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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

They are not a shared public resource when one private school gets priority use for 20 (!) years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

They are not a shared public resource when one private school gets priority use for 20 (!) years.

Yes -- that's exactly the point I made above. It's an unusual arrangement. Can anyone find an arrangement similar to Maret exclusivity at Jelleff?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

They are not a shared public resource when one private school gets priority use for 20 (!) years.

Yes -- that's exactly the point I made above. It's an unusual arrangement. Can anyone find an arrangement similar to Maret exclusivity at Jelleff?

NP here. Re the bolded language above. That is the "home" field for Georgetown University Womens Softball!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

I’d like one of the ANC persons to ask Muriel this question tomorrow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I’d like one of the ANC persons to ask Muriel this question tomorrow.

+1 I'm glad they're finally getting face time with the mayor on this issue. I just got this form to provide comment on my local listserv too with a note that they are asking the DC council to hold a hearing about this topic and how DC plans in general to share limited public resources.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1tyru0xQQCHcKS8RCcETFgkodne69S09ppOsCMOxCRR8/edit

[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.”

I wonder if the inking of the first Maret deal right after Jack Evans son was granted admission there is a subject of the current Jack Evans corruption investigations.

[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.”

I wonder if the inking of the first Maret deal right after Jack Evans son was granted admission there is a subject of the current Jack Evans corruption investigations.

We know that the FBI looked at / is looking at his son’s computer. Everything beyond that is speculation.

[Anonymous]

Anyone know what happened at the meeting with Muriel Bowser today?

[Anonymous]

For all the interest this issue is generating, it would be good to have a bit more organization. There is a petition and a Twitter handle, yes, but no website or working group. It's not even clear who is behind the "Make Jelleff Public" account.

[Anonymous]

Wow. Mary Cheh finally took a stand on something: http://marycheh.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/2019-08-30-DPR-Jelleff-Field.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Mary Cheh finally took a stand on something: http://marycheh.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/2019-08-30-DPR-Jelleff-Field.pdf

As she should--this affects her Ward's schools. Elissa Silverman already came out against this a few weeks ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As she should--this affects her Ward's schools. Elissa Silverman already came out against this a few weeks ago.[/quote

It's good to see and hopefully represents a change in her style. For Ward 3, she's been rather useless. Despite promoting legislation a few years to prevent food deserts, she apparently has done very little to prevent the Palisades from becoming exactly that following the abrupt closure of the Safeway in May. She has also been AWOL on livability issues in the ward - she campaigned on safer streets, yet Ward 3 still has no cycle lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As she should--this affects her Ward's schools. Elissa Silverman already came out against this a few weeks ago.[/quote

It's good to see and hopefully represents a change in her style. For Ward 3, she's been rather useless. Despite promoting legislation a few years to prevent food deserts, she apparently has done very little to prevent the Palisades from becoming exactly that following the abrupt closure of the Safeway in May. She has also been AWOL on livability issues in the ward - she campaigned on safer streets, yet Ward 3 still has no cycle lanes.

Huh? W3 has the CCT and towpath - both fabulous cycle lanes!!

[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.”

I wonder if the inking of the first Maret deal right after Jack Evans son was granted admission there is a subject of the current Jack Evans corruption investigations.

+1000. Jack Evans is so corrupt. I can’t believe he is still on the council

[Anonymous]

Should we all be emailing the mayor to protest?