Anonymous wrote:I'll take satisfaction in Harris being gone. She makes me want to slap someone.
Just wait till you see the new ones.
It was a bad choice vs. bad choice.
The losers are the students.
If you want better candidates, make the positions a reasonably attractive occupation by affording compensation similar to that which would be garnered from alternate job opportunities for those with the level of education and experience that would meet your expectations for a well qualified candidate.
+1
The BOE sucks and it's a structural issue stemming from the expectation people (predominantly women) should work for peanuts.
Boards are generally volunteer jobs with stipends.
That makes sense for a small or medium nonprofit, not a multi billion dollar school system
You get what you pay for
The state sets the stipend and why should they get more than teachers and work full time jobs.
So we get better board members. These new ones are awful.
? they haven't even started yet. Clearly the existing ones weren't great, either. No one knows if the new ones will be worse. No, we really don't know, but I think people are willing to give the new ones a try because the existing ones were awful for many years.
We don't know for certain that they'll be worse, but based on their remarks and experiences to date, we can be pretty certain that they won't be better.
I'm sure that the out going BOE members didn't have much experience in running a large, expensive school district prior to starting, and they have also probably made some questionable comments. Certainly, they've made questionable decisions as BOE members.
As stated, people want change. I guess people felt that the outgoing BOE members were so bad that no one else could be worse.
Too many scandals in the past few years under their and previous supe's leadership.
Yes, people want change, but that change can be worse if you're not careful. Look what happened at the top of the ballot. We're seeing a different version of that here at the local level.
There is no reason to believe that Montoya, Stewart, and Zimmerman will vote on BOE issues differently than Harris, Evans, and Smondrowski did.
I agree with you with regard to Stewart. She is a go-along, get-along kind of girl. But Montoya and Zimmerman have demonstrated that they are willing to challenge the status quo.
How have they demonstrated anything like that yet?
In terms of their responses in various candidate forums. They specifically answered questions about how they'd approach a variety of topics differently compared to the way the current board has.
OK, but that's more a demonstration of them answering a question at a forum, not them challenging the status quo. Let's see how they perform once they're on the board.
Obviously. Doesn't dispute the point I was making which is that the incoming BOE candidates have displayed a propensity to challenge the status quo. Whether they actually will act in that remains to be seen. But that propensity is why voters chose them over the incumbents.
I think the voters chose them because they were on the Apple Ballot and they didn't know anything else about them.
Maybe, but I think people were mostly just voting against incumbents because they were just mad and not thinking rationally. Up and down the ballot.
That could also explain MCEA's thinking.
No, they made it clear they were coming after everyone that moved to reopen schools.
Stop making stuff up.. MCEA's responsibilty is to the teachers. They are a teachers union and thats what they are paid to do.
Which is why MCEA doesn't belong anywhere near the Board.
And yes, of course they made it clear. Their initial attacks against McKnight were clearly over reopening. And they started threatening the school board members then, too.
These endorsements were more a post-Beidelman/McKnight inevitability than anything about reopening.
It's hard to say how much that impacted it after the fact, but we know they were going to do it before due to reopening.
That was in 2022, when they also didn't endorse incumbents.
That's one of the many reasons you know this has always been about reopening.
2022 reasons are not 2024 reasons.
They are. There were just more reasons in 2024. But they demonstrated in 2021 and 2022 that they were going to come after everyone involved in reopening.
Instead of listening to anonymous DCUM posters, I'm listening to David Stein, who made the case to the BOE quite clearly in his own words this week:
"Montgomery County voters clearly value and respect the views of educators in a way, quite frankly, that this board and district administration have not always done. We are the ones closest to the work. We are the ones who see the problems vividly and immediately. When educators tell you through climate surveys or otherwise that there are morale issues in certain workplaces, when we tell you that there are problems with the curriculum and services that we are delivering to students, when we tell you we don’t have enough time and we don’t have enough control over the time we do have, when we tell you our physical environments are unhealthy and unsafe, you need to listen. And then you need to act because listening is not enough. And work with us to develop solutions even when those solutions are hard and expensive."
Thank you for continuing to demonstrate my points. You see the union president who was behind Zimmerman's campaign threatening the other board members.
It's not about reopening. Move on with your life.
They threatened Board members over reopening, and MCEA just made it clear they're going to act on their threats. Yes, reopening was a major part of this. They want to be prepared for their next fights against students and parents.
It's almost 2025 and you're still going on and on about 2021. We have different problems to solve now.
Yes, but we also need to avoid the mistakes of the past, and MCEA has never been willing to acknowledge their role in those from covid.
They handled Covid fine. Don’t have kids if you cannot care for them.
They handled covid by fighting attempts to reopen schools, and then limiting services after schools reopened through the MCPS-MCEA impact bargaining agreement.
Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}