On the contrary, by rooting out the source of bullying harassment and burnout they are helping the professionals on the front line have a stable career instead of being manipulated and having their careers dashed so a fat cat can climb another wrung.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OIG can subpoena people to testify under oath. Why wouldn't they do that with both the person who made the complaint and the ones they interviewed who were evasive? Seems like they are covering for McKnight.

They both work for Montgimery county under the executive branch so it’s not a far fetched ideas. I’m not saying collusion I’m saying they are under the same entity and may just be trying to save face for the systems

The MCPS Superintendent does not work for the County Executive.

Anonymous wrote:Why can't the BOE talk to these people and sort it out? Isn't that their one job?

No, that's the IG's job.

Why can't the BOE talk to these people and sort it out? Isn't that their one job?

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry. Without naming people it gets confusing. Is everyone saying that Dr. McKnight herself was the administrator who was being obviously evasive and couldn’t remember things one would have been very like to recall?

Dr M Knight just put out an evasive and forgetful press release trying to distract people from the OIG's findings, so draw your own conclusions.

The superintendent could clarify all of this by waiving her personnel records privilege with respect to this matter and with respect to the Beidleman matter. If she had no culpability, it would only be to her benefit to waive privilege. Instead, she chooses to hide behind privilege.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry. Without naming people it gets confusing. Is everyone saying that Dr. McKnight herself was the administrator who was being obviously evasive and couldn’t remember things one would have been very like to recall?

That's what I infer. The IG addressed the school board, not McKnight in this communication, correct?

The BOE sets the system's policies and that is what this IG report is about, hence the memo being written to the BOE president.

The other memo made policy recommendations too but was addressed to the superintendent, so the fact that the memo had policy recommendations doesn’t explain why the recipient was different.

Anonymous wrote:The OIG can subpoena people to testify under oath. Why wouldn't they do that with both the person who made the complaint and the ones they interviewed who were evasive? Seems like they are covering for McKnight.

They both work for Montgimery county under the executive branch so it’s not a far fetched ideas. I’m not saying collusion I’m saying they are under the same entity and may just be trying to save face for the systems

The OIG can subpoena people to testify under oath. Why wouldn't they do that with both the person who made the complaint and the ones they interviewed who were evasive? Seems like they are covering for McKnight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry. Without naming people it gets confusing. Is everyone saying that Dr. McKnight herself was the administrator who was being obviously evasive and couldn’t remember things one would have been very like to recall?

That's what I infer. The IG addressed the school board, not McKnight in this communication, correct?

The BOE sets the system's policies and that is what this IG report is about, hence the memo being written to the BOE president.

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry. Without naming people it gets confusing. Is everyone saying that Dr. McKnight herself was the administrator who was being obviously evasive and couldn’t remember things one would have been very like to recall?

That's what I infer. The IG addressed the school board, not McKnight in this communication, correct?

I love how the MCPS statement highlights the exoneration but doesn’t mention the lying at all. Typical.

I’m also curious why the report was addressed to the BOE.

Anonymous wrote:The OIG doesn't seem especially credible these days.

What? Imagine this being your takeaway from that report.

Anonymous wrote:The OIG doesn't seem especially credible these days.

You seem like a prolific troll.

Anonymous wrote:The OIG doesn't seem especially credible these days.

Why not?