Naperville SUN Article 3/11 & 3/12 204 SD Defense

[doctorwho]

mo said:

Update: D204 says it will hire more attorneys

March 11, 2008
By Tim Waldorf [e-mail]
By Tim Waldorf
[e-mail]


Indian Prairie School District 204’s board met behind closed doors Monday to discuss the lawsuit filed Friday by Neighborhood Schools for Our Children.

And it emerged from the closed session meeting with little to say.

“The lawsuit will be defended is all I can tell you at this point,” board President Mark Metzger said.

Metzger added that the district will employ co-counsel to work alongside its attorneys from Whitt Law, but who that co-counsel will be has yet to be determined, he said.

A group of Indian Prairie School District 204 parents has filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent the construction of a third high school "on any property other than Brach-Brodie." Attorney Shawn Collins 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.

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."

Metzger noted that for this to occur, the district must purchase the Brach-Brodie property.

“We don’t have the money to close on that site and build on it,” Metzger said. “That hasn’t changed.”

District officials have received calls from the Brach-Brodie trust’s attorney “to see if they were still in the mix,” but, he added, the district has not contacted representatives of the Brach-Brodie trust. He said, though, that he’d expect their asking price is still come in at $31million.
“The bottom line is we can’t afford that,” he said.

Earlier in the evening, the district reviewed its long-term financial outlook, which shows the district maintaining a cumulative surplus of $91 million at the end of the year. That amount is equal to roughly 35 percent of its operating budget, and it is projected to fall to roughly 20 percent – or $61 million, by 2012, which is now the earliest date District 204 administrators can foresee seeking an operating fund tax increase.

Metzger stressed that the district would not use any of that money for these purposes because doing so would only accelerate the need to return to voters for more money.

“Absolutely not. Never, ever, ever,” he said. “We made a commitment in September that we will only spend capital funds on this project, and we intend to keep that commitment.”

<District officials have received calls from the Brach-Brodie trust’s attorney “to see if they were still in the mix,” but, he added, the district has not contacted representatives of the Brach-Brodie trust. He said, though, that he’d expect their asking price is still come in at $31million.
“The bottom line is we can’t afford that,” he said.<

Wait - so BB tried to contact them, but we're not returning calls -- I hope this didn't start before we walked away --- I still remember the last quote I saw said Brodie attorneys ( at least from what we knwo the holdup) - wanted to meet in front of the judge the following week when we left saying after 2 years- another week was too long.


If we don't know whether we can afford it or not-- I hope that's not the defense - because maybe someone else knows we can afford it now ?

[d204mom]

Wonder if Collins has been in contact with Helm? It probably would be pretty cheap for Helm to file a 10-15 M dollar lawsuit for damages against the district. They've already published the reports showing we "can't afford" BB by 3.1 M.

That's the defense? Oh lord, are we in trouble.

[jill]

doctorwho said:

mo said:

Update: D204 says it will hire more attorneys

March 11, 2008
By Tim Waldorf [e-mail]
By Tim Waldorf
[e-mail]


Indian Prairie School District 204’s board met behind closed doors Monday to discuss the lawsuit filed Friday by Neighborhood Schools for Our Children.

And it emerged from the closed session meeting with little to say.

“The lawsuit will be defended is all I can tell you at this point,” board President Mark Metzger said.

Metzger added that the district will employ co-counsel to work alongside its attorneys from Whitt Law, but who that co-counsel will be has yet to be determined, he said.

A group of Indian Prairie School District 204 parents has filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent the construction of a third high school "on any property other than Brach-Brodie." Attorney Shawn Collins 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.

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."

Metzger noted that for this to occur, the district must purchase the Brach-Brodie property.

“We don’t have the money to close on that site and build on it,” Metzger said. “That hasn’t changed.”

District officials have received calls from the Brach-Brodie trust’s attorney “to see if they were still in the mix,” but, he added, the district has not contacted representatives of the Brach-Brodie trust. He said, though, that he’d expect their asking price is still come in at $31million.
“The bottom line is we can’t afford that,” he said.

Earlier in the evening, the district reviewed its long-term financial outlook, which shows the district maintaining a cumulative surplus of $91 million at the end of the year. That amount is equal to roughly 35 percent of its operating budget, and it is projected to fall to roughly 20 percent – or $61 million, by 2012, which is now the earliest date District 204 administrators can foresee seeking an operating fund tax increase.

Metzger stressed that the district would not use any of that money for these purposes because doing so would only accelerate the need to return to voters for more money.

“Absolutely not. Never, ever, ever,” he said. “We made a commitment in September that we will only spend capital funds on this project, and we intend to keep that commitment.”

<District officials have received calls from the Brach-Brodie trust’s attorney “to see if they were still in the mix,” but, he added, the district has not contacted representatives of the Brach-Brodie trust. He said, though, that he’d expect their asking price is still come in at $31million.
“The bottom line is we can’t afford that,” he said.<

Wait - so BB tried to contact them, but we're not returning calls -- I hope this didn't start before we walked away --- I still remember the last quote I saw said Brodie attorneys ( at least from what we knwo the holdup) - wanted to meet in front of the judge the following week when we left saying after 2 years- another week was too long.


If we don't know whether we can afford it or not-- I hope that's not the defense - because maybe someone else knows we can afford it now ?

I asked M2 the same questions this morning. He responded...

"It's a misquote. Mr. Helm confirmed the price to us."

m2

[proschool]

“Absolutely not. Never, ever, ever,” he said. “We made a commitment in September that we will only spend capital funds on this project, and we intend to keep that commitment.”


Wasn't this the commitment that they made to the state senator to get quick take?

IIRC she didn't keep her end of the bargain.

[proschool]

jill said:

doctorwho said:

<District officials have received calls from the Brach-Brodie trust’s attorney “to see if they were still in the mix,” but, he added, the district has not contacted representatives of the Brach-Brodie trust. He said, though, that he’d expect their asking price is still come in at $31million.
“The bottom line is we can’t afford that,” he said.<

Wait - so BB tried to contact them, but we're not returning calls -- I hope this didn't start before we walked away --- I still remember the last quote I saw said Brodie attorneys ( at least from what we knwo the holdup) - wanted to meet in front of the judge the following week when we left saying after 2 years- another week was too long.


If we don't know whether we can afford it or not-- I hope that's not the defense - because maybe someone else knows we can afford it now ?

I asked M2 the same questions this morning. He responded...

"It's a misquote. Mr. Helm confirmed the price to us."

m2

The board really needs to make it clear to everyone that they have negotiated with BB and the exact pric that BB would take right now.

[sushi]

At the Jan. meeting no price was mentioned but several (CB, Alka, MM) indicated that they had tried everything to make BB work - Alka went on about how the public has no idea what effort they put into it etc, etc. and just couldn't make it work.

I have said before, the more info that gets out, the better some people will feel. I agree they should get the details out.

[d204mom]

proschool said:

“Absolutely not. Never, ever, ever,” he said. “We made a commitment in September that we will only spend capital funds on this project, and we intend to keep that commitment.”


Wasn't this the commitment that they made to the state senator to get quick take?

IIRC she didn't keep her end of the bargain.

We are sitting on $91M and we "can't afford" an extra 3.1M 2.1M to avoid this giant mess?

D203 has no problem spending op funds on construction. Are they doing something terribly wrong? I don't get it.

How much of the $91M are we spending on attorney fees to continue to fight with Brach-Brodie? Talk about penny-wise / pound-foolish!

ETA - and before eveyone jumps all over me that spending an extra 2.1 M would enrage all of the fiscal conservatives in the district. "Good night!" AME is $20 MILLION OVER BUDGET. They are already enraged.

[WeBe204]

jill said:

I asked M2 the same questions this morning. He responded...

"It's a misquote. Mr. Helm confirmed the price to us."

m2

Just wanted to say... Welcome aboard Jill.

[jill]

proschool said:

jill said:

I asked M2 the same questions this morning. He responded...

"It's a misquote. Mr. Helm confirmed the price to us."

m2

The board really needs to make it clear to everyone that they have negotiated with BB and the exact pric that BB would take right now.

Agreed. I asked what the final offer was in my original e-mail to M2. He didn't answer that question. I replied asking again for the price. I haven't heard back.

[d204mom]

Half the story:

“We don’t have the money to close on that site and build on it,” Metzger said. “That hasn’t changed.”


The other half of the story:

We don't technically have the money in the capital fund because we kind of decided to only use capital money even though we could just transfer some of our $91,000,000 operating surplus over into capital but llike I said earlier, we kind of decided not to do that. So, no we don't have the money in the capital account right now. So we "can't afford it." And we are hiding behind that excuse to make some sort of fiscal responsibility argument even though anyone that's been paying attention knows that we are blowing a giant hole in "the budget" by building at MWGEN/AME. A big big hole. $16,751,400 to be exact. So it's ok to "blow the budget" for MWGEN/AME but it's NOT ok to do it for Brach-Brodie.

[d204mom]

mo said:

Update: D204 says it will hire more attorneys

March 11, 2008
By Tim Waldorf [e-mail]


Metzger noted that for this to occur, the district must purchase the Brach-Brodie property.

“We don’t have the money to close on that site and build on it,” Metzger said. “That hasn’t changed.”

District officials have received calls from the Brach-Brodie trust’s attorney “to see if they were still in the mix,” but, he added, the district has not contacted representatives of the Brach-Brodie trust. He said, though, that he’d expect their asking price is still come in at $31million.
“The bottom line is we can’t afford that,” he said.

Earlier in the evening, the district reviewed its long-term financial outlook, which shows the district maintaining a cumulative surplus of $91 million at the end of the year. That amount is equal to roughly 35 percent of its operating budget, and it is projected to fall to roughly 20 percent – or $61 million, by 2012, which is now the earliest date District 204 administrators can foresee seeking an operating fund tax increase.

Metzger stressed that the district would not use any of that money for these purposes because doing so would only accelerate the need to return to voters for more money.

“Absolutely not. Never, ever, ever,” he said. “We made a commitment in September that we will only spend capital funds on this project, and we intend to keep that commitment.”

I think Tim Waldorf included the $91 million budget surplus information directly following the Metzger quote “The bottom line is we can’t afford that,” in order to point out Metzger's hypocrisy. Then asked him - "Hey you do have the money to do what the voters approved, why aren't you buying Brach-Brodie?" which got him the "never ever ever" comment and surprise!! NO MORE INTERVIEWS OR COMMENTS.

There was a blurb from Jim Lynch on the Potluck blog (apparently The Sun is being "punished" for asking some tough questions and Metzger won't talk to them anymore):

By Naperville Sun editors on March 21, 2008 11:06 AM
Moderator Jim to Anonymous: Precisely the point. We look forward to talking to them [the board]...when they decide they want to talk. Meanwhile, we're simply in the business of reporting news in a fair and balanced manner.

Also probably why Daescher's point NOW is that "AME is CHEAPER" instead of "WE CAN'T AFFORD BB." Because we all know now that the latter is untrue.

[concerned2]

Good Job 204 mom!! Way to call the SB out.