Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Reply to "3/9 and 3/10 public hearings "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I watched yesterday's video recording, and it was not a pleasant experience. BOE chose to let the CO staff to defend their projection, whereas Wootton parents insisted their data were flawed. So they ended up in stuck, and BOE apparently firmly believed in the former. It's a lost war to me from a spectator's perspective. [/quote] That sets up the BOE’s decision as being arbitrary and capricious. Disregarding clear data flaws is the very definition. If the BOE were smart (and honest) it would redo its numbers. But that would mean Wootton can’t move to Crown in the fall of 2027. [/quote] The data doesn’t seem flawed. I’ve watched all the presentations even the joint one with planning board. It all seems very defensible and would withstand legal challenge. [/quote] A court looks at everything - it’s not obligated to believe anyone. [/quote] Uh no. No, they look at the record before it. And will defer to policy makers when reasoned. Seems reasoned here. I wouldn’t want to be the one wasting money on this suit. MCPS will win despite you not liking it.[/quote] So you just made my point. A court looks at everything. It also doesn’t have to defer to policy makers. There is insufficient evidence to indicate a process of reasoned elaboration here - indeed, there is a clear rush to a decision based on external factors. [/quote] The burden is on plaintiffs to show some kind of law violation. “Insufficient evidence to indicate a process of reasoned elaboration” is ridiculous. There was a scope, there were consultants, there were options, there was feedback. That’s all part of the process even if the option selected wasn’t always under consideration. Then there’s the CO recommendation and report, calculations, and cooperation with the Planning Dept. It doesn’t mean MCPS is right about the numbers. But they don’t have to be right. Projections are inherently projecting an unknown. If you could see the future you wouldn’t need projections. For a court, they don’t have to be right, they have to be not arbitrary or discriminatory. A lawsuit will not win unless the MAGA SC just wants to stick it to Montgomery County enough to do something without a basis in the law, which is of course a real possibility at this point. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics