APS - Who is running for School Board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.facebook.com/ArlingtonYoungDemocrats/videos/255531268926501/?hc_location=ufi

Nancy Van Doren endorsed David and Cristina on Facebook:

I am endorsing two candidates in this election: David Priddy and Cristina Diaz-Torres. Their positive, can-do approaches and forward, flexible thinking are essential in school leadership right now. Both have backgrounds and experience in on-going advisory group work related to county-wide education practice, budgets, capital planning, and policy-making. This solid grounding combined with positive attitudes make David and Cristina ideal board members. And did I mention that they are both kind and thoughtful? Well, they are. I am confident both will serve all our citizens well and provide Arlington Public Schools with the leadership needed to ensure all Arlington students are successful in our rapidly changing world.

You can read about both candidates and request a ballot from ArlDems https://arlingtondemocrats.org/vote/school-board-caucus.

All of the Dem candidates other than Krieger have endorsements from current SB members. Blue Virginia has an article listing all of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Nancy Van Doren endorsed David and Cristina on Facebook:



Well that seals the deal: DEFINITELY not voting for Cristina or David!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nancy Van Doren endorsed David and Cristina on Facebook:

Well that seals the deal: DEFINITELY not voting for Cristina or David!!

I don't find an endorsement by ANY of our current SB members to be particularly compelling

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.facebook.com/ArlingtonYoungDemocrats/videos/255531268926501/?hc_location=ufi

Nancy Van Doren endorsed David and Cristina on Facebook:

I am endorsing two candidates in this election: David Priddy and Cristina Diaz-Torres. Their positive, can-do approaches and forward, flexible thinking are essential in school leadership right now. Both have backgrounds and experience in on-going advisory group work related to county-wide education practice, budgets, capital planning, and policy-making. This solid grounding combined with positive attitudes make David and Cristina ideal board members. And did I mention that they are both kind and thoughtful? Well, they are. I am confident both will serve all our citizens well and provide Arlington Public Schools with the leadership needed to ensure all Arlington students are successful in our rapidly changing world.

You can read about both candidates and request a ballot from ArlDems https://arlingtondemocrats.org/vote/school-board-caucus.

All of the Dem candidates other than Krieger have endorsements from current SB members. Blue Virginia has an article listing all of them.

Good for them. I began watching the debate yesterday uncommitted to any of the candidates. Cristina was so much more informed than the other four candidates. I am surprised Nancy would equally support David and Cristina. But Tannia also endorsed Cristina and David, and people say he is better off camera. I'm voting 1) Cristina and 2) David.

[Anonymous]

I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.

Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.

I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.

Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.

I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.

LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.

[Anonymous]

Another day, another unsolicited Krieger email. This time on the super important topic of essentially moving from a majority to supermajority vote of the SB to renew the Superintendent's contract. In the middle of a global pandemic, facing still unknown budget shortfalls, I definitely have been kept awake at night by worrying whether it should be 3 of 5 or 4 of 5 SB members that approve the (an as not yet named) Superintendent's contract.

You certainly have your finger on the pulse, Steven.

[Anonymous]

I think I’m going with Dave and Sandy (on the fence with Cristina).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.

Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.

I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.

I'm considering a similar ranking. I'm less dissatisfied with Cristina than I am with her early marketing efforts. After watching several debates, I feel she is more informed than most and more genuine offline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another day, another unsolicited Krieger email. This time on the super important topic of essentially moving from a majority to supermajority vote of the SB to renew the Superintendent's contract. In the middle of a global pandemic, facing still unknown budget shortfalls, I definitely have been kept awake at night by worrying whether it should be 3 of 5 or 4 of 5 SB members that approve the (an as not yet named) Superintendent's contract.

You certainly have your finger on the pulse, Steven.

Yeah, I don't think I've ever heard that as an issue or as a question in any campaign debate. A supermajority would make more sense if it were a larger board. Increasing the size of the board would be much more worthwhile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another day, another unsolicited Krieger email. This time on the super important topic of essentially moving from a majority to supermajority vote of the SB to renew the Superintendent's contract. In the middle of a global pandemic, facing still unknown budget shortfalls, I definitely have been kept awake at night by worrying whether it should be 3 of 5 or 4 of 5 SB members that approve the (an as not yet named) Superintendent's contract.

You certainly have your finger on the pulse, Steven.

LOL.

But if that had been in effect the last time The superintendent's contract was voted on, it wouldn't have been renewed. We'd already have a replacement. But who could see the future and plan for this...

I still think they'll just choose Cintia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another day, another unsolicited Krieger email. This time on the super important topic of essentially moving from a majority to supermajority vote of the SB to renew the Superintendent's contract. In the middle of a global pandemic, facing still unknown budget shortfalls, I definitely have been kept awake at night by worrying whether it should be 3 of 5 or 4 of 5 SB members that approve the (an as not yet named) Superintendent's contract.

You certainly have your finger on the pulse, Steven.

LOL.

But if that had been in effect the last time The superintendent's contract was voted on, it wouldn't have been renewed. We'd already have a replacement. But who could see the future and plan for this...

I still think they'll just choose Cintia.

She can retire whenever she chooses -- highly unlikely that she is applying for the position permanently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another day, another unsolicited Krieger email. This time on the super important topic of essentially moving from a majority to supermajority vote of the SB to renew the Superintendent's contract. In the middle of a global pandemic, facing still unknown budget shortfalls, I definitely have been kept awake at night by worrying whether it should be 3 of 5 or 4 of 5 SB members that approve the (an as not yet named) Superintendent's contract.

You certainly have your finger on the pulse, Steven.

Yeah, I don't think I've ever heard that as an issue or as a question in any campaign debate. A supermajority would make more sense if it were a larger board. Increasing the size of the board would be much more worthwhile.

I like this idea. How could we adapt higher-ed like system where some voters are elected and others are appointed and skills-based?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think I’m going with Dave and Sandy (on the fence with Cristina).

Similarly, I'm going with Cristina and David (on the fence with Sandy). I appreciate that Sandy has lived and worked in Arlington for a long time but I don't know that she is the best person for APS right now. I might be biased. I am 30 years younger than she is (I don't know her exact age). I only ever hear her talking about reading. Literacy should be more a priority in APS than it is. Poor reading skills means years of struggle for students and people generally. And I want every student to read as well as my kids. But I'm concerned this is all she has to say and that she doesn't understand how complicated and technical the world has become.

I might choose Steven as my third choice. I don't like all of his ideas (or how he emails them to me) but at least he has new ideas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
LOL.

But if that had been in effect the last time The superintendent's contract was voted on, it wouldn't have been renewed. We'd already have a replacement. But who could see the future and plan for this...

Eh, I kind of feel like certain votes are all about the optics. If they'd needed a supermajority to renew Coach Murphy's contract, they'd have gotten one, plus a token vote against, just to demonstrate that They Hear Out Concerns.

Ditto to the person who doesn't take endorsements from current SB members (or other elected Arlington officials) as particularly valuable.