2025 - MCPS's worst year yet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

You want to pay them for destroying Mcps. No thanks. They should be paying for their mistakes when the have attorneys and others to advice them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Oversight isn't a full time job. What corporate board of directors put anything remotely close to full time in?

The school board professional staff need to be pulled outside the superintendent's sphere of influence. Elected positions need to be truly part time, facilitating working parents to have those roles.

They aren’t going to work 40 hours a week and some have full time jobs double dipping with the county. What is your obsession over working parents? Better to have an involved educated stay at home parent truly committed as they have more time. A board job is not a living wage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Oversight isn't a full time job. What corporate board of directors put anything remotely close to full time in?

The school board professional staff need to be pulled outside the superintendent's sphere of influence. Elected positions need to be truly part time, facilitating working parents to have those roles.

They aren’t going to work 40 hours a week and some have full time jobs double dipping with the county. What is your obsession over working parents? Better to have an involved educated stay at home parent truly committed as they have more time. A board job is not a living wage.

It shouldn't be. Board positions should reflect community members with kids in school. That isn't retirees that have no skin in the game. And SAHPs have very different equities than typical parents.

A committed, but misguided, board member can easily do more damage than incompetent board members. I definitely don't want to see SAHPs or retirees on the board.

[Anonymous]

As an extreme example, would you really want people like Janice on the BoE? I'd take a MCEA plant before her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Oversight isn't a full time job. What corporate board of directors put anything remotely close to full time in?

The school board professional staff need to be pulled outside the superintendent's sphere of influence. Elected positions need to be truly part time, facilitating working parents to have those roles.

They aren’t going to work 40 hours a week and some have full time jobs double dipping with the county. What is your obsession over working parents? Better to have an involved educated stay at home parent truly committed as they have more time. A board job is not a living wage.

It shouldn't be. Board positions should reflect community members with kids in school. That isn't retirees that have no skin in the game. And SAHPs have very different equities than typical parents.

A committed, but misguided, board member can easily do more damage than incompetent board members. I definitely don't want to see SAHPs or retirees on the board.

So, who don't you hate? You think a high educated SAHP cannot do it. That speaks volumes. I don't want a working parent who is hyper focused on advancing their career. The retirees make no sense as they don't have a clue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just stop.
Homeschool or leave the rest of us with brains know our children get a great education at MCPS.

Move to a red state like Alabama or MO or omg Oklahoma just loves the dummies ...you will fit right in.

You must work for Taylor.

Do you know how stupid you sound when you endlessly default to these dumb little quips, pretending that everyone who doesn’t whine like you do is an employee? Just wondering, because it seems like you don’t. 🤷‍♀️

NP, parent, not a teacher, not a school board member, do not work in education in any capacity. Yes, really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget the announcement to close both highly respected magnet programs (Blair Science and Math and RMIB).

Those programs aren’t closing. They’re being regionalized. I know for magnet supporters like yourself that is tantamount to closure since they will no longer draw a pool of students across the county, but the programs are not technically closing.

DP

I dgaf about the magnet programs, but it seems almost certain they will cut resources for the existing magnets "for equity" (their excuse for everything regardless of whether or not it makes any sense).

Stop making up stuff and being selfish. Just cut them as they only serve a few hundred kids and that money is better spread to give more students advanced classes.

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw on Facebook that the poor boy in the Odessa Shannon attack is back in surgery today.

He was supposed to have more surgeries. This was way more than bullying. This was an attack.

It was backlash from bullying.

Just stop it. The boy could have died. That is not backlash.

You don’t know what happened leading up to this incident. It’s horrible and unacceptable what happened to this particular student but this highlights another huge issue with MCPS - no real consequences for bullying or violent behavior.

Yes, poor Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. They were also forced into what they did.

It’s not even remotely comparable and you should be deeply ashamed at using the victims of a mass murder to further your goals. You are sickening.

Eliminating violent attacks... what a sick goal.

You, on the other hand, are defending someone who almost killed a classmate. You really don't feel any shame on that one? You think it just slipped out of her hand? Or that she thought it was a nerf ball?

I wasn’t defending anyone, but if you cannot tell the difference between the two incidents, you are deranged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Why would you equate more money with oversight? There is no connection. Oversight is about integrity and respect for the law and voters. No respect and well paid gives you Trump.

The MoCo IG has had some serious reports about MCPS. What was Taylor and the BOE’s response? Middle finger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Oversight isn't a full time job. What corporate board of directors put anything remotely close to full time in?

The school board professional staff need to be pulled outside the superintendent's sphere of influence. Elected positions need to be truly part time, facilitating working parents to have those roles.

They aren’t going to work 40 hours a week and some have full time jobs double dipping with the county. What is your obsession over working parents? Better to have an involved educated stay at home parent truly committed as they have more time. A board job is not a living wage.

It shouldn't be. Board positions should reflect community members with kids in school. That isn't retirees that have no skin in the game. And SAHPs have very different equities than typical parents.

A committed, but misguided, board member can easily do more damage than incompetent board members. I definitely don't want to see SAHPs or retirees on the board.

Do you see a bunch of working parents or community members putting themselves out there to run? No, because people don't want the headache. Folks know that while it should not be a full-time job, it certainly takes a lot more time than most people suspect. Heck most of ya'll haven't even served on the Exec Board of a PTA so have no idea what you're talking about. And who wants to be getting screamed at and headaches from a bunch of people who can't even view a budget or boundaries with and understanding of the realities and tradeoffs.

The reality is that very few people want to run for BOE and very few people want the Superintendent position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Why would you equate more money with oversight? There is no connection. Oversight is about integrity and respect for the law and voters. No respect and well paid gives you Trump.

The MoCo IG has had some serious reports about MCPS. What was Taylor and the BOE’s response? Middle finger.

The OIG as well as MCPS internal audit have found several things and clearly they were not given the middle finger, otherwise there would not have been policy and fiscal changes related to P-Cards, or all the work done this fall to bring fingerprinting into compliance. You can have problems with MCPS while also acknowledging progress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Why would you equate more money with oversight? There is no connection. Oversight is about integrity and respect for the law and voters. No respect and well paid gives you Trump.

The MoCo IG has had some serious reports about MCPS. What was Taylor and the BOE’s response? Middle finger.

The OIG as well as MCPS internal audit have found several things and clearly they were not given the middle finger, otherwise there would not have been policy and fiscal changes related to P-Cards, or all the work done this fall to bring fingerprinting into compliance. You can have problems with MCPS while also acknowledging progress.

What progress? Press Releases are not progress. If you think they are, then MCPS is a perfectly run, fiscally responsible multi-billion dollar organization.

Why are they still in court fighting for an illegal electric bus contract?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Oversight isn't a full time job. What corporate board of directors put anything remotely close to full time in?

The school board professional staff need to be pulled outside the superintendent's sphere of influence. Elected positions need to be truly part time, facilitating working parents to have those roles.

They aren’t going to work 40 hours a week and some have full time jobs double dipping with the county. What is your obsession over working parents? Better to have an involved educated stay at home parent truly committed as they have more time. A board job is not a living wage.

It shouldn't be. Board positions should reflect community members with kids in school. That isn't retirees that have no skin in the game. And SAHPs have very different equities than typical parents.

A committed, but misguided, board member can easily do more damage than incompetent board members. I definitely don't want to see SAHPs or retirees on the board.

So, who don't you hate? You think a high educated SAHP cannot do it. That speaks volumes. I don't want a working parent who is hyper focused on advancing their career. The retirees make no sense as they don't have a clue.

A highly educated SAHP might be very effective in the position toward achieving their goals. But I'm not convinced we would have the same goals. A family with a SAHP has a very different set of equities and challenges than a typical family. We've always seen one recent example where this came through: school closures during covid.

families with SAHPs should not be over represented on the board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More complaining by people likely not doing anything to produce change. Those who want change will actively be advocating for county, state, and district policy that moves change, and aligning expectation appropriately.

For example, if they want correct oversight then they will pay the BOE members a salary worthy of the time to do so, thus attracting more candidates. They will also provide the funding so those persons have the appropriate staff to be able to ensure said oversight.

They will be actively paying attention to MSDE policy that is going to then drive policy and operations in districts. They will be paying attention to budget from a position of analyzing needs, tradeoffs, and wants.

But what we have is people complaining about getting a new school.

Oversight isn't a full time job. What corporate board of directors put anything remotely close to full time in?

The school board professional staff need to be pulled outside the superintendent's sphere of influence. Elected positions need to be truly part time, facilitating working parents to have those roles.

They aren’t going to work 40 hours a week and some have full time jobs double dipping with the county. What is your obsession over working parents? Better to have an involved educated stay at home parent truly committed as they have more time. A board job is not a living wage.

It shouldn't be. Board positions should reflect community members with kids in school. That isn't retirees that have no skin in the game. And SAHPs have very different equities than typical parents.

A committed, but misguided, board member can easily do more damage than incompetent board members. I definitely don't want to see SAHPs or retirees on the board.

Do you see a bunch of working parents or community members putting themselves out there to run? No, because people don't want the headache. Folks know that while it should not be a full-time job, it certainly takes a lot more time than most people suspect. Heck most of ya'll haven't even served on the Exec Board of a PTA so have no idea what you're talking about. And who wants to be getting screamed at and headaches from a bunch of people who can't even view a budget or boundaries with and understanding of the realities and tradeoffs.

The reality is that very few people want to run for BOE and very few people want the Superintendent position.

+1. So far no one is running against Rivera-Oven in district 1, and no one at all is running in district 5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw on Facebook that the poor boy in the Odessa Shannon attack is back in surgery today.

He was supposed to have more surgeries. This was way more than bullying. This was an attack.

It was backlash from bullying.

Just stop it. The boy could have died. That is not backlash.

You don’t know what happened leading up to this incident. It’s horrible and unacceptable what happened to this particular student but this highlights another huge issue with MCPS - no real consequences for bullying or violent behavior.

Yes, poor Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. They were also forced into what they did.

It’s not even remotely comparable and you should be deeply ashamed at using the victims of a mass murder to further your goals. You are sickening.

Eliminating violent attacks... what a sick goal.

You, on the other hand, are defending someone who almost killed a classmate. You really don't feel any shame on that one? You think it just slipped out of her hand? Or that she thought it was a nerf ball?

I wasn’t defending anyone, but if you cannot tell the difference between the two incidents, you are deranged.

Look back at your posts - you certainly did. You called this a reaction to bullying. There's no evidence of that to begin with, but suppose there was. What kind of bullying justifies deadly force?