BOE - who are people voting for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are you voting for?

No one in this District!!!!

Disappointing candidates

Push for the County Council to make BOE full time senior professional pay and we might get someone competent who reflects family interests more broadly. Until then, expect a few single-issue folks, a few heavy partisans and maybe an independently wealthy socialite, each crusader-types in their own right.

But, then, the heavily partisan County Council are just fine with that, with little chance for the first, the second being closely aligned and the third being the ones who have them in their pocket, anyway.

The County Council can't do it. It would be members of the Montgomery County delegation to the General Assembly introducing legislation.

In a way, yes, but unless this has changed, it starts with the County Executive and County Council appointing folks to the compensation commission, and we know how such appointments work:

"MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION COMPENSATION COMMISSION
In October 2018, the Montgomery County Board of Education Compensation Commission was created (Chapter 121, Acts of 2018).

Salaries of the County Board of Education are studied by the Commission, which reports to Montgomery County's General Assembly Delegation. Commission recommendations cover not only the appropriate compensation for Board members, but also whether the Board president should receive an additional stipend, and what scholarship amount to award the student Board member. After receiving the Commission's recommendations, the County's General Assembly Delegation may introduce legislation to change the salaries of Board members.

The Commission's first report is due September 1, 2019, and every four years thereafter.

Five Montgomery County residents are appointed to the Commission by the County Executive with County Council consent. The initial members must be appointed by January 1, 2019, and every four years thereafter."

That commission already issued a report that recommended the increase.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/pay-would-more-than-double-for-montgomery-county-md-school-board-members-under-proposal/2019/12/29/d2217334-233c-11ea-bed5-880264cc91a9_story.html

Typical that the Parents Coalition negged the suggestion. "What do we want? Oversight! How will we get it? Not with our tax dollars!"

Seems like all the far-right groups like the Parents Coalitions, Mom's for Liberty and "Moderately" Moco are out in force here.

Thank you

+1

Explain how more money will increase the Board of Education's oversight. Give actual examples.

Right now, the BOE never sees a contract, doesn't ask questions about the many no bid contracts and never holds staff accountable for waste, fraud or abuse. The BOE has already voted most of their oversight power away to the Superintendent.

But you think giving the BOE more money will do what? The BOE has no power anymore to do anything. But pay them more money to do exactly what they are doing now.

Why would we pay them more? To get more qualified people running and raise expectations for their time commitment, as explained a few posts above. Not to pay the current BOE members, unless they then win a re-election among the more qualified field. A more competent BOE with a full time commitment would not have to relegate oversight responsibility.

I'd hope for folks who alternately could fill a mid-step GS-14 federal position with their combination of skill/qualifications and experience. Pay for that in this area is north of $150k. Maybe we could get such folks interested for a bit less than that, but the suggested $60k is laughable, as is anything less than a full time expectation (this is not like having a part time commitment on the board of a corporation where the executive overseen is tied to company performance by their own compensation package, needing more suggestion/contacts/etc. than public-performance oversight). Forget about the current $25k pittance.

.

County Council makes double that and they can’t exert what oversight they have over MCPS and there are more councilmembers. Your argument fails.

[Anonymous]

Which of these 14 candidates plan to handle the issues surrounding school bathrooms? So students who need to use it have access to OPEN bathrooms.
Bathrooms that are clean.
Bathrooms that are not occupied by students who do not need to use the bathroom to pee, poop, handle menstrual needs.

Please list from each group of candidates which ones have addressed this issue and what exactly their plans are, an actual list of actions they plan to take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which of these 14 candidates plan to handle the issues surrounding school bathrooms? So students who need to use it have access to OPEN bathrooms.
Bathrooms that are clean.
Bathrooms that are not occupied by students who do not need to use the bathroom to pee, poop, handle menstrual needs.

Please list from each group of candidates which ones have addressed this issue and what exactly their plans are, an actual list of actions they plan to take.

Why don’t you ask them yourself and report back on what they say

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are you voting for?

No one in this District!!!!

Disappointing candidates

Push for the County Council to make BOE full time senior professional pay and we might get someone competent who reflects family interests more broadly. Until then, expect a few single-issue folks, a few heavy partisans and maybe an independently wealthy socialite, each crusader-types in their own right.

But, then, the heavily partisan County Council are just fine with that, with little chance for the first, the second being closely aligned and the third being the ones who have them in their pocket, anyway.

The County Council can't do it. It would be members of the Montgomery County delegation to the General Assembly introducing legislation.

In a way, yes, but unless this has changed, it starts with the County Executive and County Council appointing folks to the compensation commission, and we know how such appointments work:

"MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION COMPENSATION COMMISSION
In October 2018, the Montgomery County Board of Education Compensation Commission was created (Chapter 121, Acts of 2018).

Salaries of the County Board of Education are studied by the Commission, which reports to Montgomery County's General Assembly Delegation. Commission recommendations cover not only the appropriate compensation for Board members, but also whether the Board president should receive an additional stipend, and what scholarship amount to award the student Board member. After receiving the Commission's recommendations, the County's General Assembly Delegation may introduce legislation to change the salaries of Board members.

The Commission's first report is due September 1, 2019, and every four years thereafter.

Five Montgomery County residents are appointed to the Commission by the County Executive with County Council consent. The initial members must be appointed by January 1, 2019, and every four years thereafter."

That commission already issued a report that recommended the increase.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/pay-would-more-than-double-for-montgomery-county-md-school-board-members-under-proposal/2019/12/29/d2217334-233c-11ea-bed5-880264cc91a9_story.html

Typical that the Parents Coalition negged the suggestion. "What do we want? Oversight! How will we get it? Not with our tax dollars!"

Seems like all the far-right groups like the Parents Coalitions, Mom's for Liberty and "Moderately" Moco are out in force here.

Thank you

+1

Explain how more money will increase the Board of Education's oversight. Give actual examples.

Right now, the BOE never sees a contract, doesn't ask questions about the many no bid contracts and never holds staff accountable for waste, fraud or abuse. The BOE has already voted most of their oversight power away to the Superintendent.

But you think giving the BOE more money will do what? The BOE has no power anymore to do anything. But pay them more money to do exactly what they are doing now.

Why would we pay them more? To get more qualified people running and raise expectations for their time commitment, as explained a few posts above. Not to pay the current BOE members, unless they then win a re-election among the more qualified field. A more competent BOE with a full time commitment would not have to relegate oversight responsibility.

I'd hope for folks who alternately could fill a mid-step GS-14 federal position with their combination of skill/qualifications and experience. Pay for that in this area is north of $150k. Maybe we could get such folks interested for a bit less than that, but the suggested $60k is laughable, as is anything less than a full time expectation (this is not like having a part time commitment on the board of a corporation where the executive overseen is tied to company performance by their own compensation package, needing more suggestion/contacts/etc. than public-performance oversight). Forget about the current $25k pittance.

.

County Council makes double that and they can’t exert what oversight they have over MCPS and there are more councilmembers. Your argument fails.

You managed a few logical fallacies in.a short post, there. I'll hit the most glaring.

County Council basically doesn't oversee MCPS, the BOE and MSDE (which employs the BOE) do. Council can approve the budget, but not line-item it, they can call hearings, they can back-room negotiate about things while getting to budget approval (which they've consistently shorted for a couple of decades), but that's about it. They also have the rest of the county government to attend to, which is among the reasons for there to be a BOE conducting oversight of this enterprise that takes up half the county budget.

I'm not saying the Council should be making what they are or that we should have as many as we do (the at-large candidates basically ensure a supermajority for whichever party is more popular, allowing groupthink and more extreme policies -- that's been Dems, here, for a while, of course). They also have some staffers making a fair amount, I think. But saying the BOE, then, shouldn't be compensated more than the very much less they are afforded doesn't follow at all. And saying that they've failed so we shouldn't pay them anyway, if that's what you are intimating, would completely ignore the possibility of that body succeeding if better constructed -- full time and paid well enough to attract competency.

And, while I'm open to other suggestions, I don't see one in your post. Rely on the combo of ideologues, whether single-issue or political extremist, and independently wealthy socialite types that might go for the job now, as poorly compensated as it is? Something else?

[Anonymous]

I watched the Poolesville Forum for BOE. Hidayat knows Poolesville. He pledged to get Poolesville’s Athletic Fields funded. He was the only candidate that told Poolesville residents that they weren’t a broken community needing to be fixed by MCPS. He said that Poolesville’s school community is a good example for the rest of the county to follow. Good for him for not trying to fix something that isn’t broken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which of these 14 candidates plan to handle the issues surrounding school bathrooms? So students who need to use it have access to OPEN bathrooms.
Bathrooms that are clean.
Bathrooms that are not occupied by students who do not need to use the bathroom to pee, poop, handle menstrual needs.

Please list from each group of candidates which ones have addressed this issue and what exactly their plans are, an actual list of actions they plan to take.

Why don’t you ask them yourself and report back on what they say

Nah, we'll wait for your fabulous report.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are you voting for?

No one in this District!!!!

Disappointing candidates

Push for the County Council to make BOE full time senior professional pay and we might get someone competent who reflects family interests more broadly. Until then, expect a few single-issue folks, a few heavy partisans and maybe an independently wealthy socialite, each crusader-types in their own right.

But, then, the heavily partisan County Council are just fine with that, with little chance for the first, the second being closely aligned and the third being the ones who have them in their pocket, anyway.

The County Council can't do it. It would be members of the Montgomery County delegation to the General Assembly introducing legislation.

In a way, yes, but unless this has changed, it starts with the County Executive and County Council appointing folks to the compensation commission, and we know how such appointments work:

"MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION COMPENSATION COMMISSION
In October 2018, the Montgomery County Board of Education Compensation Commission was created (Chapter 121, Acts of 2018).

Salaries of the County Board of Education are studied by the Commission, which reports to Montgomery County's General Assembly Delegation. Commission recommendations cover not only the appropriate compensation for Board members, but also whether the Board president should receive an additional stipend, and what scholarship amount to award the student Board member. After receiving the Commission's recommendations, the County's General Assembly Delegation may introduce legislation to change the salaries of Board members.

The Commission's first report is due September 1, 2019, and every four years thereafter.

Five Montgomery County residents are appointed to the Commission by the County Executive with County Council consent. The initial members must be appointed by January 1, 2019, and every four years thereafter."

That commission already issued a report that recommended the increase.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/pay-would-more-than-double-for-montgomery-county-md-school-board-members-under-proposal/2019/12/29/d2217334-233c-11ea-bed5-880264cc91a9_story.html

Typical that the Parents Coalition negged the suggestion. "What do we want? Oversight! How will we get it? Not with our tax dollars!"

Seems like all the far-right groups like the Parents Coalitions, Mom's for Liberty and "Moderately" Moco are out in force here.

Thank you

+1

Explain how more money will increase the Board of Education's oversight. Give actual examples.

Right now, the BOE never sees a contract, doesn't ask questions about the many no bid contracts and never holds staff accountable for waste, fraud or abuse. The BOE has already voted most of their oversight power away to the Superintendent.

But you think giving the BOE more money will do what? The BOE has no power anymore to do anything. But pay them more money to do exactly what they are doing now.

Why would we pay them more? To get more qualified people running and raise expectations for their time commitment, as explained a few posts above. Not to pay the current BOE members, unless they then win a re-election among the more qualified field. A more competent BOE with a full time commitment would not have to relegate oversight responsibility.

I'd hope for folks who alternately could fill a mid-step GS-14 federal position with their combination of skill/qualifications and experience. Pay for that in this area is north of $150k. Maybe we could get such folks interested for a bit less than that, but the suggested $60k is laughable, as is anything less than a full time expectation (this is not like having a part time commitment on the board of a corporation where the executive overseen is tied to company performance by their own compensation package, needing more suggestion/contacts/etc. than public-performance oversight). Forget about the current $25k pittance.

.

County Council makes double that and they can’t exert what oversight they have over MCPS and there are more councilmembers. Your argument fails.

You managed a few logical fallacies in.a short post, there. I'll hit the most glaring.

County Council basically doesn't oversee MCPS, the BOE and MSDE (which employs the BOE) do. Council can approve the budget, but not line-item it, they can call hearings, they can back-room negotiate about things while getting to budget approval (which they've consistently shorted for a couple of decades), but that's about it. They also have the rest of the county government to attend to, which is among the reasons for there to be a BOE conducting oversight of this enterprise that takes up half the county budget.

I'm not saying the Council should be making what they are or that we should have as many as we do (the at-large candidates basically ensure a supermajority for whichever party is more popular, allowing groupthink and more extreme policies -- that's been Dems, here, for a while, of course). They also have some staffers making a fair amount, I think. But saying the BOE, then, shouldn't be compensated more than the very much less they are afforded doesn't follow at all. And saying that they've failed so we shouldn't pay them anyway, if that's what you are intimating, would completely ignore the possibility of that body succeeding if better constructed -- full time and paid well enough to attract competency.

And, while I'm open to other suggestions, I don't see one in your post. Rely on the combo of ideologues, whether single-issue or political extremist, and independently wealthy socialite types that might go for the job now, as poorly compensated as it is? Something else?

You are wrong. Council has subpoena power over MCPS and they refused to use it in the Beidleman hearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are you voting for?

No one in this District!!!!

Disappointing candidates

Push for the County Council to make BOE full time senior professional pay and we might get someone competent who reflects family interests more broadly. Until then, expect a few single-issue folks, a few heavy partisans and maybe an independently wealthy socialite, each crusader-types in their own right.

But, then, the heavily partisan County Council are just fine with that, with little chance for the first, the second being closely aligned and the third being the ones who have them in their pocket, anyway.

The County Council can't do it. It would be members of the Montgomery County delegation to the General Assembly introducing legislation.

In a way, yes, but unless this has changed, it starts with the County Executive and County Council appointing folks to the compensation commission, and we know how such appointments work:

"MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION COMPENSATION COMMISSION
In October 2018, the Montgomery County Board of Education Compensation Commission was created (Chapter 121, Acts of 2018).

Salaries of the County Board of Education are studied by the Commission, which reports to Montgomery County's General Assembly Delegation. Commission recommendations cover not only the appropriate compensation for Board members, but also whether the Board president should receive an additional stipend, and what scholarship amount to award the student Board member. After receiving the Commission's recommendations, the County's General Assembly Delegation may introduce legislation to change the salaries of Board members.

The Commission's first report is due September 1, 2019, and every four years thereafter.

Five Montgomery County residents are appointed to the Commission by the County Executive with County Council consent. The initial members must be appointed by January 1, 2019, and every four years thereafter."

That commission already issued a report that recommended the increase.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/pay-would-more-than-double-for-montgomery-county-md-school-board-members-under-proposal/2019/12/29/d2217334-233c-11ea-bed5-880264cc91a9_story.html

Typical that the Parents Coalition negged the suggestion. "What do we want? Oversight! How will we get it? Not with our tax dollars!"

Seems like all the far-right groups like the Parents Coalitions, Mom's for Liberty and "Moderately" Moco are out in force here.

Thank you

+1

Explain how more money will increase the Board of Education's oversight. Give actual examples.

Right now, the BOE never sees a contract, doesn't ask questions about the many no bid contracts and never holds staff accountable for waste, fraud or abuse. The BOE has already voted most of their oversight power away to the Superintendent.

But you think giving the BOE more money will do what? The BOE has no power anymore to do anything. But pay them more money to do exactly what they are doing now.

Why would we pay them more? To get more qualified people running and raise expectations for their time commitment, as explained a few posts above. Not to pay the current BOE members, unless they then win a re-election among the more qualified field. A more competent BOE with a full time commitment would not have to relegate oversight responsibility.

I'd hope for folks who alternately could fill a mid-step GS-14 federal position with their combination of skill/qualifications and experience. Pay for that in this area is north of $150k. Maybe we could get such folks interested for a bit less than that, but the suggested $60k is laughable, as is anything less than a full time expectation (this is not like having a part time commitment on the board of a corporation where the executive overseen is tied to company performance by their own compensation package, needing more suggestion/contacts/etc. than public-performance oversight). Forget about the current $25k pittance.

.

County Council makes double that and they can’t exert what oversight they have over MCPS and there are more councilmembers. Your argument fails.

You managed a few logical fallacies in.a short post, there. I'll hit the most glaring.

County Council basically doesn't oversee MCPS, the BOE and MSDE (which employs the BOE) do. Council can approve the budget, but not line-item it, they can call hearings, they can back-room negotiate about things while getting to budget approval (which they've consistently shorted for a couple of decades), but that's about it. They also have the rest of the county government to attend to, which is among the reasons for there to be a BOE conducting oversight of this enterprise that takes up half the county budget.

I'm not saying the Council should be making what they are or that we should have as many as we do (the at-large candidates basically ensure a supermajority for whichever party is more popular, allowing groupthink and more extreme policies -- that's been Dems, here, for a while, of course). They also have some staffers making a fair amount, I think. But saying the BOE, then, shouldn't be compensated more than the very much less they are afforded doesn't follow at all. And saying that they've failed so we shouldn't pay them anyway, if that's what you are intimating, would completely ignore the possibility of that body succeeding if better constructed -- full time and paid well enough to attract competency.

And, while I'm open to other suggestions, I don't see one in your post. Rely on the combo of ideologues, whether single-issue or political extremist, and independently wealthy socialite types that might go for the job now, as poorly compensated as it is? Something else?

You are wrong. Council has subpoena power over MCPS and they refused to use it in the Beidleman hearing.

What was it about "they can call hearings" that you failed to read? And, again, this says nothing about whether real BOE salaries with real full time expectations would be more effective.

You sound like all you want to write are negative sound bites instead of anything substantive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I watched the Poolesville Forum for BOE. Hidayat knows Poolesville. He pledged to get Poolesville’s Athletic Fields funded. He was the only candidate that told Poolesville residents that they weren’t a broken community needing to be fixed by MCPS. He said that Poolesville’s school community is a good example for the rest of the county to follow. Good for him for not trying to fix something that isn’t broken.

What does that mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which of these 14 candidates plan to handle the issues surrounding school bathrooms? So students who need to use it have access to OPEN bathrooms.
Bathrooms that are clean.
Bathrooms that are not occupied by students who do not need to use the bathroom to pee, poop, handle menstrual needs.

Please list from each group of candidates which ones have addressed this issue and what exactly their plans are, an actual list of actions they plan to take.

I would hope none. This is an issue for your local school to sort out. BOE needs to focus on education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the Poolesville Forum for BOE. Hidayat knows Poolesville. He pledged to get Poolesville’s Athletic Fields funded. He was the only candidate that told Poolesville residents that they weren’t a broken community needing to be fixed by MCPS. He said that Poolesville’s school community is a good example for the rest of the county to follow. Good for him for not trying to fix something that isn’t broken.

What does that mean?

sounds racist because it's way less diverse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the Poolesville Forum for BOE. Hidayat knows Poolesville. He pledged to get Poolesville’s Athletic Fields funded. He was the only candidate that told Poolesville residents that they weren’t a broken community needing to be fixed by MCPS. He said that Poolesville’s school community is a good example for the rest of the county to follow. Good for him for not trying to fix something that isn’t broken.

What does that mean?

DP. It means he's pandering to the Fair Access self-image of "we don't perceive ourselves as victims (unlike everyone else in the rest of the county)" - which is kinda funny, because the Fair Access people have definitely portrayed Poolesville as victims of unfair neglect; that's the whole point of Fair Access.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which of these 14 candidates plan to handle the issues surrounding school bathrooms? So students who need to use it have access to OPEN bathrooms.
Bathrooms that are clean.
Bathrooms that are not occupied by students who do not need to use the bathroom to pee, poop, handle menstrual needs.

Please list from each group of candidates which ones have addressed this issue and what exactly their plans are, an actual list of actions they plan to take.

I would hope none. This is an issue for your local school to sort out. BOE needs to focus on education.

I'm wondering how you think education works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which of these 14 candidates plan to handle the issues surrounding school bathrooms? So students who need to use it have access to OPEN bathrooms.
Bathrooms that are clean.
Bathrooms that are not occupied by students who do not need to use the bathroom to pee, poop, handle menstrual needs.

Please list from each group of candidates which ones have addressed this issue and what exactly their plans are, an actual list of actions they plan to take.

I would hope none. This is an issue for your local school to sort out. BOE needs to focus on education.

This is a very weird take on an issue that affects the entire school system, learning, safety, drugs, and I can go on and on. This is most definitely something that the Board of Education candidates should address. We’re not talking one school with a broken toilet. We’re talking middle schools and high schools that don’t have working or open bathrooms for kids to use. Kids who can’t find safe and working bathrooms along there route between classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the full Moderately MoCo Forum:

I think Shebra and Lynne really did a horrible job defending their track record and making the case for why they should be re-elected. They really need to retool their talking points because what they're doing and saying now is NOT working.

I liked Rita Montoya the best. That's probably the only Apple Ballot candidate I'll vote for.

I'm finding this hard. As usual I know a bit about some folks but not enough about everyone, so I still have research to do.

I do know Rita Montoya a bit. If I didn't know her I would vote for her. However, having direct experience with her for the past few years through the school system she's off my list. Her actions and decision-making at the direct student/teacher level don't match her campaign rhetoric for me, so my vote will go elsewhere.

Please elaborate. That's the feeling I get about her too but I don't have firsthand experience with her to suss out if that's the case.

She seems like she's playing a part. And I like the part she's playing but I don't know if that's genuinely how she feels and thinks.

I just haven't found her leadership to be as unbiased, fact based, or inclusive as I expected. She is very smart and committed, I just haven't seen an ability to weigh all sides and effectively reach resolution when dealing with a mix of administration/faculty/students and parents. I've seen damage done - unintentionally, I'm sure, she seems earnest and well meaning - but damage nonetheless. But maybe she'd be better in this kind of leadership role than in the more direct engagement. I hate when I have to vote without sufficient information, so this is a rare instance of me having some direct knowledge, but even that knowledge is limited and therefore flawed. And I really care about the Board of Education so I'm trying to get it right on what little I can discern. So challenging...

DP, though a PP in this thread. If you have more concrete examples of the kinds of sides she is taking, that would be helpful.

I can't think of a way to provide enough detail to be fair to Mrs. Montoya that wouldn't make the examples obvious to people who are in the NCC community - and that's not fair to the families and kids involved. I probably shouldn't have said anything. As another poster said, without evidence it's just gossip, and that is very fair criticism. Unfortunately, those exact dynamics are often what play out within PTA communities - which is exactly why I'm avoiding specifics.