Reply to Why is the Foxhall Community Citizens Association scared of public school children?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Why is the Foxhall Community Citizens Association scared of public school children?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
Thanks for taking the time to post these sources. I had not seen them before or, if I had, I hadn't given them the necessary attention. Whoever drew that example map either wanted to sabotage Foxhall ES or was very naïve. So, yes, with due apologies to the FCCA, this is nothing but an own-goal by DCPS/CWG.

All of that said, it is just one example and one that I would bet my life savings would never be implemented by DCPS because, well, it is just stone-cold crazy. If you find any candidates that endorse this example, please feel free to scream from the hilltops.

And, to the point, the badly-conceived example does not suggest that Foxhall ES cannot be filled with students from the area, nor even that it would be a good idea to build a much smaller school than what is proposed (particularly given the increases in density called for by the Comp Plan and families will inevitably move to where the schools are).

It certainly is not justification for rejecting a new school building next to Old Hardy in favor of pie-in-the-sky dreams (like LAB opting to abandon their sweetheart lease and move to the River School). [/quote]

Thank you, as you can tell, I am fairly exercised about all this!  I clearly don't have your faith that DCPS will come to its senses, but here's hoping.  Whether a [i]new[/i] council member will have enough sway to change DCPS's course is also unclear to me.  Hopefully whoever wins doesn't retain Cheh's education staff.

I agree with you that the best outcome is a smaller-than-currently-planned Foxhall ES that pulls from the nearby area, takes up less of Hardy park to boot, along with a Stoddert expansion (and maybe sending the Russians out!).  [b]This is what Frumin understands, and is the main option he's pushing, hence my (and I theorize what will be the rest of Glover Park's) overwhelming support.
[/b]
You right LAB won't give up their sweetheart deal without an equally sweetheart buyout.  No one will use their political power for that, and draw new attention to the situation.[/quote]

This is where I was coming from when I was posting in this thread about 20 pages ago. One can have a clear vision of how things should be accomplished in a more rational manner without strictly catering to the FCCA. So invectively ctriticizing Frumin as being a Foxhall NIMBY is totally wrong, even if the end goals are loosely aligned. the better solution is for better planning and better expenditure of money. The Foxhall ES as currently planned isn't it.[/quote]

It’s a sad commentary on modern American democracy that candidates can win plaudits for a “clear vision” that in fact consists of a series of completely infeasible proposals that play on the base instincts of those scared of outsiders. It’s not totally dissimilar to ideas about building expensive border walls on private land and which are paid for by a foreign state that has no interest in doing so.[/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