Tired of Name Changes/Bad Planning - Vote NO on School Bonds

[Anonymous]

Also voting no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is Falls Church High in the bond? I really want to see that school renovated.

Yes, that school's renovation also ought to take precedence over an addition at Madison.

Lee High School.could definitely use a renovation too.

Their football stadium is nice but the parts of that school I have seen is a dump.

[Anonymous]

Changing a school name so it’s no longer a homage to a Confederate general?! The horror!

You’re really going to vote against $315 million in much-needed money for important capital projects, at historically low interest rates, directed at improving children’s education—because you can’t stand the thought of investing a fraction of a percent of that amount so we’re not commemorating someone who committed treason and waged war against the United States?

Just want to make sure we’re clear on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Changing a school name so it’s no longer a homage to a Confederate general?! The horror!

You’re really going to vote against $315 million in much-needed money for important capital projects, at historically low interest rates, directed at improving children’s education—because you can’t stand the thought of investing a fraction of a percent of that amount so we’re not commemorating someone who committed treason and waged war against the United States?

Just want to make sure we’re clear on that.

+1. Trump logic. Your friends think you’re an idiot OP. Just so we’re clear.

[Anonymous]

You have a low tolerance if one school’s name change made you tired. Perhaps an aerobic exercise program would be helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Changing a school name so it’s no longer a homage to a Confederate general?! The horror!

You’re really going to vote against $315 million in much-needed money for important capital projects, at historically low interest rates, directed at improving children’s education—because you can’t stand the thought of investing a fraction of a percent of that amount so we’re not commemorating someone who committed treason and waged war against the United States?

Just want to make sure we’re clear on that.

Other names will follow, and they'll cost even more money (let's see how much FCPS tries to bury in the capital budget), plus the projects they actually want to find are, for the most part, bad choices that will delay other capital projects that are needed and will aggravate demographic disparities within FCPS. So it's time to vote NO and tell FCPS we're tired of their BS.

[Anonymous]

Other names will follow, and they'll cost even more money (let's see how much FCPS tries to bury in the capital budget), plus the projects they actually want to find are, for the most part, bad choices that will delay other capital projects that are needed and will aggravate demographic disparities within FCPS. So it's time to vote NO and tell FCPS we're tired of their BS.

Agree. Poor stewardship of taxpayers' funds.

The whole name change debacle should never have happened. They could have dropped the Jeb and eliminated anything that said Jeb over years at no cost. Had they done this at the beginning of this whole name change process (two years ago), Jeb would have pretty much disappeared by now and the costs would have been almost nil. Instead, I'm betting that some purchases over the last two years have gone to "Jeb" included signs, uniforms, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Other names will follow, and they'll cost even more money (let's see how much FCPS tries to bury in the capital budget), ... So it's time to vote NO and tell FCPS we're tired of their BS.

You mean the school board might have the temerity to change school names so that not one remains named after a treacherous Confederate general? OH NOES. What "BS" that would be.

And I'm sure they'll need to pull some extraordinary accounting shenanigans to hide all of that money for new signs and clothes.

[Anonymous]

I heard that FCPS has funding authority under two earlier bond referendums that have not been utilized - $630M. So this bond referendum will add another $315M in borrowing approvals. Can anyone confirm or explain why FCPS needs this money if it already has borrowing authority that it has not used?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole name change debacle should never have happened.

Exactly! If only the board hadn't named a bunch of schools after traitors against the United States--soon after Brown v. Board and right as the Civil Rights movement was picking steam (surely just a coincidence)--this debate would never have happened!

But alas, a prior generation saddled us with school names that any decent person should be ashamed of and that send a toxic signal, especially to black and Latino students, that the leaders of an armed rebellion fighting to relegate non-whites to permanent second-class citizenship deserve veneration in our history books and public consciousness.

Anonymous wrote:They could have dropped the Jeb and eliminated anything that said Jeb over years at no cost."

... leaving the school still named after a traitor who fought for the cause of slavery. Just more subtly so, which may even be worse.

I'm not saying that the process leading up to the name change. I don't particularly care for "Justice High" and don't entirely understand why it was chosen over other, seemingly better alternatives. But the outcome is still better than keeping the school named after a traitor like Stuart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other names will follow, and they'll cost even more money (let's see how much FCPS tries to bury in the capital budget), ... So it's time to vote NO and tell FCPS we're tired of their BS.

You mean the school board might have the temerity to change school names so that not one remains named after a treacherous Confederate general? OH NOES. What "BS" that would be.

And I'm sure they'll need to pull some extraordinary accounting shenanigans to hide all of that money for new signs and clothes.

If you think the Board's priorities should be changing school names, and building additions rather than building new schools and/or using existing capacity at under-enrolled schools, you should vote yes on this bond. I think this board's priorities are ridiculous and that it pays more attention to fringe social issues than to managing the available resources soundly, so I'll be voting against this bond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I think this board's priorities are ridiculous and that it pays more attention to fringe social issues than to managing the available resources soundly, so I'll be voting against this bond.

So it's a "fringe" position not to want to venerate traitors who took up arms against the United States? See, I would have thought that the "fringe" position was the contrary one. Who knew that Confederate generals were such mainstream, popular figures these days!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
They could have dropped the Jeb and eliminated anything that said Jeb over years at no cost."


... leaving the school still named after a traitor who fought for the cause of slavery. Just more subtly so, which may even be worse.

I'm not saying that the process leading up to the name change. I don't particularly care for "Justice High" and don't entirely understand why it was chosen over other, seemingly better alternatives. But the outcome is still better than keeping the school named after a traitor like Stuart.

No. The point was that it would NO LONGER have been named after Jeb. They could have removed all reference to him and just called it Stuart--as many had for years. Do you think of George Washington every time you hear "Washington, DC"?

And, your other points show a lack of understanding of other issues. You are using today's lens. The fact is that Lee and others were part of the fabric of Virginia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I think this board's priorities are ridiculous and that it pays more attention to fringe social issues than to managing the available resources soundly, so I'll be voting against this bond.

So it's a "fringe" position not to want to venerate traitors who took up arms against the United States? See, I would have thought that the "fringe" position was the contrary one. Who knew that Confederate generals were such mainstream, popular figures these days!

This name change movement only started in 2015. Are you suggesting people were really venerating Confederate figures in 2010 or 1998? The fact is that people associated the school names more with the surrounding community and the schools' traditions than with the namesakes.

But, either way, I'd be less concerned with the SJW fixation on school names if the School Board could demonstrate that it was otherwise exercising prudent management of FCPS's resources - i.e., looking to use to available capacity at schools like Lee and Mount Vernon, accelerating the overdue renovation at Falls Church, and moving promptly to build a new high school in western Fairfax that might discourage the continued flight of higher income families to Loudoun. But instead we get lectures on how painful names like "Stuart" are to a handful of people from the likes of Ryan McElveen, along with capital spending projects that are arbitrary and will only aggravate existing disparities between schools (West Potomac vs. Mount Vernon, Madison vs. Marshall, etc.)

Vote NO if you want to send a strong message that FCPS needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with something better.

[Anonymous]

bump - I heard that FCPS has funding authority under two earlier bond referendums that have not been utilized - $630M. So this bond referendum will add another $315M in borrowing approvals. Can anyone confirm or explain why FCPS needs this money if it already has borrowing authority that it has not used?