Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

Mr. Alexander, it would be better if you were truthful regarding your motives. I was wondering why you labeled the quote from the non-Shepherd parent who wanted us kicked out of the Deal/Wilson feeder as "A Valid Counterpoint" and why your article was so biased. It all makes more sense now that I've read the pp's post.

Also, it's fair game to quote elected officials at these informal meetings, but you should get permission from private citizens. At the very least, let everyone know that you plan to write and publish an article so private citizens can provide you with permission to quote them if they desire. Otherwise you don't to avoid interfering with the community's ability to speak freely.

+100, i found it totally irresponsible to quote people (private citizen) who were talking not knowing they were being recorded. You should have disclosed that you were recording the meeting! And if I remember correctly one of your kid still attend Deal. It is time you come clean about your motive because your article was really biased. Maybe you should have followed you best judgement not to post it?

A) It was a meeting OPEN to the PUBLIC
B) He is a citizen journalist
C) I was at the meeting and his reporting is accurate

D) You're a jerk

You are the same Takoma person who keeps attending these meetings and asking the same question over and over again. Of course his reporting is correct in your opinion, he selectively choose what to put there to support your cause. Whatever happens you are not going to get what you want, you can forget about the strong SES cohort you keep talking about, many SES parents will not send their kids to New North or Coolidge, so keep dreaming.

As of Mr Alexander, he stated before in this thread that he had no position, which was inaccurate if you see his reporting and his previous posts on the subject. It is good he got called out. He tries to make it sound like he is objective but he is not, it sounds like he has something to hide otherwise he will be more open about where he stand!

With that say I am off this thread, I will let the same two people continue posting!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

Mr. Alexander, it would be better if you were truthful regarding your motives. I was wondering why you labeled the quote from the non-Shepherd parent who wanted us kicked out of the Deal/Wilson feeder as "A Valid Counterpoint" and why your article was so biased. It all makes more sense now that I've read the pp's post.

Also, it's fair game to quote elected officials at these informal meetings, but you should get permission from private citizens. At the very least, let everyone know that you plan to write and publish an article so private citizens can provide you with permission to quote them if they desire. Otherwise you don't to avoid interfering with the community's ability to speak freely.

+100, i found it totally irresponsible to quote people (private citizen) who were talking not knowing they were being recorded. You should have disclosed that you were recording the meeting! And if I remember correctly one of your kid still attend Deal. It is time you come clean about your motive because your article was really biased. Maybe you should have followed you best judgement not to post it?

A) It was a meeting OPEN to the PUBLIC
B) He is a citizen journalist
C) I was at the meeting and his reporting is accurate

D) You're a jerk

You are the same Takoma person who keeps attending these meetings and asking the same question over and over again. Of course his reporting is correct in your opinion, he selectively choose what to put there to support your cause. Whatever happens you are not going to get what you want, you can forget about the strong SES cohort you keep talking about, many SES parents will not send their kids to New North or Coolidge, so keep dreaming.

As of Mr Alexander, he stated before in this thread that he had no position, which was inaccurate if you see his reporting and his previous posts on the subject. It is good he got called out. He tries to make it sound like he is objective but he is not, it sounds like he has something to hide otherwise he will be more open about where he stand!

With that say I am off this thread, I will let the same two people continue posting!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

Mr. Alexander, it would be better if you were truthful regarding your motives. I was wondering why you labeled the quote from the non-Shepherd parent who wanted us kicked out of the Deal/Wilson feeder as "A Valid Counterpoint" and why your article was so biased. It all makes more sense now that I've read the pp's post.

Also, it's fair game to quote elected officials at these informal meetings, but you should get permission from private citizens. At the very least, let everyone know that you plan to write and publish an article so private citizens can provide you with permission to quote them if they desire. Otherwise you don't to avoid interfering with the community's ability to speak freely.

+100, i found it totally irresponsible to quote people (private citizen) who were talking not knowing they were being recorded. You should have disclosed that you were recording the meeting! And if I remember correctly one of your kid still attend Deal. It is time you come clean about your motive because your article was really biased. Maybe you should have followed you best judgement not to post it?

A) It was a meeting OPEN to the PUBLIC
B) He is a citizen journalist
C) I was at the meeting and his reporting is accurate

D) You're a jerk

You are the same Takoma person who keeps attending these meetings and asking the same question over and over again. Of course his reporting is correct in your opinion, he selectively choose what to put there to support your cause. Whatever happens you are not going to get what you want, you can forget about the strong SES cohort you keep talking about, many SES parents will not send their kids to New North or Coolidge, so keep dreaming.

As of Mr Alexander, he stated before in this thread that he had no position, which was inaccurate if you see his reporting and his previous posts on the subject. It is good he got called out. He tries to make it sound like he is objective but he is not, it sounds like he has something to hide otherwise he will be more open about where he stand!

With that say I am off this thread, I will let the same two people continue posting!

What a weird comment. And I live in Brightwood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

Mr. Alexander, it would be better if you were truthful regarding your motives. I was wondering why you labeled the quote from the non-Shepherd parent who wanted us kicked out of the Deal/Wilson feeder as "A Valid Counterpoint" and why your article was so biased. It all makes more sense now that I've read the pp's post.

Also, it's fair game to quote elected officials at these informal meetings, but you should get permission from private citizens. At the very least, let everyone know that you plan to write and publish an article so private citizens can provide you with permission to quote them if they desire. Otherwise you don't to avoid interfering with the community's ability to speak freely.

+100, i found it totally irresponsible to quote people (private citizen) who were talking not knowing they were being recorded. You should have disclosed that you were recording the meeting! And if I remember correctly one of your kid still attend Deal. It is time you come clean about your motive because your article was really biased. Maybe you should have followed you best judgement not to post it?

A) It was a meeting OPEN to the PUBLIC
B) He is a citizen journalist
C) I was at the meeting and his reporting is accurate

D) You're a jerk

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know him, but with google he seems to be active in a parent run STEM club. http://www.nwsadc.com/

I am not sure why he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea because he participates in a STEM club. I am not sure if his children went to Wilson he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea.

School boundaries change all the time. It's perfectly legitimate to think SP/CV etc. should be routed to actual Ward 4 schools. Ideally, each Ward would have a quality middle school/high school path and there would be multiple test-in city-wide MS/HS paths. Similarly, Ward 2 feeders should be routed to Ward 2 MS/HS. Ward 1 to Ward 1., etc.

By that thinking Lafayette should go too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

Mr. Alexander, it would be better if you were truthful regarding your motives. I was wondering why you labeled the quote from the non-Shepherd parent who wanted us kicked out of the Deal/Wilson feeder as "A Valid Counterpoint" and why your article was so biased. It all makes more sense now that I've read the pp's post.

Also, it's fair game to quote elected officials at these informal meetings, but you should get permission from private citizens. At the very least, let everyone know that you plan to write and publish an article so private citizens can provide you with permission to quote them if they desire. Otherwise you don't to avoid interfering with the community's ability to speak freely.

+100, i found it totally irresponsible to quote people (private citizen) who were talking not knowing they were being recorded. You should have disclosed that you were recording the meeting! And if I remember correctly one of your kid still attend Deal. It is time you come clean about your motive because your article was really biased. Maybe you should have followed you best judgement not to post it?

A) It was a meeting OPEN to the PUBLIC
B) He is a citizen journalist
C) I was at the meeting and his reporting is accurate

D) You're a jerk

yeah. Who is doing the yelling now? Common decency dictates disclosing your position/interests when you claim to provide objective reporting. How hard is it to say at the beginning of the meeting: "hey, I am planning to write a blog post on this meeting and I will provide extensive 'quotes'. I also need to leave half way the meeting. Is there anybody I can talk with afterwards to update me on things that were said while I was not there?". That way, he could have captured that Brandon Todd's representative went on the record supporting the current SES feeder pattern. His reporting was not accurate to most of the attendants, and that is verifiable. It also does not align with the notes provided by the SPCA President on a local listserv. That is also verifiable. Finally, obviously Mr. Alexander is entitled to have an opinion, and to make family decision that align or do not align with that opinion. It 'd just be better if he would disclose his position. That's all. Besides the odd opinion that SP parents look down on Takoma by someone who says herself (at other meetings, and out of context), she will not send her kid to Coolidge because it has the wrong demographics , the meeting went actually very well and O'leary was applauded when he said he wanted to make Ward 4 education better for everyone, including working for the New North middle school and supporting SP parents in their desire to stay within a currently good feeder.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

Mr. Alexander, it would be better if you were truthful regarding your motives. I was wondering why you labeled the quote from the non-Shepherd parent who wanted us kicked out of the Deal/Wilson feeder as "A Valid Counterpoint" and why your article was so biased. It all makes more sense now that I've read the pp's post.

Also, it's fair game to quote elected officials at these informal meetings, but you should get permission from private citizens. At the very least, let everyone know that you plan to write and publish an article so private citizens can provide you with permission to quote them if they desire. Otherwise you don't to avoid interfering with the community's ability to speak freely.

+100, i found it totally irresponsible to quote people (private citizen) who were talking not knowing they were being recorded. You should have disclosed that you were recording the meeting! And if I remember correctly one of your kid still attend Deal. It is time you come clean about your motive because your article was really biased. Maybe you should have followed you best judgement not to post it?

A) It was a meeting OPEN to the PUBLIC
B) He is a citizen journalist
C) I was at the meeting and his reporting is accurate

D) You're a jerk

You are the same Takoma person who keeps attending these meetings and asking the same question over and over again. Of course his reporting is correct in your opinion, he selectively choose what to put there to support your cause. Whatever happens you are not going to get what you want, you can forget about the strong SES cohort you keep talking about, many SES parents will not send their kids to New North or Coolidge, so keep dreaming.

As of Mr Alexander, he stated before in this thread that he had no position, which was inaccurate if you see his reporting and his previous posts on the subject. It is good he got called out. He tries to make it sound like he is objective but he is not, it sounds like he has something to hide otherwise he will be more open about where he stand!

With that say I am off this thread, I will let the same two people continue posting!

What a weird comment. And I live in Brightwood.

DP here. Of course you live in Brightwood. Mr. Alexander's bias is in your favor as you would only gain by Shepherd losing its in boundary rights to Deal and Wilson at the expense of kids in SP/CV/NPE. It's disgusting to push for our kids to lose so much just to pacify jealous people like you who don't want us to have anything better than you do. I'm losing any sympathy I once had for the other EOTP neighborhoods that lost their in boundary rights to Deal and Wilson a few years ago.

So from now on I suggest that those of us in boundary for Shepherd/Deal/Wilson meet privately, with an understanding that these meetings are off the record and exclude anyone not in our boundary. Clearly we have conflicting interests and goals from other Ward 4 neighborhoods.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know him, but with google he seems to be active in a parent run STEM club. http://www.nwsadc.com/

I am not sure why he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea because he participates in a STEM club. I am not sure if his children went to Wilson he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea.

School boundaries change all the time. It's perfectly legitimate to think SP/CV etc. should be routed to actual Ward 4 schools. Ideally, each Ward would have a quality middle school/high school path and there would be multiple test-in city-wide MS/HS paths. Similarly, Ward 2 feeders should be routed to Ward 2 MS/HS. Ward 1 to Ward 1., etc.

By that thinking Lafayette should go too.

out of ward does not equal out of boundary. SP has been feeding into deal/wilson for decades. 3 out of the 7 ES feeding into deal are not in Ward 3.

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know him, but with google he seems to be active in a parent run STEM club. http://www.nwsadc.com/

I am not sure why he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea because he participates in a STEM club. I am not sure if his children went to Wilson he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea.

School boundaries change all the time. It's perfectly legitimate to think SP/CV etc. should be routed to actual Ward 4 schools. Ideally, each Ward would have a quality middle school/high school path and there would be multiple test-in city-wide MS/HS paths. Similarly, Ward 2 feeders should be routed to Ward 2 MS/HS. Ward 1 to Ward 1., etc.

By that thinking Lafayette should go too.

out of ward does not equal out of boundary. SP has been feeding into deal/wilson for decades. 3 out of the 7 ES feeding into deal are not in Ward 3.

Not the poster you're responding to, but I think the pp might be pointing out the racism of some Ward 3 parents wanting Ward 4 (majority AA) Shepherd kicked out of Deal and Wilson while not advocating for Wards 3/4 (majority White) Lafayette to get kicked out.

I agree with you that school boundaries aren't determined by wards.

calexander wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

First of all, enough with this passive aggressive bullshit. Come talk to me face to face.

Secondly, this was a straight reporting piece; my opinion is not relevant here. Aside from editing for clarity and brevity, those are accurate quotes from the participants.

Finally, in my work with my robotics program and with helping to stand up the new NSBE chapter at Howard and in advocating with Ward4Ed for DCPS to create the new Ward 4 middle schools, I have interacted with the families of more than 500 upper elementary students. I have a perspective on DC middle schools that I share with people in real-life conversations, NOT on this anonymous forum.

Good day, sir.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know him, but with google he seems to be active in a parent run STEM club. http://www.nwsadc.com/

I am not sure why he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea because he participates in a STEM club. I am not sure if his children went to Wilson he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea.

School boundaries change all the time. It's perfectly legitimate to think SP/CV etc. should be routed to actual Ward 4 schools. Ideally, each Ward would have a quality middle school/high school path and there would be multiple test-in city-wide MS/HS paths. Similarly, Ward 2 feeders should be routed to Ward 2 MS/HS. Ward 1 to Ward 1., etc.

By that thinking Lafayette should go too.

out of ward does not equal out of boundary. SP has been feeding into deal/wilson for decades. 3 out of the 7 ES feeding into deal are not in Ward 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know him, but with google he seems to be active in a parent run STEM club. http://www.nwsadc.com/

I am not sure why he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea because he participates in a STEM club. I am not sure if his children went to Wilson he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea.

School boundaries change all the time. It's perfectly legitimate to think SP/CV etc. should be routed to actual Ward 4 schools. Ideally, each Ward would have a quality middle school/high school path and there would be multiple test-in city-wide MS/HS paths. Similarly, Ward 2 feeders should be routed to Ward 2 MS/HS. Ward 1 to Ward 1., etc.

By that thinking Lafayette should go too.

out of ward does not equal out of boundary. SP has been feeding into deal/wilson for decades. 3 out of the 7 ES feeding into deal are not in Ward 3.

A decade. Shepherd fed Paul until 2008.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know him, but with google he seems to be active in a parent run STEM club. http://www.nwsadc.com/

I am not sure why he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea because he participates in a STEM club. I am not sure if his children went to Wilson he can't think rerouting SP to NN is a good idea.

School boundaries change all the time. It's perfectly legitimate to think SP/CV etc. should be routed to actual Ward 4 schools. Ideally, each Ward would have a quality middle school/high school path and there would be multiple test-in city-wide MS/HS paths. Similarly, Ward 2 feeders should be routed to Ward 2 MS/HS. Ward 1 to Ward 1., etc.

By that thinking Lafayette should go too.

out of ward does not equal out of boundary. SP has been feeding into deal/wilson for decades. 3 out of the 7 ES feeding into deal are not in Ward 3.

A decade. Shepherd fed Paul until 2008.

No it didn't. It closed long before 2008. Shepherd has been feeding to Deal for 50 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

calexander wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm posting the link to my blog post about last's night's Community Conversation here.

I was in and out of the meeting, but I think I got the gist of it. Enjoy.

Hi Christopher,
Maybe it is time you stated your current position on this issue? You have posted before on perceived overcrowding issues at Wilson and Deal. If that it is still your position you my want to disclose that.
I was at this meeting and it seems like you only selected quotes that makes your position stronger?
Maybe it also time you disclosed you have a vested interest on this issue?
E.g. if ward 4 students leave for ward 3 that may impact your educational organization that primarily caters for ward 4 students?
Also didn’t you kids attend deal/Wilson through SES? When your neighbors are trying to do the same, why cast them as defensive?

Mr. Alexander, it would be better if you were truthful regarding your motives. I was wondering why you labeled the quote from the non-Shepherd parent who wanted us kicked out of the Deal/Wilson feeder as "A Valid Counterpoint" and why your article was so biased. It all makes more sense now that I've read the pp's post.

Also, it's fair game to quote elected officials at these informal meetings, but you should get permission from private citizens. At the very least, let everyone know that you plan to write and publish an article so private citizens can provide you with permission to quote them if they desire. Otherwise you don't to avoid interfering with the community's ability to speak freely.

+100, i found it totally irresponsible to quote people (private citizen) who were talking not knowing they were being recorded. You should have disclosed that you were recording the meeting! And if I remember correctly one of your kid still attend Deal. It is time you come clean about your motive because your article was really biased. Maybe you should have followed you best judgement not to post it?

A) It was a meeting OPEN to the PUBLIC
B) He is a citizen journalist
C) I was at the meeting and his reporting is accurate

D) You're a jerk

yeah. Who is doing the yelling now? Common decency dictates disclosing your position/interests when you claim to provide objective reporting. How hard is it to say at the beginning of the meeting: "hey, I am planning to write a blog post on this meeting and I will provide extensive 'quotes'. I also need to leave half way the meeting. Is there anybody I can talk with afterwards to update me on things that were said while I was not there?". That way, he could have captured that Brandon Todd's representative went on the record supporting the current SES feeder pattern. His reporting was not accurate to most of the attendants, and that is verifiable. It also does not align with the notes provided by the SPCA President on a local listserv. That is also verifiable. Finally, obviously Mr. Alexander is entitled to have an opinion, and to make family decision that align or do not align with that opinion. It 'd just be better if he would disclose his position. That's all. Besides the odd opinion that SP parents look down on Takoma by someone who says herself (at other meetings, and out of context), she will not send her kid to Coolidge because it has the wrong demographics , the meeting went actually very well and O'leary was applauded when he said he wanted to make Ward 4 education better for everyone, including working for the New North middle school and supporting SP parents in their desire to stay within a currently good feeder.