Valley Voices Boundary chatter good for laughs

[d204mom]

mandmmom said:

sushi said:

Althought I was surprised at the Board's behavior, I realized after hearing the same thing over and over again from the same neighborhoods, that they are sick of it. I am sure nothing was said that wasn't e-mailed 1200 times to the board before the meeting. However, I wish they could have checked their anger and taken the high road so as not to fuel the fire.

They do not get to pick and choose what they get to hear....if they are here for the entire district, then they are here for all the neighborhoods, big or small. I agree they should have taken the high road, b/c they are the leaders and to be an effective one you must be able to deal with conflict....they wanted this job, so if they can’t handle it then maybe they should step down.....

I for one am tired of hearing that we are bad people. Which is what the Jim Lynch piece was about and what this piece is about.

We are just like the people in Oswego and D203 and everyplace else. People everywhere are very predictable when you treat them a certain way.

In D203 they decided to add onto Mill Street instead of redistrict Will O Way out. Alan Leis met with those parent and listened to their concerns. And their ref passed - no problem. Imagine that.

I just get the feeling that Daeschner has NO political sense whatsoever and it's going to continue to cause problems.

[mandmmom]

d204mom said:

mandmmom said:

They do not get to pick and choose what they get to hear....if they are here for the entire district, then they are here for all the neighborhoods, big or small. I agree they should have taken the high road, b/c they are the leaders and to be an effective one you must be able to deal with conflict....they wanted this job, so if they can’t handle it then maybe they should step down.....

I for one am tired of hearing that we are bad people. Which is what the Jim Lynch piece was about and what this piece is about.

We are just like the people in Oswego and D203 and everyplace else. People everywhere are very predictable when you treat them a certain way.

In D203 they decided to add onto Mill Street instead of redistrict Will O Way out. Alan Leis met with those parent and listened to their concerns. And their ref passed - no problem. Imagine that.

Wow someone actually listened to them instead of trying to push their own agenda....

[mustangpride]

sushi said:

mustangpride said:

I agree. This type of talk does nothing but stir up more trouble IMO.

And the people I know who are concerned have no beef with WVHS.

I don't think I am contributing to the problem; I am trying to call out the people who are hiding behind their stated agendas. I want them to be honest with themselves. I, too, know many people who are excited about WV for many reasons.

But are you stating that everyone who is opposed to the site, boundaries or whatever has a problem with WVHS?

Because that is simply not true.

And I think you are perpetuating some of the sterotypes on both sides - and I think that is really sad.

[sushi]

Arch, not privy to planning council minutes. Are you? If so, do tell. Does anyone know if there is a timeline for remediation?

What about the proximity to NV and the people living on the Macom site? Also delays with that site that could go on for a long time IMO.

[wvhsparent]

It looks like in the paper(Trib) they had a photo of a speaker addressing the Oswego SB. Background looked like a school auditorium.....

Personally that is exactly what our SB should have done too..The seriously dropped the ball on that one.

[Arch]

sushi said:

Arch, not privy to planning council minutes. Are you? If so, do tell. Does anyone know if there is a timeline for remediation?

What about the proximity to NV and the people living on the Macom site? Also delays with that site that could go on for a long time IMO.

City of aurora web site, city clerk section, meetings and agendas.. look in the Jan and Feb months (2008) for the planning council.

[sushi]

archwinsome said:

sushi said:

Arch, what about the people living there? What about the road?

What about the peaker plant?

The road is scheduled to be moved this spring (supposedly). ComEd needs 6 months lead time and that work order should be in their queues from last year I believe.

The peaker isn't even scheduled but the best time being thrown around was december 2008 that I heard. When is remediation of the environmental problems scheduled?

Have you read the planning council minutes from Aurora about their opinion of the aggressiveness of the site plans at MWGEN? Rush jobs around pipelines... Perfect formula.

I did read the minutes for Jan. 29; it states concerns about the peaker plant not being completed all the way but I didn't leave with the same impression. As far as the gas mains, it was stated that the city had to be sure that all were relocated before construction could start. I'm not an engineer, but I don't see a conspiracy here, Arch. Yes, they want to move forward quickly, but don't see any shortcuts being taken that would jeopardize any safety issues. It stated they will resolve more issues at the meeting this week.

[Arch]

sushi said:

archwinsome said:

What about the peaker plant?

The road is scheduled to be moved this spring (supposedly). ComEd needs 6 months lead time and that work order should be in their queues from last year I believe.

The peaker isn't even scheduled but the best time being thrown around was december 2008 that I heard. When is remediation of the environmental problems scheduled?

Have you read the planning council minutes from Aurora about their opinion of the aggressiveness of the site plans at MWGEN? Rush jobs around pipelines... Perfect formula.

I did read the minutes for Jan. 29; it states concerns about the peaker plant not being completed all the way but I didn't leave with the same impression. As far as the gas mains, it was stated that the city had to be sure that all were relocated before construction could start. I'm not an engineer, but I don't see a conspiracy here, Arch. Yes, they want to move forward quickly, but don't see any shortcuts being taken that would jeopardize any safety issues. It stated they will resolve more issues at the meeting this week.

Conspiracy is a word you are throwing into this and it is one that I did not use. I pointed out the city's own concern of the aggressive plans (their words) and the fact that we are slated to pay 8 digits of 'hurry up' costs equates to a 'rush' which is the term I used. When people are rushed, they are more prone to mistakes. That was the observation I put forth, not a 'conspiracy'.

[wvhsparent]

I also just finished reading the minutes......Looks like pretty standard stuuf, that they are discussing. Not sure much, if any, fall under the project halting category.
The mention of agressive plans also means that while Aurora may be on-board, they are not going to allow "shortcuts", and that is good IMHO.

[sushi]

archwinsome said:

sushi said:

I did read the minutes for Jan. 29; it states concerns about the peaker plant not being completed all the way but I didn't leave with the same impression. As far as the gas mains, it was stated that the city had to be sure that all were relocated before construction could start. I'm not an engineer, but I don't see a conspiracy here, Arch. Yes, they want to move forward quickly, but don't see any shortcuts being taken that would jeopardize any safety issues. It stated they will resolve more issues at the meeting this week.

Conspiracy is a word you are throwing into this and it is one that I did not use. I pointed out the city's own concern of the aggressive plans (their words) and the fact that we are slated to pay 8 digits of 'hurry up' costs equates to a 'rush' which is the term I used. When people are rushed, they are more prone to mistakes. That was the observation I put forth, not a 'conspiracy'.

Of course, you are right; no conspiracy. Sorry Arch. I guess the point I was trying to make is it doesn't seem like as big a deal as it was presented to be. I agree with Parent, it does seem Aurora is on top of things. The meeting this week will give more info.

[Arch]

sushi said:

archwinsome said:

Conspiracy is a word you are throwing into this and it is one that I did not use. I pointed out the city's own concern of the aggressive plans (their words) and the fact that we are slated to pay 8 digits of 'hurry up' costs equates to a 'rush' which is the term I used. When people are rushed, they are more prone to mistakes. That was the observation I put forth, not a 'conspiracy'.

Of course, you are right; no conspiracy. Sorry Arch. I guess the point I was trying to make is it doesn't seem like as big a deal as it was presented to be. I agree with Parent, it does seem Aurora is on top of things. The meeting this week will give more info.

We are then all in agreement that it's a good thing the City of Aurora seems to be putting forth the posture that they are not allowing short cuts.

[twhl]

archwinsome said:

sushi said:

Of course, you are right; no conspiracy. Sorry Arch. I guess the point I was trying to make is it doesn't seem like as big a deal as it was presented to be. I agree with Parent, it does seem Aurora is on top of things. The meeting this week will give more info.

We are then all in agreement that it's a good thing the City of Aurora seems to be putting forth the posture that they are not allowing short cuts.

Because if BB went through then they could have lost significant tax revenue. by pushing AME, they are trying to put the school in an area that would have yielded significantly less if much at all. So it is clearly in the best interest for Aurora to get the school built on the AME site.

[mandmmom]

twhl said:

archwinsome said:

We are then all in agreement that it's a good thing the City of Aurora seems to be putting forth the posture that they are not allowing short cuts.

Because if BB went through then they could have lost significant tax revenue. by pushing AME, they are trying to put the school in an area that would have yielded significantly less if much at all. So it is clearly in the best interest for Aurora to get the school built on the AME site.

Interesting point.....

[Arch]

twhl said:

archwinsome said:

We are then all in agreement that it's a good thing the City of Aurora seems to be putting forth the posture that they are not allowing short cuts.

Because if BB went through then they could have lost significant tax revenue. by pushing AME, they are trying to put the school in an area that would have yielded significantly less if much at all. So it is clearly in the best interest for Aurora to get the school built on the AME site.

Considering the fact that the Agriculture use is usually the lowest taxed, it was not even annexed into the city, and that the peaker has not fired since 9/2004 to generate any revenue they are offloading a non/low-income producing parcel and keeping one with much more potential and plans for build out. Definitely another point of view worth considering, and a good one at that.

[fryfox]

archwinsome said:

momto4 said:

But BB was NOT willing to negotiate or we'd have the land. Our SB and Admin tried everything they could to get that land and many who weren't that keen on the site thought they held on too long as it is. I don't think anything more could have been done outside of paying the jury price.

When could a school open on Macom site, realistically? It doesn't seem like it would be anytime soon and I thought they had some of the same concerns as AME? Power lines, tracks? Plus others.

In the scorecard of negatives, Macomb had less than MWGEN/AME. 6 active transit pipelines less and also less power lines. Same substation problem, same RR track problems but might cause less people to have to traverse at-grade crossings. Without real bus routes, that's only a guess and should not really count one way or the other.

Because Macom is East of the RR tracks, boundaries could be done that would have less people crossing RR tracks. For the most part (with a few exceptions), those W of the RR could stay at WV and those E of the RR could go to MV at Macom or NV.

Additionally, you wouldn't be adding to most people's commute, and fewer people could be moved from their current schools.