just discussing. I have said on several occasions that yep, if the district chose Macom I would support it. Lacy, would you support BB if the district decided that was best? You say you would support Macom if it was decided, but you seem to spend alot of time and energy casting it in the worst light that you possibly can. So I'm struggling with your statement... And I believe that BB is too expensive. That money could be put to better use. $17 million dollars more is just way too much more. |
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Oct 15, 2007 12:36:09 GMT -6
Let me think about this, oh yeah, I have a child in the system, that is why I am so active. I want that child to have the same quality educational experience my older child had. Defensive, no, just discussing. I have said on several occasions that yep, if the district chose Macom I would support it. Lacy, would you support BB if the district decided that was best? You say you would support Macom if it was decided, but you seem to spend alot of time and energy casting it in the worst light that you possibly can. So I'm struggling with your statement... And I believe that BB is too expensive. That money could be put to better use. $17 million dollars more is just way too much more. Is that your answer? I asked you, if the district comes back and selects BB, will you support that? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 15, 2007 12:37:00 GMT -6
Let me think about this, oh yeah, I have a child in the system, that is why I am so active. I want that child to have the same quality educational experience my older child had. Defensive, no, just discussing. I have said on several occasions that yep, if the district chose Macom I would support it. Lacy, would you support BB if the district decided that was best? You say you would support Macom if it was decided, but you seem to spend alot of time and energy casting it in the worst light that you possibly can. So I'm struggling with your statement... And I believe that BB is too expensive. That money could be put to better use. $17 million dollars more is just way too much more. You do the exact same with BB. If the cost difference can be accounted for and worked within, you should accept that. If not, there's your difference. |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Oct 15, 2007 12:37:01 GMT -6
I think there are some John Q's who disagree with you. Why are you so "active" and defensive I might add? If you support a third high school, and there's a viable alternative that would cost less, why stay so "active" on here disparaging it? I wouldn't call it disparaging it. We know what BB costs. What are all the costs and problems involved in leaving BB for Macom. I see some problems that need to be answered about Macom 1) Wolf's Crossing not being moved until Spring 2) The water filled ditch that runs through the property 3) The old couple 4) The mythical Naperville study about the safety of the substation. 5) Has Macom done the swap with NPD? I couldn't find anything at the NPD website. I might have missed it though. If not done how long will it take? Maybe if there was an open forum for questions, etc., you could get these questions answered. The same could be said for anyone who has unanswered questions about BB. That's why we need a public meeting. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Oct 15, 2007 12:39:19 GMT -6
I wouldn't call it disparaging it. We know what BB costs. What are all the costs and problems involved in leaving BB for Macom. I see some problems that need to be answered about Macom 1) Wolf's Crossing not being moved until Spring 2) The water filled ditch that runs through the property 3) The old couple 4) The mythical Naperville study about the safety of the substation. 5) Has Macom done the swap with NPD? I couldn't find anything at the NPD website. I might have missed it though. If not done how long will it take? Maybe if there was an open forum for questions, etc., you could get these questions answered. The same could be said for anyone who has unanswered questions about BB. That's why we need a public meeting. Those aren't SB questions. Wolf's crossing is known. The Ditch was made by Macom. So they can answer that. PL said the old couple would be the SD's problem. The mythical study was from the e-mail. Macom would have to answer the swap question. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 15, 2007 12:39:28 GMT -6
I wouldn't call it disparaging it. We know what BB costs. What are all the costs and problems involved in leaving BB for Macom. I see some problems that need to be answered about Macom 1) Wolf's Crossing not being moved until Spring 2) The water filled ditch that runs through the property 3) The old couple 4) The mythical Naperville study about the safety of the substation. 5) Has Macom done the swap with NPD? I couldn't find anything at the NPD website. I might have missed it though. If not done how long will it take? Maybe if there was an open forum for questions, etc., you could get these questions answered. The same could be said for anyone who has unanswered questions about BB. That's why we need a public meeting. If the money can not be made to work at BB, then yes, we move on to plan B. Call whichever site you want to call Plan B, but the SB has already said they have other sites under consideration. It seems that you will only be happy with 248th. Again, that is the largest difference between those you are claiming are BB at any cost. It's not BB at any cost. It's BB *WITHIN* cost. If it's not within cost, then it's Plan B. |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Oct 15, 2007 12:40:37 GMT -6
You say you would support Macom if it was decided, but you seem to spend alot of time and energy casting it in the worst light that you possibly can. So I'm struggling with your statement... And I believe that BB is too expensive. That money could be put to better use. $17 million dollars more is just way too much more. Is that your answer? I asked you, if the district comes back and selects BB, will you support that? I think BB is too expensive. $17 - $20 million too expensive. And before proceeding, other viable alternatives should be examined thoroughly. (including St. John's and any other site) That's my answer. And don't twist it around. My question for you is if you would ultimately support the Macom site, why are each of your posts so negative in nature regarding such site? |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Oct 15, 2007 12:42:19 GMT -6
Maybe if there was an open forum for questions, etc., you could get these questions answered. The same could be said for anyone who has unanswered questions about BB. That's why we need a public meeting. Those aren't SB questions. Wolf's crossing is known. The Ditch was made by Macom. So they can answer that. PL said the old couple would be the SD's problem. The mythical study was from the e-mail. Macom would have to answer the swap question. Whomever needs to answer such questions that the public has should do so. We need the facts surrounding all viable alternatives. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 15, 2007 12:43:16 GMT -6
Is that your answer? I asked you, if the district comes back and selects BB, will you support that? I think BB is too expensive. $17 - $20 million too expensive. And before proceeding, other viable alternatives should be examined thoroughly. (including St. John's and any other site) That's my answer. And don't twist it around. My question for you is if you would ultimately support the Macom site, why are each of your posts so negative in nature regarding such site? I'll answer this one from my own perspective. There is a difference between SUPPORTING it and BEING HAPPY WITH IT. SUPPORTING IT means you do not work AGAINST IT. If that is what is chosen, you roll with it and make the best of it even if it was NOT YOUR FIRST CHOICE. One can be UNHAPPY WITH 248th and state WHY they are unhappy with it. If it's chosen, I will SUPPORT it. Will you support BB if it is chosen, even if you are and remain UNHAPPY with it? |
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Oct 15, 2007 12:44:02 GMT -6
Is that your answer? I asked you, if the district comes back and selects BB, will you support that? I think BB is too expensive. $17 - $20 million too expensive. And before proceeding, other viable alternatives should be examined thoroughly. (including St. John's and any other site) That's my answer. And don't twist it around. My question for you is if you would ultimately support the Macom site, why are each of your posts so negative in nature regarding such site? Because I do not believe it is the correct place to put MV. The issues with the power lines, substation, and the RR tracks have me concerned. I am also concerned that the school is too far south in the district. So if after examining all that information, alternate sites, and the district and the SB select BB as the best site, would you support it? ETA: And thank you Arch, you explained perfectly how I feel about the Macom site. Yes lacy, I can tell you if the Macom site is selected, I will support that decision. |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Oct 15, 2007 12:45:43 GMT -6
Maybe if there was an open forum for questions, etc., you could get these questions answered. The same could be said for anyone who has unanswered questions about BB. That's why we need a public meeting. If the money can not be made to work at BB, then yes, we move on to plan B. Call whichever site you want to call Plan B, but the SB has already said they have other sites under consideration. It seems that you will only be happy with 248th. Again, that is the largest difference between those you are claiming are BB at any cost. It's not BB at any cost. It's BB *WITHIN* cost. If it's not within cost, then it's Plan B. I don't want BB *WITHIN* cost unless I know exactly how they would do that without that affecting the ultimate outcome of the school and without that taking money away from things that could benefit the other schools. Just because they might be able to "get er done" doesn't mean that would ultimately be in the best interest of the district if they could have spent the money more wisely, benefiting the district as a whole. |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Oct 15, 2007 12:47:49 GMT -6
I think BB is too expensive. $17 - $20 million too expensive. And before proceeding, other viable alternatives should be examined thoroughly. (including St. John's and any other site) That's my answer. And don't twist it around. My question for you is if you would ultimately support the Macom site, why are each of your posts so negative in nature regarding such site? I'll answer this one from my own perspective. There is a difference between SUPPORTING it and BEING HAPPY WITH IT. SUPPORTING IT means you do not work AGAINST IT. If that is what is chosen, you roll with it and make the best of it even if it was NOT YOUR FIRST CHOICE. One can be UNHAPPY WITH 248th and state WHY they are unhappy with it. If it's chosen, I will SUPPORT it. Will you support BB if it is chosen, even if you are and remain UNHAPPY with it? Gosh, I guess I could spell in all capital letters too. At this point, my concern is the district using the tax dollars they have wisely and in the best interest of the district. GOT IT?  ? I never knew you were so concerned about my happiness. Thank you.  |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 15, 2007 12:48:13 GMT -6
If the money can not be made to work at BB, then yes, we move on to plan B. Call whichever site you want to call Plan B, but the SB has already said they have other sites under consideration. It seems that you will only be happy with 248th. Again, that is the largest difference between those you are claiming are BB at any cost. It's not BB at any cost. It's BB *WITHIN* cost. If it's not within cost, then it's Plan B. I don't want BB *WITHIN* cost unless I know exactly how they would do that without that affecting the ultimate outcome of the school and without that taking money away from things that could benefit the other schools. Just because they might be able to "get er done" doesn't mean that would ultimately be in the best interest of the district if they could have spent the money more wisely, benefiting the district as a whole. If you are that concerned with HOW they spend the money WITHIN what the public authorized by a vote, then perhaps you need to put yourself on the inside of the workings of the district to enact that change. It was pointed out time and time again that they can not take money from the referendum to distribute to other schools. It is for land acquisition and construction for the 3rd high school. |
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Oct 15, 2007 12:49:22 GMT -6
I'll answer this one from my own perspective. There is a difference between SUPPORTING it and BEING HAPPY WITH IT. SUPPORTING IT means you do not work AGAINST IT. If that is what is chosen, you roll with it and make the best of it even if it was NOT YOUR FIRST CHOICE. One can be UNHAPPY WITH 248th and state WHY they are unhappy with it. If it's chosen, I will SUPPORT it. Will you support BB if it is chosen, even if you are and remain UNHAPPY with it? Gosh, I guess I could spell in all capital letters too. At this point, my concern is the district using the tax dollars they have wisely and in the best interest of the district. GOT IT? ? I never knew you were so concerned about my happiness. Thank you. Okay, that means you do not support BB right? You have me confused because I believe I am asking a yes or no question and I am getting everything but yes or no. |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Oct 15, 2007 12:50:13 GMT -6
I don't want BB *WITHIN* cost unless I know exactly how they would do that without that affecting the ultimate outcome of the school and without that taking money away from things that could benefit the other schools. Just because they might be able to "get er done" doesn't mean that would ultimately be in the best interest of the district if they could have spent the money more wisely, benefiting the district as a whole. If you are that concerned with HOW they spend the money WITHIN what the public authorized by a vote, then perhaps you need to put yourself on the inside of the workings of the district to enact that change. It was pointed out time and time again that they can not take money from the referendum to distribute to other schools. It is for land acquisition and construction for the 3rd high school. But earlier newspaper articles indicated they had other sources of revenue to cover the gap at BB. How else could those sources be spent? Could they be spent in a way to benefit the ENTIRE (there are those caps again!) district? If so, they should not be thrown away on land when other alternatives exist. |
|
?