|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 9, 2008 9:57:58 GMT -6
HA! I thought that was funny too. WHAT'S NEXT, MARK?With a picture of him superimposed over the rendering of the 3rd HS. And the bullets were great too - Board faces coughing up $5M if it walks away from purchase
- May be forced to build third high school on one of three other sitesIt makes me sad that this fiasco has turned D204 into a laughingstock. Their bullet points have been discussed in their paper for the last 4 months. It's nothing new. It's the wording that is great - "coughing up" and "may be forced"... WHAT'S NEXT MARK? is nothing new, either.  |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Jan 9, 2008 10:21:43 GMT -6
whhsparent, are you saying that you do not support sitting down with BB, mediated by judge Kilander to attempt to reach a compromise? I think it must be pursed. We already have sunk costs of at least 5 million (probably higher). If BB could come down on their side by say 5 Million then we might have something workable. Remember, 5 Million must be added to the cost of any other site before making comparisons. I never said that. Sit down and talk...go for it! I agree it should be pursued. I just stated I would not be optimistic of a favorable outcome, based on the infighting between the 2 trusts. 318/2 = 159k split between the 2 trusts. But say Brach came back and said we will take 100k for our part and let Brodie have it's full 159. That then puts BB at 259k/acre, clearly in range then. Can they do that? I have no idea. I'd start buying Brach candies again if they did...... Haven't there been ongoing talks (or attempted talks) with BB already? We can't wait forever. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 9, 2008 11:16:18 GMT -6
Two things -
Helm's signature is on the counter-motion, not Brach attorney Simon. So why did they report that Brach attorneys filed the motion?
I took the second part to mean that we have to officially abandon the property in order for the determination of additional damages and payment of damage to remainder. So to me that is saying we won't even know the full walk away costs until we actually walk away?
How can the board and admin be so sure we will stay on budget with another property with pending litigation for 2.5 M damage to remainder and unknown millions in additional damages on the Brach Brodie property?
|
|
|
|
Post by proschool on Jan 9, 2008 11:18:51 GMT -6
I never said that. Sit down and talk...go for it! I agree it should be pursued. I just stated I would not be optimistic of a favorable outcome, based on the infighting between the 2 trusts. 318/2 = 159k split between the 2 trusts. But say Brach came back and said we will take 100k for our part and let Brodie have it's full 159. That then puts BB at 259k/acre, clearly in range then. Can they do that? I have no idea. I'd start buying Brach candies again if they did...... Haven't there been ongoing talks (or attempted talks) with BB already? We can't wait forever. I think the attorneys understand that. I think they want to sit down with the judge so everyone can make an educated guess as to what the walkaway costs might be on everyone's end. Obviously they believe there is hope for a deal. |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 9, 2008 11:19:08 GMT -6
I took the second part to mean that we have to officially abandon the property in order for the determination of additional damages and payment of damage to remainder. So to me that is saying we won't even know the full walk away costs until we actually walk away? How can the board and admin be so sure we will stay on budget with another property with pending litigation for 2.5 M damage to remainder and unknown millions in additional damages on the Brach Brodie property? Unless they pay those damages with operating funds in order to tout that they have stayed on budget with the building fund. Which saves us nothing in the long run. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 9, 2008 11:20:04 GMT -6
Two things - Helm's signature is on the counter-motion, not Brach attorney Simon. So why did they report that Brach attorneys filed the motion? I took the second part to mean that we have to officially abandon the property in order for the determination of additional damages and payment of damage to remainder. So to me that is saying we won't even know the full walk away costs until we actually walk away? How can the board and admin be so sure we will stay on budget with another property with pending litigation for 2.5 M damage to remainder and unknown millions in additional damages on the Brach Brodie property? crack reporting by the newpapers...they always get the info right.....NOT! |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 9, 2008 11:27:15 GMT -6
I took the second part to mean that we have to officially abandon the property in order for the determination of additional damages and payment of damage to remainder. So to me that is saying we won't even know the full walk away costs until we actually walk away? How can the board and admin be so sure we will stay on budget with another property with pending litigation for 2.5 M damage to remainder and unknown millions in additional damages on the Brach Brodie property? Unless they pay those damages with operating funds in order to tout that they have stayed on budget with the building fund. Which saves us nothing in the long run. The problem is that at this point I have more confidence in Helm/Simon arguing and winning big bucks in additional damages than I have confidence in Whitt Law successfully defending us. |
|
|
|
Post by chicoryowl on Jan 9, 2008 12:31:31 GMT -6
I never said that. Sit down and talk...go for it! I agree it should be pursued. I just stated I would not be optimistic of a favorable outcome, based on the infighting between the 2 trusts. 318/2 = 159k split between the 2 trusts. But say Brach came back and said we will take 100k for our part and let Brodie have it's full 159. That then puts BB at 259k/acre, clearly in range then. Can they do that? I have no idea. I'd start buying Brach candies again if they did...... Haven't there been ongoing talks (or attempted talks) with BB already? We can't wait forever. I would prefer BB as the site and if they are being genuine in their desire to hold talks, I say go for it. However, I think we have tried to negotiate (even offering to buy less acres) and been rebuffed. Time is an element to be considered also. |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Jan 9, 2008 12:42:55 GMT -6
Pending litigation always puts a damper on sincere negotiation - you simply can not negotiate in good faith for fear of undermining your position.
For the first time in 2 years, the SD and BB have no pending litigation. Now is the time to talk, sincerely, on both sides.
|
|
|
|
Post by anteater on Jan 10, 2008 8:38:18 GMT -6
whhsparent, are you saying that you do not support sitting down with BB, mediated by judge Kilander to attempt to reach a compromise? I would feel more comfortable sitting down with Judge Kilander as the mediator were it not for his casual comment that any errors in the proceedings were made by him. He was the judge presiding over this case! In other words, he's not going to take any specific responsibility or do anything about it. |
|
|
|
Post by proschool on Jan 10, 2008 14:40:53 GMT -6
whhsparent, are you saying that you do not support sitting down with BB, mediated by judge Kilander to attempt to reach a compromise? I would feel more comfortable sitting down with Judge Kilander as the mediator were it not for his casual comment that any errors in the proceedings were made by him. He was the judge presiding over this case! In other words, he's not going to take any specific responsibility or do anything about it. ..but BB as the land we want expressed an interest in sitting down under these conditions. I have heard of an attorney winning a case and then asking the judge to sit down and talk about it. Why don't we just sit down and see what they have to say. Especially when BB is likely to come after us for 8-10 million dollars in walk away costs. There is nothing binding, Nothing that can be bought up in a lawsuit so there is nothing to loose. |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Jan 10, 2008 15:23:35 GMT -6
I agree - now is the perfect time to get that agreement you were looking for on BB. They are scared (that the SD will walk away entirely). It's let's make a deal time.
|
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 15, 2008 11:05:59 GMT -6
School board President Mark Metzger said the board will likely make a decision on what to do next during Monday's school board meeting.
"The board will have to decide whether to file an appeal or not or whether this ends the pursuit of the Brach-Brodie parcel," Metzger said.
The district now has 30 days to appeal the final decision to a higher court and/or abandon its right to the land it originally slated for a third high school.
------------------------------------
I forgot about this. This should have been discussed last night too. How do we officially abandon BB? Does our attorney have to file something or do we just let the clock run out?
|
|
