DCPS students shafted again - sign petition to keep Jelleff field public

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lawyers out there....
Legally speaking, if Maret has already signed a deal, can it be reneged? Or is DC in for a legal battle with Maret lawyers?

This is why Maret has to be the focus of the pressure. They have to realize it's not on their long-term interest to pursue this deal. If Maret wants to back out it's over.

[Anonymous]

Maret will not back out. At the end of the day, they don’t care what DCPS parents think of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maret will not back out. At the end of the day, they don’t care what DCPS parents think of them.

Yep. They are just waiting for the attention to die down, but they have no plans to behave differently.

They are comfortable with their hypocrisy, consoling themselves with, “Well, this is just how the system works” and, as Marjo Talbott said, “These fields are a necessity for our programs, not a luxury.”

[Anonymous]

When is the sit-in? OCCUPY JELLEFF!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maret will not back out. At the end of the day, they don’t care what DCPS parents think of them.

They do care what their own parents think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret will not back out. At the end of the day, they don’t care what DCPS parents think of them.

Yep. They are just waiting for the attention to die down, but they have no plans to behave differently.

They are comfortable with their hypocrisy, consoling themselves with, “Well, this is just how the system works” and, as Marjo Talbott said, “These fields are a necessity for our programs, not a luxury.”

That really burned me because they're just as much a necessity for Hardy and Walls kids, perhaps more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret will not back out. At the end of the day, they don’t care what DCPS parents think of them.

Yep. They are just waiting for the attention to die down, but they have no plans to behave differently.

They are comfortable with their hypocrisy, consoling themselves with, “Well, this is just how the system works” and, as Marjo Talbott said, “These fields are a necessity for our programs, not a luxury.”

That really burned me because they're just as much a necessity for Hardy and Walls kids, perhaps more.

Pshaw! Public school kids don’t need athletics. Let them eat cake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret will not back out. At the end of the day, they don’t care what DCPS parents think of them.

Yep. They are just waiting for the attention to die down, but they have no plans to behave differently.

They are comfortable with their hypocrisy, consoling themselves with, “Well, this is just how the system works” and, as Marjo Talbott said, “These fields are a necessity for our programs, not a luxury.”

That really burned me because they're just as much a necessity for Hardy and Walls kids, perhaps more.

Pshaw! Public school kids don’t need athletics. Let them eat cake.

The sense of entitlement goes something like this - 'we pay high tuition AND DC income/property/business taxes and we don't even use our per pupil DC funding. Our tuition pays for upkeep of a recently decrepit field'

The shame angle works with that set, even for the ones who live in MD and pay nothing to the District.

[Anonymous]

I get that some just don't like the Maret deal but the concerns about Hardy space are solvable even if the contract remains in place (not advocating it should or should not). Looking at satellite images of Hardy -- DCPS/DPR should expand the Hardy field by eliminating the tennis court and track. Hardy students could walk to use the track at Duke Ellington for spring track. Why have Hardy parents not advocated for expansion of their field to its maximum? Still doesn't solve the aftercare kid concern but the fact that DPR hasn't sought to solve that problem in 10 years is on them. They could take the kids up the street to the Glover park off Wisconsin. It has nice equipment and is shaded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret will not back out. At the end of the day, they don’t care what DCPS parents think of them.

Yep. They are just waiting for the attention to die down, but they have no plans to behave differently.

They are comfortable with their hypocrisy, consoling themselves with, “Well, this is just how the system works” and, as Marjo Talbott said, “These fields are a necessity for our programs, not a luxury.”

That really burned me because they're just as much a necessity for Hardy and Walls kids, perhaps more.

Pshaw! Public school kids don’t need athletics. Let them eat cake.

The sense of entitlement goes something like this - 'we pay high tuition AND DC income/property/business taxes and we don't even use our per pupil DC funding. Our tuition pays for upkeep of a recently decrepit field'

The shame angle works with that set, even for the ones who live in MD and pay nothing to the District.

Well, you have to remember that attending private school isn’t really a choice. Their children have a lot of potential and going to a school with metal detectors is not suitable for them. So opting out of public for private is a necessity, not a luxury.

[Anonymous]

Grist for the mill: https://www.maret.org/athletics/jelleff

To answer the legal question, I take it from this that the deal is done:

"Maret followed this protocol and sent a letter to DPR on July 1, 2019 to ask for the extension. Maret further committed to replace the turf field at its own expense in order to keep the Jelleff field safe and available to the public, which will cost approximately $500,000. Maret will also make improvements to the fencing per a project design to be approved by DPR, costing approximately $200,000. In addition, Maret will support the renovation to the Jelleff Recreation Center building up to $250,000. DPR accepted our request and a new set of agreements were executed in late July and early August."

[Anonymous]

"Maret is committed to being a good neighbor and partner that believes Jelleff is an asset not only to Maret but to the overall community.” Head of School Marjo Talbott

Filthy one-percenter logic. Take away a man's fishing line, but throw him a few fish and be proud of yourself. You are not a good neighbor when do deals in public agencies that serve your interests without any shred of transparency. Had Maret gave a damn, they would have ensured that this was done the proper way with a public consultation. They knew what would happen if they did, so they deliberately ensured that the deal was wrapped up under a cloak of secrecy as soon as it could be done.

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/which-kids-should-get-to-use-the-jelleff-field-in-dc/2019/09/09/2e8cb040-cf26-11e9-a620-0a91656d7db6_story.html

"The Sept. 2 Metro article “School stirs uproar over claim to playing field” reported that the District is accepting $950,000 from a private school in exchange for allowing the school to have exclusive access to the field at certain prime times. Apparently, the District cannot or will not find the funds to accomplish the needed repairs and improvements to the field. But the May 24 Metro article “D.C. dog park may be saved after all” reported that the District is quite willing to spend up to $2.5 million to acquire land for a dog park. The dog owners, who hijacked that plot of land in Columbia Heights, must have more influence than the students. What does this tell us about the District’s priorities?"- Tony Magliero, Hyattsville

Hear hear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I get that some just don't like the Maret deal but the concerns about Hardy space are solvable even if the contract remains in place (not advocating it should or should not). Looking at satellite images of Hardy -- DCPS/DPR should expand the Hardy field by eliminating the tennis court and track. Hardy students could walk to use the track at Duke Ellington for spring track. Why have Hardy parents not advocated for expansion of their field to its maximum? Still doesn't solve the aftercare kid concern but the fact that DPR hasn't sought to solve that problem in 10 years is on them. They could take the kids up the street to the Glover park off Wisconsin. It has nice equipment and is shaded.

The kids suffer because the DC government won't take action on their behalf. But the DC government is perfectly happy to take action to benefit rich kids, many of whom don't even live in DC. That's the reason this story is so infuriating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get that some just don't like the Maret deal but the concerns about Hardy space are solvable even if the contract remains in place (not advocating it should or should not). Looking at satellite images of Hardy -- DCPS/DPR should expand the Hardy field by eliminating the tennis court and track. Hardy students could walk to use the track at Duke Ellington for spring track. Why have Hardy parents not advocated for expansion of their field to its maximum? Still doesn't solve the aftercare kid concern but the fact that DPR hasn't sought to solve that problem in 10 years is on them. They could take the kids up the street to the Glover park off Wisconsin. It has nice equipment and is shaded.

The kids suffer because the DC government won't take action on their behalf. But the DC government is perfectly happy to take action to benefit rich kids, many of whom don't even live in DC. That's the reason this story is so infuriating.

There are other examples of DPR space being used by DCPS schools and this arrangement is atypical. Watkins and Sherwood fields are both DPR facilities adjacent to elementary schools and utilized primarily but not exclusively by DCPS during school hours. However, after school programming provides no preference, let alone exclusivity for the schools or anyone else. The fields are a shared public resource.