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:

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?

The million dollar or more 3000-10,000 square foot townhouse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

LOL. By the way, what is your stupid answer to why TT is in court defending McGuire’s $168M disaster?

[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?

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

Isn’t it nap time for you? At least give the adults here the benefit of kindergarten quiet time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

LOL. By the way, what is your stupid answer to why TT is in court defending McGuire’s $168M disaster?

They don’t have one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

LOL. By the way, what is your stupid answer to why TT is in court defending McGuire’s $168M disaster?

One has nothing to do with the other. You could have filed to try to block the vote or get it postponed. What happened to all the donations? Did you steal it?

[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?

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

Isn’t it nap time for you? At least give the adults here the benefit of kindergarten quiet time.

Maybe they can take the stolen attorney donation money and use it for a place in Crown so their kids can walk.

[Anonymous]

Any MCPS total update on the 6 regions programs and the dismantling of county wide?https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DMJHXR4AA9BD/$file/Boundary%20Studies%20Program%20Analysis%20Update%20251016%20PPT%20REV.pdf
Region 4:
Richard Montgomery: IB[c], dance [c-BS language inc should have experience but not required], theatre/tech [i] should be available at all schools
Rockville: medical science and heathcare [c,i], leadership bs-why bother
Churchill: humanities, etc. Why bother?
Wootton: STEM [c], tech [i], music [c]
Region 5 includes :
Crown: Medical Science (c) and Healthcare (i) , Performing Arts: dance (c). Building decent size dance studio with high ceilings? Alternative to PE?

Newer document has 3 schools in Region 4. Where's Rockville now? https://drive.google.com/file/d/1doLnOvo86NOxAoBAmBBtgYXKoU-ayktW/view
Wootton, Churchill and Montgomery supplied 45% of the students to Blair STEM and 49% [110 home school] for the county wide IB. Those 3 also sent about 50 to Poolesville ecology. Super STEM at Crown for 400-500 including ecology?

Taylor is counting on movement out of Churchill for programs so why move any in? He's stuffing it to 112.6% capacity while MCPS has HS below 80% and 90%. Crown was designed for 2700 core. Any student can be super STEM and still want to participate in arts programs or theatre or dance. Who went where shows one school had <10 in it's own specialty program and MCPS is so sloppy it didn't fill green on 86 Kennedy IB students in their home school program. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Any MCPS total update on the 6 regions programs and the dismantling of county wide?https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DMJHXR4AA9BD/$file/Boundary%20Studies%20Program%20Analysis%20Update%20251016%20PPT%20REV.pdf
Region 4:
Richard Montgomery: IB[c], dance [c-BS language inc should have experience but not required], theatre/tech [i] should be available at all schools
Rockville: medical science and heathcare [c,i], leadership bs-why bother
Churchill: humanities, etc. Why bother?
Wootton: STEM [c], tech [i], music [c]
Region 5 includes :
Crown: Medical Science (c) and Healthcare (i) , Performing Arts: dance (c). Building decent size dance studio with high ceilings? Alternative to PE?

Newer document has 3 schools in Region 4. Where's Rockville now? https://drive.google.com/file/d/1doLnOvo86NOxAoBAmBBtgYXKoU-ayktW/view
Wootton, Churchill and Montgomery supplied 45% of the students to Blair STEM and 49% [110 home school] for the county wide IB. Those 3 also sent about 50 to Poolesville ecology. Super STEM at Crown for 400-500 including ecology?

Taylor is counting on movement out of Churchill for programs so why move any in? He's stuffing it to 112.6% capacity while MCPS has HS below 80% and 90%. Crown was designed for 2700 core. Any student can be super STEM and still want to participate in arts programs or theatre or dance. Who went where shows one school had <10 in it's own specialty program and MCPS is so sloppy it didn't fill green on 86 Kennedy IB students in their home school program. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

Those programs should be limited to students who don't have access to stem at their own schools. There i sno reason why a Churchill or Wootton student needs to go to Blair, a neighborhood their parents wouldn't live in when they have the classes at their homeschools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

LOL. By the way, what is your stupid answer to why TT is in court defending McGuire’s $168M disaster?

One has nothing to do with the other. You could have filed to try to block the vote or get it postponed. What happened to all the donations? Did you steal it?

No you can’t file to block the vote or have it postponed. Clearly you want them to file prematurely and be dismissed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

LOL. By the way, what is your stupid answer to why TT is in court defending McGuire’s $168M disaster?

One has nothing to do with the other. You could have filed to try to block the vote or get it postponed. What happened to all the donations? Did you steal it?

No you can’t file to block the vote or have it postponed. Clearly you want them to file prematurely and be dismissed.

I do wonder why they’re in such a hurry to have litigation. First it was “litigation is a waste of taxpayer money,” now it’s “hurry up and file already.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

LOL. By the way, what is your stupid answer to why TT is in court defending McGuire’s $168M disaster?

One has nothing to do with the other. You could have filed to try to block the vote or get it postponed. What happened to all the donations? Did you steal it?

No you can’t file to block the vote or have it postponed. Clearly you want them to file prematurely and be dismissed.

I do wonder why they’re in such a hurry to have litigation. First it was “litigation is a waste of taxpayer money,” now it’s “hurry up and file already.”

Pretty sure we’re mostly just nosy. And a little bored. It really isn’t always a conspiracy theory.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, it would be the smart move for the BOE to delay the vote a bit. The biggest issue right now isn’t even the decision itself, it’s how rushed and unclear the process has felt. Taking a little more time to share the data, show what alternatives were actually considered, and explain how community input factored in would make this way more defensible. Rushing it through now just opens the door to legal challenges and more backlash. A short delay now prob saves them a lot of headaches later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

LOL. By the way, what is your stupid answer to why TT is in court defending McGuire’s $168M disaster?

One has nothing to do with the other. You could have filed to try to block the vote or get it postponed. What happened to all the donations? Did you steal it?

No you can’t file to block the vote or have it postponed. Clearly you want them to file prematurely and be dismissed.

I do wonder why they’re in such a hurry to have litigation. First it was “litigation is a waste of taxpayer money,” now it’s “hurry up and file already.”

Pretty sure we’re mostly just nosy. And a little bored. It really isn’t always a conspiracy theory.

Assume you’re not the why haven’t you filed poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it would be the smart move for the BOE to delay the vote a bit. The biggest issue right now isn’t even the decision itself, it’s how rushed and unclear the process has felt. Taking a little more time to share the data, show what alternatives were actually considered, and explain how community input factored in would make this way more defensible. Rushing it through now just opens the door to legal challenges and more backlash. A short delay now prob saves them a lot of headaches later.

Do you think they’re not talking to their lawyers about this? Pretty clear to me they’ve correctly concluded that no amount of process or time prevents the Wootton group from suing, and I’m sure their lawyers have signed off on them having done enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it would be the smart move for the BOE to delay the vote a bit. The biggest issue right now isn’t even the decision itself, it’s how rushed and unclear the process has felt. Taking a little more time to share the data, show what alternatives were actually considered, and explain how community input factored in would make this way more defensible. Rushing it through now just opens the door to legal challenges and more backlash. A short delay now prob saves them a lot of headaches later.

Do you think they’re not talking to their lawyers about this? Pretty clear to me they’ve correctly concluded that no amount of process or time prevents the Wootton group from suing, and I’m sure their lawyers have signed off on them having done enough.

Are these the same lawyers who signed off on no opt out and ev deal? Asking for a friend.