Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's crazy that "general project escalation costs," "current funding... does not accurately accurately reflect the scope of the project," "cost escalation, informed market conditions, unforeseen conditions, and scope of work alignment," etc. are all code for "we are a bunch of dummies who don't know how to plan."
Reprogramming is paperwork to prepare for the next reprogramming that results from said dummies continuing to plan wrong.
While I'm at it, 10 of the 13 projects slated to receive funding are $2.0 million or more. In the real world people who lose their jobs over these kinds of mistakes.
Anonymous wrote:How on earth can one school get 140million? That is unbelievable.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Poor Garrison.
I really feel bad for them. Where are Garrison boosters? They seemed very hopeful on the renovations and the success of the school.
Anonymous wrote:Poor Garrison.
Anonymous wrote:It seems as though if you can your project started, then you are ok because they gladly taketh from others (Elligton and Janney for example). Murch and Lafayette should be fine because they are slated to begin this year.
How do they even arrive at these decisions? Murch and Lafayette serve more children in DCPS than if you combine many of those schools together.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This kind of crap is why I only put in for charters even under the old system where there were six dedicated DCPS spots. DCPS just can't be trusted.
This is a bad reason to opt for charters.
Anonymous wrote:This kind of crap is why I only put in for charters even under the old system where there were six dedicated DCPS spots. DCPS just can't be trusted.
Anonymous wrote:This kind of crap is why I only put in for charters even under the old system where there were six dedicated DCPS spots. DCPS just can't be trusted.