BOE - who are people voting for?

[Anonymous]

Here's the most recent BOE meeting:

https://mcpsmd.new.swagit.com/videos/302390

If you go to about 4h:16m in the Video (Item of DIsccussion 10), that is when they discuss school security. MCPS presents some action items from their 2019 report on security, and gives an update on where they are 5 years later (spoiler alert: not as far along as you'd expect). Notice the BOE members and their lack of hard-hitting questions. Now forward to 5h:45m and the student member speaks. He comes off as the best leader of all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meetings should be more frequent, more efficient and everyone comes prepared! Members need to devote full time to this gig! Oh that CO, staff from same departments can not even agree and there's inconsistent messages when have had to contact them unfortunately.

Sure, if you're amenable to paying them full time salaries.

It's a $3.3 billion budget in a highly regulated endeavor. If you want meaningful oversight, you have to pay the board full-time. It's pennies, relatively speaking, to empower this elected board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone highlight meaningful changes made by the current board? Lynne if you're still around in here, this one could be for you.

They have hired their own financial analyst and a deputy chief of staff, so I am hopeful they will be better equipped and prepared to provide oversight going forward. I also think the overdue changes in the HR processes in the wake of the scandal are meaningful.

Amazing it took an expose by a journalist at the Post to finally spur them into any action.

CO has been expert at stonewalling the board for years. So yeah, power of the press...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone highlight meaningful changes made by the current board? Lynne if you're still around in here, this one could be for you.

They have hired their own financial analyst and a deputy chief of staff, so I am hopeful they will be better equipped and prepared to provide oversight going forward. I also think the overdue changes in the HR processes in the wake of the scandal are meaningful.

Amazing it took an expose by a journalist at the Post to finally spur them into any action.

CO has been expert at stonewalling the board for years. So yeah, power of the press...

Honestly, having watched the CO in action, it’s not hard to poke holes in a lot of what they say and do. You just have to be willing to be perceived as not being “nice” to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look, I'm actually not really here for the crass comments about Mandel, but the substance is correct.

She's a right-wing Twitter figure with a long history of hateful rhetoric. She's a Republican running as a Democrat for political gain, and a white homeschooling parent seeking a position of authority over a majority Black/brown public school population.

Those are all disqualifying without a bunch of depersonalizing language.

Being white is disqualifying? Um, okay racist!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone highlight meaningful changes made by the current board? Lynne if you're still around in here, this one could be for you.

Well, firing the Superintendent was a significant change. I’m still not supporting any incumbents given that they agreed to pay her more than she had left in her contract, but it was a significant change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone highlight meaningful changes made by the current board? Lynne if you're still around in here, this one could be for you.

They have hired their own financial analyst and a deputy chief of staff, so I am hopeful they will be better equipped and prepared to provide oversight going forward. I also think the overdue changes in the HR processes in the wake of the scandal are meaningful.

they have HIRED a FA and a DCoS?! Another layer between the Board and us (you know the people who "hired" - voted the members). They have staff and still can't ask and get answers to questions concerning students, their safety and on other issues?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sort of boils down to 3 groups of choices (District 2,4, at-large):
1. Incumbents - Smondrowski, Evans, Harris
2. Apple ballot (teacher's union endorsed) - Zimerman, Stewart, Montoya
3. Rebels: Diaz, Mandel, Mofor

Sorry, couldn't come up with a better name for group 3, but they are all sort of consistent in wanting big change, SROs back in schools, and stuff like that.

So if you like how things are going, vote group 1.

If you like the teacher's union (keep in mind their 2022 apple ballot picks currently sit on the board, but aren't up for election this cycle), vote group 2.

If you think big changes are needed, vote group 3.

How does anyone justify voting 1 or 2 ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sort of boils down to 3 groups of choices (District 2,4, at-large):
1. Incumbents - Smondrowski, Evans, Harris
2. Apple ballot (teacher's union endorsed) - Zimerman, Stewart, Montoya
3. Rebels: Diaz, Mandel, Mofor

Sorry, couldn't come up with a better name for group 3, but they are all sort of consistent in wanting big change, SROs back in schools, and stuff like that.

So if you like how things are going, vote group 1.

If you like the teacher's union (keep in mind their 2022 apple ballot picks currently sit on the board, but aren't up for election this cycle), vote group 2.

If you think big changes are needed, vote group 3.

How does anyone justify voting 1 or 2 ?

How does anyone justify voting for group 3 - homeschooling parents and anti trans bigots?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sort of boils down to 3 groups of choices (District 2,4, at-large):
1. Incumbents - Smondrowski, Evans, Harris
2. Apple ballot (teacher's union endorsed) - Zimerman, Stewart, Montoya
3. Rebels: Diaz, Mandel, Mofor

Sorry, couldn't come up with a better name for group 3, but they are all sort of consistent in wanting big change, SROs back in schools, and stuff like that.

So if you like how things are going, vote group 1.

If you like the teacher's union (keep in mind their 2022 apple ballot picks currently sit on the board, but aren't up for election this cycle), vote group 2.

If you think big changes are needed, vote group 3.

How does anyone justify voting 1 or 2 ?

Just watch the video and it's really easy.

[Anonymous]

Diaz and Mandel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sort of boils down to 3 groups of choices (District 2,4, at-large):
1. Incumbents - Smondrowski, Evans, Harris
2. Apple ballot (teacher's union endorsed) - Zimerman, Stewart, Montoya
3. Rebels: Diaz, Mandel, Mofor

Sorry, couldn't come up with a better name for group 3, but they are all sort of consistent in wanting big change, SROs back in schools, and stuff like that.

So if you like how things are going, vote group 1.

If you like the teacher's union (keep in mind their 2022 apple ballot picks currently sit on the board, but aren't up for election this cycle), vote group 2.

If you think big changes are needed, vote group 3.

How does anyone justify voting 1 or 2 ?

How does anyone justify voting for group 3 - homeschooling parents and anti trans bigots?

In this thread I see info on Diaz and Mandel. What is Mofor's story?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sort of boils down to 3 groups of choices (District 2,4, at-large):
1. Incumbents - Smondrowski, Evans, Harris
2. Apple ballot (teacher's union endorsed) - Zimerman, Stewart, Montoya
3. Rebels: Diaz, Mandel, Mofor

Sorry, couldn't come up with a better name for group 3, but they are all sort of consistent in wanting big change, SROs back in schools, and stuff like that.

So if you like how things are going, vote group 1.

If you like the teacher's union (keep in mind their 2022 apple ballot picks currently sit on the board, but aren't up for election this cycle), vote group 2.

If you think big changes are needed, vote group 3.

How does anyone justify voting 1 or 2 ?

I will vote for group 2, except for Stewart, because I recognize that teachers know better than anyone that the central office needs better oversight. Teachers are the ones getting stuck with unfunded mandates, and the ones dealing with a generation of completely out of control youth with no support and no way of enforcing consequences for bad behavior.

If you talk to teachers, they have great ideas for how to improve the overall education situation for our collective students. So, I more or less trust them.to advise on candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone highlight meaningful changes made by the current board? Lynne if you're still around in here, this one could be for you.

They have hired their own financial analyst and a deputy chief of staff, so I am hopeful they will be better equipped and prepared to provide oversight going forward. I also think the overdue changes in the HR processes in the wake of the scandal are meaningful.

they have HIRED a FA and a DCoS?! Another layer between the Board and us (you know the people who "hired" - voted the members). They have staff and still can't ask and get answers to questions concerning students, their safety and on other issues?

You can characterize it as a layer of bureaucracy if you want, but arming the board with independent advisors is a good thing; otherwise, they are reliant on the superintendent's staff to give them information. That has worked poorly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone highlight meaningful changes made by the current board? Lynne if you're still around in here, this one could be for you.

They have hired their own financial analyst and a deputy chief of staff, so I am hopeful they will be better equipped and prepared to provide oversight going forward. I also think the overdue changes in the HR processes in the wake of the scandal are meaningful.

they have HIRED a FA and a DCoS?! Another layer between the Board and us (you know the people who "hired" - voted the members). They have staff and still can't ask and get answers to questions concerning students, their safety and on other issues?

You can characterize it as a layer of bureaucracy if you want, but arming the board with independent advisors is a good thing; otherwise, they are reliant on the superintendent's staff to give them information. That has worked poorly.

+1. I am actually feeling cautiously optimistic about this board now. Of course much will depend on who they hire as the new superintendent. But that will not be known until after the primary.