BOE - who are people voting for?

[Anonymous]

Share the link please to the boundary priorities responses please.

[Anonymous]

Montoya/Diaz/Evans best hope for little bussing with boundary studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do any of you watch board meetings? I watch most. Lynne typically only comments on the following things: schedules at Thomas Edison and how that one school would be affected by the placement of early release days on the school calendar, affirming LGBTQ testimony, asking for MCPS to use more “green” and eco friendly cleaning products. That’s fine if these are her interests. Mine are actual curriculum, school safety, rational budgeting, staffing, rooting out rot/cronyism, helping all students reach their potential. Montoya’s goals align much more closely with what I think are the bigger priorities but ymmv.

I also think with the big boundary analysis coming up, Lynne would be much much more likely to have students bussing all over in the name of diversity when most families of every race and ethnicity would prioritize sending their kids to schools close to home.

It's funny that you'd think that, when Harris has a voting record on several boundary studies over the past few years, none of which had "students bussing all over in the name of diversity," nor did Harris (or any other member) ever even put forward an alternative plan which would have done so.

Montoya has suggested that MCPS consider expanding the upcoming boundary studies to all 25 high schools in the county, rather than the current 19.

These are their actual answers on the subject from a recent questionnaire. Lynne point blank prioritizes diversity over proximity and over stability. Rita says while all factors are important, she would maximize the ability for students to attend school in their community.

Order the following priorities you believe should apply when considering school boundary changes (separate by commas for consistency): utilization, proximity, diversity, stability

Lynne Harris:
utilization, diversity, proximity, stability
Boundary changes — over and under utilized schools cost money we really can’t afford to spend. Ensuring we are responsibly managing our infrastructure is essential. Diversity – the research is clear — students in any demographic you want to define do better in truly diverse schools– academically, socially, personally . That’s the way we make students ready for the world. Any discussion of boundaries must be accompanied by an intentional, thoughtful, comprehensive review of program availability, and a commitment to creating a strategic plan for programs so that EVERY student in the county has genuine access to every program

Rita Montoya:
All of these factors should be considered when considering school boundary changes. To the extent possible, I think we should maximize students’ ability to go to school in their community. I await the results of the currently scheduled boundary study.

Lynne has voted on multiple boundary studies, which reduced disparities in demographics among the schools, but also maximized the number of walkers and improved utilization levels. These are good and appropriate outcomes, and the fear-mongering about "bussing all over in the name of diversity" is ridiculous. They are making small changes, as they can, between adjacent schools.

You have no idea if the changes will be big or small or whether they will be adjacent schools. Nobody has this info yet. You are downplaying something that will potentially impact a lot of people.

I'd argue we have some idea, based on how board members haves voted in the recent past. People were making the same claims about Harris in 2020. If she was on some sort of mission to bus students all over in the name of diversity, she's had several opportunities to do so by now, and yet instead she voted along with the other board members only for marginal, reasonable changes.

[Anonymous]

Harris hasn't had the chance to make big changes, yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Montoya/Diaz/Evans best hope for little bussing with boundary studies.

Based on what? Not voting for Diaz under any circumstances.

[Anonymous]

QUESTION FOR DIAZ:
Order the following priorities you believe should apply when considering school boundary changes (separate by commas for consistency): utilization, proximity, diversity, stability

RESPONSE:
proximity, stability, utilization, diversity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harris hasn't had the chance to make big changes, yet.

Sure she has. Board members are specifically allowed to propose their own boundary alternatives. MCPS had excluded Laytonsville from any of the boundary options during the Harriet Tubman study, even though it's also within the Gaithersburg cluster and had the highest percentage of white students and a relatively low FARMS rate. A member who was out to prioritize diversity over the other factors would have objected to this, and presented an option which tried to better balance the demographics of all the cluster's schools. But instead, this was not a concern, because everyone understood that Laytonsville was too far away from Tubman, and it wouldn't make any sense to bus kids that distance for diversity's sake, even though it was within the same cluster. So, if a school in the same cluster is too far to be considered, why are people fretting about schools "halfway across the county" being considered?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do any of you watch board meetings? I watch most. Lynne typically only comments on the following things: schedules at Thomas Edison and how that one school would be affected by the placement of early release days on the school calendar, affirming LGBTQ testimony, asking for MCPS to use more “green” and eco friendly cleaning products. That’s fine if these are her interests. Mine are actual curriculum, school safety, rational budgeting, staffing, rooting out rot/cronyism, helping all students reach their potential. Montoya’s goals align much more closely with what I think are the bigger priorities but ymmv.

I also think with the big boundary analysis coming up, Lynne would be much much more likely to have students bussing all over in the name of diversity when most families of every race and ethnicity would prioritize sending their kids to schools close to home.

It's funny that you'd think that, when Harris has a voting record on several boundary studies over the past few years, none of which had "students bussing all over in the name of diversity," nor did Harris (or any other member) ever even put forward an alternative plan which would have done so.

Montoya has suggested that MCPS consider expanding the upcoming boundary studies to all 25 high schools in the county, rather than the current 19.

These are their actual answers on the subject from a recent questionnaire. Lynne point blank prioritizes diversity over proximity and over stability. Rita says while all factors are important, she would maximize the ability for students to attend school in their community.

Order the following priorities you believe should apply when considering school boundary changes (separate by commas for consistency): utilization, proximity, diversity, stability

Lynne Harris:
utilization, diversity, proximity, stability
Boundary changes — over and under utilized schools cost money we really can’t afford to spend. Ensuring we are responsibly managing our infrastructure is essential. Diversity – the research is clear — students in any demographic you want to define do better in truly diverse schools– academically, socially, personally . That’s the way we make students ready for the world. Any discussion of boundaries must be accompanied by an intentional, thoughtful, comprehensive review of program availability, and a commitment to creating a strategic plan for programs so that EVERY student in the county has genuine access to every program

Rita Montoya:
All of these factors should be considered when considering school boundary changes. To the extent possible, I think we should maximize students’ ability to go to school in their community. I await the results of the currently scheduled boundary study.

Provide a link please to verify this info.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New to this thread and I cannot stomach reading 186 pages of this. I’m trying to decide between Harris and Montoya. Harris was great engaging with our PTA a few years ago on return to school and COVID issues and I found her answers to the questions on various candidate forums and her website policy positions to be sensible. Montoya seems like a good candidate but much less experienced and I wasn’t very impressed by her specific answers to candidate questions, which were a bit vague. Can anyone explain to me why the Apple ballot is supporting Montoya and not Harris? Or if there are issues with Harris I’m not aware of can someone enlighten me? I know Diaz is a total nut so no questions there.

I think the union decided they would not support any incumbents, hence Montoya. I am with you that she doesn’t bring enough experience to the table so am voting Harris.

Not only not enough experience, but also a lack of intentionality. You’re running for a spot on the BOE and yet you’re not caught up in the budget at this point. It’s published on the McPs website when it’s approved. There a regular Fiscal Committee meetings where updates are provided. There is a budget site that allows you to ask questions. It was a key topic of concern all summer.

Lynne’s experience, as a current board member and chair of the fiscal management committee, is evidently not asking the right questions all summer and not being informed about the budget. But yeah, vote for Lynne

She's had her time. New blood is necessary. Vote Apple Ballot!

Yeah, because Montoya has zero experience with any budget.

[Anonymous]

https://moderatelymoco.com/2024-boe-finalist-candidate-questionnaire-rita-montoya-at-large/?amp=1

https://moderatelymoco.com/2024-boe-finalist-candidate-questionnaire-lynne-harris-at-large/?amp=1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do any of you watch board meetings? I watch most. Lynne typically only comments on the following things: schedules at Thomas Edison and how that one school would be affected by the placement of early release days on the school calendar, affirming LGBTQ testimony, asking for MCPS to use more “green” and eco friendly cleaning products. That’s fine if these are her interests. Mine are actual curriculum, school safety, rational budgeting, staffing, rooting out rot/cronyism, helping all students reach their potential. Montoya’s goals align much more closely with what I think are the bigger priorities but ymmv.

I also think with the big boundary analysis coming up, Lynne would be much much more likely to have students bussing all over in the name of diversity when most families of every race and ethnicity would prioritize sending their kids to schools close to home.

For this PP ^^^ it will always be the fall of 2019.

Which is kind of ironic, because Lynne Harris wasn't even elected until November 2020.

I miss 2019 Lynne Harris. Back when she wasn’t a politician and really spoke her mind honestly. Like when she gave her testimony at the BOE boundary analysis meeting in her capacity as an MCCPTA leader (https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/BJ3SXE6F5C59/$file/Lynne%20Harris.pdf) and then had to apologize to MCCPTA members because she was never authorized to speak on behalf of MCCPTA on the issue.

Or when she engaged in fun thought experiments in email exchanges with BOE members about how great it would be if, every year, families had to “roll the dice” to see what school their kids would attend that year because of how it would do so much to better diversify schools.

I wish she had the conviction to actually act on her beliefs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New to this thread and I cannot stomach reading 186 pages of this. I’m trying to decide between Harris and Montoya. Harris was great engaging with our PTA a few years ago on return to school and COVID issues and I found her answers to the questions on various candidate forums and her website policy positions to be sensible. Montoya seems like a good candidate but much less experienced and I wasn’t very impressed by her specific answers to candidate questions, which were a bit vague. Can anyone explain to me why the Apple ballot is supporting Montoya and not Harris? Or if there are issues with Harris I’m not aware of can someone enlighten me? I know Diaz is a total nut so no questions there.

I think the union decided they would not support any incumbents, hence Montoya. I am with you that she doesn’t bring enough experience to the table so am voting Harris.

Not only not enough experience, but also a lack of intentionality. You’re running for a spot on the BOE and yet you’re not caught up in the budget at this point. It’s published on the McPs website when it’s approved. There a regular Fiscal Committee meetings where updates are provided. There is a budget site that allows you to ask questions. It was a key topic of concern all summer.

Lynne’s experience, as a current board member and chair of the fiscal management committee, is evidently not asking the right questions all summer and not being informed about the budget. But yeah, vote for Lynne

She's had her time. New blood is necessary. Vote Apple Ballot!

Yeah, because Montoya has zero experience with any budget.

And, the current BOE destroyed the budget and mismanaged the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Montoya/Diaz/Evans best hope for little bussing with boundary studies.

Evans was on the BOE when they modified the policy to use "especially" in relation to diversity among the factors. Personally, I think the hullabaloo over that is overblown -- it's not a nothingburger, exactly, but they weren't looking at 60s/70s-type busing. But she did vote for that language, and may have driven it. She currently listed utilization and then proximity higher on the questionnaire, but ranked diversity above stability.

Stewart just said follow the policy. Her advocacy over the years, though, has indicated a bent towards making utilization work across schools.

Not a lot of daylight between them on this issue, as presented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya/Diaz/Evans best hope for little bussing with boundary studies.

Evans was on the BOE when they modified the policy to use "especially" in relation to diversity among the factors. Personally, I think the hullabaloo over that is overblown -- it's not a nothingburger, exactly, but they weren't looking at 60s/70s-type busing. But she did vote for that language, and may have driven it. She currently listed utilization and then proximity higher on the questionnaire, but ranked diversity above stability.

Stewart just said follow the policy. Her advocacy over the years, though, has indicated a bent towards making utilization work across schools.

Not a lot of daylight between them on this issue, as presented.

Since the adoption of the revised policy that included the "especially" language, how many times has the BOE made a boundary decision that prioritized diversity over the other 3 factors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New to this thread and I cannot stomach reading 186 pages of this. I’m trying to decide between Harris and Montoya. Harris was great engaging with our PTA a few years ago on return to school and COVID issues and I found her answers to the questions on various candidate forums and her website policy positions to be sensible. Montoya seems like a good candidate but much less experienced and I wasn’t very impressed by her specific answers to candidate questions, which were a bit vague. Can anyone explain to me why the Apple ballot is supporting Montoya and not Harris? Or if there are issues with Harris I’m not aware of can someone enlighten me? I know Diaz is a total nut so no questions there.

I think the union decided they would not support any incumbents, hence Montoya. I am with you that she doesn’t bring enough experience to the table so am voting Harris.

These are the same posters who have a personal grudge against Montoya. Earlier threads established this and called these posters out.

So you are saying that people who post they don’t think Montoya is experienced enough have a personal grudge against her? I don’t think that is fair.

As opposed to someone with “experience” who cost the school district $39 million?

Not to mention the debacle with electric buses under Lynne. Yeah, we see through racism. In this case, the BS about “experience” is just a dog whistle for choosing the white woman who screwed up the finances simply because she’s not a brown other.

When you compare Lynne’s endorsements (1 union and one county council member) versus Montoya’s (teachers union, a host of other organizations as well as multiple local and state officials), it’s hard not to see that these posters supporting Lynne either have a personal grudge or are just racist

The only candidate running that is racist is Diaz
And she’s not qualified to sit on a public board. She’s horrifying. When you support moms4 liberty that is prof positive you are racist anti semetic and stupid and hateful. Their rhetoric is not acceptable period

I thought that endorsements didn't matter. Also please point or cite to Diaz's racists and anti-semetic comments rather than making generalizations.

Easy her Twitter is full of it .
Libs of TikTok she supports right on her social media RFK Jr as well oh yes she’s fully anti vax glad you support the polio candidate.
Her words are horrible her support of Stephen Miller for
Gods sake . Mr racist
The way she spoke to students at Gaithersburg hs and she chose to speak of them outside of school
Her support of curriculum the Heritage Foundation designed and printed.

She speaks at moms4 liberty events in support of them. That alone is disgraceful
Those videos are online I won’t print her words because they are vile.

Let’s say you want to discount her ultra RW endorsements which by the way prove my point. If she’s not racist why is Stephen Milker, Unified against racism in education lol {is racist as shit ie code for racist ) the heritage foundation and libs of TikTok endorsing her? she is still highly unqualified can clearly not work with others given her tenure at Gaithersburg and how she interacts with students and MCPS families online.


And have you heard her speak at BOE forums vs her Republican forums yeah she’s a god dammed racist
There are no mental gymnastics to show she is not . She thinks she hid it. She has not.

And her supporters online all want the same White Christian Nationalist curriculum that’s racist . They think their code words of parental rights and fear mongering hide their racism they do not.

Gibberish. Post the actual twitter posts.