|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 4, 2008 19:48:29 GMT -6
Well did anyone go? Any hoping, wishing or chanting?
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jan 4, 2008 20:00:14 GMT -6
Just voicing my opinion. They have nothing to lose (meaning BB) by just hanging onto the land. They have held onto it for this long.
|
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Jan 4, 2008 20:03:11 GMT -6
Well did anyone go? Any hoping, wishing or chanting? Why Bother? (trustind that it was not scheduled to elicit that) I am hoping to hear from anyone who did bother. |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jan 4, 2008 20:12:46 GMT -6
BB can just sit on the land. It's not developed so taxes are minimal.
|
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Jan 4, 2008 21:06:09 GMT -6
No news on tonights meeting???
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jan 4, 2008 22:10:12 GMT -6
Nope - didn't go either
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Jan 4, 2008 22:40:01 GMT -6
My best guess is that nothing came out of tonight's meeting in terms of public awareness of what's going to happen.
But... information will come soon in the coming days.
I'm thinking..... the Naperville Sun will report something first, probably by Sunday's edition then a listserve prior to the 1/14 scheduled meeting with the options for site selection. Just my guess, nothing concrete.
The SB/district doesn't need a rubber stamp of approval. Technically, anything is possible. Who knows? Legally they can move forward any way they chose to spend 124.7 million (plus interest/land cash) to build Metea wherever they chose regardless of boundaries, right?
It's going to be an interesting week!
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Jan 5, 2008 8:07:34 GMT -6
My best guess is that nothing came out of tonight's meeting in terms of public awareness of what's going to happen. But... information will come soon in the coming days. I'm thinking..... the Naperville Sun will report something first, probably by Sunday's edition then a listserve prior to the 1/14 scheduled meeting with the options for site selection. Just my guess, nothing concrete. The SB/district doesn't need a rubber stamp of approval. Technically, anything is possible. Who knows? Legally they can move forward any way they chose to spend 124.7 million (plus interest/land cash) to build Metea wherever they chose regardless of boundaries, right? It's going to be an interesting week! That's exactly what I think will happen. I'll be up early tomorrow looking at the papers. I think that the info will be there and then we'll get a couple of days to mull it over and at best a cursory meeting to supposedly air our opinions. IMO, the decision has been made and it will be out there and confirmed on January 14. I wonder if MM will quote the fact that the public for the most part seems unconcerned (you know since no one attends the SB meetings anymore  ) and trusts the SB to make the right decisions. I still say that come 2009 the SB members up for term are facing a serious uphill battle. Not a whole lot of trust for any of them on my end. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 5, 2008 8:39:59 GMT -6
So any guesses on what the top secret information they were waiting on was? I can't imagine anyone that was serious about selling their land would drag their feet for 6 weeks. If they choose the foot-dragging property, does that bode well for getting the deal done in time to break ground in Spring?  |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 5, 2008 8:41:58 GMT -6
My best guess is that nothing came out of tonight's meeting in terms of public awareness of what's going to happen. But... information will come soon in the coming days. I'm thinking..... the Naperville Sun will report something first, probably by Sunday's edition then a listserve prior to the 1/14 scheduled meeting with the options for site selection. Just my guess, nothing concrete. The SB/district doesn't need a rubber stamp of approval. Technically, anything is possible. Who knows? Legally they can move forward any way they chose to spend 124.7 million (plus interest/land cash) to build Metea wherever they chose regardless of boundaries, right? It's going to be an interesting week! That's exactly what I think will happen. I'll be up early tomorrow looking at the papers. I think that the info will be there and then we'll get a couple of days to mull it over and at best a cursory meeting to supposedly air our opinions. IMO, the decision has been made and it will be out there and confirmed on January 14. I wonder if MM will quote the fact that the public for the most part seems unconcerned (you know since no one attends the SB meetings anymore ) and trusts the SB to make the right decisions. I still say that come 2009 the SB members up for term are facing a serious uphill battle. Not a whole lot of trust for any of them on my end. Hey casey, Is your guess based on something you heard from IPPC or just a guess? |
|
|
|
Post by casey on Jan 5, 2008 9:14:17 GMT -6
Hey casey, Is your guess based on something you heard from IPPC or just a guess? It was based on the original IPPC statement sent out to members before Christmas. It mentioned that the SB was talking about how they want to inform the public of the site selection and the process they went through to make that selection. "They are discussing possibly putting out a list serve message, say 5 days before the board meeting, saying they will be voting on the site selection. This message may also contain information in attachments, comparing the various sites, and why the administration is recommending to the board a particular site. It will possibly also contain guidelines for public comment at that board meeting. They believe communication of this information effectively is crucial to the process." Let's hope that they truly believe that information is crucial! |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 5, 2008 10:34:50 GMT -6
"They are discussing possibly putting out a list serve message, say 5 days before the board meeting, saying they will be voting on the site selection. This message may also contain information in attachments, comparing the various sites, and why the administration is recommending to the board a particular site. It will possibly also contain guidelines for public comment at that board meeting. They believe communication of this information effectively is crucial to the process." I hope our board and admin doesn't treat public input like they did during the all day K discussion. Tabling it for 2 weeks and then insinuating that anyone who does not agree with Daeschner must be stupid. But that's the precedent. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 5, 2008 10:38:46 GMT -6
Just voicing my opinion. They have nothing to lose (meaning BB) by just hanging onto the land. They have held onto it for this long. I thought that there were living Brodie heirs that got the dough when it sold. Brach half probably couldn't care less. |
|
|
|
Post by slp on Jan 5, 2008 14:42:21 GMT -6
Hey casey, Is your guess based on something you heard from IPPC or just a guess? It was based on the original IPPC statement sent out to members before Christmas. It mentioned that the SB was talking about how they want to inform the public of the site selection and the process they went through to make that selection. "They are discussing possibly putting out a list serve message, say 5 days before the board meeting, saying they will be voting on the site selection. This message may also contain information in attachments, comparing the various sites, and why the administration is recommending to the board a particular site. It will possibly also contain guidelines for public comment at that board meeting. They believe communication of this information effectively is crucial to the process." Let's hope that they truly believe that information is crucial! Casey, My hunch is that you are right on....I have a feeling that the big piece of info they may have been waiting on has to do with a final acknowledgement that BB is completely and totally out of the picture. I think they (the SB) have made their decision on another location but needed to wait on this last bit of info before they completely abandoned BB and told the public of their 2nd choice for the new high school. This is just my own speculation. |
|
) and trusts the SB to make the right decisions. I still say that come 2009 the SB members up for term are facing a serious uphill battle. Not a whole lot of trust for any of them on my end.