Reply to Patch article summarizing AAP Expansion vote

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "Patch article summarizing AAP Expansion vote"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It is also interesting to hear you haycock parents decrying an "us vs. them" mentality. Do you have no self-awareness at all? It was pretty sad to listen to one after another of you talk about your wonderful community that would be so much better if you could jettison a portion of the 9-11 year olds and their parents from said community.  But keeping telling yourself how high minded you are.[/quote]

The behavior described by a previous poster (who, by the way, didn't even identify whether she was a Haycock parent) is subtle, obviously too subtle for this poster to understand.  At the risk of being flamed by this same, angry person, let me try again: The proposals raised by both Reed & Schultz on behalf of Cluster 2 parents were hardly more than flickers of an idea when they were presented.  They were not fully researched, not fully discussed with the ENTIRE Haycock community, and certainly came as a huge last-minute surprise to many.  There was not a single person from Haycock who talked about how they were eager to "jettison" anyone.  Janie Strauss recognized the huge overcrowding problem coupled with the need for the renovation, and proposed a solution.  She researched alternatives, discarded them if they seemed unworkable, and gave plenty of time for public input.  Schultz and Reed heard from some angry Cluster 2 parents, and tried to make political hay by doing what they do best: harnessing angry people with a grievance and making them believe that, in fact, "the system" is corrupt, incompetently run, etc.  These are people who want to make you believe that they only way you can get your way is essentially to overthrow the government by... voting more people like them into office.  Schultz especially spent the meeting rolling her eyes, showing blatant disrespect for anyone who dared challenge her version of the facts... she acted imperious.  Reed spent the SB "work session" defending her proposals from attacks by BOTH the Lemon Road and Haycock principals, neither of which she had (obviously) discussed her ideas with.

It's fine to disagree with people on a given issue, but I think we ought to demand that our politicians do so carefully, respectfully, and spend their time trying to find the best solution... but usually there is no perfect solution.  Reed & Schultz --- and Epstein whenever I've come across her --- spend their time tearing down the SB, FCPS staff, and anyone who opposes them.  If you cross them, you are an ENEMY.  If you disagree, you are UNINFORMED.  They dismiss facts to the contrary has having been gathered by an incompetent staff.  From Strauss I heard a thoughtful argument.  From these guys I heard an emotional appeal to "do no harm" or "keep the cohort together" without any analysis about what those phrases actually mean... Ted Velkoff did a nice job (politely) suggesting that no solution to the Haycock debacle would "do no harm," and implying that Reed & Schultz were being disingenuous to suggest there was such a solution.  I think he was right.[/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