Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t the Clarksburg case brought based on violation of the Open Meetings Act? Are the Wootton parents claiming this?

Not specifically but it sounds like they are hoping to make a similar argument about process.

[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:Damnit - now we have to get to 200 pages. Think we can do it?

We’ve got a week to go, is someone still tracking the score here? Any newcomers to the competition?

Yes of course… things have been ramped up by the posters doing PR on here for the lawsuit group

Won’t you be surprised when it’s filed.

Why would we be surprised? Clarksburg filed a lawsuit and the Wootton community is more vocal and passionate.
We'll see if it gets beyond the initial dismissal phase.

If it does, an injunction will likely follow. Depositions after that, etc. in the meantime, Crown will be a holding school for quite a while - and Magruder will push even harder for renovation.

An injunction for this temper tantrum is hilarious.

Any lawyer that’s behind this is dancing their way to their new PJ.

Was the Mahmoud case that ended up in front of the Supreme Court also a temper tantrum? Very expensive for MCPS.

Why are you reaching for that case when the Clarksburg boundary study case seems more relevant?

You can read the decision and appeal that the Maryland State of Education ruled on back then. We'll see what the legal arguments for the Wootton lawsuit and how they differ, but this seems like a high bar.

https://marylandpublicschools.org/stateboard/Documents/legalopinions/2020/122020/VanHerksen-et-al.Op.No.20-45.pdf

Clarksburg is highly distinguishable. I’m sure the Wootton parents (many of who are lawyers) have studied that situation in great detail. MCPS should be worried with its recent litigation track record.

There are also many lawyers who have looked at it in depth and concluded no strong case and advised against this route.
And as another poster said- the losses being cited as a track record have no bearing on this issue from a legal perspective, zero.

File your suit, lose your money, cost the taxpayers money, and maybe even cause a slight delay. But the outcome will not change.

Those the same ones who told Taylor it was legal to violate the law for Mahmoud case and EV bus case?

Oh, and don’t forget about the IG report about MCPS $1M misuse of funds from just last year.

Nobody has claimed that MCPS hasn’t had its issues. It would be wonderful if it didn’t have a history of issues.

The point is we don’t agree with YOU and your specific issues on the boundary study. Plus, the cherry on top is we condemn your racism, classism, entitlement, etc etc

Hope that helps.

Toodles

[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:Damnit - now we have to get to 200 pages. Think we can do it?

We’ve got a week to go, is someone still tracking the score here? Any newcomers to the competition?

Yes of course… things have been ramped up by the posters doing PR on here for the lawsuit group

Won’t you be surprised when it’s filed.

Why would we be surprised? Clarksburg filed a lawsuit and the Wootton community is more vocal and passionate.
We'll see if it gets beyond the initial dismissal phase.

If it does, an injunction will likely follow. Depositions after that, etc. in the meantime, Crown will be a holding school for quite a while - and Magruder will push even harder for renovation.

An injunction for this temper tantrum is hilarious.

Any lawyer that’s behind this is dancing their way to their new PJ.

Was the Mahmoud case that ended up in front of the Supreme Court also a temper tantrum? Very expensive for MCPS.

Why are you reaching for that case when the Clarksburg boundary study case seems more relevant?

You can read the decision and appeal that the Maryland State of Education ruled on back then. We'll see what the legal arguments for the Wootton lawsuit and how they differ, but this seems like a high bar.

https://marylandpublicschools.org/stateboard/Documents/legalopinions/2020/122020/VanHerksen-et-al.Op.No.20-45.pdf

Clarksburg is highly distinguishable. I’m sure the Wootton parents (many of who are lawyers) have studied that situation in great detail. MCPS should be worried with its recent litigation track record.

There are also many lawyers who have looked at it in depth and concluded no strong case and advised against this route.
And as another poster said- the losses being cited as a track record have no bearing on this issue from a legal perspective, zero.

File your suit, lose your money, cost the taxpayers money, and maybe even cause a slight delay. But the outcome will not change.

Those the same ones who told Taylor it was legal to violate the law for Mahmoud case and EV bus case?

Oh, and don’t forget about the IG report about MCPS $1M misuse of funds from just last year.

Nobody has claimed that MCPS hasn’t had its issues. It would be wonderful if it didn’t have a history of issues.

The point is we don’t agree with YOU and your specific issues on the boundary study. Plus, the cherry on top is we condemn your racism, classism, entitlement, etc etc

Hope that helps.

Toodles

Who is “we”? You mean that you don’t agree. Glad it’s not up to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t the Clarksburg case brought based on violation of the Open Meetings Act? Are the Wootton parents claiming this?

Not specifically but it sounds like they are hoping to make a similar argument about process.

There’s a huge difference about allegedly secret meetings and failure to follow regulations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t the Clarksburg case brought based on violation of the Open Meetings Act? Are the Wootton parents claiming this?

Not specifically but it sounds like they are hoping to make a similar argument about process.

There’s a huge difference about allegedly secret meetings and failure to follow regulations.

Sure! But seemingly very similar quality of evidence

[Anonymous]

https://youtu.be/9a9n3B7W0vg?si=o-wtLdYmnjbOmJKv

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t the Clarksburg case brought based on violation of the Open Meetings Act? Are the Wootton parents claiming this?

Not specifically but it sounds like they are hoping to make a similar argument about process.

There’s a huge difference about allegedly secret meetings and failure to follow regulations.

Sure! But seemingly very similar quality of evidence

Actually, Wootton has much more evidence, including MCPS emails. Plus, the chronology and the BOE’s own conduct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t the Clarksburg case brought based on violation of the Open Meetings Act? Are the Wootton parents claiming this?

Not specifically but it sounds like they are hoping to make a similar argument about process.

There’s a huge difference about allegedly secret meetings and failure to follow regulations.

Sure! But seemingly very similar quality of evidence

Actually, Wootton has much more evidence, including MCPS emails. Plus, the chronology and the BOE’s own conduct.

Ok, file already and stop with the threats.

[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:Damnit - now we have to get to 200 pages. Think we can do it?

We’ve got a week to go, is someone still tracking the score here? Any newcomers to the competition?

Yes of course… things have been ramped up by the posters doing PR on here for the lawsuit group

Won’t you be surprised when it’s filed.

Why would we be surprised? Clarksburg filed a lawsuit and the Wootton community is more vocal and passionate.
We'll see if it gets beyond the initial dismissal phase.

If it does, an injunction will likely follow. Depositions after that, etc. in the meantime, Crown will be a holding school for quite a while - and Magruder will push even harder for renovation.

An injunction for this temper tantrum is hilarious.

Any lawyer that’s behind this is dancing their way to their new PJ.

Was the Mahmoud case that ended up in front of the Supreme Court also a temper tantrum? Very expensive for MCPS.

Why are you reaching for that case when the Clarksburg boundary study case seems more relevant?

You can read the decision and appeal that the Maryland State of Education ruled on back then. We'll see what the legal arguments for the Wootton lawsuit and how they differ, but this seems like a high bar.

https://marylandpublicschools.org/stateboard/Documents/legalopinions/2020/122020/VanHerksen-et-al.Op.No.20-45.pdf

Clarksburg is highly distinguishable. I’m sure the Wootton parents (many of who are lawyers) have studied that situation in great detail. MCPS should be worried with its recent litigation track record.

There are also many lawyers who have looked at it in depth and concluded no strong case and advised against this route.
And as another poster said- the losses being cited as a track record have no bearing on this issue from a legal perspective, zero.

File your suit, lose your money, cost the taxpayers money, and maybe even cause a slight delay. But the outcome will not change.

Those the same ones who told Taylor it was legal to violate the law for Mahmoud case and EV bus case?

Oh, and don’t forget about the IG report about MCPS $1M misuse of funds from just last year.

Nobody has claimed that MCPS hasn’t had its issues. It would be wonderful if it didn’t have a history of issues.

The point is we don’t agree with YOU and your specific issues on the boundary study. Plus, the cherry on top is we condemn your racism, classism, entitlement, etc etc

Hope that helps.

Toodles

Who is “we”? You mean that you don’t agree. Glad it’s not up to you.

Ditto. Oh look “we” agree on something. Alert the press.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t the Clarksburg case brought based on violation of the Open Meetings Act? Are the Wootton parents claiming this?

Not specifically but it sounds like they are hoping to make a similar argument about process.

There’s a huge difference about allegedly secret meetings and failure to follow regulations.

Sure! But seemingly very similar quality of evidence

Actually, Wootton has much more evidence, including MCPS emails. Plus, the chronology and the BOE’s own conduct.

Ok, file already and stop with the threats.

Look up “ripeness” in a law dictionary

[Anonymous]

Even Rockville's own AVG said that the route to Wootton victory "is political and not legal." And given that his entire job is to keep all the good things in Rockville, I think this is significant. Even they know they don't have a legal case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even Rockville's own AVG said that the route to Wootton victory "is political and not legal." And given that his entire job is to keep all the good things in Rockville, I think this is significant. Even they know they don't have a legal case.

What is AVG? Average?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even Rockville's own AVG said that the route to Wootton victory "is political and not legal." And given that his entire job is to keep all the good things in Rockville, I think this is significant. Even they know they don't have a legal case.

A lawsuit will make political support for Option H evaporate No politician will want to support it if the facts show the recommendation was pre-determined and community engagement was a sham.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even Rockville's own AVG said that the route to Wootton victory "is political and not legal." And given that his entire job is to keep all the good things in Rockville, I think this is significant. Even they know they don't have a legal case.

A lawsuit will make political support for Option H evaporate No politician will want to support it if the facts show the recommendation was pre-determined and community engagement was a sham.

Too little, too late. Move or move on-the choice is yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even Rockville's own AVG said that the route to Wootton victory "is political and not legal." And given that his entire job is to keep all the good things in Rockville, I think this is significant. Even they know they don't have a legal case.

A lawsuit will make political support for Option H evaporate No politician will want to support it if the facts show the recommendation was pre-determined and community engagement was a sham.

Too little, too late. Move or move on-the choice is yours.

Nope. Right on time. As soon as the BOE votes.

What are you afraid of?