NSFOC meeting 3/25

[concerned2]

Then why did the district bring up the IEPA?

[sushi]

I received an e-mail from someone who said the IEPA will do an inspection AFTER the site has been remediated. The area that is polluted will not be built on and is not near an area where any students will be in contact.

[WeBe204]

sushi said:

I received an e-mail from someone who said the IEPA will do an inspection AFTER the site has been remediated. The area that is polluted will not be built on and is not near an area where any students will be in contact.

Thanks Sushi for getting that data point. So, I take from that the fenced off part will be inspected after purchase and after remediaiton. The only change there for me is I thought that was supposed to happen before purchase and before children enter the site.

[sushi]

The findings were limited to a small portion of the site, not immediately critical to the short term development and operation of the 3rd HS site (i.e. even if it took 24 mos. it might not have an impact on the ability to open or use the school).

I'm assuming the remediation will be immediate. The IEPA inspection that the remediation is complete could take awhile. It is my understanding that the IEPA will be contacted after closing and before remediation begins.

I am still waiting for more information.

[cornholio]

sushi said:

The findings were limited to a small portion of the site, not immediately critical to the short term development and operation of the 3rd HS site (i.e. even if it took 24 mos. it might not have an impact on the ability to open or use the school).

I'm assuming the remediation will be immediate. The IEPA inspection that the remediation is complete could take awhile. It is my understanding that the IEPA will be contacted after closing and before remediation begins.

I am still waiting for more information.

Flipping brilliant. Remediation AFTER the school takes ownership of the land

[doctorwho]

sushi said:

The findings were limited to a small portion of the site, not immediately critical to the short term development and operation of the 3rd HS site (i.e. even if it took 24 mos. it might not have an impact on the ability to open or use the school).

I'm assuming the remediation will be immediate. The IEPA inspection that the remediation is complete could take awhile. It is my understanding that the IEPA will be contacted after closing and before remediation begins.

I am still waiting for more information.

would it not be possible the IEPA would want to look at a larger sample - and check for more issues than Phase I and phase II did ?

[fryfox]

cornholio said:

sushi said:

The findings were limited to a small portion of the site, not immediately critical to the short term development and operation of the 3rd HS site (i.e. even if it took 24 mos. it might not have an impact on the ability to open or use the school).

I'm assuming the remediation will be immediate. The IEPA inspection that the remediation is complete could take awhile. It is my understanding that the IEPA will be contacted after closing and before remediation begins.

I am still waiting for more information.

Flipping brilliant. Remediation AFTER the school takes ownership of the land

Yes, then if it comes back unacceptable, we could hand over $20 million damages to BB, plus the cost of the Eola site AND still not third high school. Or we could just build a giant brick wall around the contamination with electric barbed wire to ensure that the kids don't go to "that" area. They could have science labs in the walled off area. Talk about hands on experience!

[WeBe204]

First of all lets not shoot the messenger. Its nice to get clean data from the board in a timely fashion. Second it needs to be established if the board/admin promised anyhting else other then the a review by the IEPA at some point. I really thought that was part of duediligence before purchase. If it was not promised that way then the it is what is.

[doctorwho]

fryfox said:

cornholio said:

Flipping brilliant. Remediation AFTER the school takes ownership of the land

Yes, then if it comes back unacceptable, we could hand over $20 million damages to BB, plus the cost of the Eola site AND still not third high school. Or we could just build a giant brick wall around the contamination with electric barbed wire to ensure that the kids don't go to "that" area. They could have science labs in the walled off area. Talk about hands on experience!

again, would anyone here build their home next to 'that area' ? Why would we build a school there ? This isn't hard...

[sushi]

My guess is the findings are not serious, easily remediated (its too easy to overuse that word).

[Arch]

The underlying problem we have with this transaction is that we have both a buyer and a seller who have the perception of motivation to overlook any 'bad things'.

The district needs a school. It's already been established that our Administration will understate hazards at the site and flat out lie about them per the Jan 22 SB meeting to get a site to start building a school.

That is a problem.

MWGEN has a piece of land with some future enviro liability attached to it (their words per their SEC filings in the past and worried about future tightening enviro regulations). They certainly don't want a microscope up their backside on this subject. That's a problem too.

[d204mom]

cornholio said:

sushi said:

The findings were limited to a small portion of the site, not immediately critical to the short term development and operation of the 3rd HS site (i.e. even if it took 24 mos. it might not have an impact on the ability to open or use the school).

I'm assuming the remediation will be immediate. The IEPA inspection that the remediation is complete could take awhile. It is my understanding that the IEPA will be contacted after closing and before remediation begins.

I am still waiting for more information.

Flipping brilliant. Remediation AFTER the school takes ownership of the land

The impression I got from the "if you will fence" comments from Daeschner is that it would be remediated after students were on site.

[sushi]

My impression (who cares?) is that the site will be remediated, possibly the IEPA report will not be back, maybe it will. The fence is after the fact to quell any lingering worries.

[promark]

archwinsome said:

The underlying problem we have with this transaction is that we have both a buyer and a seller who have the perception of motivation to overlook any 'bad things'.

The district needs a school. It's already been established that our Administration will understate hazards at the site and flat out lie about them per the Jan 22 SB meeting to get a site to start building a school.

That is a problem.

MWGEN has a piece of land with some future enviro liability attached to it (their words per their SEC filings in the past and worried about future tightening enviro regulations). They certainly don't want a microscope up their backside on this subject. That's a problem too.

I agree 100%. My only hope -- certainly a pipe dream -- is that continuing this present "Eola-no-matter-what" course is Metzger's way of getting BB to lower its price. That would be one of the ballsiest moves ever...

[steckmom]

promark said:

archwinsome said:

The underlying problem we have with this transaction is that we have both a buyer and a seller who have the perception of motivation to overlook any 'bad things'.

The district needs a school. It's already been established that our Administration will understate hazards at the site and flat out lie about them per the Jan 22 SB meeting to get a site to start building a school.

That is a problem.

MWGEN has a piece of land with some future enviro liability attached to it (their words per their SEC filings in the past and worried about future tightening enviro regulations). They certainly don't want a microscope up their backside on this subject. That's a problem too.

I agree 100%. My only hope -- certainly a pipe dream -- is that continuing this present "Eola-no-matter-what" course is Metzger's way of getting BB to lower its price. That would be one of the ballsiest moves ever...

That's completely ridiculous, but wouldn't it be cool if it were true and it worked?