BOE - who are people voting for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apple ballot. That's who everyone needs to vote for.

lol. Nice try.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get started on next election already. How do we get better candidates and how do you increase number of more qualified candidates? What should those quals be?

You increase the number of qualified candidates by paying the board members a reasonable salary for a difficult full-time job.

More pay will not help. Most of the boe members work full time jobs and are double dipping.

That's exactly why more pay will help. You want qualified people who see board membership as their full-time job, and who don't need to work another job at the same time.

Of course they will continue their employment in less you make it a full time job and that’s not how boards work. Then it would be an mcps management team. Mcps has central office who is incompetent.

That’s precisely what we want to be: management and oversight of MCPS. The BOE needs to be full-time. Part-time status with no independent staff from management is not working.

The point of the board is to be independent, not salary employees of MCPS. They really are unnecessary as they are not providing any oversight and have no idea what they are doing and making so many mistakes and allowing so many bad things to go on. They wouldn't be missed at all if we didn't have one. That would be a huge cost savings.

The BOE members are MD state employees, not MCPS employees. Their salaries are set in state law, but those are different for each county's board, based, effectively, on each county government's request (and funding). The County Council had hit pause on an effort to reconsider that compensation, but has let their own deadline for unpausing pass.

Getting more qualified individuals in these oversight positions, and paying them for the actual time that is needed to perform the oversight, would tend to see their not allowing so many bad things to go on. Eliminating the oversight would provide no check at all to those bad things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get started on next election already. How do we get better candidates and how do you increase number of more qualified candidates? What should those quals be?

You increase the number of qualified candidates by paying the board members a reasonable salary for a difficult full-time job.

More pay will not help. Most of the boe members work full time jobs and are double dipping.

That's exactly why more pay will help. You want qualified people who see board membership as their full-time job, and who don't need to work another job at the same time.

Of course they will continue their employment in less you make it a full time job and that’s not how boards work. Then it would be an mcps management team. Mcps has central office who is incompetent.

That’s precisely what we want to be: management and oversight of MCPS. The BOE needs to be full-time. Part-time status with no independent staff from management is not working.

The point of the board is to be independent, not salary employees of MCPS. They really are unnecessary as they are not providing any oversight and have no idea what they are doing and making so many mistakes and allowing so many bad things to go on. They wouldn't be missed at all if we didn't have one. That would be a huge cost savings.

The BOE members are MD state employees, not MCPS employees. Their salaries are set in state law, but those are different for each county's board, based, effectively, on each county government's request (and funding). The County Council had hit pause on an effort to reconsider that compensation, but has let their own deadline for unpausing pass.

Getting more qualified individuals in these oversight positions, and paying them for the actual time that is needed to perform the oversight, would tend to see their not allowing so many bad things to go on. Eliminating the oversight would provide no check at all to those bad things.

I agree in principle, but making them full-time, full-salaried positions would attract the wrong people. The BoE should have independent, full-time staff under their own control, but the BoE positions themselves should be designed such that working parents can hold them. That would mean substantially reducing the time obligations of the Board itself.

[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:Let's get started on next election already. How do we get better candidates and how do you increase number of more qualified candidates? What should those quals be?

You increase the number of qualified candidates by paying the board members a reasonable salary for a difficult full-time job.

More pay will not help. Most of the boe members work full time jobs and are double dipping.

That's exactly why more pay will help. You want qualified people who see board membership as their full-time job, and who don't need to work another job at the same time.

Of course they will continue their employment in less you make it a full time job and that’s not how boards work. Then it would be an mcps management team. Mcps has central office who is incompetent.

That’s precisely what we want to be: management and oversight of MCPS. The BOE needs to be full-time. Part-time status with no independent staff from management is not working.

The point of the board is to be independent, not salary employees of MCPS. They really are unnecessary as they are not providing any oversight and have no idea what they are doing and making so many mistakes and allowing so many bad things to go on. They wouldn't be missed at all if we didn't have one. That would be a huge cost savings.

So your solution to the BOE’s oversight failings is to get rid of it completely? How does that make any sense?

It would save a lot of money. There is little point to the BOE given how they have run things over the last 10-15 years.

This is a pointless line of argument. The board is going to continue to exist whether you like it or not.

What is the point of the board? We spend a fortune on staff, office space and so much more for the board and they have done a terrible job. Why are we wasting money on these people who have done a terrible job and mismanaged funds.

The amount spent on central office staff and office space is far greater. If you want to save money, start there.

How about both?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris Zimmerman Stewart

Hopedthe word is out about tin foil hat Diaz.
It’s time to send Moms4libery a message from an intelligent community that they are not welcome here with their hate.

Who is the intelligent community? The people that supported Biedleman?

Diaz was fired for not showing up for classes. Her disrespect of students and other staff is awful.

Diaz has nothing to add to the BOE whatsoever she can not even answer one question without deflecting,

Spare me your defection as well.

She also signed her name to lawsuits against MCPS which we as taxpayers paid to defend against I read then did you? No because of you did you would be appalled that the lawyers were not sanctioned for filing garbage and that Diaz would support such nonsensical claims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get started on next election already. How do we get better candidates and how do you increase number of more qualified candidates? What should those quals be?

You increase the number of qualified candidates by paying the board members a reasonable salary for a difficult full-time job.

More pay will not help. Most of the boe members work full time jobs and are double dipping.

That's exactly why more pay will help. You want qualified people who see board membership as their full-time job, and who don't need to work another job at the same time.

Of course they will continue their employment in less you make it a full time job and that’s not how boards work. Then it would be an mcps management team. Mcps has central office who is incompetent.

That’s precisely what we want to be: management and oversight of MCPS. The BOE needs to be full-time. Part-time status with no independent staff from management is not working.

The point of the board is to be independent, not salary employees of MCPS. They really are unnecessary as they are not providing any oversight and have no idea what they are doing and making so many mistakes and allowing so many bad things to go on. They wouldn't be missed at all if we didn't have one. That would be a huge cost savings.

The BOE members are MD state employees, not MCPS employees. Their salaries are set in state law, but those are different for each county's board, based, effectively, on each county government's request (and funding). The County Council had hit pause on an effort to reconsider that compensation, but has let their own deadline for unpausing pass.

Getting more qualified individuals in these oversight positions, and paying them for the actual time that is needed to perform the oversight, would tend to see their not allowing so many bad things to go on. Eliminating the oversight would provide no check at all to those bad things.

I agree in principle, but making them full-time, full-salaried positions would attract the wrong people. The BoE should have independent, full-time staff under their own control, but the BoE positions themselves should be designed such that working parents can hold them. That would mean substantially reducing the time obligations of the Board itself.

This is a reasonable alternative, but the combination of funding needed, whether allocated to the elected BOE, to support staff, where it also would be necessary to attract candidates of reasonably high capability, or to some combination (e.g., reflecting whatever partial FTE would then be needed from the BOE members to perform effectively).

[Anonymous]

I watched the debate. Based on it, I am going to vote for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart. I don't particularly like Stewart, but she is better than Evans. The other two I feel better about.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get started on next election already. How do we get better candidates and how do you increase number of more qualified candidates? What should those quals be?

You increase the number of qualified candidates by paying the board members a reasonable salary for a difficult full-time job.

More pay will not help. Most of the boe members work full time jobs and are double dipping.

That's exactly why more pay will help. You want qualified people who see board membership as their full-time job, and who don't need to work another job at the same time.

Of course they will continue their employment in less you make it a full time job and that’s not how boards work. Then it would be an mcps management team. Mcps has central office who is incompetent.

That’s precisely what we want to be: management and oversight of MCPS. The BOE needs to be full-time. Part-time status with no independent staff from management is not working.

The point of the board is to be independent, not salary employees of MCPS. They really are unnecessary as they are not providing any oversight and have no idea what they are doing and making so many mistakes and allowing so many bad things to go on. They wouldn't be missed at all if we didn't have one. That would be a huge cost savings.

So your solution to the BOE’s oversight failings is to get rid of it completely? How does that make any sense?

It would save a lot of money. There is little point to the BOE given how they have run things over the last 10-15 years.

This is a pointless line of argument. The board is going to continue to exist whether you like it or not.

What is the point of the board? We spend a fortune on staff, office space and so much more for the board and they have done a terrible job. Why are we wasting money on these people who have done a terrible job and mismanaged funds.

The amount spent on central office staff and office space is far greater. If you want to save money, start there.

We should do both. Central office can work at home or out of MCPS owned buildings. They spend what $50K a month on the BOE space? They can hold their meetings in a school auditorium for free.

You have it all worked out in your brain, don't you? You have no idea what it is like to lead a large organization such as MCPS.

Neither do MCPS administrators! Did you see the Audit meeting last week? LOL

Hopefully Taylor sees this as an opportunity to make staff changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I watched the debate. Based on it, I am going to vote for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart. I don't particularly like Stewart, but she is better than Evans. The other two I feel better about.

Montoya is a know-nothing. The teachers' union regrets endorsing her. If she gets in, people will be whining about her by week 2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get started on next election already. How do we get better candidates and how do you increase number of more qualified candidates? What should those quals be?

You increase the number of qualified candidates by paying the board members a reasonable salary for a difficult full-time job.

More pay will not help. Most of the boe members work full time jobs and are double dipping.

That's exactly why more pay will help. You want qualified people who see board membership as their full-time job, and who don't need to work another job at the same time.

Of course they will continue their employment in less you make it a full time job and that’s not how boards work. Then it would be an mcps management team. Mcps has central office who is incompetent.

That’s precisely what we want to be: management and oversight of MCPS. The BOE needs to be full-time. Part-time status with no independent staff from management is not working.

The point of the board is to be independent, not salary employees of MCPS. They really are unnecessary as they are not providing any oversight and have no idea what they are doing and making so many mistakes and allowing so many bad things to go on. They wouldn't be missed at all if we didn't have one. That would be a huge cost savings.

The BOE members are MD state employees, not MCPS employees. Their salaries are set in state law, but those are different for each county's board, based, effectively, on each county government's request (and funding). The County Council had hit pause on an effort to reconsider that compensation, but has let their own deadline for unpausing pass.

Getting more qualified individuals in these oversight positions, and paying them for the actual time that is needed to perform the oversight, would tend to see their not allowing so many bad things to go on. Eliminating the oversight would provide no check at all to those bad things.

Paying more would not make a difference. Be real. Its another waste of MCPS money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the debate. Based on it, I am going to vote for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart. I don't particularly like Stewart, but she is better than Evans. The other two I feel better about.

Montoya is a know-nothing. The teachers' union regrets endorsing her. If she gets in, people will be whining about her by week 2.

She's better than the alternative.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get started on next election already. How do we get better candidates and how do you increase number of more qualified candidates? What should those quals be?

You increase the number of qualified candidates by paying the board members a reasonable salary for a difficult full-time job.

More pay will not help. Most of the boe members work full time jobs and are double dipping.

That's exactly why more pay will help. You want qualified people who see board membership as their full-time job, and who don't need to work another job at the same time.

Of course they will continue their employment in less you make it a full time job and that’s not how boards work. Then it would be an mcps management team. Mcps has central office who is incompetent.

That’s precisely what we want to be: management and oversight of MCPS. The BOE needs to be full-time. Part-time status with no independent staff from management is not working.

The point of the board is to be independent, not salary employees of MCPS. They really are unnecessary as they are not providing any oversight and have no idea what they are doing and making so many mistakes and allowing so many bad things to go on. They wouldn't be missed at all if we didn't have one. That would be a huge cost savings.

So your solution to the BOE’s oversight failings is to get rid of it completely? How does that make any sense?

It would save a lot of money. There is little point to the BOE given how they have run things over the last 10-15 years.

This is a pointless line of argument. The board is going to continue to exist whether you like it or not.

What is the point of the board? We spend a fortune on staff, office space and so much more for the board and they have done a terrible job. Why are we wasting money on these people who have done a terrible job and mismanaged funds.

The amount spent on central office staff and office space is far greater. If you want to save money, start there.

We should do both. Central office can work at home or out of MCPS owned buildings. They spend what $50K a month on the BOE space? They can hold their meetings in a school auditorium for free.

You have it all worked out in your brain, don't you? You have no idea what it is like to lead a large organization such as MCPS.

Neither do MCPS administrators! Did you see the Audit meeting last week? LOL

Hopefully Taylor sees this as an opportunity to make staff changes.

Taylor isn't going to do anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris Zimmerman Stewart

Hopedthe word is out about tin foil hat Diaz.
It’s time to send Moms4libery a message from an intelligent community that they are not welcome here with their hate.

Who is the intelligent community? The people that supported Biedleman?

Diaz was fired for not showing up for classes. Her disrespect of students and other staff is awful.

Diaz has nothing to add to the BOE whatsoever she can not even answer one question without deflecting,

Spare me your defection as well.

She also signed her name to lawsuits against MCPS which we as taxpayers paid to defend against I read then did you? No because of you did you would be appalled that the lawyers were not sanctioned for filing garbage and that Diaz would support such nonsensical claims.

Its interesting she is slamming her competitor, but has very little educator or MCPS experience. She works for a private school that's basically a money grab tutoring to get kids to graduate preying on desperate parents. She runs a preschool program but will not say if its licensed or anything about it. She homeschools her youngest. I don't see how she would be competent at all in this position. And, if she cannot show up for classes and treat students and staff with respect that speaks volumes. She doesn't dispute it so one has to assume its true.

[Anonymous]

Like I said, all the candidates are awful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I watched the debate. Based on it, I am going to vote for Montoya, Zimmerman, and Stewart. I don't particularly like Stewart, but she is better than Evans. The other two I feel better about.

Stewart is horrible. She treats people badly, she lies and is part of all the mismanagement.