Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a usual year I'd say they would have a good shot. However this is not a typical year. Two school board members are not seeking re-election. We have an interim superintendent. They are much less likely to cave to literature when they have zero accountability.

I'm not a betting person, but I'm betting on the move happening.

Ugh cave to pressure, not literature. Lol.

If only it were literature! Imagine if people could only speak at SB meeting if they spoke in rhymed couplets, or a single haiku!

A single haiku limit would be amazing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a usual year I'd say they would have a good shot. However this is not a typical year. Two school board members are not seeking re-election. We have an interim superintendent. They are much less likely to cave to literature when they have zero accountability.

I'm not a betting person, but I'm betting on the move happening.

Ugh cave to pressure, not literature. Lol.

If only it were literature! Imagine if people could only speak at SB meeting if they spoke in rhymed couplets, or a single haiku!

Apparently Reid Goldstein met privately with McKinley PTA officers over winter break, even though he’s not their school liaison. I guess he doesn’t have as much integrity as the staff.

Fortunately Reid is pretty ineffective at asserting positions or persuading people, so even if they convinced him, he won’t do more than “spitball” without taking an actual position.

If there’s nothing in Thursday’s information item indicating the staff is developing a new proposal, then it’s a done deal.

Anonymous wrote:If they cave staff has permanently lost all credibility. I say no cave.

If SB caves and I were staff working on this, I’d be looking for another job. It isn’t as if staff has never discussed any of this with the SB outside of the public view. Caving would throwing the staff under the school bus.

Anyone want to bet on how many pages this thread will go on before it finally dies? I'm going with 18 pages.

Of course none of the schools WANT to move! This should have been anticipated as part of the process. They better not cave. Unless the next boundary process only includes proposals with these schools MOVING, with no choices for them NOT to move.

I’m ATS and I don’t object to the move. My guess is the SB doesn’t cave and the move happens. They can’t keep wasting this much time and effort if they’re going to sit on it. Any proposal is going to produce a counter-proposal from the affected parents.

I’ll be surprised if it works.

If they cave staff has permanently lost all credibility. I say no cave.

Anonymous wrote:In a usual year I'd say they would have a good shot. However this is not a typical year. Two school board members are not seeking re-election. We have an interim superintendent. They are much less likely to cave to literature when they have zero accountability.

I'm not a betting person, but I'm betting on the move happening.

Ugh cave to pressure, not literature. Lol.

In a usual year I'd say they would have a good shot. However this is not a typical year. Two school board members are not seeking re-election. We have an interim superintendent. They are much less likely to cave to literature when they have zero accountability.

I'm not a betting person, but I'm betting on the move happening.

Probably, yes. I can’t see them not caving. The no move view makes some sense. But so does the move view. APS has perfected the art of kicking the can down the road. At some point they have to cowboy up because crap kicked down the road won’t disappear. The balance of factors weighs in favor of the pro-move position.

The school board is truly broken if they cave to this pressure. It’s their job to take a holistic approach to the county’s needs, which is what this initiative is doing. Enough with crumbling in the face of backlash from small groups that don’t want to be inconvenienced.

Apparently Key, McK, and ATS have united. None of them want to move until the full boundary change process moves forward.