Post by sushi on Mar 9, 2008 7:04:58 GMT -6
Parents file suit against District 204
Complaint says board made promises it didn't keep
March 9, 2008
By Tim Waldorf twaldorf@scn1.com
A group of Indian Prairie School District 204 parents Friday filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent the construction of a third high school "on any property other than Brach-Brodie."
The case was filed at 4 p.m. Friday by attorney Shawn Collins, who has been hired to represent the group of residents, who call themselves Neighborhood Schools for Our Children, in their lawsuit against the District 204 board.
» Click to enlarge image
Members of Neighborhood Schools for Our Children pass a box around to collect funds Tuesday night for their fight involving boundary changes in the Indian Prairie School District.
(Donnell Collins/Special to the Beacon News)
» Click to enlarge image
Collins
RELATED STORIES
• PDF: Copy of the complaint
RELATED PDF
• Copy of the complaint
Their complaint is two-fold. It contests the district's recent decision to locate Metea Valley High School on property at Eola and Molitor roads in Aurora, as that land had "previously been disqualified by the district as a potential health threat." The complaint also claims residents' rights were violated by the "blatant repudiation of the district's own resolutions and repeated public and in-court statements that the referendum money was to be used to build the high school on different property, known as Brach-Brodie."
"The federal and state constitutions forbid bait-and-switch tactics surrounding an election," Collins told The Sun after filing the suit. "I think that's what happened here, either unintentionally or intentionally. People went to the polls and thought they were voting up or down on money for Brach-Brodie."
Specific location
The complaint cites the April 2005 referendum asking voters to approve a $130.5 million tax increase to build a third high school in the district, and how the measure failed "by a wide margin," 58 percent to 42 percent.
In the wake of this defeat, the district hired a consultant to help it determine "how to win voter approval at the next election opportunity - on March 21, 2006." According to the complaint, the district needed to "provide more information" to voters, such as "the specific location" of the school, and "specific identification of each high school's boundaries."
After studying of 11 potential locations in the fall of 2005, District 204 selected "the so-called 'Brach-Brodie property'" (at the corner of 75th Street and Commons Drive in Aurora). The complaint contends District 204 then began to publicize this selection to voters, and it notes that the district also sought to condemn the property. And the complaint alleges that, after the district's Jan. 9, 2006, decision to seek a $124.7 million tax increase, it "repeatedly and publicly counseled potential March 21, 2006, voters that the district's bond referendum was specifically for the purpose of buying the Brach-Brodie (property) and building a third high school on it."
Then, on Feb. 1, 2006, the district publicized "precise boundaries" for the three high schools.
Bait and switch
And, as part of what the complaint terms an "aggressive campaign to persuade voters to vote in favor" of its referendum proposal, the district met with residents at least 25 times, states the complaint. The complaint claims that, in those meetings, district representatives advised potential voters that, if the referendum passed, District 204 would buy the Brach-Brodie property, build a high school there, and stand by the boundaries it had predetermined.
"The district was so committed to convincing potential voters of these two facts that it reacted swiftly and decisively to counter any suggestion to the contrary," states the complaint.
To prove this point, the complaint quotes current District 204 board President Mark Metzger's "widely distributed" e-mail response to such a suggestion.
"Beyond the practical reality lies the idea of simple fairness," reads the complaint's quote of Metzger. "We did the boundaries ... two years earlier than normal because the voters told us that they needed to know the boundaries in order to evaluate their votes. To change the boundaries after the vote smacks of a bait and switch and is just simply unfair ..."
A complete reversal
Then, "in a complete reversal of the failed referendum" of less than a year prior, the complaint states, voters approved the March 21, 2006, referendum proposal, 58 percent to 42 percent. And the group's complaint states that, throughout the condemnation proceedings that wouldn't be resolved for another six months, the district argued its case by saying, "In our opinion, the location of the land and boundaries are contributing factors to why people voted as they did. A promise was made to the community, which supported the district by passing the referendum."
When, on Sept. 26, 2007, a jury returned its verdict in that condemnation suit, things changed, as it placed a $31 million price tag on the Brach-Brodie property. District 204 expected the property to cost roughly half that.
So, on Jan. 15, District 204 announced its decision to purchase the Eola site instead of Brach-Brodie. It then approved new high school boundaries based on this decision during a Feb. 25 board meeting.
Neighborhood Schools for Our Children is claiming that this decision by the district "nullifies the result of an election and removes the will and decision of the voters by creating an after-the-fact negation of the right to vote."
"It seems to me that the district, for a period of time, certainly intended to purchase Brach-Brodie with the referendum money, and somewhere along the line, after the jury verdict in September of 2007, that intention changed," Collins said. "But it also looks to me like the district was behaving recklessly in assuring voters repeatedly that, come hell or high water, it was going to buy Brach-Brodie. I mean, did it really believe that, or did it just say that in order to secure votes and win the referendum?"
Complaint says board made promises it didn't keep
March 9, 2008
By Tim Waldorf twaldorf@scn1.com
A group of Indian Prairie School District 204 parents Friday filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent the construction of a third high school "on any property other than Brach-Brodie."
The case was filed at 4 p.m. Friday by attorney Shawn Collins, who has been hired to represent the group of residents, who call themselves Neighborhood Schools for Our Children, in their lawsuit against the District 204 board.
» Click to enlarge image
Members of Neighborhood Schools for Our Children pass a box around to collect funds Tuesday night for their fight involving boundary changes in the Indian Prairie School District.
(Donnell Collins/Special to the Beacon News)
» Click to enlarge image
Collins
RELATED STORIES
• PDF: Copy of the complaint
RELATED PDF
• Copy of the complaint
Their complaint is two-fold. It contests the district's recent decision to locate Metea Valley High School on property at Eola and Molitor roads in Aurora, as that land had "previously been disqualified by the district as a potential health threat." The complaint also claims residents' rights were violated by the "blatant repudiation of the district's own resolutions and repeated public and in-court statements that the referendum money was to be used to build the high school on different property, known as Brach-Brodie."
"The federal and state constitutions forbid bait-and-switch tactics surrounding an election," Collins told The Sun after filing the suit. "I think that's what happened here, either unintentionally or intentionally. People went to the polls and thought they were voting up or down on money for Brach-Brodie."
Specific location
The complaint cites the April 2005 referendum asking voters to approve a $130.5 million tax increase to build a third high school in the district, and how the measure failed "by a wide margin," 58 percent to 42 percent.
In the wake of this defeat, the district hired a consultant to help it determine "how to win voter approval at the next election opportunity - on March 21, 2006." According to the complaint, the district needed to "provide more information" to voters, such as "the specific location" of the school, and "specific identification of each high school's boundaries."
After studying of 11 potential locations in the fall of 2005, District 204 selected "the so-called 'Brach-Brodie property'" (at the corner of 75th Street and Commons Drive in Aurora). The complaint contends District 204 then began to publicize this selection to voters, and it notes that the district also sought to condemn the property. And the complaint alleges that, after the district's Jan. 9, 2006, decision to seek a $124.7 million tax increase, it "repeatedly and publicly counseled potential March 21, 2006, voters that the district's bond referendum was specifically for the purpose of buying the Brach-Brodie (property) and building a third high school on it."
Then, on Feb. 1, 2006, the district publicized "precise boundaries" for the three high schools.
Bait and switch
And, as part of what the complaint terms an "aggressive campaign to persuade voters to vote in favor" of its referendum proposal, the district met with residents at least 25 times, states the complaint. The complaint claims that, in those meetings, district representatives advised potential voters that, if the referendum passed, District 204 would buy the Brach-Brodie property, build a high school there, and stand by the boundaries it had predetermined.
"The district was so committed to convincing potential voters of these two facts that it reacted swiftly and decisively to counter any suggestion to the contrary," states the complaint.
To prove this point, the complaint quotes current District 204 board President Mark Metzger's "widely distributed" e-mail response to such a suggestion.
"Beyond the practical reality lies the idea of simple fairness," reads the complaint's quote of Metzger. "We did the boundaries ... two years earlier than normal because the voters told us that they needed to know the boundaries in order to evaluate their votes. To change the boundaries after the vote smacks of a bait and switch and is just simply unfair ..."
A complete reversal
Then, "in a complete reversal of the failed referendum" of less than a year prior, the complaint states, voters approved the March 21, 2006, referendum proposal, 58 percent to 42 percent. And the group's complaint states that, throughout the condemnation proceedings that wouldn't be resolved for another six months, the district argued its case by saying, "In our opinion, the location of the land and boundaries are contributing factors to why people voted as they did. A promise was made to the community, which supported the district by passing the referendum."
When, on Sept. 26, 2007, a jury returned its verdict in that condemnation suit, things changed, as it placed a $31 million price tag on the Brach-Brodie property. District 204 expected the property to cost roughly half that.
So, on Jan. 15, District 204 announced its decision to purchase the Eola site instead of Brach-Brodie. It then approved new high school boundaries based on this decision during a Feb. 25 board meeting.
Neighborhood Schools for Our Children is claiming that this decision by the district "nullifies the result of an election and removes the will and decision of the voters by creating an after-the-fact negation of the right to vote."
"It seems to me that the district, for a period of time, certainly intended to purchase Brach-Brodie with the referendum money, and somewhere along the line, after the jury verdict in September of 2007, that intention changed," Collins said. "But it also looks to me like the district was behaving recklessly in assuring voters repeatedly that, come hell or high water, it was going to buy Brach-Brodie. I mean, did it really believe that, or did it just say that in order to secure votes and win the referendum?"