BOE/MCPS is a mess

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busing". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation

Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

You can't because wealthy people live on one side of the county and poor people love on the other side. The only way to achieve the "ideal mix" is via busing.

You might want to explore the county a bit since you really don't know anything. The PP was correct. This is a false choice.

+1 yeah because all those people in $1 million+ homes in Woodside are so "poor" lol. Lots of nice houses in east county and you need $$$ to buy them. Maybe not $$$$$, but not poor either.

Ok. Tell me how you would make Springbrook more diverse. Or Whitman. Or Damascus. Or Poolesville.

You know at least Whitman, you really can't, and I don't believe the BOE has any intention of trying to. That doesn't mean there aren't clusters you can't make more balanced demographically, and that's what the boundary analysis was for.

Do you really think that woke pro-busers are about to leave Whitman as it is? Not a chance. They HATE Whitman and can't wait to slice and dice up the neighborhoods around it into various DCC schools. Fire up the buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

The poster is just fearmongering by presenting a false choice. They likely have a larger political agenda.

If you mean the agenda of keeping my kids in the schools they are currently assigned to (schools very near our home) instead of having them bused far from home so that woke lunatics can feel like white saviors then yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busing". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation

Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

You can't because wealthy people live on one side of the county and poor people love on the other side. The only way to achieve the "ideal mix" is via busing.

You might want to explore the county a bit since you really don't know anything. The PP was correct. This is a false choice.

+1 yeah because all those people in $1 million+ homes in Woodside are so "poor" lol. Lots of nice houses in east county and you need $$$ to buy them. Maybe not $$$$$, but not poor either.

Ok. Tell me how you would make Springbrook more diverse. Or Whitman. Or Damascus. Or Poolesville.

You know at least Whitman, you really can't, and I don't believe the BOE has any intention of trying to. That doesn't mean there aren't clusters you can't make more balanced demographically, and that's what the boundary analysis was for.

Do you really think that woke pro-busers are about to leave Whitman as it is? Not a chance. They HATE Whitman and can't wait to slice and dice up the neighborhoods around it into various DCC schools. Fire up the buses.

I do, actually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busing". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation

Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

You can't because wealthy people live on one side of the county and poor people love on the other side. The only way to achieve the "ideal mix" is via busing.

You might want to explore the county a bit since you really don't know anything. The PP was correct. This is a false choice.

+1 yeah because all those people in $1 million+ homes in Woodside are so "poor" lol. Lots of nice houses in east county and you need $$$ to buy them. Maybe not $$$$$, but not poor either.

Ok. Tell me how you would make Springbrook more diverse. Or Whitman. Or Damascus. Or Poolesville.

You know at least Whitman, you really can't, and I don't believe the BOE has any intention of trying to. That doesn't mean there aren't clusters you can't make more balanced demographically, and that's what the boundary analysis was for.

Do you really think that woke pro-busers are about to leave Whitman as it is? Not a chance. They HATE Whitman and can't wait to slice and dice up the neighborhoods around it into various DCC schools. Fire up the buses.

LOL. You're sounding more and more unhinged post after post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

The poster is just fearmongering by presenting a false choice. They likely have a larger political agenda.

If you mean the agenda of keeping my kids in the schools they are currently assigned to (schools very near our home) instead of having them bused far from home so that woke lunatics can feel like white saviors then yes.

"I abhor diversity with all my heart and hate people who want it so I call them dumb names"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

The poster is just fearmongering by presenting a false choice. They likely have a larger political agenda.

If you mean the agenda of keeping my kids in the schools they are currently assigned to (schools very near our home) instead of having them bused far from home so that woke lunatics can feel like white saviors then yes.

Depends on what "very near" means. If you live in the walk zone, you're fine. If you're in a neighborhood that's currently bussed, then there may be other reasonable options that aren't "far from home."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busing". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation

Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

You can't because wealthy people live on one side of the county and poor people love on the other side. The only way to achieve the "ideal mix" is via busing.

You might want to explore the county a bit since you really don't know anything. The PP was correct. This is a false choice.

+1 yeah because all those people in $1 million+ homes in Woodside are so "poor" lol. Lots of nice houses in east county and you need $$$ to buy them. Maybe not $$$$$, but not poor either.

Ok. Tell me how you would make Springbrook more diverse. Or Whitman. Or Damascus. Or Poolesville.

You know at least Whitman, you really can't, and I don't believe the BOE has any intention of trying to. That doesn't mean there aren't clusters you can't make more balanced demographically, and that's what the boundary analysis was for.

Do you really think that woke pro-busers are about to leave Whitman as it is? Not a chance. They HATE Whitman and can't wait to slice and dice up the neighborhoods around it into various DCC schools. Fire up the buses.

I do, actually.

So you think they only want SOME schools to be more diverse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If you mean the agenda of keeping my kids in the schools they are currently assigned to (schools very near our home) instead of having them bused far from home so that woke lunatics can feel like white saviors then yes.

Anybody want to guess where the PP lives? The schools are "very near", yet the PP does not live in the walk zone, because otherwise the PP would not be so fearful. So, where would a person live "very near" to the assigned ES, MS, and HS, but not in the walk zone for any of them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busing". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation

Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

You can't because wealthy people live on one side of the county and poor people love on the other side. The only way to achieve the "ideal mix" is via busing.

You might want to explore the county a bit since you really don't know anything. The PP was correct. This is a false choice.

+1 yeah because all those people in $1 million+ homes in Woodside are so "poor" lol. Lots of nice houses in east county and you need $$$ to buy them. Maybe not $$$$$, but not poor either.

Ok. Tell me how you would make Springbrook more diverse. Or Whitman. Or Damascus. Or Poolesville.

You know at least Whitman, you really can't, and I don't believe the BOE has any intention of trying to. That doesn't mean there aren't clusters you can't make more balanced demographically, and that's what the boundary analysis was for.

Do you really think that woke pro-busers are about to leave Whitman as it is? Not a chance. They HATE Whitman and can't wait to slice and dice up the neighborhoods around it into various DCC schools. Fire up the buses.

LOL. You're sounding more and more unhinged post after post.

If I sound unhinged it's because I'm echoing a combination of the BOE, One Montgomery and a few posters here on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

The poster is just fearmongering by presenting a false choice. They likely have a larger political agenda.

If you mean the agenda of keeping my kids in the schools they are currently assigned to (schools very near our home) instead of having them bused far from home so that woke lunatics can feel like white saviors then yes.

Depends on what "very near" means. If you live in the walk zone, you're fine. If you're in a neighborhood that's currently bussed, then there may be other reasonable options that aren't "far from home."

Thank you for being honest. If a kid is a walker they'll probably remain a walker. If they take the bus, the BOE has no problem extending their bus ride another 20 minutes so they'll have the opportunity to sit next to kids who aren't like themselves which is just another way of saying busing aka diversity busing. Former BOE member Jeanette Dixon even said this out loud during a meeting last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you mean the agenda of keeping my kids in the schools they are currently assigned to (schools very near our home) instead of having them bused far from home so that woke lunatics can feel like white saviors then yes.

Anybody want to guess where the PP lives? The schools are "very near", yet the PP does not live in the walk zone, because otherwise the PP would not be so fearful. So, where would a person live "very near" to the assigned ES, MS, and HS, but not in the walk zone for any of them?

What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

The poster is just fearmongering by presenting a false choice. They likely have a larger political agenda.

If you mean the agenda of keeping my kids in the schools they are currently assigned to (schools very near our home) instead of having them bused far from home so that woke lunatics can feel like white saviors then yes.

"I abhor diversity with all my heart and hate people who want it so I call them dumb names"

I don't care enough about diversity to abhor it, just like 90% of the county. And we definitely don't want our kids bused farther from home for diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don't care enough about diversity to abhor it, just like 90% of the county. And we definitely don't want our kids bused farther from home for diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busing". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation

Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

You can't because wealthy people live on one side of the county and poor people love on the other side. The only way to achieve the "ideal mix" is via busing.

You might want to explore the county a bit since you really don't know anything. The PP was correct. This is a false choice.

+1 yeah because all those people in $1 million+ homes in Woodside are so "poor" lol. Lots of nice houses in east county and you need $$$ to buy them. Maybe not $$$$$, but not poor either.

Ok. Tell me how you would make Springbrook more diverse. Or Whitman. Or Damascus. Or Poolesville.

You know at least Whitman, you really can't, and I don't believe the BOE has any intention of trying to. That doesn't mean there aren't clusters you can't make more balanced demographically, and that's what the boundary analysis was for.

Do you really think that woke pro-busers are about to leave Whitman as it is? Not a chance. They HATE Whitman and can't wait to slice and dice up the neighborhoods around it into various DCC schools. Fire up the buses.

I do, actually.

So you think they only want SOME schools to be more diverse?

I think they have limits as to how far they are willing to bus children. Making a bunch of Black and Latino kids sit on a bus for that long would look terrible politically from all sides, as you well know. But keep fear mongering you disgusting sack.of sh$t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you for finally agreeing that MCPS will race-balance schools with busing. Now what are we going to do about it? Because 90% of the people in the county value their closest school and don't value diversity very much. The BOE got it exactly wrong when they prioritized diversity in the boundary policy.

Actually only about a third of respondents to the wildly unrepresentative survey actually went so far as to say diversity was "unimportant" to them. There are your Steve Austin supporters. Guess what, Steve Austin lost. Most people do want diversity.

Thanks for admitting what you mean by "busing". To you, "busing" doesn't refer to busing kids across the county, it doesn't mean busing kids particularly far, it just means changing school boundaries to reduce segregation, and you REALLY hate the idea of reducing segregation

Actually the more likely conclusion is that the way the law is constructed, anyone can vote for any school district; so this helps to boost the Apple Ballot slate. Remember that if everyone could only vote for At-Large and THEIR OWN Districts, there might be a better outcome than what we have now. (And if Steve Austin ran again, yes, I would vote for him!)

I noticed that your argument is "all-or-nothing". People want proximity over diversity, but not to say that they're necessarily against diversity - just that it shouldn't Trump proximity. It was a cute smear attempt though.

While I don't think anyone is against diversity, if its a choice between diversity or proximity, the boundary analysis was clear - people overwhelmingly prefer proximity.

But of course that's not a real choice since you can have both.

You can't because wealthy people live on one side of the county and poor people love on the other side. The only way to achieve the "ideal mix" is via busing.

You might want to explore the county a bit since you really don't know anything. The PP was correct. This is a false choice.

+1 yeah because all those people in $1 million+ homes in Woodside are so "poor" lol. Lots of nice houses in east county and you need $$$ to buy them. Maybe not $$$$$, but not poor either.

Ok. Tell me how you would make Springbrook more diverse. Or Whitman. Or Damascus. Or Poolesville.

You know at least Whitman, you really can't, and I don't believe the BOE has any intention of trying to. That doesn't mean there aren't clusters you can't make more balanced demographically, and that's what the boundary analysis was for.

Do you really think that woke pro-busers are about to leave Whitman as it is? Not a chance. They HATE Whitman and can't wait to slice and dice up the neighborhoods around it into various DCC schools. Fire up the buses.

I do, actually.

So you think they only want SOME schools to be more diverse?

I think they have limits as to how far they are willing to bus children. Making a bunch of Black and Latino kids sit on a bus for that long would look terrible politically from all sides, as you well know. But keep fear mongering you disgusting sack.of sh$t.

I mean, they did it in the 70s and sold it as a great benefit to black kids even though it was a disaster. And it's exactly what they're proposing to do now despite the fact that 90% of the county doesn't want it. So don't be surprised when they do it again you disgusting sack of sh$t.