another SAFETY meeting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9:37, DC (Jackson Reed HS) students enter building a little after 8am and instruction starts after 9am. They end school day around 3:30pm and there's still time for students to engage in sports (gasp!). Why does MCPS have things not worked out, it can be done.

You clearly have not paid attention to the Bell Times debate and fight with you saying what you're saying here.

That poster is clearly a troll. Everyone and their momma is trolling the MCPS forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good turnout. Lots of filibustering and word salad by security chief, and some downright offensive comments about parents needing to step up, followed by increasingly noisy and restive responses from audience. On the plus side audience questions and commentary were effective, particularly the testimony of a girl in her junior year. MCPS’s Peter Moran offered some decent action items at end and promised to send a written update laying them out. Principal was not there and my strong sense is that he will be lucky to finish out the year, and definitely won’t be back for another year. I’ve been to a lot of these sorts of meetings (for more than one mcps school) and don’t say that lightly.

When? When the Purple Line opens?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any mention of detectors in schools?

Yes. Peter Moran said they would cost $100 million to just implement in high schools. Marcus said they’re doing evaluations and exploration with vendors but won’t be coming anytime soon.

Curious if anyone has checked DCPS or PgPS budget for how much these cost. I’m really not convinced the value is there, considering both the financial cost and the cost in student time (waking up substantially earlier to get thru metal detectors). But they could put a lot of SROs back in school for that money. From my perspective, bringing in weapons is a relatively rare occurrence (or at least it’s rare that the weapons are used in the school)—but fist fights and similar violence is a very common occurrence. If they could get more SROs and security officers in the schools — like at least one in every HS hallway, they could at least reroute that violence outside the school buildings so that kids and teachers who want to engage in education can do so.
That’s my two cents as a parent with 15 years at McPS and another 4 to go.

In case you haven't heard, MCPD has a serious staffing shortage that is only predicted to get worse. I suggest the "Bring Back SROs" crowd shift their thinking because it is simply not possible to go back to that with current and future staffing levels in the police department.

SROs, deployed appropriately, meaning they are in schools building positive relationships with kids, are a force MULTIPLIER. The violence doesn't start or stop at school doors and much of the violence in schools is committed by kids who commit violence outside of schools. So having actual proactive community engagement, which is what a best practice SRO (triad) model is, helps reduce violence. That's what the SRO program did before Elrich pulled them out.

The current model send cops to confront kids accused of criminal conduct. It's 100% responsive and not proactive. It's 100% punitive and not preventive. It's just a stupid waste of money and good people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any mention of detectors in schools?

Yes. Peter Moran said they would cost $100 million to just implement in high schools. Marcus said they’re doing evaluations and exploration with vendors but won’t be coming anytime soon.

Curious if anyone has checked DCPS or PgPS budget for how much these cost. I’m really not convinced the value is there, considering both the financial cost and the cost in student time (waking up substantially earlier to get thru metal detectors). But they could put a lot of SROs back in school for that money. From my perspective, bringing in weapons is a relatively rare occurrence (or at least it’s rare that the weapons are used in the school)—but fist fights and similar violence is a very common occurrence. If they could get more SROs and security officers in the schools — like at least one in every HS hallway, they could at least reroute that violence outside the school buildings so that kids and teachers who want to engage in education can do so.
That’s my two cents as a parent with 15 years at McPS and another 4 to go.

In case you haven't heard, MCPD has a serious staffing shortage that is only predicted to get worse. I suggest the "Bring Back SROs" crowd shift their thinking because it is simply not possible to go back to that with current and future staffing levels in the police department.

SROs, deployed appropriately, meaning they are in schools building positive relationships with kids, are a force MULTIPLIER. The violence doesn't start or stop at school doors and much of the violence in schools is committed by kids who commit violence outside of schools. So having actual proactive community engagement, which is what a best practice SRO (triad) model is, helps reduce violence. That's what the SRO program did before Elrich pulled them out.

The current model send cops to confront kids accused of criminal conduct. It's 100% responsive and not proactive. It's 100% punitive and not preventive. It's just a stupid waste of money and good people.

Ok….how does any of what you said address the fact that MCPD has a staffing shortage now and that that staffing shortage is forecasted to only get worse in the near future?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any mention of detectors in schools?

Yes. Peter Moran said they would cost $100 million to just implement in high schools. Marcus said they’re doing evaluations and exploration with vendors but won’t be coming anytime soon.

Curious if anyone has checked DCPS or PgPS budget for how much these cost. I’m really not convinced the value is there, considering both the financial cost and the cost in student time (waking up substantially earlier to get thru metal detectors). But they could put a lot of SROs back in school for that money. From my perspective, bringing in weapons is a relatively rare occurrence (or at least it’s rare that the weapons are used in the school)—but fist fights and similar violence is a very common occurrence. If they could get more SROs and security officers in the schools — like at least one in every HS hallway, they could at least reroute that violence outside the school buildings so that kids and teachers who want to engage in education can do so.
That’s my two cents as a parent with 15 years at McPS and another 4 to go.

In case you haven't heard, MCPD has a serious staffing shortage that is only predicted to get worse. I suggest the "Bring Back SROs" crowd shift their thinking because it is simply not possible to go back to that with current and future staffing levels in the police department.

SROs, deployed appropriately, meaning they are in schools building positive relationships with kids, are a force MULTIPLIER. The violence doesn't start or stop at school doors and much of the violence in schools is committed by kids who commit violence outside of schools. So having actual proactive community engagement, which is what a best practice SRO (triad) model is, helps reduce violence. That's what the SRO program did before Elrich pulled them out.

The current model send cops to confront kids accused of criminal conduct. It's 100% responsive and not proactive. It's 100% punitive and not preventive. It's just a stupid waste of money and good people.

Ok….how does any of what you said address the fact that MCPD has a staffing shortage now and that that staffing shortage is forecasted to only get worse in the near future?

are you saying it'll be a banana republic?!!

[Anonymous]

Friedson doing press and sharing his thoughts after the B-CC community meeting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Friedson doing press and sharing his thoughts after the B-CC community meeting

Did he explain why he held a meeting about schools without the superintendent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Friedson doing press and sharing his thoughts after the B-CC community meeting

Did he explain why he held a meeting about schools without the superintendent?

The superintendent was out of town from what I heard.

[Anonymous]

Moran said MCPS was also in the process of rewriting the student code of conduct to better reflect the high expectations the district has for students. He says following the pandemic, MCPS lowered expectations academically, and lowered expectations for the character and conduct of students.

[Anonymous]

He said he would look into tempor9increasing the number of security staff. Has he, BCC?

[Anonymous]

There was a similar meeting at Kennedy HS last week after a shelter in place and a lockdown at the school in January. What the hell is going on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Friedson doing press and sharing his thoughts after the B-CC community meeting

Did he explain why he held a meeting about schools without the superintendent?

The superintendent was out of town from what I heard.

Friedson picked the date. His choice to exclude the superintendent.

[Anonymous]

They didn't have any communications from mcps on that panel? Cram was also "out of town"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Friedson doing press and sharing his thoughts after the B-CC community meeting

Did he explain why he held a meeting about schools without the superintendent?

The superintendent was out of town from what I heard.

Friedson picked the date. His choice to exclude the superintendent.

omg, what a horrible person

[Anonymous]

100 or so in attendance. The school has less than 2400 students. None of the school's personnel were in attendance. They were :
A. Fearful of showing up, did anyone from MCPS or their union advise them not to come?
B. They know "nothing" is coming out of yet another meeting.
C. They don't parents coming up to them to talk about their Larlo and Larla.
D. They were busy with their own outside work responsibilities, like working another job.
E. All of the above.