Unit 4 Consent Decree - October 19, 2006 Order

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

SA'DA JOHNSON, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BOARD OF EDUCATION CHAMPAIGN
COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL
DISTRICT #4,

Defendant.

Case No. 00-1349

Having found Defendant’s brief to be largely unresponsive to the Court’s July 31, 2006 Order in that it did not, in collaboration with Plaintiff’s, adequately address specific targets, steps, and responsibility for accelerating the progress of African American students as agreed under the Second Revised Consent Decree, the Court hereby orders Defendant to work collaboratively with Plaintiffs to produce a plan that is responsive to the Court’s Order, and which addresses all areas of the Consent Decree including all objectives and goals as stated in the Education Equity Implementation Plan.

The proposed plan must be reviewed and approved by the Monitoring Team. Any disputes that arise during the negotiation of this plan should be submitted for mediation. The plan should include a mutually agreed upon process for fulfilling the District’s good faith commitment for the provision of student seats in North Champaign. The plan must be submitted to the Court no later than January 15, 2007.

ENTERED this 19th day of October, 2006.

s/Joe B. McDade
JOE BILLY McDADE
United States District Judge

Thanks, Ken!

Thanks, Ken! Lest anyone thought that you actually have a brain, you have now gone and eliminated all doubt. In today's News-Gazette, His Idiocy has proclaimed, in pure, simple-minded fashion, that 'if we don't increase the tax rate, we haven't increased the tax.'

What a moron! Let's see, yesterday, the city taxed and spent $100. Today the city taxed and spent $120.

I know it's hard, dumb ass, but you just increased taxes by $20. Whether that increase was accomplished by increasing the rate or increasing the levy, what's the difference? Taxpayers are paying $20 more.

I guess, in Pirok's simple-minded world, if my house increases in value by 10%, the cost of everything the city does must have also increased 10%. Wake up, Ken! There is virtually NO logical relationship between increased housing values and the cost of city services. If you wanted to increase the total levy by the Consumer Price Index, that would be one thing. But to just leave the rate constant in the face of dramatically escalating values and then delude yourself into thinking that taxes are static is just dumb. Even Ken's sister, Kendra, agrees with that.

Now, unless you are a moron as big as Ken, you know that the price of providing city services increases over time, and, all things being equal, the city has to collect additional tax revenue to provide those same services.

The larger question (not sure Ken-boy has ever considered this) is whether the city could (and should) get by with less. Has it ever occurred to the city council that it would be OK, even noble, to reduce the overall tax levy?

I think all the booze has killed the 17 brain cells that KP was born with.

Mark Foley

The following is copied in its entirety from Redstate.com:

"Here's an interesting bit of transcript. This bit involved the Congressman having an explicit IM conversation with a 16 year old with whom he had sexual relations. "M" is the Congressman. "B" is the minor.

M: What you gonna wear?

B: Well, my peach underwear, like you told me to. I was hoping that we could do something really special but I see that's not gonna happen, I guess.

M: I was definitely gonna stick [. . . .] in you.

B: Really?

M: Right in my office. I was gonna [. . . .] too.

B: Really?

M: I was looking forward to it.

B: Yeah, I been thinking about a lot times we had together. We had some really good times.

M: Uh-huh, that summer when I used to [. . . .] you out south in that Riverdale apartment?

Of course that was Mel Reynolds, not Mark Foley. And Mel got a pardon from Bill Clinton." Credits: www.redstate.com; www.polipundit.com