Reply to Murch moving to lafayette

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Murch moving to lafayette "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]We weren't able to attend the meeting at Lafayette last night - any updates/impressions?  Thanks in advance![/quote]

There was a Post reporter in attendance, taking notes - hopefully she'll write a story about it.  The PPT presented is supposed to be updated and posted here: http://www.lafayettehsa.org/category/renovation/

But the short of it: an overwhelming majority of &gt;700 survey respondents are strongly opposed to using the existing Lafayette swing space for Murch, there are still a few other viable options for Murch to move to during renovations, this option was put 'back on the table' because the Chancellor insisted it needed to be reviewed as an option. DGS has a list of criteria they'll use in evaluating the viable sites for Murch to move to, but no weighting, and no consistent fact or data collection mechanism in place so the options can be evaluated in an objective manner (forgive my editorializing!). Council Member Todd appeared and reaffirmed what he wrote in the letter he sent, objecting to use of the Lafayette site for Murch, give the other more viable, less disruptive options.  DGS was a little all over the place about the reasons: the cost savings and financial impact weren't presented, and are supposed to be part of the updated PPT posted to the school site...[/quote]

All accurate. What was confusing to me was why the Chancellor suddenly insisted Lafayette be included for consideration. The DGS guy said the swing space costs of the four options (including Lafayette) were comparable, suggesting that using the Lafayette trailers won't save money or be more efficient. That's a big missing piece of the equation for me--why did this get forced back on the table now? I left early, so maybe this question was asked an answered (although I suspect not, since it was clear that the DGS folks were not in a position to answer questions about DCPS motivations, and the guy there representing DCPS--Patrick?--was useless).[/quote]

My guess is either one of three things:

1) The cynical view- this was the plan all along and they knew they would face resistance so tried to slip it in at the last minute.
2) The less cynical view- they really realized that the other 3 options were non starters and had to scramble to come up with others
3) My hopeful view - this is to provide political cover. They don't want to do it, but need to show they explored the option so they can check the box and eliminate it.[/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