3/13 SUN LTE - No official position

[doctorwho]

rural said:

Maybe it needs to be put in a different light. How's this:

Just as the majority of support for MV at AME and the antipathy towards NSFOC and their lawsuit increases the farther north you move, the inverse is true as you move south over the district.

Is that fair?

I think it's an accurate statement as exceptions become rarer the further from poles you get . I will say though that most of the central- who actuall has to attend a school on that site is not supportive of the site - whether it be distance / safety or in many cases both.

Now there are also some SE who may be apathetic because it doesn't involve them and maybe even an area who likes the current boundary split and doesn't want to upset that apple cart.
So maybe it doesn't work so well after all

[spousestonethrow]

scarbroughknight said:

sushi said:

It's not the political purpose I object to, it's the subsequent painting of the neighborhood with a wide brush. Because this is such a heated issue and people are divided in their beliefs, it is a bad idea to have this particular meeting at our clubhouse. Before NSFOC was formed it was a meeting of residents to sound off. That was different, IMO.
_________________________________________________

I have to side with Sushi who is not talking about rights but about the perception that WE and TG are joined at the hip. Yesterday I heard people talking about how racist and elitist WE is which is simply not true and I let them know about it.It is that one group from TG that is dragging us (WE) through the mud. Haven't you been reading the papers and the potluck blog?

I just felt the need to post on this one. There are racist people everywhere unfortunately, but as it relates to WE there ARE many and elitist. I can comment firsthand since I have been part of a few situations and heard various comments that were inappropriate. Most recent incident was when I considered joining WE for a golf membership. I was appalled to say the least with many comments I heard from members while on and off of the course. Hence, I opted to place our money elsewhere. As for TG or any other neighborhood putting WE in the mud, your neighbors did that on their own. Remember there were several meetings during the boundaries and the comments made were definately racist to say the least. Deny if you choose, but I EXPERIENCED IT FIRSTHAND! To label a subdivision as not racist or racist is a big mistake.....you cannot speak for over a thousand people to profess they are not racist or elitist.

[spousestonethrow]

fryfox said:

scarbroughknight said:

Fryfox- Did I refer to the entire subdivision? I said one group who I am told the core of which are the people you refer to as stomping out of the school board meeting and are now calling themselves NSFOC. I am aware many people in that organization are very sincere in their concerns but mentioned core could care less about safety hazards and are only concerned about staying at NV. I know people in TG have told me they are embarrassed and chagrined by these people. However both TG and WE have been painted as the black sheep of the district because of their actions. I just don't like being called rasist and elitist and I know you don't either.

Just so you know, I know who is at the core of this group and it is NOT the group who stomped out of the meeting or I would not be defending them.

People calling those involved with the NSFOC racist &/or elitist are misinformed. I don't like being called that either but am confident that it is their ignorance, not the reality, that is at the root of that namecalling.

Are there minorities involved in NSFOC? If so don't think all involved are racist, that's for sure. Whoever says that is just plain stupid!

[secondtimearound]

spousestonethrow said:

scarbroughknight said:

sushi said:

It's not the political purpose I object to, it's the subsequent painting of the neighborhood with a wide brush. Because this is such a heated issue and people are divided in their beliefs, it is a bad idea to have this particular meeting at our clubhouse. Before NSFOC was formed it was a meeting of residents to sound off. That was different, IMO.
_________________________________________________

I have to side with Sushi who is not talking about rights but about the perception that WE and TG are joined at the hip. Yesterday I heard people talking about how racist and elitist WE is which is simply not true and I let them know about it.It is that one group from TG that is dragging us (WE) through the mud. Haven't you been reading the papers and the potluck blog?

I just felt the need to post on this one. There are racist people everywhere unfortunately, but as it relates to WE there ARE many and elitist. I can comment firsthand since I have been part of a few situations and heard various comments that were inappropriate. Most recent incident was when I considered joining WE for a golf membership. I was appalled to say the least with many comments I heard from members while on and off of the course. Hence, I opted to place our money elsewhere. As for TG or any other neighborhood putting WE in the mud, your neighbors did that on their own. Remember there were several meetings during the boundaries and the comments made were definately racist to say the least. Deny if you choose, but I EXPERIENCED IT FIRSTHAND! To label a subdivision as not racist or racist is a big mistake.....you cannot speak for over a thousand people to profess they are not racist or elitist.

I feel the need to respond to this generalization and conclusion. First of all the White Eagle Golf Club and the neighborhood are two different entities. I can tell you that more than half of the golf members do not live in the White Eagle subdivision. They live throughout Naperville, Aurora and the surrounding areas. So to equate something you heard on the Golf Course and paint many in the neighborhood with a racist brush is not appropriate. By the way, there are also many minorities that are White Eagle golf members, including the President of the White Eagle Golf Board who happens to be African American. Also, your comments about boundary meetings and paitning White Eagle as racist again is just not appropriate. Please stick to the facts and issues at hand without throwing this trash around!!! Or confine your posts to Potluck, where these type of comments are routine...

[sushi]

I am disturbed by your comments, spousestonethrow. I do think some in our community are elitist, but racism is another matter altogether. We have an extremely diverse community as verified by the many different people attending the first HO meeting. There are also members at our golfclub from many different racial/religous groups. I am appalled that you had a bad experience at the golfclub. Just goes to show, there are a**h*les everywhere.

I don't feel this is a race issue as much as a "I want the new school, I want the close school, I want the best school." In other words, FOR SOME, it is all about what "I" want. (note the "for some, people!)

[spousestonethrow]

secondtimearound said:

spousestonethrow said:

scarbroughknight said:

I just felt the need to post on this one. There are racist people everywhere unfortunately, but as it relates to WE there ARE many and elitist. I can comment firsthand since I have been part of a few situations and heard various comments that were inappropriate. Most recent incident was when I considered joining WE for a golf membership. I was appalled to say the least with many comments I heard from members while on and off of the course. Hence, I opted to place our money elsewhere. As for TG or any other neighborhood putting WE in the mud, your neighbors did that on their own. Remember there were several meetings during the boundaries and the comments made were definately racist to say the least. Deny if you choose, but I EXPERIENCED IT FIRSTHAND! To label a subdivision as not racist or racist is a big mistake.....you cannot speak for over a thousand people to profess they are not racist or elitist.

I feel the need to respond to this generalization and conclusion. First of all the White Eagle Golf Club and the neighborhood are two different entities. I can tell you that more than half of the golf members do not live in the White Eagle subdivision. They live throughout Naperville, Aurora and the surrounding areas. So to equate something you heard on the Golf Course and paint many in the neighborhood with a racist brush is not appropriate. By the way, there are also many minorities that are White Eagle golf members, including the President of the White Eagle Golf Board who happens to be African American. Also, your comments about boundary meetings and paitning White Eagle as racist again is just not appropriate. Please stick to the facts and issues at hand without throwing this trash around!!! Or confine your posts to Potluck, where these type of comments are routine...

Is that what I said? NO! What I said is that ALL neighborhoods have racist people so to say that WE does not have racist or elitists is incorrect. Also, the people that made the comments DID LIVE IN WE. Another thing, I do know of 2 African American families that lives in WE who would agree that the subdivsion does have alot of elitists that don't want to attend WV. Fact....I am just saying what I know firsthand. As for sticking to the issue.....reread.....I RESPONDED TO POST NOT INITIATED.

[spousestonethrow]

sushi said:

I am disturbed by your comments, spousestonethrow. I do think some in our community are elitist, but racism is another matter altogether. We have an extremely diverse community as verified by the many different people attending the first HO meeting. There are also members at our golfclub from many different racial/religous groups. I am appalled that you had a bad experience at the golfclub. Just goes to show, there are a**h*les everywhere.

I don't feel this is a race issue as much as a "I want the new school, I want the close school, I want the best school." In other words, FOR SOME, it is all about what "I" want. (note the "for some, people!)

When comments like "I dont' want my kids to attend with those kinds" are made what do you think they are saying.....it definately is not Metzgers son they are referring to.. Plus Title One is always linked with minorities which I am also sick of hearing in the community (not just WE but the entire district).

[sushi]

Note from above: There are a**h**les everywhere.

[snerdley]

sushi said:

Note from above: There are a**h**les everywhere.

I think this should be the quote we stick at the top.

You said it, sister.

[fryfox]

sushi said:

I am disturbed by your comments, spousestonethrow. I do think some in our community are elitist, but racism is another matter altogether. We have an extremely diverse community as verified by the many different people attending the first HO meeting. There are also members at our golfclub from many different racial/religous groups. I am appalled that you had a bad experience at the golfclub. Just goes to show, there are a**h*les everywhere.

I don't feel this is a race issue as much as a "I want the new school, I want the close school, I want the best school." In other words, FOR SOME, it is all about what "I" want. (note the "for some, people!)

Sushi, I'm not really sure what your agenda is, but it is obvious that you are not here to listen to anyone but yourself. Maybe you think if you push hard enough what you're saying will become true.

There is definietely some "I want" going on. Such as, "I want due diligence from our school board," "I want solid decisions that will be able to last in this district and not a crummy generic bandaid to our overcrowding that's not going to fall off when it gets a little wet," (or worse, severely damage the skin). "I want our elected officials to say what they mean and mean what they say (especially when they say it with the intense conviction that they tend to use)." "I want fiscal responsibility."

My real question to you, Sushi, is why are you so bent on making this go through? What do you stand to gain? There is obviously something.

[spousestonethrow]

snerdley said:

sushi said:

Note from above: There are a**h**les everywhere.

I think this should be the quote we stick at the top.

You said it, sister.

I am cracking up! ;D

[sushi]

My motives are simple, Fryfox. We need a new HS. I have supported it from the beginning. It should have been built by now.

I am not willing to risk any childs health to do it. If the site is deemed safe, we should build the HS.

[Avenging Eagle]

sushi said:

My motives are simple, Fryfox. We need a new HS. I have supported it from the beginning. It should have been built by now.

I am not willing to risk any childs health to do it. If the site is deemed safe, we should build the HS.

What kind of proof do you required that is is safe?

There are certificate generation programs on sale at Best Buy for $9.99. I am afraid they will print one of those off for us and push forward with construction.

Why aren't you afraid of this happening to us? And nobody has addressed why we feel ok to build on a site with 3 pipelines which would be illegal in California?

[sleeplessinnpvl]

I am going to show my ignorance and lack of knowledge about CAlifornia so someone please correct me if I am wrong. Could CA be a bit worried about building on gas lines because of earthquakes? We already know IL doesn't have laws concerning this-what about the other 48 states?

I guess I would be more concerned about this if 50% or more of our country is concerned about this or if we were the only state in the US to not have laws about this. But just because it's California.....(I will keep my thoughts about CA to myself). But couldn't that really be because of earthquakes? I know we are on a fault too but I'm just wondering.

[JB]

sleeplessinnpvl said:

I am going to show my ignorance and lack of knowledge about CAlifornia so someone please correct me if I am wrong. Could CA be a bit worried about building on gas lines because of earthquakes? We already know IL doesn't have laws concerning this-what about the other 48 states?

I guess I would be more concerned about this if 50% or more of our country is concerned about this or if we were the only state in the US to not have laws about this. But just because it's California.....(I will keep my thoughts about CA to myself). But couldn't that really be because of earthquakes? I know we are on a fault too but I'm just wondering.

I think that could be a part of it, but not all of CA is on a fault. I think they've just thought ahead and decided not to place schools near things that go boom. If you look at the code, they are also concerned about railroad derailments and the effect on underground pipes.