Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm Wondering why all the Maret hate?

Because they are behaving horribly to everyone who is not part of their cool little club. It’s fine to act in the interests of your employer, but when contracts are entered into with public entities that violate basic principles of procurement and then you accuse those who are upset about that of slandering your institution and having ulterior motives, you look fairly silly when you then try to claim that you are in fact everyone’s best friend.

“Is this because of Lisa?” Is going to become a classic DCUM catchphrase for being so inside the bubble you can’t see out of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm Wondering why all the Maret hate?

Because they are behaving horribly to everyone who is not part of their cool little club. It’s fine to act in the interests of your employer, but when contracts are entered into with public entities that violate basic principles of procurement and then you accuse those who are upset about that of slandering your institution and having ulterior motives, you look fairly silly when you then try to claim that you are in fact everyone’s best friend.

The opponents of the field use agreement decided to frame their arguments in terms of race and class to portray Maret negatively. If there are folks to criticize it is not the Maret community but rather corrupt, self-dealing Jack Evans and DC’s corrupt but dumb-as-a-doornail mayor Bowser. They are responsible for this mess.

My favorite part of the hearing on Monday was the Maret affiliate who claimed it was “offensive” for people to call the extension a “back-room deal”. Speakers after her then asserted the 10 year contract was actually a de facto 19 year agreement. If that 19 year agreement was not documented anywhere and was not subject to any oversight by elected representatives, what in the world would you call it?

Anonymous wrote:I'm Wondering why all the Maret hate?

Because they are behaving horribly to everyone who is not part of their cool little club. It’s fine to act in the interests of your employer, but when contracts are entered into with public entities that violate basic principles of procurement and then you accuse those who are upset about that of slandering your institution and having ulterior motives, you look fairly silly when you then try to claim that you are in fact everyone’s best friend.

Anonymous wrote:I'm Wondering why all the Maret hate? Did your dc get waitlisted?
Lisa's dd went there and you can't stand her?

It seems that the focus should be reforming DPR's laws and rules if you want to really be effective.

Ok.. back to the entertaining circus of trolls in 3... 2.... 1...

Who is Lisa?

Sooner or later, this story will hit the national media. If the right wing outlets pick it up, it will be used to feed the narrative about corrupt liberal elites screwing over the general public. If left wing outlets pick it up, it will feed a narrative about how centrist liberals employ identity politics (48% of our students identify as people of color!) to distract from practices and policies that undermine public services and enrich themselves. Either way, it’s an extremely bad look for DC’s political class.

I'm Wondering why all the Maret hate? Did your dc get waitlisted?
Lisa's dd went there and you can't stand her?

It seems that the focus should be reforming DPR's laws and rules if you want to really be effective.

Ok.. back to the entertaining circus of trolls in 3... 2.... 1...

Anonymous wrote:Not a good look for Maret. Seems shortsighted of them to be mooching off public resources when GDS and Sidwell have moved aggressively to consolidate land.

Terrible look for the Fighting Frogs. You can tell by how MAD their supporters are getting.

Anonymous wrote:Not a good look for Maret. Seems shortsighted of them to be mooching off public resources when GDS and Sidwell have moved aggressively to consolidate land.

Seriously. It seems like sheer laziness on the part of Marjo and Maret. No strategic planning for the future, aside from mooching off the tax payer teet. This is NOT a winning strategy for the future of the school.

I think Marjo is getting old and "tired" - probably time for Maret to get a younger and visionary leader who is willing to put in the hard work for the future. Marjo was hired in the early 90s and, like Jack Evans, has this leftover corrupt "DeeCee" mindset of the 1990s. It's so pathetically anachronistic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:121 pages of whining. Parents if you want your kid to have access to Jeliff Field, then send your kid to Maret. If you can't send your kid to Maret, then that's on you -- "poor" decision making by your and/or your spouse, unexceptional kids, etc. Look at yourselves and stop blaming others and stop with the conspiracy theories. Signed, non-Maret parent

No thanks. My kids go to a private school that can afford to buy a playing field of its own without doing backroom deals to get a taxpayer funded field for their exclusive use. Why would anyone want to pay 45k/year to go to a school that can’t even afford a field of its own?

+1 The first PP is just a stupid Maret troll who can’t even be bothered to spell Jelleff properly even though it’s in the subject of this thread.

Not the PP but Yep disagree with you = troll. Opposed to you being a Hardy troll.

Not a good look for Maret. Seems shortsighted of them to be mooching off public resources when GDS and Sidwell have moved aggressively to consolidate land.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:121 pages of whining. Parents if you want your kid to have access to Jeliff Field, then send your kid to Maret. If you can't send your kid to Maret, then that's on you -- "poor" decision making by your and/or your spouse, unexceptional kids, etc. Look at yourselves and stop blaming others and stop with the conspiracy theories. Signed, non-Maret parent

No thanks. My kids go to a private school that can afford to buy a playing field of its own without doing backroom deals to get a taxpayer funded field for their exclusive use. Why would anyone want to pay 45k/year to go to a school that can’t even afford a field of its own?

+1 The first PP is just a stupid Maret troll who can’t even be bothered to spell Jelleff properly even though it’s in the subject of this thread.

Anonymous wrote:121 pages of whining. Parents if you want your kid to have access to Jeliff Field, then send your kid to Maret. If you can't send your kid to Maret, then that's on you -- "poor" decision making by your and/or your spouse, unexceptional kids, etc. Look at yourselves and stop blaming others and stop with the conspiracy theories. Signed, non-Maret parent

No thanks. My kids go to a private school that can afford to buy a playing field of its own without doing backroom deals to get a taxpayer funded field for their exclusive use. Why would anyone want to pay 45k/year to go to a school that can’t even afford a field of its own?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither an Ellington or Hardy renovation does anything for the taxpayers who've spent millions to give Maret its own field.

$15m purchase price + $7.5m financing cost (over ten years) = no benefit for the City. At least the Nats bring in tax revenue and have anchored revitalization of a new part of the city. This deal has done nothing for the city except cost money.

It's not that clear in the testimony, but didn't DPR say that they get $3mil a year from renting the field?

Asking for a friend who like facts.

They said they got $3 million a year from their entire portfolio -- 120 fields and 67 rec centers.

And they issue 45,000 permits per year. Average permit is $67.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither an Ellington or Hardy renovation does anything for the taxpayers who've spent millions to give Maret its own field.

$15m purchase price + $7.5m financing cost (over ten years) = no benefit for the City. At least the Nats bring in tax revenue and have anchored revitalization of a new part of the city. This deal has done nothing for the city except cost money.

It's not that clear in the testimony, but didn't DPR say that they get $3mil a year from renting the field?

Asking for a friend who like facts.

They said they got $3 million a year from their entire portfolio -- 120 fields and 67 rec centers.