Board wants Monifa to step down

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If she's not responsible for the organization then what is the point of her job? She needs to take responsibility for the organization she is running and step down. I guess she'd rather have the extra money pushing her out than respect. Where will she be able to go next?


DCPS?


Wherever she goes is her business and there are bigger issues at the table. I could personally give less than 2 shreds of a damn, to be quite honest. How dare she expect people to go above and beyond and do this and that when she couldn’t do the bare minimum. If she wanted the security of not having to worry about that, she would’ve led with integrity, transparency, and knowing her core. There’s nobody in an organization that talented that’s worth going to bat for.

She’ll probably do what other disgraced former superintendents have done: she’ll be a “senior advisor” for a think tank or university education department, or she’ll be an overpaid “equity” consultant for other districts, where all she does is use unsubstantive buzzwords. Oh wait, that’s what she does now.

Her name is too tarnished to get another superintendency anytime soon. She’s what the kids call “cooked”. I’m sure she was probably a good person as a principal, but something about Hungerford Drive and moving up within this district creates toxicity in so many people. She probably saw what those being promoted around her were doing and copied that. But once you’re the superintendent, you have to be independent of the “friendships” you’ve made along the way. You use them to get things done, you don’t drink with them. It’s business.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The Board has known for months that McKnight withheld information from them. What have they been doing all this time?

Gotta be careful when trying to break a contract. Very careful. Unless you want a 7 figure judgment against you.


Realistically, MCPS is going to have to pay out the rest of the contract. The only way they could get into trouble is if they start making accusations against her (either out of spite or to try to argue for firing for cause).


So, looking at her contract, it appears MCPS could fire her without cause and they'd only be on the hook to pay her one year's severance.

Maybe that's why she wants to fight termination. I don't think she'd get a similarly-paying job within a year, and I don't think she and her husband have a lot of money.

Should have saved up, especially if she didn't spring for a MoCo residence.


Regardless, it's interesting she seems to want to fight this when the board has broad authority to fire her under her contract. What is she hoping to achieve, versus quietly negotiating a less painful exit?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The Board has known for months that McKnight withheld information from them. What have they been doing all this time?

Gotta be careful when trying to break a contract. Very careful. Unless you want a 7 figure judgment against you.


Realistically, MCPS is going to have to pay out the rest of the contract. The only way they could get into trouble is if they start making accusations against her (either out of spite or to try to argue for firing for cause).


So, looking at her contract, it appears MCPS could fire her without cause and they'd only be on the hook to pay her one year's severance.

Maybe that's why she wants to fight termination. I don't think she'd get a similarly-paying job within a year, and I don't think she and her husband have a lot of money.

Should have saved up, especially if she didn't spring for a MoCo residence.


Regardless, it's interesting she seems to want to fight this when the board has broad authority to fire her under her contract. What is she hoping to achieve, versus quietly negotiating a less painful exit?


Honestly, I think it is the same impulse that keeps JB posting on this board. Neither of them have ever seen a consequence before, so they don't know it when it comes for them.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The Board has known for months that McKnight withheld information from them. What have they been doing all this time?

Gotta be careful when trying to break a contract. Very careful. Unless you want a 7 figure judgment against you.


Realistically, MCPS is going to have to pay out the rest of the contract. The only way they could get into trouble is if they start making accusations against her (either out of spite or to try to argue for firing for cause).


So, looking at her contract, it appears MCPS could fire her without cause and they'd only be on the hook to pay her one year's severance.

Maybe that's why she wants to fight termination. I don't think she'd get a similarly-paying job within a year, and I don't think she and her husband have a lot of money.


They have enough money. They are probably enjoying the super raise but they will manage. Someone will hire her.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The Board has known for months that McKnight withheld information from them. What have they been doing all this time?

Gotta be careful when trying to break a contract. Very careful. Unless you want a 7 figure judgment against you.


Realistically, MCPS is going to have to pay out the rest of the contract. The only way they could get into trouble is if they start making accusations against her (either out of spite or to try to argue for firing for cause).


So, looking at her contract, it appears MCPS could fire her without cause and they'd only be on the hook to pay her one year's severance.

Maybe that's why she wants to fight termination. I don't think she'd get a similarly-paying job within a year, and I don't think she and her husband have a lot of money.

Should have saved up, especially if she didn't spring for a MoCo residence.


You would think they could fire her on that. She should have rented a room or efficiency and stayed there a few nights a week.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The Board has known for months that McKnight withheld information from them. What have they been doing all this time?

Gotta be careful when trying to break a contract. Very careful. Unless you want a 7 figure judgment against you.


Realistically, MCPS is going to have to pay out the rest of the contract. The only way they could get into trouble is if they start making accusations against her (either out of spite or to try to argue for firing for cause).


So, looking at her contract, it appears MCPS could fire her without cause and they'd only be on the hook to pay her one year's severance.

Maybe that's why she wants to fight termination. I don't think she'd get a similarly-paying job within a year, and I don't think she and her husband have a lot of money.

Should have saved up, especially if she didn't spring for a MoCo residence.


Regardless, it's interesting she seems to want to fight this when the board has broad authority to fire her under her contract. What is she hoping to achieve, versus quietly negotiating a less painful exit?


She's clearly signaling that she's a victim of racism and sexism. But that's hard to square with an all-female board that only has two white women on it.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The Board has known for months that McKnight withheld information from them. What have they been doing all this time?

Gotta be careful when trying to break a contract. Very careful. Unless you want a 7 figure judgment against you.


Realistically, MCPS is going to have to pay out the rest of the contract. The only way they could get into trouble is if they start making accusations against her (either out of spite or to try to argue for firing for cause).


So, looking at her contract, it appears MCPS could fire her without cause and they'd only be on the hook to pay her one year's severance.

Maybe that's why she wants to fight termination. I don't think she'd get a similarly-paying job within a year, and I don't think she and her husband have a lot of money.

Should have saved up, especially if she didn't spring for a MoCo residence.


Regardless, it's interesting she seems to want to fight this when the board has broad authority to fire her under her contract. What is she hoping to achieve, versus quietly negotiating a less painful exit?


IMO, she's a combative person and her response on this is partly reflexive. I believe she may think she can win the PR war on this and drain the budget further with a large payout, but I am not sure she can. She can only build more negative media hits against herself, which may not serve her well when looking for new work. It appears the board has known for months that she lied to them about Beidleman, and the members appear to have carefully built the case surrounding termination. Whatever else the BOE is, I'm sure its members know the importance of due diligence in this matter, their one legal prerogative over the superintendent. And if McKnight was truly surprised when they asked her to resign, that says something about McKnight, who should have realized that she would get called out on Beidleman.
Anonymous
Please step down and please let level heads find a replacement!
Anonymous
The next board meeting (2/6) is gonna be so awkward.
Anonymous
Thirteen pages of speculation when all we know is that the board asked her to step down. No one posting here has any idea whether the board has any concrete information that justify asking her to step down.
Anonymous
The board also needs to go as they are equally responsible.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:The board also needs to go as they are equally responsible.

Rank the BOE members in order from most culpable to least culpable.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The board also needs to go as they are equally responsible.

Rank the BOE members in order from most culpable to least culpable.


All of them are responsible.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:The board also needs to go as they are equally responsible.


How on earth are they equally responsible? McKnight and her deputies orchestrated a coverup to keep the information from the board and the public.
Anonymous
It's interesting that her dissertation was based on interviews with this group of other MS principals
https://api.drum.lib.umd.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/81271894-d2b2-4cfd-b767-909cdf1c81f8/content
Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Go to: