Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Myself and all my Republican friends will be there to vote for Siebold.
I'm not sure if you are implying something .... but
General Participation/Voter Requirements. Each participant in the Caucus must be a qualified voter in the 35th District at the time of their participation. No participant in the Caucus may intend to support any candidate who is opposed to the Democratic nominee in that Special Election.
DP but how are you going to enforce that?
Not sure why you think I (the PP) have a responsibility to enforce this. It's simply a quote from the Fairfax Cnty Dems webpage.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Myself and all my Republican friends will be there to vote for Siebold.
I'm not sure if you are implying something .... but
General Participation/Voter Requirements. Each participant in the Caucus must be a qualified voter in the 35th District at the time of their participation. No participant in the Caucus may intend to support any candidate who is opposed to the Democratic nominee in that Special Election.
DP but how are you going to enforce that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Myself and all my Republican friends will be there to vote for Siebold.
I'm not sure if you are implying something .... but
General Participation/Voter Requirements. Each participant in the Caucus must be a qualified voter in the 35th District at the time of their participation. No participant in the Caucus may intend to support any candidate who is opposed to the Democratic nominee in that Special Election.
DP but how are you going to enforce that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Myself and all my Republican friends will be there to vote for Siebold.
I'm not sure if you are implying something .... but
General Participation/Voter Requirements. Each participant in the Caucus must be a qualified voter in the 35th District at the time of their participation. No participant in the Caucus may intend to support any candidate who is opposed to the Democratic nominee in that Special Election.
Anonymous wrote:Myself and all my Republican friends will be there to vote for Siebold.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the dog park attacks make me uneasy. "The gay guy without kids favors dog parents more." That is a gross look.
The simple fact is that Blake Ln should have never been considered for an ES. Big kudos to Fritsch for stopping that unnecessary and wasteful plan.
The property was purchased to be a school, and we desperately need a school in that area. Neighboring schools are over capacity. Honestly the dog park thing was the nicest gloss you could put on the straight up NIMBYism driving the opposition.
Show me the CIP data that shows that a school is desperately needed there.
I don’t know what is in the CIP, but there are more than 650 new homes opening in the Providence neighborhood in the next year. If 1% of those homes have school aged kids, Providence will be back over capacity.
The point is that the school board agreed to make boundary changes for Shrevewood and build a new school at Blake Lane. They agreed to it!!! And then Karl came along and convinced them to change their plans. This is 100% all on him.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the dog park attacks make me uneasy. "The gay guy without kids favors dog parents more." That is a gross look.
The simple fact is that Blake Ln should have never been considered for an ES. Big kudos to Fritsch for stopping that unnecessary and wasteful plan.
The property was purchased to be a school, and we desperately need a school in that area. Neighboring schools are over capacity. Honestly the dog park thing was the nicest gloss you could put on the straight up NIMBYism driving the opposition.
Show me the CIP data that shows that a school is desperately needed there.
I don’t know what is in the CIP, but there are more than 650 new homes opening in the Providence neighborhood in the next year. If 1% of those homes have school aged kids, Providence will be back over capacity.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Worse SB member ever and that's sayin' something.
This has to be some kind of sock puppet who keeps writing this stuff. Compared to so many people who have been on. The SB in the last 15 years or more, Frisch has stood out as being unremarkable. He’s well spoken, pretty responsive in my experience, and has been in the mainstream on the vast majority of SB decisions. He doesn’t waste board time and he doesn’t grandstand. So why the hate? Because he’s gay? Because he has a teacher in his family?
As for supporting virtual learning during the months before a COVID vaccine was widely available, he was certainly in the mainstream for that. Only Megan differentiated herself by being grandstanding and argumentative with the Superintendent so she could walk the tightrope of looking like she supported those who wanted all buildings open while in reality staying in the mainstream and supporting temporarily virtual learning.
It just strikes me as really fishy that there is this concerted scrum of negativity about Frisch when he doesn’t stand out in actual school board meetings. He doesn’t bloviate or ask stupid questions. He doesn’t waste time. He’s not a grandstander. I don’t know what his over all track record is in terms of responsiveness but he has responded to me the few times I wrote to more than one SB rep.
Personally, the biggest red flag that screams to me about this other candidate Holly is that she brags about having Chap Peterson’s endorsement. Chap! is no progressive Democrat, so I question her bona tides as a progressive if she is touting his support.
Karl, we know it's you.