Bowser throws shade at Lafayette parents

[Anonymous]

Janeese asked Bowser in today's budget hearing about overcrowding at Lafayette. Bowser responded by saying they had a chance to fix the overcrowding when the city offered them the Military Road building but they didn't want it.

"It is across the park, I’ll leave that there," Bowser said.

https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1504878188152999940

[Anonymous]

But it's true, no?

[Anonymous]

"You're neighborhood school is no longer in your neighborhood. I'll leave that there."

[Anonymous]

I mean, this is kind of funny and true.

But it's also not like we are going to get someone better as a mayor.

[Anonymous]

There are quite a few other schools in W4 that are waiting on necessary modernizations, so Lafayette can get in line. Perhaps their PTA can crowdfund their own expansion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But it's true, no?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But it's true, no?

What she was trying to imply is stupid because she's confirming that location is outside the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But it's true, no?

What she was trying to imply is stupid because she's confirming that location is outside the neighborhood.

The question was about overcrowding. The answer was not stupid, it was directly on point. There was an offer on the table to alleviate overcrowding and it was rejected by Lafayette parents because it was EOTP. Only Early Action schools are guaranteed pre-k in their neighborhood; Lafayette is not be uniquely disadvantaged because the City wouldn't buy a building that wasn't for sale and turn it into a pre-k for them like they wanted.

[Anonymous]

She told them!

[Anonymous]

Janeese lobbied against Lafayette using the Military Rd School, as did the Ward 4 Education Alliance. Both thought the school should be used for students who lived near the school (aka not used by student across the park).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are quite a few other schools in W4 that are waiting on necessary modernizations, so Lafayette can get in line. Perhaps their PTA can crowdfund their own expansion.

There's no more room on that site to expand Lafayette, and it just was modernized a few years ago, so that's not happening. I hope they either enjoy the return of the trailers or losing PK4 because that's the next step for them, all because they rejected a perfectly reasonable offer because of "reasons."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Janeese lobbied against Lafayette using the Military Rd School, as did the Ward 4 Education Alliance. Both thought the school should be used for students who lived near the school (aka not used by student across the park).

I don't have any problem with Bowser shading Janeese at the same time as Lafayette parents on this issue, and I voted for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Janeese lobbied against Lafayette using the Military Rd School, as did the Ward 4 Education Alliance. Both thought the school should be used for students who lived near the school (aka not used by student across the park).

She lobbied against Lafayette losing the school because she knew it would play well with Lafayette voters. There was no other reason. If she had pushed Lafayette to move PK there, her next election would have become a lot more difficult.

[Anonymous]

the difficulty here is that more than one of these things can be true.

Lafayette can be full.

The Military Road School location is across Rock Creek Park. It's really not close to Lafayette.

Rock Creek Park has been a boundary of residential, racial, social, class, segregation.

The neighborhoods right near Military Road School are also full of students; the building is literally just down 14th from a row of huge apartment buildings and an area with many Spanish-speaking families with needs that include preschool options.

So who's in the wrong for asking for what they want? Who should get scarce resources?

(In my opinion, just mine, I think I'd favor the needs of lower-income families right near the school location over those of Lafayette. BUT when a school like Lafayette is huge, full, and overcrowded - you do have to do SOMETHING.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the difficulty here is that more than one of these things can be true.

Lafayette can be full.

The Military Road School location is across Rock Creek Park. It's really not close to Lafayette.

Rock Creek Park has been a boundary of residential, racial, social, class, segregation.

The neighborhoods right near Military Road School are also full of students; the building is literally just down 14th from a row of huge apartment buildings and an area with many Spanish-speaking families with needs that include preschool options.

So who's in the wrong for asking for what they want? Who should get scarce resources?

(In my opinion, just mine, I think I'd favor the needs of lower-income families right near the school location over those of Lafayette. BUT when a school like Lafayette is huge, full, and overcrowded - you do have to do SOMETHING.)

You clearly don't live near Military ELC. Brightwood is a stone's throw away and clears its pre-K waitlist every year. There are charters all around, many undersubscribed. Our preschools are not full, we have options. Don't pity us for our huge apartment buildings full of Spanish speakers. Lafayette didn't turn up their nose at Military out of altruism to underserved communities. You're saying "who is in the wrong for asking for what they want" but you invented that EOTP parents were asking for the building in the first place.

Lafayette wanted a dedicated preschool to alleviate overcrowding. They were offered one, but got scared that it was a slippery slope to leaving the Deal-Wilson pattern. So they declined and instead asked for building that was not for sale. Now they're back asking why nobody cares about their overcrowding. The answer is because they didn't seem to care, at least not really.