Washington Post article about Former Farquhar Administrator

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Don't try to get revenge for yourselves, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath. It is written, Revenge belongs to me; I will pay it back, says the Lord.” The Good News: What goes around comes around, but it's up to the Lord, not to you, to make sure there's justice.

The Lord made lawyers and courts.

Any google search will pull up how many of Beidleman’s relatives are pastors. If you’re posting here, you’re wasting your time. Instead, pray for Beidleman that he can get the help he needs to move forward in a healthy way.

STALKER

Haha! No, when you are trying to understand a predator you search for answers

Why are you trying to understand a predator? This isn’t an episode of CSI. This is real life. Stop being a stalker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers were told that we can’t couldn’t talk about the investigation during the investigation. Can we talk about it now that it’s over?!?

Who told you this?

It’s in the script from the new principal on how to respond to students asking questions. I’m pretty sure it was also in emails from Monifa

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Don't try to get revenge for yourselves, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath. It is written, Revenge belongs to me; I will pay it back, says the Lord.” The Good News: What goes around comes around, but it's up to the Lord, not to you, to make sure there's justice.

The Lord made lawyers and courts.

Any google search will pull up how many of Beidleman’s relatives are pastors. If you’re posting here, you’re wasting your time. Instead, pray for Beidleman that he can get the help he needs to move forward in a healthy way.

STALKER

Haha! No, when you are trying to understand a predator you search for answers

Why are you trying to understand a predator? This isn’t an episode of CSI. This is real life. Stop being a stalker.

A victim has never tried to understand their assailant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Don't try to get revenge for yourselves, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath. It is written, Revenge belongs to me; I will pay it back, says the Lord.” The Good News: What goes around comes around, but it's up to the Lord, not to you, to make sure there's justice.

The Lord made lawyers and courts.

Any google search will pull up how many of Beidleman’s relatives are pastors. If you’re posting here, you’re wasting your time. Instead, pray for Beidleman that he can get the help he needs to move forward in a healthy way.

STALKER

Haha! No, when you are trying to understand a predator you search for answers

Why are you trying to understand a predator? This isn’t an episode of CSI. This is real life. Stop being a stalker.

A victim has never tried to understand their assailant?

Most “victims” don’t google their “assailants” unless they are obsessed and revengeful.

[Anonymous]

Again- this is a weird deflection, or at least a very random tangent.

No one cares about Biedleman's family's occupations!

This story is about him, and all those who enabled (and promoted!) him.

Again- I expect a Friday afternoon news dump of the Jackson Lewis report, probably with all of the names redacted.

[Anonymous]

Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Don't try to get revenge for yourselves, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath. It is written, Revenge belongs to me; I will pay it back, says the Lord.” The Good News: What goes around comes around, but it's up to the Lord, not to you, to make sure there's justice.

The Lord made lawyers and courts.

Any google search will pull up how many of Beidleman’s relatives are pastors. If you’re posting here, you’re wasting your time. Instead, pray for Beidleman that he can get the help he needs to move forward in a healthy way.

STALKER

Haha! No, when you are trying to understand a predator you search for answers

Why are you trying to understand a predator? This isn’t an episode of CSI. This is real life. Stop being a stalker.

A victim has never tried to understand their assailant?

Most “victims” don’t google their “assailants” unless they are obsessed and revengeful.

Hmm. Wonder what would make them obsessed and vengeful?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

Isn’t that practice potentially a core part of the problem with the Biedleman case? Move a horrendous Principal to a new school and give him a promotion so he accepts the transfer?

Keeping bad employees on staff brings down the whole school system. Giving him the promotion over a deserving applicant was wrong. Transparency and accountability is needed to weed out these types of practices in MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

Isn’t that practice potentially a core part of the problem with the Biedleman case? Move a horrendous Principal to a new school and give him a promotion so he accepts the transfer?

Keeping bad employees on staff brings down the whole school system. Giving him the promotion over a deserving applicant was wrong. Transparency and accountability is needed to weed out these types of practices in MCPS.

No disagreements from me! I think poor performers should be fired without hesitation. But I know that doesn't happen in MCPS and honestly, most government agencies, due to those entities having a conservative approach to personnel issues to mitigate wrongful termination lawsuits from the fired employees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

Isn’t that practice potentially a core part of the problem with the Biedleman case? Move a horrendous Principal to a new school and give him a promotion so he accepts the transfer?

Keeping bad employees on staff brings down the whole school system. Giving him the promotion over a deserving applicant was wrong. Transparency and accountability is needed to weed out these types of practices in MCPS.

Usually the move is a quiet shuffling to Carver (head office), not a high profile Principal job.

Thats a telling difference that someone(s) still viewed Biedleman as a rising star, which is really incredible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

But don't they need to stay in compliance with Maryland's privacy laws, which limit the sharing of individual personnel records?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

But don't they need to stay in compliance with Maryland's privacy laws, which limit the sharing of individual personnel records?

Please site the specific law you are referring to and clarify how those laws apply to public government officials.

MCPS is notorious for misquoting laws to serve their purposes. Principals on up do not have the same cover of privacy as other employees because of the public nature of their job.

Again, MCPS and the Board promised transparency and accountability. They owe it to the public to release an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report and to take disciplinary and corrective actions to protect staff from sexual harassment and bullying in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes absolutely names will be redacted. But I will still be interested to see how many of the MCPS offices had input during the interview and vetting process, or lack thereof, and whether any of them were against the promotion.

Names are not always redacted and to do so wouldn’t be transparent. For example, Letters to the Community go out all the time with MCPS employees named. The BCC teacher is an example. MCPS has referred to Biedleman by name in correspondence and at news conferences. The two Transportation Department employees who were fired by MCPS were also publicly named.

The public has a right to know who specifically in MCPS knew about the complaints from over 18 victims, why they did nothing, why the usual procedures for hiring a principal was not followed, and why Biedleman was promoted. Releasing an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report would show transparency by MCPS. Disciplinary action against responsible employees would show accountability that both Dr. McKnight and the Board promised.

I think the difference is, Engel outted himself with his lawsuit, MCPS did not. Once the employee outs themselves, then MCPS will name them.

But MCPS is notorious for not getting into personnel specifics IF the employee in question is going to remain an MCPS employee. If they decide to fire an employee, then they might name names, but MCPS almost never fires people. They shift them around to a special assignment status and wait for the heat to die down, or they hope the employee in question resigns on their own.

But don't they need to stay in compliance with Maryland's privacy laws, which limit the sharing of individual personnel records?

Please site the specific law you are referring to and clarify how those laws apply to public government officials.

MCPS is notorious for misquoting laws to serve their purposes. Principals on up do not have the same cover of privacy as other employees because of the public nature of their job.

Again, MCPS and the Board promised transparency and accountability. They owe it to the public to release an unredacted copy of the Jackson Lewis report and to take disciplinary and corrective actions to protect staff from sexual harassment and bullying in the future.

GP 4-311. The law does not distinguish among low-level and senior employees or among back office and public facing employees. The protection of personnel records is broad and absolute and has been further broadened from the categories of information enumerated in the statute by case law.

They will have to redact information about Biedelman’s disciplinary proceedings as well as information about how other employees performed their jobs, even if there was misconduct, when those descriptions could reasonably identify the employee. Expect MCPS to redact heavily based on this criteria, especially when the information could expose members of the in-crowd.

People will be understandably up in arms about this, but the only remedy is to change the law, just like the GA did with police misconduct records. If you don’t like it, tell your state legislators.