Deseret News | New Jordan split proposal on the table

Reader comments
New Jordan split proposal on the table

Fair | 11:28 a.m. May 21, 2008

This sure sounds fair to me -- and I live on the east side of the valley. This split was originally based on a "best for the children" theory anyway.

Semantics | 11:34 a.m. May 21, 2008

Technically, this can not be called a split. Only one side was allowed to vote and they chose to leave. That is called a seccesion, not a split.

Navyvet | 11:59 a.m. May 21, 2008

I've said it before and probably will again. The East side folks chose to "secede from the Union" and start their own district. It is NOT a split. They should get nothing. It was their own greed (coupled with the legislative abrogation of responsibility) that allowed this travesty in the first place. Now let them deal with it.

Comments continue below

2-bits | 12:38 p.m. May 21, 2008

I would have no problem with a 60-40 split. Problem is... There are many involved who will only be happy with a 100%-West, 0%-East split (not on the committee but in the public).

Why so selfish? | 12:48 p.m. May 21, 2008

Why are those on the West side so self absorbed? The sniveling, "We didn't get to vote to decide what you will do in your communities, so we should get EVERYTHING", line is obsurd.

You can say people in the East side of the district are selfish too, because they didn't want to have 90% of their taxes going to build projects on the West side of the district and almost none in their local communities, and I agree you have a point, but you sound like an idiot when you assume YOU should be able to decide what they do in their community and You should get EVERYTHING if there is ever a district split.

Just do the split so we can move on, whatever it takes. I'm tired of all the whining about it.

Right on | 1:00 p.m. May 21, 2008

Navyvet and Semantics are right on. Is there any way we can undo this mess?A referendum or whatever? It is clearly the biggest mess around, and there doesn't seem to be an equitable way out.

east sider | 3:20 p.m. May 21, 2008

It sounds like to me the west siders are crying because we want our kids to have the best opportunitiies on the east side and they can no longer piggyback off of us.
Split it 60-40 or 50-50, who cares, but to think that all the tax money the east side folks have paid over the years to build the assets up in the district would go over to the west side district is ridiculous.
Secede, split, dump, move-on, progress, however you want to classify what the east side did with the vote, it really doesn't matter, it's just name calling now that you are feeling sorry for yourselves.

anom | 3:45 p.m. May 21, 2008

By the time they settle lawsuits with Draper they will have nothing..Pinheads all of them

Unbelievable | 4:11 p.m. May 21, 2008

The audacity of the west-side transition team. They propose a 60-40 split in their favor, don't want to value any of the school buildings even though the entire district paid for them, and they claim all of the assets for themselves by broad-brushing them as "liabilities." Then, they do it all in the name of kids.

Well, I have news for this team: There are thousands of kids on the east-side as well. What are you doing to look out for them?

Anti-Split | 5:50 p.m. May 21, 2008

To east sider,

I feel sorry for the kids and employees on both sides.

To Unbelievable,

The West met your needs early on. I am sorry the Middle School got cut because of this split, but something had to be because the East transition team pushed for the bonds to be used immediately. You did get Willow Springs and Copperview built, and a lot of buildings renovated (Sandy) as part of the bond, or have we already forgotten that?

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.