Karl Frisch and the Stupidity of Dunn Loring ES
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Mosaic (Mosby) is projected to be at 69% per the latest CIP. There was no reason for another school there post-renovation. Thankfully, Karl saved us from that boondoggle. |
Anonymous
Actually, he didn't do that at all. The School Board voted on that allocation before any post-COVID enrollment numbers were available. He and the Board absolutely did the right thing. Now the question is whether they should delay the project. That is a different issue. |
Anonymous
No, accelerating the Dunn Loring project was a terrible idea from the first day Frisch began to promote it. And he would have known that but he was eager to show how creative he could be, and to curry favor with the rabid anti-BLP activists, regardless of whether it made any sense or would make it more difficult to build a school elsewhere where it would make far more sense. Maybe he’ll find a way to wiggle out of it by agreeing the project should be delayed based on “new information.” The reality is that the project should never have been approved (and would not have been had the Board not been composed entirely of Ds eager to do each other favors) and should be canceled. He’s the biggest idiot in local politics, and the competition for that honor is fierce. |
Anonymous
What are you smoking? WTF do you the projections will be for new Dunn Loring, or gutted Stenwood and Freedom Hill, if Dunn Loring is built? They will be even lower. |
Anonymous
So, just to be clear, you wanted Karl to override the wishes of everyone and that neighborhood and force an elementary school at Blake Lane? |
Anonymous
Are you brain-damaged? Try reading what people have actually said. |
Anonymous
| Karl rode the wave of pro-choice voters who just went ahead and voted straight party-line for SB candidates, who they probably knew nothing about. |
Anonymous
| The fact remains that they need to put the Dunn Loring project on hold and reassess both the need and the location. |
Anonymous
To be fair, being a R in 2023 does demonstrate poor judgment. |
Anonymous
So if has no kids, not teacher or no college degree as someone posted above, why did they run for School board and still on it? I guess I would get if did one term to give resume builder if wants to do other politics, but why run for board multiple terms? |
Anonymous
There was nothing else Karl could run for where he'd get elected. We know he doesn't really want to be on the School Board; it's why he tried to run for the open House of Delegates seat in a special election when Mark Keam stepped down. Another Democrat beat him. And it's because he's trying to be a show-off that he pulled this stunt with Dunn Loring, where he took money that had been earmarked for a school in Fairfax/Oakton and got it reallocated for a different school - which isn't needed at that location - in another part of the county. He was trying to demonstrate that he knew how to "work the system" but instead just created a mess for others to clean up later. He's counting on being in the state legislature by the time the sh*t really hits the fan. |
Anonymous
|
Support for school bonds has been declining in recent years (77% approval in 2019, vs. 70% in 2021 and now 67% in 2023).
That is still a healthy 2-to-1 margin, but when dopes like Frisch basically play fast-and-loose with what the voters originally were asked to approve - and then ignore the schools with the biggest capacity challenges - it starts to erode confidence in FCPS as a sound steward of capital resources. |
Anonymous
Shrevewood was the school with the biggest capacity challenge in that part of the county at the time the decision was made. Fairfax/Oakton had been fixed. If you were to make the same decision right now, it might be a different one, which is why I would support a pause on Dunn Loring until we get a better read on future enrollment. But the initial decision to shift from Oakton/Fairfax to Dunn Loring was just fine. |
Anonymous
Which decision are you referring to? The initial decision to re-allocate the bond funds was pushed through by Frisch in January 2021. Shrevewood had 700 students then, in a building with a design capacity of 728 students. Then, as now, it was surrounded by schools that were under-enrolled and projected to remain under-enrolled. Then the decision was made in March 2022 to extend a contract with the architects. Shrevewood had 704 students then and, as now, was surrounded by schools that were under-enrolled and projected to remain under-enrolled. Now, it has 645 students and remains surrounded by schools that are under-enrolled and projected to remain under-enrolled. By January 2021 it should have been clear that the construction of a new school in Dunn Loring was not justified by conditions at Shrevewood; any over-crowding or spike in enrollment easily could have been addressed through boundary changes with Stenwood and Freedom Hill. The decision to double-down on a bad plan in March 2022 was inexcusable and testimony to the School Board's stubbornness - 10 members defiantly ignored information in front of them because supporting Frisch, a member of the same political party, was more important than common sense. Fortunately, there will be a new School Board soon, including 8 new members who aren't responsible for the mess and can insist on putting this fiasco in the making on pause. Unfortunately, they are all from the same political party, so the instinct to close ranks may yet again take precedence over common sense. |
Anonymous
| Shrevewood's enrollment peaked in 2018-19, the year Frisch ran for the School Board. It was already coming down by the time he came up with his half-assed scheme at Dunn Loring two years later in order to make sure nothing got built at Blake Lane. |