My gut feeling on 3/26 BOE vote

[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:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might 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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

Frivolous lawsuits can cost taxpayers a lot of money

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But wasn’t Crown built using state funds not the county?

If this is true, that’s a Mossi g piece of the puzzle. Taylor proposed using Crown as a holding school, then suddenly pivoted 2 days later to proposed closing Wootton and moving its kids to Crown. Perhaps someone in Annapolis told him a holding school was a non-starter?

State is on record saying Crown as a holding school is ok. Ironically, the only option not okayed by state is using Crown as a “relocation” of Wootton

The state is also on record saying they don't get involved in boundary decisions, which is what H is. They would have needed to approve the holding school option because of funding but they do not need to approve H.

Interesting point. This actually isn’t just a boundary study. In fact, the boundary study is the only way MCPS can get away with closing Wootton. Without moving the Wootton boundary to encompass Crown, this would be an absolute school closure and MCPS couldn’t send Wootton’s kids to Crown.

I wonder what would happen if it comes out that this entire move Wootton to Crown idea was cooked up before the State of Maryland cut a $100M check to build Crown (so MCPS wouldn’t lose the land).

This timeline doesn't make sense.

Crown project is much older than Taylor's tenure, and Taylor loves publicly blaming past leadership for MCPS problems.

From an administrative view, the Wootton/Crown shell came makes perfect budget sense and bureaucratic sense. It's bad for students and families, but that's not the unelected bureaucracy's concern.

What doesn’t make sense about the timeline? If the state offered $100M to build Crown, MCPS had to find a way to break ground within the 20 year time limit, or both that money and the land would be gone. MCPS had every financial incentive to shade the data in its favor, break ground on time, then figure out how to fill Crown later (assuming they didn’t already have a plan to close/move Wootton to Crown)

More likely, taking Wootton off the CIP right before breaking ground on Crown was not a coincidence. Rather, MCPS probably considered moving Wootton to Crown at that time, then sought to paper that decision through the boundary study commissioned in November 2024 (at which point moving an existing school to Crown was allegedly being considered).

So yes, MCPS wanted the money, the land, and close Wootton. It would be in a $1B+ hole if it didn’t (i.e., no Crown Farm land ($200-300M, no new Crown ($$300-400M) and have to renovate Wootton’s existing facility ($300-400M). Oh, and no holding school for Magruder and other schools needing renovation.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

Frivolous lawsuits can cost taxpayers a lot of money

Funny, Taylor didn’t have a problem spending money on the Mahmoud case when he had a $0 solution.

Also, if the case is frivolous, it will get dismissed quickly at minimal cost.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

Sounds like some people are afraid of what a lawsuit might uncover.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

Sounds like some people are afraid of what a lawsuit might uncover.

stop it you crazy conspiracy theorists, we have nothing to hide. everything we do is always above board. (also please don’t sue us 😭😭😭. we keep losing in court)

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

Sounds like some people are afraid of what a lawsuit might uncover.

stop it you crazy conspiracy theorists, we have nothing to hide. everything we do is always above board. (also please don’t sue us 😭😭😭. we keep losing in court)

That does sound like the trolls here who keep claiming litigation would be a waste of taxpayer money. There’s an easy way to avoid this in the future - be transparent about why and how you’re doing things.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

Frivolous lawsuits can cost taxpayers a lot of money

I know, right? So why is TT spending so much money in court to keep the EV bus contract going?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

Frivolous lawsuits can cost taxpayers a lot of money

I know, right? So why is TT spending so much money in court to keep the EV bus contract going?

And several other cases too.

[Anonymous]

Just file already. What is stopping you. If there are tons of Wootton parents who want the laws, surely one is an attorney who can handle the lawsuit and money was collected for the filing fees and costs.

[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:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

What is an "appropriate settlement"? Money for our tiny townhouse owner friend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just file already. What is stopping you. If there are tons of Wootton parents who want the laws, surely one is an attorney who can handle the lawsuit and money was collected for the filing fees and costs.

For the last time, you can’t file before the vote. JFC.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Without question, it will all pass and all the BOE members will vote for it.

It will pass, but you might get a few BOE members who are nominated to perform and cast a no vote to make the public believe their petitions and protests made a difference.

If they cast unanimous votes it’ll validate the rubber stamping criticism they insist is not reality.

You seem to think there is a wide-ranging conspiracy that involves the superintendent and the entire BOE to do...what exactly? What is their motivation to conspire together and make this choice if it is not the one they think is best for the whole county?

It’s not a conspiracy theory if it turns out to be true. Then again, MCPS will say “oh well, too late now.”

The chronology of events and other evidence appear to show that the decision was made before community engagement.

You are convinced they’re right, so you have a clear bias. I guess the ends justify the means in your mind - laws and regulations don’t matter, and apparently the views of those most affected don’t either.

Sounds rather authoritarian.

None of this tracks, or answers the question.

Why would all of these people collude to do something “wrong.” What is the motivation?

MCPS had a $300M+ parcel with a 20-year deadline and no comparable land available—but not the data to justify a new high school. Now, instead of rethinking that decision, they’re proposing to close a 55-year-old school to make Crown work. That’s not planning—that’s backfilling a decision that was already made.

PP here. So they are trying to make the best decision today, given poor decisions in the past?

I'm OK with that. That is not a conspiracy or wrongdoing.

I'm not making the argument that H is the objectively best option (though I do think it likely is). I'm trying to get at the view that there is conspiracy/collusion, rather than a difference of opinion...

So you’re okay with what MCPS did in the past, and you’re okay with all of MCPS’ failures in pushing Option H.

I guess you’re okay with what the guy in the White House is doing - he thinks it’s the right thing to do as well.

Fortunately, courts don’t look at things that way.

You aren't making sense.

I don't need to be OK with past decisions to be OK with current decisions that are influenced by prior decisions.

And since you want to make this somehow about the White House- when the Biden administration took actions that were needed to clean up from the prior administration's actions, does that mean Biden was "OK with" those actions?

But you are okay with those past decisions, otherwise you would be calling for many MCPS people to be fired for mismanagement, and not allowing them to make any more decisions. Instead you are supporting the new decisions made by the same people who made those poor decisions.

As for current decisions, you’re okay with those too, even if MCPS has to allegedly break the law to push them through.

Finally, as for the guy in the White House, you missed the point. If the guy in charge thinks it’s the right decision, your position is that he is automatically 100% correct and must not be questioned (or sued).

Talk about living 1984 - “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

OK, so this is the definition of moving the goal posts.

1. You agree that people can and do often have to make current day decisions that are influenced by prior bad decisions, right? OK.

2. I don't have to call for people to be fired to think a bad decision was made. Bad decisions get made all the time. Have you publicly called for firing of people every time you disagree with a decision in your professional and personal life? I doubt it.

3. I never said anything at all like what you are saying about the WH. I never said people should not be questions. There is a difference between agreeing with somebody and saying that nobody should ever question them. You know this.

4. And I can be against baseless lawsuits in general. That has nothing to do with claiming anybody is immune from lawsuit. In fact, I oppose many lawsuits filed by the guy in the WH himself on the grounds that they are baseless.

You have no logic here. You are just attacking people who disagree with you.

My logic is sound. Let the courts sort this out.

And for the record, I have fired people for making bad decisions based on flawed data or a failure to get accurate data. I most certainly do not give them another chance to screw up.

Are you going to fire yourself for the terrible decision to "let the courts sort out" a complex political and bureaucratic issue?

Not at all. We do file litigation when it’s appropriate to preserve our rights while still seeking an appropriate settlement.

Bureaucracy and politics bow to the courts. This is how our society functions.

Are you afraid of what a court might say?

I know right lol. These people are crashing out over a “meritless” lawsuit. They are literally foaming at the mouth trying to figure out the claims. If none of them are valid legal claims, why are you so worried and curious?

As in the wise words of TT, “just relax” LOL

Sounds like some people are afraid of what a lawsuit might uncover.

File, you waste more energy complaining online. Love to see what new you’d bring forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just file already. What is stopping you. If there are tons of Wootton parents who want the laws, surely one is an attorney who can handle the lawsuit and money was collected for the filing fees and costs.

For the last time, you can’t file before the vote. JFC.

Of course you can. Stop making stuff up.