Places to Sign Recall Petitions - Tholen/Omeish/Cohen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OPENFCPS PEOPLE and their twitter rumors are absurd. Shut up, Joanne and Rory Bory.

From what I've read, there was a specific proposal recently before the National Education Association to require “mandatory safe and effective COVID-19 vaccinations and testing for all students and staff before returning to face-to-face instruction in the fall.” The proposal appears to have been rejected or at least downplayed by the NEA for now, but having watched teachers' organizations in Fairfax lobby to keep schools closed last year it would hardly be surprising if this raised a red flag for local parents here.

Stop. The NEA has tossed a lot of idiotic proposals around that show its leadership is extremely out of touch with its constituents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where did this rumor originate?

People at least claiming to be FCPS staff told someone or someones (I was not present) gathering petitions that it was one possible plan; short Mondays were another possible plan mentioned (and that was discussed in the last RTS presentation for teacher training purposes, but only once a month).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why couldn't they just repurpose one of the schools already in that area? There are a ton of them.

If you're talking about Frisch, Shrevewood is overcrowded and other elementary schools that feed into the same MS/HS (Kilmer/Marshall) had capacity. He could have arranged for immediate relief at Shrevewood starting this fall by moving part of Shrevewood to Stenwood, and part of Stenwood to Freedom Hill. The Dunn Loring site was one of two former elementary schools (the other being Pimmit Hills) that FCPS had suggested might be repurposed in a decade or so.

Instead, Frisch took money earmarked for a new elementary school in Oakton at Blake Lane Park and got the others on the School Board to agree it could be used to accelerate the renovation of Dunn Loring. So the Shrevewood families will have to wait years for overcrowding relief, and more families - especially those now at Stenwood - will end up redistricted than would have otherwise been necessary to address the overcrowding at Shrevewood. Why do this? Because a few dozen active Democrats, many without children, wanted Blake Lane Park to remain a dog park, not a school site.

It's obscene that he prioritized his friends over his constituents, and what's even worse is that other School Board members have done things just as bone-headed. He did get a few Shrevewood parents to support his scheme, which involved the rest of the School Board closing their eyes and pretending that money dedicated to building a new school in "Fairfax/Oakton" could just as readily be used to renovate a school over five miles away in Dunn Loring, but one suspects that their enthusiasm will wane once they realize how long it's going to take to renovate Dunn Loring and adjust the boundaries at multiple schools in their pyramid.

Thanks for the summary.

And wasn't that Dunn Loring building constructed in the 1930s? It is almost a century old, so renovating and retrofitting it to an ADA accessible, environmentally safe elementary schoop is going to run way over budget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why couldn't they just repurpose one of the schools already in that area? There are a ton of them.

If you're talking about Frisch, Shrevewood is overcrowded and other elementary schools that feed into the same MS/HS (Kilmer/Marshall) had capacity. He could have arranged for immediate relief at Shrevewood starting this fall by moving part of Shrevewood to Stenwood, and part of Stenwood to Freedom Hill. The Dunn Loring site was one of two former elementary schools (the other being Pimmit Hills) that FCPS had suggested might be repurposed in a decade or so.

Instead, Frisch took money earmarked for a new elementary school in Oakton at Blake Lane Park and got the others on the School Board to agree it could be used to accelerate the renovation of Dunn Loring. So the Shrevewood families will have to wait years for overcrowding relief, and more families - especially those now at Stenwood - will end up redistricted than would have otherwise been necessary to address the overcrowding at Shrevewood. Why do this? Because a few dozen active Democrats, many without children, wanted Blake Lane Park to remain a dog park, not a school site.

It's obscene that he prioritized his friends over his constituents, and what's even worse is that other School Board members have done things just as bone-headed. He did get a few Shrevewood parents to support his scheme, which involved the rest of the School Board closing their eyes and pretending that money dedicated to building a new school in "Fairfax/Oakton" could just as readily be used to renovate a school over five miles away in Dunn Loring, but one suspects that their enthusiasm will wane once they realize how long it's going to take to renovate Dunn Loring and adjust the boundaries at multiple schools in their pyramid.

Thanks for the summary.

And wasn't that Dunn Loring building constructed in the 1930s? It is almost a century old, so renovating and retrofitting it to an ADA accessible, environmentally safe elementary schoop is going to run way over budget.

It is a charming old building, but it almost certainly will cost a lot of money to bring up to current code. That's assuming they don't just decide to tear it down instead. By the time it's sorted out current Shrevewood students may already be at Marshall or have graduated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why couldn't they just repurpose one of the schools already in that area? There are a ton of them.

If you're talking about Frisch, Shrevewood is overcrowded and other elementary schools that feed into the same MS/HS (Kilmer/Marshall) had capacity. He could have arranged for immediate relief at Shrevewood starting this fall by moving part of Shrevewood to Stenwood, and part of Stenwood to Freedom Hill. The Dunn Loring site was one of two former elementary schools (the other being Pimmit Hills) that FCPS had suggested might be repurposed in a decade or so.

Instead, Frisch took money earmarked for a new elementary school in Oakton at Blake Lane Park and got the others on the School Board to agree it could be used to accelerate the renovation of Dunn Loring. So the Shrevewood families will have to wait years for overcrowding relief, and more families - especially those now at Stenwood - will end up redistricted than would have otherwise been necessary to address the overcrowding at Shrevewood. Why do this? Because a few dozen active Democrats, many without children, wanted Blake Lane Park to remain a dog park, not a school site.

It's obscene that he prioritized his friends over his constituents, and what's even worse is that other School Board members have done things just as bone-headed. He did get a few Shrevewood parents to support his scheme, which involved the rest of the School Board closing their eyes and pretending that money dedicated to building a new school in "Fairfax/Oakton" could just as readily be used to renovate a school over five miles away in Dunn Loring, but one suspects that their enthusiasm will wane once they realize how long it's going to take to renovate Dunn Loring and adjust the boundaries at multiple schools in their pyramid.

Thanks for the summary.

And wasn't that Dunn Loring building constructed in the 1930s? It is almost a century old, so renovating and retrofitting it to an ADA accessible, environmentally safe elementary schoop is going to run way over budget.

It is a charming old building, but it almost certainly will cost a lot of money to bring up to current code. That's assuming they don't just decide to tear it down instead. By the time it's sorted out current Shrevewood students may already be at Marshall or have graduated.

I am not saying I really agree or disagree with Frisch's position, but I have never seen a boundary change proposition that didn't come along with major objections by some parents/families that mucked up the works. And honestly I do think there should be an evaluation of what we're looking at in 10 years.

BUT, I had the occasion to visit the Dunn Loring Admin Center to register a kid in 2019 - not sure what major issues would have to be addressed to put kid in school there since FCPS is already testing kids there, and there are offices, etc. The place has not been shuttered or something. It would make much more sense to locate those services elsewhere and make Dunn Loring a school again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why couldn't they just repurpose one of the schools already in that area? There are a ton of them.

If you're talking about Frisch, Shrevewood is overcrowded and other elementary schools that feed into the same MS/HS (Kilmer/Marshall) had capacity. He could have arranged for immediate relief at Shrevewood starting this fall by moving part of Shrevewood to Stenwood, and part of Stenwood to Freedom Hill. The Dunn Loring site was one of two former elementary schools (the other being Pimmit Hills) that FCPS had suggested might be repurposed in a decade or so.

Instead, Frisch took money earmarked for a new elementary school in Oakton at Blake Lane Park and got the others on the School Board to agree it could be used to accelerate the renovation of Dunn Loring. So the Shrevewood families will have to wait years for overcrowding relief, and more families - especially those now at Stenwood - will end up redistricted than would have otherwise been necessary to address the overcrowding at Shrevewood. Why do this? Because a few dozen active Democrats, many without children, wanted Blake Lane Park to remain a dog park, not a school site.

It's obscene that he prioritized his friends over his constituents, and what's even worse is that other School Board members have done things just as bone-headed. He did get a few Shrevewood parents to support his scheme, which involved the rest of the School Board closing their eyes and pretending that money dedicated to building a new school in "Fairfax/Oakton" could just as readily be used to renovate a school over five miles away in Dunn Loring, but one suspects that their enthusiasm will wane once they realize how long it's going to take to renovate Dunn Loring and adjust the boundaries at multiple schools in their pyramid.

Thanks for the summary.

And wasn't that Dunn Loring building constructed in the 1930s? It is almost a century old, so renovating and retrofitting it to an ADA accessible, environmentally safe elementary schoop is going to run way over budget.

It is a charming old building, but it almost certainly will cost a lot of money to bring up to current code. That's assuming they don't just decide to tear it down instead. By the time it's sorted out current Shrevewood students may already be at Marshall or have graduated.

I am not saying I really agree or disagree with Frisch's position, but I have never seen a boundary change proposition that didn't come along with major objections by some parents/families that mucked up the works. And honestly I do think there should be an evaluation of what we're looking at in 10 years.

BUT, I had the occasion to visit the Dunn Loring Admin Center to register a kid in 2019 - not sure what major issues would have to be addressed to put kid in school there since FCPS is already testing kids there, and there are offices, etc. The place has not been shuttered or something. It would make much more sense to locate those services elsewhere and make Dunn Loring a school again.

Tell that to the Shrevewood families whose kids will be trailers for years due to Frisch’s “creativity.” He clearly did not have their interests primarily in mind.

[Anonymous]

What is the latest updates on the recall efforts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the latest updates on the recall efforts?

They are about 100 signatures away from 4400 (the required number plus extras in case of invalid ones) for Tholen. Looks like it will go to court.

The others are picking up speed as there is more media coverage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the latest updates on the recall efforts?

The media are calling it an example of demographic anxiety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the latest updates on the recall efforts?

The media are calling it an example of demographic anxiety.

All the more impressive they’re getting enough signatures when you have media publications writing biased stories that favor school board members they endorsed in 2019.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where did this rumor originate?

People at least claiming to be FCPS staff told someone or someones (I was not present) gathering petitions that it was one possible plan; short Mondays were another possible plan mentioned (and that was discussed in the last RTS presentation for teacher training purposes, but only once a month).

Yeah, that’s called hearsay for a reason - someone told someone and you weren’t present. Please don’t propagate rumors basedmon such flimsy “evidence.” It is irresponsible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the latest updates on the recall efforts?

The media are calling it an example of demographic anxiety.

All the more impressive they’re getting enough signatures when you have media publications writing biased stories that favor school board members they endorsed in 2019.

I think the Omeish petition is the most impressive.

They are almost half way to her total with only having collected in 2 regions.

Once they start spreading out beyond Tholen and Cohen's districts, that petition should really start to fill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where did this rumor originate?

People at least claiming to be FCPS staff told someone or someones (I was not present) gathering petitions that it was one possible plan; short Mondays were another possible plan mentioned (and that was discussed in the last RTS presentation for teacher training purposes, but only once a month).

Yeah, that’s called hearsay for a reason - someone told someone and you weren’t present. Please don’t propagate rumors basedmon such flimsy “evidence.” It is irresponsible.

I didn’t post it on Twitter and think it should not have been posted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So do they now have enough signatures to at least trigger the recall process for Tholen? She is just as bad as Frisch.

I’ll see your Frisch and raise you a Meren. 💤

I would sign for Maren JUST BECAUSE she did not want kids in school all last year, BUT hired a private tutor and had a "pod" for her own child. (FCPS virtual learning was good enough for YOUR kids, but not HERS). She also swore school wasn't safe for kids but then let her own kid play travel soccer. OK for me, but not for thee!

I don’t care about any of that. Most families we know in the area had pods and most were a disaster. I don’t know how hers went. They were not a manic replacement for being in school. I didn’t want my kids in person for the majority of the year and they played soccer. Soccer is outside. School was inside. I’m not sure why so many people are upset over the pod. I didn’t hear anything positive about any pod. They were paid babysitters. Actual teachers refused to take any of these jobs.

The point is she was totally on Board with keeping schools closed because school wasn’t safe. But what FCPS was offering everyone wasn’t good enough for her kids! They needed a private teacher.
And if she genuinely believes school was unsafe, she should have been doing her part to lower community transmission and get schools open, which would preclude traveling around for kids soccer.

A lot of normal, non hysterical people don’t see anything wrong with that. It’s been proven over and over that outdoor activities are safe. Even sports. A person tutoring in a pod is not a private teacher. I didn’t hire one but my kids had private sports lessons and were in team sports since spring 2020. They started as soon as we found options. I believed it wasn’t safe to open schools until they did. I’m not sure why so many of you can see the difference in risk in being with the same small group inside or an outdoor large group vs. an indoor classroom of 10+ with public bathrooms. You hurt your own cause when you keep attacking her for only this reason. And I didn’t even originally vote for her.

[Anonymous]

How can people sign the omeish petition?