New Name for JEB Stuart HS - 9/16 Community Vote

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's actually proceeding as contemplated. The recent community survey suggests an overwhelming preference for changing the name (Stuart received @ 18% of the total votes cast, and other names @82%).

Really? That's the plan? Let the community vote on seventy-something names, then ignore the one that got the most votes?

It's the exact opposite of ignoring it. It's recognizing that 82% prefer something other than the minor variation on the current name.

They've already decided to change the name of JEB Stuart and this confirms Stuart without the initials (aka "Headless JEB") isn't even close to a "compromise" replacement.

The board decided that Stuart was a viable alternative, the community voted on it, and now you are indeed arguing that the fact that Stuart won should be ignored.

Indeed. The community voted on it, and 82% of the votes went to other options - in a field of 73 names. They cannot plausibly keep "Stuart" without subjecting themselves to unprecedented levels of ridicule.

It would be like having an election with one incumbent Republican and 72 Democratic primary candidates, and claiming that the Republican deserves the slot because the Democratic candidates split 72 ways, regardless of the fact that the Democrat would trounce the Republican in a general election - indeed, just like Karen Keys-Gammara trounced Chris Grisafe in the recent special election.

Seems to me that the school and school board are already subjects of ridicule.

If Democrats ran 72 candidates in a general election, and a lone Republican won more of the vote than any one of them, that Republican would indeed get the slot. You're twisting this in bizarre ways to negate the results of the vote. Again, a vote for Peace Valley does NOT equal a vote for Barbara Rose Johns, no matter how many times you insist that it does.

The keepers are the subject of ridicule though their continued, outdated allegiance to a Confederate general who fought for slavery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's actually proceeding as contemplated. The recent community survey suggests an overwhelming preference for changing the name (Stuart received @ 18% of the total votes cast, and other names @82%).

Really? That's the plan? Let the community vote on seventy-something names, then ignore the one that got the most votes?

It's the exact opposite of ignoring it. It's recognizing that 82% prefer something other than the minor variation on the current name.

They've already decided to change the name of JEB Stuart and this confirms Stuart without the initials (aka "Headless JEB") isn't even close to a "compromise" replacement.

The board decided that Stuart was a viable alternative, the community voted on it, and now you are indeed arguing that the fact that Stuart won should be ignored.

Indeed. The community voted on it, and 82% of the votes went to other options - in a field of 73 names. They cannot plausibly keep "Stuart" without subjecting themselves to unprecedented levels of ridicule.

It would be like having an election with one incumbent Republican and 72 Democratic primary candidates, and claiming that the Republican deserves the slot because the Democratic candidates split 72 ways, regardless of the fact that the Democrat would trounce the Republican in a general election - indeed, just like Karen Keys-Gammara trounced Chris Grisafe in the recent special election.

Seems to me that the school and school board are already subjects of ridicule.

If Democrats ran 72 candidates in a general election, and a lone Republican won more of the vote than any one of them, that Republican would indeed get the slot. You're twisting this in bizarre ways to negate the results of the vote. Again, a vote for Peace Valley does NOT equal a vote for Barbara Rose Johns, no matter how many times you insist that it does.

The keepers are the subject of ridicule though their continued, outdated allegiance to a Confederate general who fought for slavery.

Only a few "keepers" give a fig about JEB Stuart, the general. Most just care deeply about the school and think that the time, energy, and money devoted to this effort would be better spent elsewhere. This is a school that only recently regained full accreditation!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's actually proceeding as contemplated. The recent community survey suggests an overwhelming preference for changing the name (Stuart received @ 18% of the total votes cast, and other names @82%).

Really? That's the plan? Let the community vote on seventy-something names, then ignore the one that got the most votes?

It's the exact opposite of ignoring it. It's recognizing that 82% prefer something other than the minor variation on the current name.

They've already decided to change the name of JEB Stuart and this confirms Stuart without the initials (aka "Headless JEB") isn't even close to a "compromise" replacement.

The board decided that Stuart was a viable alternative, the community voted on it, and now you are indeed arguing that the fact that Stuart won should be ignored.

Indeed. The community voted on it, and 82% of the votes went to other options - in a field of 73 names. They cannot plausibly keep "Stuart" without subjecting themselves to unprecedented levels of ridicule.

It would be like having an election with one incumbent Republican and 72 Democratic primary candidates, and claiming that the Republican deserves the slot because the Democratic candidates split 72 ways, regardless of the fact that the Democrat would trounce the Republican in a general election - indeed, just like Karen Keys-Gammara trounced Chris Grisafe in the recent special election.

Seems to me that the school and school board are already subjects of ridicule.

If Democrats ran 72 candidates in a general election, and a lone Republican won more of the vote than any one of them, that Republican would indeed get the slot. You're twisting this in bizarre ways to negate the results of the vote. Again, a vote for Peace Valley does NOT equal a vote for Barbara Rose Johns, no matter how many times you insist that it does.

The keepers are the subject of ridicule though their continued, outdated allegiance to a Confederate general who fought for slavery.

Only a few "keepers" give a fig about JEB Stuart, the general. Most just care deeply about the school and think that the time, energy, and money devoted to this effort would be better spent elsewhere. This is a school that only recently regained full accreditation!

Most of the "keepers" I've spoken to go on about erasing history, nothing about cost. Many of the keepers are people who no longer have kids at Stuart. The point is, the rules say the board has ultimate say in the name, so they can stick with Stuart (with only 18% of the vote) because it got the most votes or it can change it because 82% voted for a change. The rules say it is entirely up to them. Regardless of what they decide, it won't be "yet another change of the rules" because they basically wrote rules that say they can do whatever they want.

[Anonymous]

The keepers are the subject of ridicule though their continued, outdated allegiance to a Confederate general who fought for slavery.

The "keepers" are not the topic here. They already lost.

The "voters" chose Stuart. Why? Money saved for the taxpayer. Less confusion for the graduates an students. Hopefully, money saved for the parents. Lots of reasons.

Some of the responses on here do not even make sense. The person who said it would only cost $200K, for example. And, yet, at the SB meeting it was easily documented that it will cost at least $650K--and that is the minimum.

And, I'm sorry, but Barbara Johns and Thurgood Marshall are not the same person. I don't see how you can count them together--that is, unless the whole purpose of this exercise is different from what I had thought.

If the SB chooses not to go with Stuart, they are dumber than I thought.

How can you keep changing the rules?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The keepers are the subject of ridicule though their continued, outdated allegiance to a Confederate general who fought for slavery.

The "keepers" are not the topic here. They already lost.

The "voters" chose Stuart. Why? Money saved for the taxpayer. Less confusion for the graduates an students. Hopefully, money saved for the parents. Lots of reasons.

Some of the responses on here do not even make sense. The person who said it would only cost $200K, for example. And, yet, at the SB meeting it was easily documented that it will cost at least $650K--and that is the minimum.

And, I'm sorry, but Barbara Johns and Thurgood Marshall are not the same person. I don't see how you can count them together--that is, unless the whole purpose of this exercise is different from what I had thought.

If the SB chooses not to go with Stuart, they are dumber than I thought.

How can you keep changing the rules?

You must not be familiar with the regulations at all. The community vote is only advisory, and what it primarily tells the School Board is that there's a hard core group of keepers who want Stuart, Stuart, and more Stuart, and everybody else - who cast 82% of their votes for a name other than Stuart.

There's absolutely nothing in the rules or regulations to curtail the School Board's discretion in deciding whether a new name is appropriate, and reaffirming the Confederate General's name would be a fiasco,

As for Johns and Marshall, they are not the same person, but they are both civil rights icons, and the School Board members would be ill-advised to ignore what the combined support for Marshall and Johns signifies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Most of the "keepers" I've spoken to go on about erasing history, nothing about cost. Many of the keepers are people who no longer have kids at Stuart. The point is, the rules say the board has ultimate say in the name, so they can stick with Stuart (with only 18% of the vote) because it got the most votes or it can change it because 82% voted for a change. The rules say it is entirely up to them. Regardless of what they decide, it won't be "yet another change of the rules" because they basically wrote rules that say they can do whatever they want.

Exactly. It's amazing how many of the keepers are old white people with no kids at Stuart who are bent out of shape over the possibility that FCPS might actually pick a school name that honors a woman or a minority. They keep claiming the School Board is going to "change the rules" to screw them over, when they are too mad and lazy to read them in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Exactly. It's amazing how many of the keepers are old white people with no kids at Stuart who are bent out of shape over the possibility that FCPS might actually pick a school name that honors a woman or a minority. They keep claiming the School Board is going to "change the rules" to screw them over, when they are too mad and lazy to read them in the first place.

LOL! Keep changing those rules until you get the result you want. So, even though "Stuart" won, it should be "Justice" because you think so. Makes NO sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. It's amazing how many of the keepers are old white people with no kids at Stuart who are bent out of shape over the possibility that FCPS might actually pick a school name that honors a woman or a minority. They keep claiming the School Board is going to "change the rules" to screw them over, when they are too mad and lazy to read them in the first place.

LOL! Keep changing those rules until you get the result you want. So, even though "Stuart" won, it should be "Justice" because you think so. Makes NO sense.

What part of the vote is not binding and is only meant to advise the board of what the community thinks do you not understand? There is no winning. They can interpret the results however they want. They can pick Schooly McSchoolface if the want and be within the rules. They specifically made it their ultimate decision so they could look at all the votes and consider factors such as a majority of the votes going to names associated with ending segregation of schools, while 18 percent selected Stuart. They can decide that 18 percent is a sufficient threshold, or they can look at the nature of the other votes. They, as the school board, get to decide. The only name that will "win" is the name they select. Let's see what that is and which side will be complaining about the rules being changed and the process being rigged, despite the rules being clearly stated from the beginning of the process.

[Anonymous]

What part of the vote is not binding and is only meant to advise the board of what the community thinks do you not understand? There is no winning. They can interpret the results however they want. They can pick Schooly McSchoolface if the want and be within the rules. They specifically made it their ultimate decision so they could look at all the votes and consider factors such as a majority of the votes going to names associated with ending segregation of schools, while 18 percent selected Stuart. They can decide that 18 percent is a sufficient threshold, or they can look at the nature of the other votes. They, as the school board, get to decide. The only name that will "win" is the name they select. Let's see what that is and which side will be complaining about the rules being changed and the process being rigged, despite the rules being clearly stated from the beginning of the process.

You are right. They can do whatever they want. Two years ago Evans said in an email that her constituents would be very happy with Marshall (not even considering that there was already a Marshall High.)

But, when you establish procedures and repeatedly ignore the responses (as in the first survey which supported keeping the name), people question your sincerity.

Selecting" Stuart" would save the taxpayers @ $3/4 million. Clearly, you do not care.

[Anonymous]

They specifically made it their ultimate decision so they could look at all the votes and consider factors such as a majority of the votes going to names associated with ending segregation of schools, while 18 percent selected Stuart.

No, the majority did NOT select names associated with ending segregation of schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They specifically made it their ultimate decision so they could look at all the votes and consider factors such as a majority of the votes going to names associated with ending segregation of schools, while 18 percent selected Stuart.

No, the majority did NOT select names associated with ending segregation of schools.

That is true, but Marshall litigated the Brown v. Board of Education suit, which included a lawsuit in which Johns was a plaintiff, and Marshall and Johns collectively received both far more weighted votes and far more votes than Stuart. I don't see how the Board sees that as anything other than a mandate for change, particularly when you also take into account other names that received a lot of votes, such as Peace Valley, Mendez, Munson Hill, Crossroads and Anderson.

Most people want a new name that is not Stuart, and they want it sooner rather than later.

[Anonymous]

You people are missing the point. The thing that upsets the actual “real” Stuart community, including students, parents, and people that actually live in this community is that:

a. The School Board decided to change the name against the MAJORITY of the actual communities wishes.

b. The board was infiltrated by outside political groups with their own agenda.

c. The “outside sources” that have infiltrated this process are the NAACP and its affiliates, they have been on a decade’s long crusade to “force” communities to change the names of streets, school, libraries, etc. in an attempt to rewrite America history to an alternate reality that is more palatable to their sense of purpose. Their tactics are unethical and illegal, using coercion, corruption, and threats to force their agenda upon local governing bodies (and the communities that they govern).

One thing is very clear... an overwhelming majority of the “local” community was against the name change in the first place, but the school board completely ignored that, why? Because of threats and intimidation by the NAACP.

Anyone that opposes the views of the NAACP are automatically labeled as “racists” to shut them up, so everyone (including politicians) is afraid to even mention the NAACP and their agenda to rewrite and distort actual American history. To challenge this agenda is political suicide.

So what does this mean? The NAACP, who are the minority view in this case, are forcing their will upon the majority of Americans. By definition this goes against the constitutionally protected equal rights that the NAACP purports to support, and takes the right of choice away from the majority that oppose this agenda.

The NAACP should be investigated as its methods fit the definition domestic terrorism and their “removing/renaming” agenda is the root cause of a great deal of civil unrest in America. This is not a harmless agenda, it is costing taxpayers billions of dollars all across the country and now people are losing their lives (Charlottesville).

The majority of Americans are not in favor of glorifying the south or slavery, but for the NAACP to try and rewrite history is just plain wrong.

[Anonymous]

NAACP should pay

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NAACP should pay

Descendants of the racist school board members should pay. As should all of the "keepers" who want it for "history".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You people are missing the point. The thing that upsets the actual “real” Stuart community, including students, parents, and people that actually live in this community is that:

a. The School Board decided to change the name against the MAJORITY of the actual communities wishes.

b. The board was infiltrated by outside political groups with their own agenda.

c. The “outside sources” that have infiltrated this process are the NAACP and its affiliates, they have been on a decade’s long crusade to “force” communities to change the names of streets, school, libraries, etc. in an attempt to rewrite America history to an alternate reality that is more palatable to their sense of purpose. Their tactics are unethical and illegal, using coercion, corruption, and threats to force their agenda upon local governing bodies (and the communities that they govern).

One thing is very clear... an overwhelming majority of the “local” community was against the name change in the first place, but the school board completely ignored that, why? Because of threats and intimidation by the NAACP.

Anyone that opposes the views of the NAACP are automatically labeled as “racists” to shut them up, so everyone (including politicians) is afraid to even mention the NAACP and their agenda to rewrite and distort actual American history. To challenge this agenda is political suicide.

So what does this mean? The NAACP, who are the minority view in this case, are forcing their will upon the majority of Americans. By definition this goes against the constitutionally protected equal rights that the NAACP purports to support, and takes the right of choice away from the majority that oppose this agenda.

The NAACP should be investigated as its methods fit the definition domestic terrorism and their “removing/renaming” agenda is the root cause of a great deal of civil unrest in America. This is not a harmless agenda, it is costing taxpayers billions of dollars all across the country and now people are losing their lives (Charlottesville).

The majority of Americans are not in favor of glorifying the south or slavery, but for the NAACP to try and rewrite history is just plain wrong.

I'm a member of the "real" Stuart community and voted for a change. I was not intimidated by anyone, I was not influenced by outside sources. I've never spoken to anyone from the NAACP about this. I've only discussed this among neighbors and friends. You can keep claiming that the NAACP is responsible for the votes for Marshall and Johns as much as you want to, it still won't change the fact that "real" community members voted. And the last time I checked, the NAACP did not drive the car into the crowd in Charlottesville. One of the keepers did. That was an act of domestic terrorism.