Tuesday, February 24, 2009

February 20 Letter to Riverdale Community

Please visit the Preserve Riverdale website (preserveriverdale.org) to read the February 20, 2009 letter to the Riverdale Community from Preserve Riverdale.  The letter seeks to clarify the many misconceptions about the goals of Preserve Riverdale.  

Please support our call for a ballot measure on May 19 to clarify how voters wish bond funds to be spent:  demolish or renovate the Doyle building.
Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. AnonymousFebruary 24, 2009 at 7:04 PM

    No, I will not support your call for a ballot measure on May 19th to clarify how voters wish bond funds to be spent. Our ELECTED officials have worked on our behalf and have made the decision. We VOTED in November to fund their decision.

    Please respect it. Cease you endless letters and legal wrangling. You are a selfish group and only cause harm to our district. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Look at the BIG picture. The Doyle building is going away. If you keep this up, I hope they change the design and make "the new building look like a prison," which I believe is one of the comments from your lovely group early on.

    The new design actually is quite nice. It pays tribute to the Doyle and will be a great addition to the neighborhood. Sorry it's going to cost an extra million in legal fees and take an extra year to build as a direct result of your self-centered ways. If we miss this bond cycle, it's quite possible the higher rates in the future will cost several hundred thousand more in financing. I wish to "Thank you" again for your concern and looking out for your fellow neighbors. Your sincerity and candor know no bounds. Thank you again for hurting my children's experience at Riverdale and costing me several thousand dollars in unnecessary expenses as a result of your efforts.

    Again, what a sad, selfish group you are.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousFebruary 25, 2009 at 4:20 PM

    In the letter the folks supporting this re-vote effort just sent out, it made mention of the 'bond use proceeds election' done some years ago relating to the high school. The way it was presented in the letter was (sadly, once again) misleading.

    That election resulted from the fact that the original HS bond language specifically used the term for a high school "in" the district - since when the HS bond was voted on the expectation was it would be at the planned site on Terwilliger at the end of Iron Mountain. When that site proved impractical, and it became necessary to site outside the district, some people who did not support the district staying independent (or just didn't want to pay more taxes) started legal action because of that specific language in the bond.

    So, that wasn't just a vote a la "let's take the temperature of the neighborhood because we don't like the school board's decision." It was needed for legal clearance to proceed with spending the bond proceeds, based on a change in the circumstances that were unforeseen when the bond language was drafted.

    In this case, the option to replace was clearly on the table from the beginning (and for those crying foul, there also apparently will be remodeling and renovating done to the stage in the gym and to the boiler, so that part is also accurate.)

    So, in this case, the bond was sold with an accurate and inclusive description of its possible uses. Having done so, the decision to what to do rests with the school board.

    The idea that a vote now would not undermine all future school boards' ability to act in their lawful capacity is nonsense. It certainly would. It would be an open invitation to those in the neighborhood who don't get their way to keep revisiting any controversial issue in a variety of ways until they did, or until additional damage was done to the community - much as has been done this time.

    Unlike the infamous Olympic basketball game many years ago, where the referees kept awarding a "do-over" to the Russians until they finally scored to beat the USA - this community has to realize that the bond was voted on appropriately, and the board has acted in good faith, whether you agree with their decision or not.

    Time to come together folks, rather than trying to continue to pull this community apart.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousFebruary 25, 2009 at 4:27 PM

    No clarification is necessary. It was clear the first time. Demolish - get it started on schedule so the children may enjoy a new school as soon as possible.

    Work towards the better good, not for nostalgia. Nostalgia can be a wonderful thing, but not in this scenario. The children deserve better than this facility has to offer.

    ReplyDelete

Please be respectful in making your comments.
New comments do not appear immediately.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)