Taylor Secret Meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My bet is that he is going to try to paint the Sligo Middle School renovation (to accommodate hundreds of displaced SSIMS students) as a real gift to the Sligo Middle School community, as part of a broader effort to prevent Flora Singer/Woodlin families from joining the growing opposition to SSIMS/SCES closing.

I think so too but we are in that community and most parents are pretty alarmed at the potential increase in size at Sligo. One of the upsides of Sligo has been it's relatively smaller size.

As a SCES/future SSIMS parent (theoretically, lol), I’m glad to hear of the opposition outside our own school community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

How did he convince you that with 1/4 - 1/5 of the current SMCS/engineering program cost, how doubling-up would be easy and very not costly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

Can you say more about this? Is he saying stop emailing us about your opposition unless you have a specific, better idea? I didn’t hear his comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

I was at the meeting also. The one new thing he mentioned was having multiple programs of the same type in the same region. He specifically mentioned the possibility of having an IB magnet at Einstein, in addition to the proposed one at BCC. But he was very squishy on when this could happened. Seemed like a possibility in the future if there was the demand.

What he did not talk about is how these programs will be stood up at all the various schools throughout our county. He minimized the resources needed at the schools and said it was mainly a transportation cost. He did not talk about MCPSs failings in the past at setting up these types programs. Especially when they were designed by the central office, not grown organically at the local school.

Also I am sure MCPS would like to not receive all those form letters expressing opposition to their plans. But volume of response does help, especially at the elected official level. Like the BOE and county council.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

Can you say more about this? Is he saying stop emailing us about your opposition unless you have a specific, better idea? I didn’t hear his comments.

Not OP, but that is what I heard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

I was at the meeting also. The one new thing he mentioned was having multiple programs of the same type in the same region. He specifically mentioned the possibility of having an IB magnet at Einstein, in addition to the proposed one at BCC. But he was very squishy on when this could happened. Seemed like a possibility in the future if there was the demand.

What he did not talk about is how these programs will be stood up at all the various schools throughout our county. He minimized the resources needed at the schools and said it was mainly a transportation cost. He did not talk about MCPSs failings in the past at setting up these types programs. Especially when they were designed by the central office, not grown organically at the local school.

Also I am sure MCPS would like to not receive all those form letters expressing opposition to their plans. But volume of response does help, especially at the elected official level. Like the BOE and county council.

Ridiculous, I guarantee you this slimeball has absolutely zero intention of doing this. Within 2 years the IB program at Einstein will be dead due to "lack of interest" (because they siphoned off half the interested students to BCC).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

Can you say more about this? Is he saying stop emailing us about your opposition unless you have a specific, better idea? I didn’t hear his comments.

Not OP, but that is what I heard.

People have offered specific, better ideas, but he has rejected them out of hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

Can you say more about this? Is he saying stop emailing us about your opposition unless you have a specific, better idea? I didn’t hear his comments.

Not OP, but that is what I heard.

People have offered specific, better ideas, but he has rejected them out of hand.

+1 also this has not been a process that has engaged community feedback in such a way as to seriously entertain alternate ideas. What are people to do other than to express their opposition to the current plan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

Can you say more about this? Is he saying stop emailing us about your opposition unless you have a specific, better idea? I didn’t hear his comments.

Not OP, but that is what I heard.

People have offered specific, better ideas, but he has rejected them out of hand.

+1 also this has not been a process that has engaged community feedback in such a way as to seriously entertain alternate ideas. What are people to do other than to express their opposition to the current plan?

Exactly. People as well paid as central office staff must know there are structured ways to collect feedback. They haven't even tried. Their community engagement is about getting support for their plan, not improving their plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

Do I feel like I learned a lot MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

Did he talk about how MCPS had those failings?
Superintendents who had their own agenda, hired lawyers rather than correcting problems, and spent school funds under the table.
Exactly all the things he is doing now.

Bingo. He throws his predecessors under the bus but does all of the same things they did and more.

[Anonymous]

Yang had offered him to pilot new programs (e.g., a new magnet, or new CTE, or both) at Crown HS. I remember seeing that letter somewhere back in May-ish. Taylor rejected this much more practically idea and went straight ahead with this vast investment of regional model without any resource to support.

[Anonymous]

I was there and I think he talked about things in a way that made him and all his plans seem reasonable to parents who haven't been following all of this that closely (which presumably was his goal), but those of us who are deep in the weeds could see how he dodged and misstated things and it didn't really change my mind about anything.

He also clearly has his own "stump speech"/set of responses he likes to give, and dove right into them any time he got a question even vaguely related to them rather than answer the actual question. Basically filibustering and eating up time so there wasn't time for that many questions. Very frustrating to sit through. But I think he seemed charming and responsible to a lot of the people there regardless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was at the meeting. He's very affable and a great speaker in person. I cannot say the same about some other BOE people. He broke down some complex issues in a very easy to understand way.

In particular, I feel like the program explanation was interesting (it's not very costly to implement these apparently) and it made me more open to that plan, especially as he said doubling-up certain programs in each region (if the demand exists) would be easy.

Do I feel like he heard the community's concerns on some issues? (Like SS getting the shaft in favor of wealthy west-county areas.) No.

Do I feel like I learned a lot about MCPS failings of the past and how that has gotten us to where we are now? Yes.

He said he has not seen the 3rd round of boundary study options and we should expect that after Thanksgiving. They are still looking for feedback and if you bring up an option they haven't considered, they will be open to that feedback. So basically, if you think you have a better idea/solution, please email him + the BOE and submit a survey response.
Form letters do not work - he was very clear about that.

He admitted that the programs he’s proposing are all cheap and insubstantial? Cool. Glad he’s finally being honest about something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was there and I think he talked about things in a way that made him and all his plans seem reasonable to parents who haven't been following all of this that closely (which presumably was his goal), but those of us who are deep in the weeds could see how he dodged and misstated things and it didn't really change my mind about anything.

He also clearly has his own "stump speech"/set of responses he likes to give, and dove right into them any time he got a question even vaguely related to them rather than answer the actual question. Basically filibustering and eating up time so there wasn't time for that many questions. Very frustrating to sit through. But I think he seemed charming and responsible to a lot of the people there regardless.

Like I said, Taylor is MoCo's highest paid politician. His goal is not to improve things per se, it's do the bidding of those in power to or to bend the system to his own interests and ambitions.

The community is not a partner, but an obstacle he has to overcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's been doing a whole bunch of these meetings with schools/local PTAs lately... this is maybe the 5th or 6th I personally have heard about just based on my own networks alone, so I assume there are way more I haven't heard about. Presumably it is his strategy to try to counteract opposition to his program analysis and CIP proposals to increase his chances of getting it through... I have heard he is very slick in person and does a good job of making people feel like he is listening and making hard but correct choices for MCPS.

He is very skilled at making you FEEL heard but then doing absolutely nothing substantive to follow-up on the concerns raised to him.

More accurate to say that he thinks he is very skilled at making you feel heard. I was at both SCES and SSIMS meetings and it was very clear that he was not listening—to anyone present.