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:

Anonymous wrote:Mui looks good to me...

For me, this just reaffirmed the Apple ballot was dead on. Still voting for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart.

The Apple Ballot is usually dead on and generally gets their candidates elected, which is why our current BOE - most of whom were endorsed by the Apple Ballot - is doing such a stellar job. I agree we need to keep their streak going and vote in the new Apple Ballot slate.

The Apple ballot is fantastic this time though. Even better than other years. Definitely voting in the mainstream candidates not the RWNJs or incumbents.

+1 the Apple Ballot this year is doubling down on what has made the BOE so successful to date. Voting Apple Ballot is the only way to keep up the great work that the BOE - and its current Apple Ballot endorsees on the board now - has been doing.

DP. What are you talking about? There are 3 incumbents on the ballot this year. The Apple Ballot endorsed 0 of the incumbents. There are no incumbents on the Apple Ballot this year. Every candidate on the Apple Ballot is a non-incumbent.

The Apple Ballot this year is the realistic, we-need-change-but-not-from-cranks choice. I had decided, independently on my own, to vote for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart, so it was interesting when I found out that those were the Apple Ballot choices.

Apple Ballot endorses Smondrowski and Evans:

https://moco360.media/2016/06/02/teachers-union-announces-endorsements-in-board-of-education-races/

I guess the fact that you think these 2 are so bad goes to show you how good the apple ballot is in picking successful BOE members.

You are citing the 2016 endorsement. It is not 2016. It is 2024. The Apple Ballot in 2024 is Montoya (not an incumbent), Zimmerman (not an incumbent), Stewart (not an incumbent).

Yes, and like the Apple Ballot endorsed Smondrowski and Evans, these 3 latest candidates will be amazing once they get to the BOE.

I think the job is harder than it looks - don't predict amazing just yet, 2 of those candidates have marginal experience in education affairs - Zimmerman, as a teacher, has no budgetary experience, and that is a very different job than managing oversight in a highly regulated $3.3 billion endeavor. Similarly, Montoya's experience as a PTA president of her elementary school, with no budgetary experience, does not make her a prepared candidate.

I agree about Zimmerman. She seems like a lovely lady and a nice teacher but I don’t think she has the experience to be on the board of education. Does she have kids? I don’t remember, but I don’t think she’s the answer, even though she has the endorsement.

She doesn't have kids, but I don't see why that should matter for a teacher from the system. She's seen more MCPS problems up close than most parents would.

Yes, I know that and I also agree with that but I have also criticized Mendel for not having kids in the system so I need to be consistent with my own logic.

[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:Mui looks good to me...

For me, this just reaffirmed the Apple ballot was dead on. Still voting for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart.

The Apple Ballot is usually dead on and generally gets their candidates elected, which is why our current BOE - most of whom were endorsed by the Apple Ballot - is doing such a stellar job. I agree we need to keep their streak going and vote in the new Apple Ballot slate.

The Apple ballot is fantastic this time though. Even better than other years. Definitely voting in the mainstream candidates not the RWNJs or incumbents.

+1 the Apple Ballot this year is doubling down on what has made the BOE so successful to date. Voting Apple Ballot is the only way to keep up the great work that the BOE - and its current Apple Ballot endorsees on the board now - has been doing.

DP. What are you talking about? There are 3 incumbents on the ballot this year. The Apple Ballot endorsed 0 of the incumbents. There are no incumbents on the Apple Ballot this year. Every candidate on the Apple Ballot is a non-incumbent.

The Apple Ballot this year is the realistic, we-need-change-but-not-from-cranks choice. I had decided, independently on my own, to vote for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart, so it was interesting when I found out that those were the Apple Ballot choices.

Apple Ballot endorses Smondrowski and Evans:

https://moco360.media/2016/06/02/teachers-union-announces-endorsements-in-board-of-education-races/

I guess the fact that you think these 2 are so bad goes to show you how good the apple ballot is in picking successful BOE members.

You are citing the 2016 endorsement. It is not 2016. It is 2024. The Apple Ballot in 2024 is Montoya (not an incumbent), Zimmerman (not an incumbent), Stewart (not an incumbent).

Yes, and like the Apple Ballot endorsed Smondrowski and Evans, these 3 latest candidates will be amazing once they get to the BOE.

I think the job is harder than it looks - don't predict amazing just yet, 2 of those candidates have marginal experience in education affairs - Zimmerman, as a teacher, has no budgetary experience, and that is a very different job than managing oversight in a highly regulated $3.3 billion endeavor. Similarly, Montoya's experience as a PTA president of her elementary school, with no budgetary experience, does not make her a prepared candidate.

I agree about Zimmerman. She seems like a lovely lady and a nice teacher but I don’t think she has the experience to be on the board of education. Does she have kids? I don’t remember, but I don’t think she’s the answer, even though she has the endorsement.

She doesn't have kids, but I don't see why that should matter for a teacher from the system. She's seen more MCPS problems up close than most parents would.

Yes, I know that and I also agree with that but I have also criticized Mendel for not having kids in the system so I need to be consistent with my own logic.

Choosing not to put your kids in MCPS (Mandel) is different from not having kids in MCPS because you don't have kids (Zimmerman).

Knowing nothing about MCPS (Mandel) is also different from knowing lots about MCPS from the perspective of a MCPS teacher (Zimmerman).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

I read up thread that she was some kind of a marijuana lobbyist. Is that true or is that a false rumor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

I read up thread that she was some kind of a marijuana lobbyist. Is that true or is that a false rumor?

She is pro-legalization but for adults 21 and over. She's pretty firm on restricting access to marijuana for those 21 and under and wants greater enforcement around that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

Smondrowksi isn't progressive - she's balanced and listens to constituents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

I read up thread that she was some kind of a marijuana lobbyist. Is that true or is that a false rumor?

She is pro-legalization but for adults 21 and over. She's pretty firm on restricting access to marijuana for those 21 and under and wants greater enforcement around that.

Isn't it alrady legal in MD as of last year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

I read up thread that she was some kind of a marijuana lobbyist. Is that true or is that a false rumor?

She is pro-legalization but for adults 21 and over. She's pretty firm on restricting access to marijuana for those 21 and under and wants greater enforcement around that.

Isn't it alrady legal in MD as of last year?

And,
usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/04/30/dea-reclassifies-marijuana-reports/72865632007/

[Anonymous]

That is a deal breaker. No way I want marijuana even over 21. There is/will only lax enforcement. Kids from all ages will suffer, directly or indirectly

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

I read up thread that she was some kind of a marijuana lobbyist. Is that true or is that a false rumor?

She is pro-legalization but for adults 21 and over. She's pretty firm on restricting access to marijuana for those 21 and under and wants greater enforcement around that.

[Anonymous]

That is a deal breaker. No way I want marijuana even over 21. There is/will only lax enforcement. Kids from all ages will suffer, directly or indirectly

This isn't a MCPS or a MCPS BOE issue. The ship has sailed. It's important to remember who has the decision making powers for each issue.

There is no one on MCPS BOE that will be able to meet your standard for this "deal breaker". The best MCPS can do is make an effective consequence when a student is caught with drugs (legal or otherwise) on campus.

[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:Mui looks good to me...

For me, this just reaffirmed the Apple ballot was dead on. Still voting for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart.

The Apple Ballot is usually dead on and generally gets their candidates elected, which is why our current BOE - most of whom were endorsed by the Apple Ballot - is doing such a stellar job. I agree we need to keep their streak going and vote in the new Apple Ballot slate.

The Apple ballot is fantastic this time though. Even better than other years. Definitely voting in the mainstream candidates not the RWNJs or incumbents.

+1 the Apple Ballot this year is doubling down on what has made the BOE so successful to date. Voting Apple Ballot is the only way to keep up the great work that the BOE - and its current Apple Ballot endorsees on the board now - has been doing.

DP. What are you talking about? There are 3 incumbents on the ballot this year. The Apple Ballot endorsed 0 of the incumbents. There are no incumbents on the Apple Ballot this year. Every candidate on the Apple Ballot is a non-incumbent.

The Apple Ballot this year is the realistic, we-need-change-but-not-from-cranks choice. I had decided, independently on my own, to vote for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart, so it was interesting when I found out that those were the Apple Ballot choices.

Apple Ballot endorses Smondrowski and Evans:

https://moco360.media/2016/06/02/teachers-union-announces-endorsements-in-board-of-education-races/

I guess the fact that you think these 2 are so bad goes to show you how good the apple ballot is in picking successful BOE members.

You are citing the 2016 endorsement. It is not 2016. It is 2024. The Apple Ballot in 2024 is Montoya (not an incumbent), Zimmerman (not an incumbent), Stewart (not an incumbent).

Yes, and like the Apple Ballot endorsed Smondrowski and Evans, these 3 latest candidates will be amazing once they get to the BOE.

I think the job is harder than it looks - don't predict amazing just yet, 2 of those candidates have marginal experience in education affairs - Zimmerman, as a teacher, has no budgetary experience, and that is a very different job than managing oversight in a highly regulated $3.3 billion endeavor. Similarly, Montoya's experience as a PTA president of her elementary school, with no budgetary experience, does not make her a prepared candidate.

I agree about Zimmerman. She seems like a lovely lady and a nice teacher but I don’t think she has the experience to be on the board of education. Does she have kids? I don’t remember, but I don’t think she’s the answer, even though she has the endorsement.

She doesn't have kids, but I don't see why that should matter for a teacher from the system. She's seen more MCPS problems up close than most parents would.

Yes, I know that and I also agree with that but I have also criticized Mendel for not having kids in the system so I need to be consistent with my own logic.

Choosing not to put your kids in MCPS (Mandel) is different from not having kids in MCPS because you don't have kids (Zimmerman).

Knowing nothing about MCPS (Mandel) is also different from knowing lots about MCPS from the perspective of a MCPS teacher (Zimmerman).

💯

Someone who has direct experience with our elementary schools would be a huge benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

I read up thread that she was some kind of a marijuana lobbyist. Is that true or is that a false rumor?

She is pro-legalization but for adults 21 and over. She's pretty firm on restricting access to marijuana for those 21 and under and wants greater enforcement around that.

We know from tobacco that secondhand smoke is a real problem. Does she expect that parents smoking at home won’t expose their kids to the smoke and damage their developing brains (especially when the parents’ judgment is impaired because they’re high)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

I read up thread that she was some kind of a marijuana lobbyist. Is that true or is that a false rumor?

She is pro-legalization but for adults 21 and over. She's pretty firm on restricting access to marijuana for those 21 and under and wants greater enforcement around that.

We know from tobacco that secondhand smoke is a real problem. Does she expect that parents smoking at home won’t expose their kids to the smoke and damage their developing brains (especially when the parents’ judgment is impaired because they’re high)?

Kennedy is a prime example of the house to school drug pipeline. I get it, it’s legal for adults, but it’s never been easier for kids to have access to it whether it’s stolen or given by the parents. But nobody’s going to listen to me because “we” (not me) voted for it so it’s legal now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the most conservative leaning candidates?

This is MoCo, so do you mean "center"?

I didn't ask the question but I guess?

Who are the candidates who aren't MomsForLiberty but will provide a nice balance to the progressives on the board?

I think Montoya fits that bill.

I read up thread that she was some kind of a marijuana lobbyist. Is that true or is that a false rumor?

She is pro-legalization but for adults 21 and over. She's pretty firm on restricting access to marijuana for those 21 and under and wants greater enforcement around that.

We know from tobacco that secondhand smoke is a real problem. Does she expect that parents smoking at home won’t expose their kids to the smoke and damage their developing brains (especially when the parents’ judgment is impaired because they’re high)?

Kennedy is a prime example of the house to school drug pipeline. I get it, it’s legal for adults, but it’s never been easier for kids to have access to it whether it’s stolen or given by the parents. But nobody’s going to listen to me because “we” (not me) voted for it so it’s legal now.

Precisely why we also need to look at banning alcohol in this country. The 21 and over rule obviously doesn’t work and kids have too easy access to it at home and then at school.