10/30 Board of Ed meeting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today’s BOE meeting sort of revealing who is the powerhouse. Taylor and CO can shut the door of communication if a BOE member is not cooperating and asking sharp questions. I’m not saying that I agree with Montoya. But seeing her got backstabbed by Yang is telling something true and ugly.

It’s not about which BOE candidate we should vote. It’s ultimately just a show - becoming one of them or being rejected from the play.

Yang trying to move out of BOE, that is telling.

I find the BOE so disappointing and infuriating sometimes but you have to give these people some credit for taking on these huge jobs for very little pay. I don't blame anyone for trying to get a higher paying job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today’s BOE meeting sort of revealing who is the powerhouse. Taylor and CO can shut the door of communication if a BOE member is not cooperating and asking sharp questions. I’m not saying that I agree with Montoya. But seeing her got backstabbed by Yang is telling something true and ugly.

It’s not about which BOE candidate we should vote. It’s ultimately just a show - becoming one of them or being rejected from the play.

Yang trying to move out of BOE, that is telling.

I find the BOE so disappointing and infuriating sometimes but you have to give these people some credit for taking on these huge jobs for very little pay. I don't blame anyone for trying to get a higher paying job.

Everyone at CO knows they know one will leave and another one will come. All trying to keep their job.

[Anonymous]

Rita is a rock star! Finally someone standing up to the MCPS BS and the BOE cronies who just nod and agree with anything the superintendent says. I also loved that she called out the horrible BOE staff, they have been a huge problem since the Jack Smith days and someone needs to hold them accountable too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like they are talking about releasing new boundary options in November to reflect the possible use of Crown as a holding school and possible closure of SSIMS? https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DMXHZX4AFC3F/$file/Rev%20Boundary%20Study%20Scopes%20251030%20PPT.pdf

Was there discussion about this in the meeting? Anything of note?

BOE not allowed discussion. Yang makes sure of that. River-Oven doesn’t even bother to show up.

Yang is running for county council and has no meaningful endorsements. I’m sure she shilling for whatever interest groups in the district she is running to try and get votes. If that means shutting down questions or transparency, she’ll do it to get elected. I’m sure yang has made promises to Taylor if she gets elected which would make him just as complicit. Everyone talks a transparency game but shuts it down when it’s a brown person trying to shed light of some questionable practices

This sure makes me less likely to vote for her. Who is she pandering to?

Good for Montoya but it's sad that she seems to be the only one pushing....

Just because Montoya is pushing, does not mean she will vote No in the final vote.

She actually votes independently a lot. If you look at closed session votes about things like appeals for reconsideration, most members typically rubber stamp the superintendent’s denial, and Montoya seems to consider the request and vote to reverse the superintendent’s denial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like they are talking about releasing new boundary options in November to reflect the possible use of Crown as a holding school and possible closure of SSIMS? https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DMXHZX4AFC3F/$file/Rev%20Boundary%20Study%20Scopes%20251030%20PPT.pdf

Was there discussion about this in the meeting? Anything of note?

BOE not allowed discussion. Yang makes sure of that. River-Oven doesn’t even bother to show up.

Yang is running for county council and has no meaningful endorsements. I’m sure she shilling for whatever interest groups in the district she is running to try and get votes. If that means shutting down questions or transparency, she’ll do it to get elected. I’m sure yang has made promises to Taylor if she gets elected which would make him just as complicit. Everyone talks a transparency game but shuts it down when it’s a brown person trying to shed light of some questionable practices

This sure makes me less likely to vote for her. Who is she pandering to?

Good for Montoya but it's sad that she seems to be the only one pushing....

Just because Montoya is pushing, does not mean she will vote No in the final vote.

She actually votes independently a lot. If you look at closed session votes about things like appeals for reconsideration, most members typically rubber stamp the superintendent’s denial, and Montoya seems to consider the request and vote to reverse the superintendent’s denial.

I noticed that as well and was troubled by how often the BOE affirmed the superintendent's decisions and wondered if they ever reversed his denials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like they are talking about releasing new boundary options in November to reflect the possible use of Crown as a holding school and possible closure of SSIMS? https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DMXHZX4AFC3F/$file/Rev%20Boundary%20Study%20Scopes%20251030%20PPT.pdf

Was there discussion about this in the meeting? Anything of note?

BOE not allowed discussion. Yang makes sure of that. River-Oven doesn’t even bother to show up.

Yang is running for county council and has no meaningful endorsements. I’m sure she shilling for whatever interest groups in the district she is running to try and get votes. If that means shutting down questions or transparency, she’ll do it to get elected. I’m sure yang has made promises to Taylor if she gets elected which would make him just as complicit. Everyone talks a transparency game but shuts it down when it’s a brown person trying to shed light of some questionable practices

This sure makes me less likely to vote for her. Who is she pandering to?

Good for Montoya but it's sad that she seems to be the only one pushing....

Just because Montoya is pushing, does not mean she will vote No in the final vote.

She actually votes independently a lot. If you look at closed session votes about things like appeals for reconsideration, most members typically rubber stamp the superintendent’s denial, and Montoya seems to consider the request and vote to reverse the superintendent’s denial.

I noticed that as well and was troubled by how often the BOE affirmed the superintendent's decisions and wondered if they ever reversed his denials.

They do but it’s extraordinarily rare. Five of them need to vote to reverse. Maybe two cases per year get reversed out of like 50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like they are talking about releasing new boundary options in November to reflect the possible use of Crown as a holding school and possible closure of SSIMS? https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DMXHZX4AFC3F/$file/Rev%20Boundary%20Study%20Scopes%20251030%20PPT.pdf

Was there discussion about this in the meeting? Anything of note?

BOE not allowed discussion. Yang makes sure of that. River-Oven doesn’t even bother to show up.

Yang is running for county council and has no meaningful endorsements. I’m sure she shilling for whatever interest groups in the district she is running to try and get votes. If that means shutting down questions or transparency, she’ll do it to get elected. I’m sure yang has made promises to Taylor if she gets elected which would make him just as complicit. Everyone talks a transparency game but shuts it down when it’s a brown person trying to shed light of some questionable practices

This sure makes me less likely to vote for her. Who is she pandering to?

Good for Montoya but it's sad that she seems to be the only one pushing....

Just because Montoya is pushing, does not mean she will vote No in the final vote.

This is the stupidest take. Why she she otherwise push? Such a moronic comment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today’s BOE meeting sort of revealing who is the powerhouse. Taylor and CO can shut the door of communication if a BOE member is not cooperating and asking sharp questions. I’m not saying that I agree with Montoya. But seeing her got backstabbed by Yang is telling something true and ugly.

It’s not about which BOE candidate we should vote. It’s ultimately just a show - becoming one of them or being rejected from the play.

Yang trying to move out of BOE, that is telling.

I find the BOE so disappointing and infuriating sometimes but you have to give these people some credit for taking on these huge jobs for very little pay. I don't blame anyone for trying to get a higher paying job.

These are not jobs. They are board/volunteer positions with a stipend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like they are talking about releasing new boundary options in November to reflect the possible use of Crown as a holding school and possible closure of SSIMS? https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DMXHZX4AFC3F/$file/Rev%20Boundary%20Study%20Scopes%20251030%20PPT.pdf

Was there discussion about this in the meeting? Anything of note?

BOE not allowed discussion. Yang makes sure of that. River-Oven doesn’t even bother to show up.

Yang is running for county council and has no meaningful endorsements. I’m sure she shilling for whatever interest groups in the district she is running to try and get votes. If that means shutting down questions or transparency, she’ll do it to get elected. I’m sure yang has made promises to Taylor if she gets elected which would make him just as complicit. Everyone talks a transparency game but shuts it down when it’s a brown person trying to shed light of some questionable practices

This sure makes me less likely to vote for her. Who is she pandering to?

Good for Montoya but it's sad that she seems to be the only one pushing....

Just because Montoya is pushing, does not mean she will vote No in the final vote.

This is the stupidest take. Why she she otherwise push? Such a moronic comment

Other board have promised to vote one way and at vote turned and voted with the majority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today’s BOE meeting sort of revealing who is the powerhouse. Taylor and CO can shut the door of communication if a BOE member is not cooperating and asking sharp questions. I’m not saying that I agree with Montoya. But seeing her got backstabbed by Yang is telling something true and ugly.

It’s not about which BOE candidate we should vote. It’s ultimately just a show - becoming one of them or being rejected from the play.

Yang trying to move out of BOE, that is telling.

I find the BOE so disappointing and infuriating sometimes but you have to give these people some credit for taking on these huge jobs for very little pay. I don't blame anyone for trying to get a higher paying job.

NP. Yang still has a job to do, and she is doing it terribly. I was one of the people who used to like her, but now that she is utterly failing to push back on central office, I'm not going to vote for her - and I'm in her district.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today’s BOE meeting sort of revealing who is the powerhouse. Taylor and CO can shut the door of communication if a BOE member is not cooperating and asking sharp questions. I’m not saying that I agree with Montoya. But seeing her got backstabbed by Yang is telling something true and ugly.

It’s not about which BOE candidate we should vote. It’s ultimately just a show - becoming one of them or being rejected from the play.

Yang trying to move out of BOE, that is telling.

I find the BOE so disappointing and infuriating sometimes but you have to give these people some credit for taking on these huge jobs for very little pay. I don't blame anyone for trying to get a higher paying job.

NP. Yang still has a job to do, and she is doing it terribly. I was one of the people who used to like her, but now that she is utterly failing to push back on central office, I'm not going to vote for her - and I'm in her district.

Same here. I was so disappointed that she is stepping on the body of her voters for her political ambition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today’s BOE meeting sort of revealing who is the powerhouse. Taylor and CO can shut the door of communication if a BOE member is not cooperating and asking sharp questions. I’m not saying that I agree with Montoya. But seeing her got backstabbed by Yang is telling something true and ugly.

It’s not about which BOE candidate we should vote. It’s ultimately just a show - becoming one of them or being rejected from the play.

Yang trying to move out of BOE, that is telling.

I find the BOE so disappointing and infuriating sometimes but you have to give these people some credit for taking on these huge jobs for very little pay. I don't blame anyone for trying to get a higher paying job.

NP. Yang still has a job to do, and she is doing it terribly. I was one of the people who used to like her, but now that she is utterly failing to push back on central office, I'm not going to vote for her - and I'm in her district.

Same here. I was so disappointed that she is stepping on the body of her voters for her political ambition.

I’m sure the are some deep pockets in the county council seat that Yang is running in that don’t want their schools impacted by the boundary study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today’s BOE meeting sort of revealing who is the powerhouse. Taylor and CO can shut the door of communication if a BOE member is not cooperating and asking sharp questions. I’m not saying that I agree with Montoya. But seeing her got backstabbed by Yang is telling something true and ugly.

It’s not about which BOE candidate we should vote. It’s ultimately just a show - becoming one of them or being rejected from the play.

Yang trying to move out of BOE, that is telling.

I find the BOE so disappointing and infuriating sometimes but you have to give these people some credit for taking on these huge jobs for very little pay. I don't blame anyone for trying to get a higher paying job.

NP. Yang still has a job to do, and she is doing it terribly. I was one of the people who used to like her, but now that she is utterly failing to push back on central office, I'm not going to vote for her - and I'm in her district.

Same here. I was so disappointed that she is stepping on the body of her voters for her political ambition.

I’m sure the are some deep pockets in the county council seat that Yang is running in that don’t want their schools impacted by the boundary study.

People with deep pockets send their kids to Sidwell not to MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today’s BOE meeting sort of revealing who is the powerhouse. Taylor and CO can shut the door of communication if a BOE member is not cooperating and asking sharp questions. I’m not saying that I agree with Montoya. But seeing her got backstabbed by Yang is telling something true and ugly.

It’s not about which BOE candidate we should vote. It’s ultimately just a show - becoming one of them or being rejected from the play.

Yang trying to move out of BOE, that is telling.

I find the BOE so disappointing and infuriating sometimes but you have to give these people some credit for taking on these huge jobs for very little pay. I don't blame anyone for trying to get a higher paying job.

NP. Yang still has a job to do, and she is doing it terribly. I was one of the people who used to like her, but now that she is utterly failing to push back on central office, I'm not going to vote for her - and I'm in her district.

Same here. I was so disappointed that she is stepping on the body of her voters for her political ambition.

I’m sure the are some deep pockets in the county council seat that Yang is running in that don’t want their schools impacted by the boundary study.

Yang wants to protect boundaries for her own family.