Sun Blog

[Arch]

Corky,

I brought up env concerns at BB back yonder. The fertilizers used, whether or not they had diesel storage tanks on the property that ever leaked, etc. I brought up power lines, substation and RR tracks w/ Macom and Landfill at Hamman (sp?)

Don't generalize and say it was never an issue before or that no one every brought it up.

[steckparent]

I have to admit that when I discovered how much the jury found the land at BB to be worth I was shocked. I practice before that Judge every week and I do not believe that he was biased. I am shocked that that attorneys for the school district did not put some parameters on the cost of the remaining land to be acquired. It doesn't take an attorney to figure that out.

Sleepless in Naperville comments were right on. Should the district now only follow the opinions of the people who shout the loudest or pay the most money to an attorney.

This is case will not be won by anyone and all will lose. I imagine that if the lawsuit goes forward it will seek an injunction to stop all further actions with the MV until after a study has been conducted. Maybe I am naive but isn't the SD going to proceed with a environemental study.

Nobody disputes that the boundaries are not fair to all, maybe not even most. Nobody disputes that the northern part of the school district has the least amount of students. MV at BB would be more convenient for most. However, logically and legally what are the options. Is BB still available? If a lawsuit stalls proceeding at MV will the district then owe money to BB for the difference in valuation of its property at the time of the quick take and now as well as money to the owners of the current site for the delay. Then what are we left with - sites in Bolingbrook or Oswego - does anyone really believe that those sites would be more convenient to most than Eola.

Does anyone contributing to the lawsuit fund really believe that a suit involving boundaries has merit? It will be thrown out of court on a Motion to Dismiss. or fraud -- are you kidding? Do you have any idea how difficult that is to prove? Do you know that there is a statute that allows for the Defendant to receive money from either the Plaintiff or his attorney due to frivolous filings. Has anyone really stopped to think this through.

[doctorwho]

steckparent said:

I have to admit that when I discovered how much the jury found the land at BB to be worth I was shocked. I practice before that Judge every week and I do not believe that he was biased. I am shocked that that attorneys for the school district did not put some parameters on the cost of the remaining land to be acquired. It doesn't take an attorney to figure that out.

Sleepless in Naperville comments were right on. Should the district now only follow the opinions of the people who shout the loudest or pay the most money to an attorney.

This is case will not be won by anyone and all will lose. I imagine that if the lawsuit goes forward it will seek an injunction to stop all further actions with the MV until after a study has been conducted. Maybe I am naive but isn't the SD going to proceed with a environemental study.

Nobody disputes that the boundaries are not fair to all, maybe not even most. Nobody disputes that the northern part of the school district has the least amount of students. MV at BB would be more convenient for most. However, logically and legally what are the options. Is BB still available? If a lawsuit stalls proceeding at MV will the district then owe money to BB for the difference in valuation of its property at the time of the quick take and now as well as money to the owners of the current site for the delay. Then what are we left with - sites in Bolingbrook or Oswego - does anyone really believe that those sites would be more convenient to most than Eola.

Does anyone contributing to the lawsuit fund really believe that a suit involving boundaries has merit? It will be thrown out of court on a Motion to Dismiss. or fraud -- are you kidding? Do you have any idea how difficult that is to prove? Do you know that there is a statute that allows for the Defendant to receive money from either the Plaintiff or his attorney due to frivolous filings. Has anyone really stopped to think this through.

There is no way an attorney with the reputation Shawn Collins has is going to take a frivolous case..so my guess is he has thought it through

Is it a precendent settig case- you bet. As was put yesterday, no one anywhere has been as mislead on what was going to happen, to have it turn around so dramatically. Due to all the material in wiritng as well as built into the condemnation suit about what exactly the plans were, I do not see this being dismissed as frivolous. Hard to win - that was said yesterday. Unwinable - no.

[doctorwho]

corky said:

This attempt at a lawsuit is a reaction to the new boundaries, not because of environmental concerns or deception by the SB/Admin.

Where were all these concerned people 2 years ago when people in the district felt a 3rd HS was not necessary because of declining enrollment numbers. These people argued about under performing schools with high enrollment. Kids unable to participate in HS activities because of such large populations. How "Mega High Schools" would affect property taxes, etc.

These people were only concerned (selfishly) with how they would be affected with a new HS and not what was best for the whole district. It was obvious when the first referendum for a 3rd HS in 2005 didn't pass, but once boundaries were decided, the referendum passed! They would do anything to avoid going to WVHS.

They prove this self-serving mentality once again with this lawsuit and it is embarrassingly obvious to the whole district.

Do people realize that if a 3rd HS is delayed or not built at all, the district will have to look at how to relieve the overcrowding at NVHS even if they use portables. How do you think they will re-draw the boundaries then? My guess is WE and TG to WVHS, again!

Again, this is not all about WE or TG. Many people there are conerned about the MV site. There were plenty of people there yesterday that wish they were going to WVHS - so the broad rush really needs to be put away.

And a lot of us have been here a long time, long before we had NV to relieve that overcrowding and do not require a history lesson.

[d204mom]

steckparent said:

Maybe I am naive but isn't the SD going to proceed with a environemental study.

No, there has been no indication that any further study will be given to the pipeline hazards nor the known EMF danger.

The only study will be on the known contamination of the former peaker plant.

They know the EMF readings are high and out of range on the athletic fields are are ignoring that for some reason or clouding the situation by talking about Phase I and II tests that don't address the EMF.

?

[secondtimearound]

doctorwho said:

corky said:

This attempt at a lawsuit is a reaction to the new boundaries, not because of environmental concerns or deception by the SB/Admin.

Where were all these concerned people 2 years ago when people in the district felt a 3rd HS was not necessary because of declining enrollment numbers. These people argued about under performing schools with high enrollment. Kids unable to participate in HS activities because of such large populations. How "Mega High Schools" would affect property taxes, etc.

These people were only concerned (selfishly) with how they would be affected with a new HS and not what was best for the whole district. It was obvious when the first referendum for a 3rd HS in 2005 didn't pass, but once boundaries were decided, the referendum passed! They would do anything to avoid going to WVHS.

They prove this self-serving mentality once again with this lawsuit and it is embarrassingly obvious to the whole district.

Do people realize that if a 3rd HS is delayed or not built at all, the district will have to look at how to relieve the overcrowding at NVHS even if they use portables. How do you think they will re-draw the boundaries then? My guess is WE and TG to WVHS, again!

Again, this is not all about WE or TG. Many people there are conerned about the MV site. There were plenty of people there yesterday that wish they were going to WVHS - so the broad rush really needs to be put away.

And a lot of us have been here a long time, long before we had NV to relieve that overcrowding and do not require a history lesson.

Thanks Doc. It seems very convenient when someone doesn't like what's going on with this group they just label it as TG or WE or people who don't want their kids to go to WV. It is much more than that and to dismiss it like many posters are is disrepectful to those who have genuine concerns.

[d204mom]

steckparent said:

I am shocked that that attorneys for the school district did not put some parameters on the cost of the remaining land to be acquired. It doesn't take an attorney to figure that out.

They absolutely did. The district offered to put $600K/acre in escrow back in June for the judgement. They knew the upper limit was $600K/acre or $33 Mil a loooooong time ago - back when they won the right to pursue the case (right after the ref passed - early summer '06-ish?).

Why didn't we know about the $600K/acre number at that time? Why do we have to dig through court filings to find out the truth?

?

ipsd204.proboards76.com/index.cgi?board=newhighschool&action=display&thread=1197078028

[d204mom]

steckparent said:

Is BB still available? ----------

Then what are we left with - sites in Bolingbrook or Oswego - does anyone really believe that those sites would be more convenient to most than Eola.

Yes and yes. Look back at the possible boundary scenarios for Macom or hammond. Very do-able.

[doctorwho]

secondtimearound said:

doctorwho said:

Again, this is not all about WE or TG. Many people there are conerned about the MV site. There were plenty of people there yesterday that wish they were going to WVHS - so the broad rush really needs to be put away.

And a lot of us have been here a long time, long before we had NV to relieve that overcrowding and do not require a history lesson.

Thanks Doc. It seems very convenient when someone doesn't like what's going on with this group they just label it as TG or WE or people who don't want their kids to go to WV. It is much more than that and to dismiss it like many posters are is disrepectful to those who have genuine concerns.

you're welcome - as I have close friends in every area of this district - that happens when you're old as dirt and lived here a long time. ;D

Labels won't work this time- there are plenty of people upset in different areas- and yes some for different reasons. If you asked other areas to move to the new site they would likely have concerns also- yet they get grouped into those happy with the decision. No - just unaffected - today. It might surpise this group that there are people who attend the 4 ES' closest to the HS that also have concerns.

easier to broadbursh areas than address the core issues

[wvhsparent]

d204mom said:

steckparent said:

Is BB still available? ----------

Then what are we left with - sites in Bolingbrook or Oswego - does anyone really believe that those sites would be more convenient to most than Eola.

Yes and yes. Look back at the possible boundary scenarios for Macom or hammond. Very do-able.

Do you have a current price for BB? BB is no longer bound to the Jury award amount. They would probably ask for even more AND expect their fees to be covered AND their Damage to Remainder claim.
Also IIRC the Brodie side pretty much said they would not deal with the SD at any price.....maybe that has changed....

Also are you willing to wait til 2010 or later?

[corky]

I'm just trying to understand what exactly does the group "nsfoc" really hope to accomplish here?

What is your agenda, honestly? How does this lawsuit benefit the families in the district? What will we, as a district, gain from this lawsuit. How will the district be better off from this lawsuit? Won't the environmental issues be addressed when the reports are done?

Please explain, I'm not getting it.

[gumby]

doctorwho said:

steckparent said:

I have to admit that when I discovered how much the jury found the land at BB to be worth I was shocked. I practice before that Judge every week and I do not believe that he was biased. I am shocked that that attorneys for the school district did not put some parameters on the cost of the remaining land to be acquired. It doesn't take an attorney to figure that out.

Sleepless in Naperville comments were right on. Should the district now only follow the opinions of the people who shout the loudest or pay the most money to an attorney.

This is case will not be won by anyone and all will lose. I imagine that if the lawsuit goes forward it will seek an injunction to stop all further actions with the MV until after a study has been conducted. Maybe I am naive but isn't the SD going to proceed with a environemental study.

Nobody disputes that the boundaries are not fair to all, maybe not even most. Nobody disputes that the northern part of the school district has the least amount of students. MV at BB would be more convenient for most. However, logically and legally what are the options. Is BB still available? If a lawsuit stalls proceeding at MV will the district then owe money to BB for the difference in valuation of its property at the time of the quick take and now as well as money to the owners of the current site for the delay. Then what are we left with - sites in Bolingbrook or Oswego - does anyone really believe that those sites would be more convenient to most than Eola.

Does anyone contributing to the lawsuit fund really believe that a suit involving boundaries has merit? It will be thrown out of court on a Motion to Dismiss. or fraud -- are you kidding? Do you have any idea how difficult that is to prove? Do you know that there is a statute that allows for the Defendant to receive money from either the Plaintiff or his attorney due to frivolous filings. Has anyone really stopped to think this through.

There is no way an attorney with the reputation Shawn Collins has is going to take a frivolous case..so my guess is he has thought it through

Is it a precendent settig case- you bet. As was put yesterday, no one anywhere has been as mislead on what was going to happen, to have it turn around so dramatically. Due to all the material in wiritng as well as built into the condemnation suit about what exactly the plans were, I do not see this being dismissed as frivolous. Hard to win - that was said yesterday. Unwinable - no.

I agree that there's a colorable case here. There's at least certainly enough to require document production and depositions.

I have no idea who Shawn Collins is. Has he won some big cases or been significant in this area in some way?

[Arch]

corky said:

I'm just trying to understand what exactly does the group "nsfoc" really hope to accomplish here?

What is your agenda, honestly? How does this lawsuit benefit the families in the district? What will we, as a district, gain from this lawsuit. How will the district be better off from this lawsuit? Won't the environmental issues be addressed when the reports are done?

Please explain, I'm not getting it.

Are they going to dig up the pipes and inspect them internally and externally and recoat and replace if any spec of corrosion is found which could become catastrophic as the years move forward?

If so, I will feel a whole heck of a lot better about the site.

[drdavelasik]

Let's remember to not generalize. I attended and one of my issues IS environmental. One mistake I am noticing as primarily a reader and not poster, is too many generalizations are being made about how others are thinking and what is motivating them if they so choose to participate. I am on the fence right now in terms of my willingness to participate but I do understand the concerns voiced at the meeting 100%. This SB is moving quickly and seems that they are not thinking things through and oing their due diligence at all. I am not impressed by this SB at all. District is definately not what it is all hyped up to be in my opinion.

[drdavelasik]

secondtimearound said:

doctorwho said:

Again, this is not all about WE or TG. Many people there are conerned about the MV site. There were plenty of people there yesterday that wish they were going to WVHS - so the broad rush really needs to be put away.

And a lot of us have been here a long time, long before we had NV to relieve that overcrowding and do not require a history lesson.

Thanks Doc. It seems very convenient when someone doesn't like what's going on with this group they just label it as TG or WE or people who don't want their kids to go to WV. It is much more than that and to dismiss it like many posters are is disrepectful to those who have genuine concerns.

I met several people last night that are slated to attend MVHS. Stop dumping on the residents of WE and TG. This issue is greater than 2 subdivisions. It is not very becoming.