Email Circulating:URGENT Meta Valley Location

[lacy]

wvhsmomcares said:

I am worried that the School Board will look for reasons why the BB land works, instead of taking a step back and allowing for a direct comparison of both properties.

Yep.

I think that's exactly what's going on.

[macy]

wvhsmomcares said:

I am worried that the School Board will look for reasons why the BB land works, instead of taking a step back and allowing for a direct comparison of both properties.

ME TOO! That's why we need public input.

In fact, that's where they are heading in my opinion.

I can't get any answers to questions I've sent in regards to St. John's or Macom.

I just want to make sure the due diligence was done on all available land prior to steaming ahead with BB.

I think I'm going to be disappointed.

[wvhsmomcares]

Well, I think if they are honest and caring - they will simply take an ojbective view of it. Which is what I want to know and I know my WVHS friends want.

We DO NOT want more dollars spent on areas outside of our school, when our last 'remodel' was nothing compared to what will be built. If the 248th land is 20 million less money, and it can go there, I would think that the SB would be proud of the fact that they walked from BB. Yet, if they do not even take an independent look at it, then there's something not forthright.

[lacy]

archwinsome said:

lacy said:

Why do I feel like I'm living in a communist country??
Wouldn't it be more likely that someone might have a comment regarding an issue that's on the agenda rather than one that's not?
It seems that they have created a situation where they are discouraging public input.
Sounds pretty un-American to me.

Where in the heck do you draw that conclusion from? Our own Congress often uses procedures and rules to stop debate and stall tactics and proceed with moving things through.

Do you consider the US Congress institution and its rules to be the work of communists too?

By putting public comment at the end - by going into executive session and by only allowing public comment on non-agenda items, I believe they are deliberately shutting the public out.

And yes, that's what communists do.

[momof3]

bob said:

I have nothing against the Macom site if it comes in cheaper after all expenses are factored in.

This e-mail should have been simple to get support for that site.

**Support the Macom Site, if it comes in cheaper than BB**

All the other garbage makes it looks like the author has a lack of knowledge of the situation.

If someone going to do an e-mail blast, better have to have links to back up your statements.

I agree with you bob. When PL address the folks at the SB meeting tomorrow, a few tips if he wants to gain support:

- focus on the cost
- don't mention the switching station; doing so only reminds people that it's there and a concern
- don't talk about boundaries, you are mistakenly assuming that if the site changes people still want the same boundaries, that's just not true and short-sighted

eta
- and don't gloss over moving Wolf's Crossing - just be honest if you think that we wouldn't get started on the school until next year - but time is running out on getting started at BB yet this year, too

[Arch]

macy said:

wvhsmomcares said:

I am worried that the School Board will look for reasons why the BB land works, instead of taking a step back and allowing for a direct comparison of both properties.

ME TOO! That's why we need public input.

In fact, that's where they are heading in my opinion.

I can't get any answers to questions I've sent in regards to St. John's or Macom.

I just want to make sure the due diligence was done on all available land prior to steaming ahead with BB.

I think I'm going to be disappointed.

Due Diligence was done to the board's satisfaction the first time. I have the feeling based on previous posting history that you will feel that there is no amount of due diligence that could ever be 'satisfactory' to select BB. There is also this thing called time.

Do you honestly feel that enough 'due diligence' can be complete by the 26th (or whatever date is the end-date to buy it) for them to say Yes, BB really is the right place and we can do it within budget. ?? Honestly answer that one.

[Arch]

lacy said:

archwinsome said:

Where in the heck do you draw that conclusion from? Our own Congress often uses procedures and rules to stop debate and stall tactics and proceed with moving things through.

Do you consider the US Congress institution and its rules to be the work of communists too?

By putting public comment at the end - by going into executive session and by only allowing public comment on non-agenda items, I believe they are deliberately shutting the public out.

And yes, that's what communists do.

You're aware of invocation of 'house rules' in congress to stifle debate on many poor pieces of legislation that transpired from 2001 to 2006? Were they a bunch of communists?

[lacy]

archwinsome said:

macy said:

ME TOO! That's why we need public input.

In fact, that's where they are heading in my opinion.

I can't get any answers to questions I've sent in regards to St. John's or Macom.

I just want to make sure the due diligence was done on all available land prior to steaming ahead with BB.

I think I'm going to be disappointed.

Due Diligence was done to the board's satisfaction the first time. I have the feeling based on previous posting history that you will feel that there is no amount of due diligence that could ever be 'satisfactory' to select BB. There is also this thing called time.

Do you honestly feel that enough 'due diligence' can be complete by the 26th (or whatever date is the end-date to buy it) for them to say Yes, BB really is the right place and we can do it within budget. ?? Honestly answer that one.

How much due diligence should be conducted before they spend $20 million more than they might have to in your opinion?

Or is money no object, because it's BB or bust for you?

[lacy]

archwinsome said:

lacy said:

By putting public comment at the end - by going into executive session and by only allowing public comment on non-agenda items, I believe they are deliberately shutting the public out.

And yes, that's what communists do.

You're aware of invocation of 'house rules' in congress to stifle debate on many poor pieces of legislation that transpired from 2001 to 2006? Were they a bunch of communists?

We aren't talking about the U.S. Congress. we are talking about the actions of our local school board.

Which at this point, seem un-American to me. We are footing the bill and it's our kids that are being educated in this district.

[slp]

Do you all know that they are going to go over the $124M budget? I have not heard or read that. That makes all the difference to me.

[bob]

lacy said:

archwinsome said:

Where in the heck do you draw that conclusion from? Our own Congress often uses procedures and rules to stop debate and stall tactics and proceed with moving things through.

Do you consider the US Congress institution and its rules to be the work of communists too?

By putting public comment at the end - by going into executive session and by only allowing public comment on non-agenda items, I believe they are deliberately shutting the public out.

And yes, that's what communists do.

Hey Lacy, when was the last time Congress or the Il state legislature had an open public comment period?

Let's see. A freely elected government body decides not to take non-agenda comments in a meeting. Yep, just like the Soviet Union.

[macy]

archwinsome said:

macy said:

ME TOO! That's why we need public input.

In fact, that's where they are heading in my opinion.

I can't get any answers to questions I've sent in regards to St. John's or Macom.

I just want to make sure the due diligence was done on all available land prior to steaming ahead with BB.

I think I'm going to be disappointed.

Due Diligence was done to the board's satisfaction the first time. I have the feeling based on previous posting history that you will feel that there is no amount of due diligence that could ever be 'satisfactory' to select BB. There is also this thing called time.

Do you honestly feel that enough 'due diligence' can be complete by the 26th (or whatever date is the end-date to buy it) for them to say Yes, BB really is the right place and we can do it within budget. ?? Honestly answer that one.

What do you mean by due diligence done to the board's satisfaction the first time? 2005 when they purchased 25 acres and condemned the additional 55? October 2006 when they met with Macom?

Can't respond til you clarify.

I've said again and again either St. John's or Macom or ANYTHING available should be looked at.

And you are sort of correct, I'm totally against going foward with BB until I feel other parcels have been seriously looked at.

Are you 100% sure the SB has done all they can to look into all available parcels? I'm not. I can't even get an email back from them.

[macy]

momof3 said:

bob said:

I have nothing against the Macom site if it comes in cheaper after all expenses are factored in.

This e-mail should have been simple to get support for that site.

**Support the Macom Site, if it comes in cheaper than BB**

All the other garbage makes it looks like the author has a lack of knowledge of the situation.

If someone going to do an e-mail blast, better have to have links to back up your statements.

I agree with you bob. When PL address the folks at the SB meeting tomorrow, a few tips if he wants to gain support:

- focus on the cost
- don't mention the switching station; doing so only reminds people that it's there and a concern
- don't talk about boundaries, you are mistakenly assuming that if the site changes people still want the same boundaries, that's just not true and short-sighted

eta
- and don't gloss over moving Wolf's Crossing - just be honest if you think that we wouldn't get started on the school until next year - but time is running out on getting started at BB yet this year, too

Another reason I'll show up and listen to what I might hear.

The SB is not providing those answers.

[wvhsmomcares]

People seem to not want to show because they think they get blown off for hours first. Why are they such lemmings? Since we know 50 people are showing up, the SB would be absurd not to address them and make them wait. We need to go and TELL them we will not wait!

The property has been known to SB officials for months and months, by the 23rd a professional staff can conclude whether the property is viable. After all, the seller Macom wouldn't be offering it if it couldn't work.

They kinda know about development on this land. Most of you live on land they developed!

[Arch]

macy said:

archwinsome said:

Due Diligence was done to the board's satisfaction the first time. I have the feeling based on previous posting history that you will feel that there is no amount of due diligence that could ever be 'satisfactory' to select BB. There is also this thing called time.

Do you honestly feel that enough 'due diligence' can be complete by the 26th (or whatever date is the end-date to buy it) for them to say Yes, BB really is the right place and we can do it within budget. ?? Honestly answer that one.

What do you mean by due diligence done to the board's satisfaction the first time? 2005 when they purchased 25 acres and condemned the additional 55? October 2006 when they met with Macom?

Can't respond.
I've said again and again either St. John's or Macom or ANYTHING available should be looked at.
And you are sort of correct, I'm totally against going foward with BB until I feel other parcels have been seriously looked at.
Are you 100% sure the SB has done all they can to look into all available parcels? I'm not. I can't even get an email back from them.

I don't believe they have to look at all parcels. I'd like them to do their best but if I wanted to ensure it the job was done to my satisfaction I would have run for the board myself. I don't.

They have one, they picked it and if they can do it in the money we authorized, there we are.

If they can not do it with the money authorized, then it becomes a problem to me.