Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why was Evans even allowed to participate in the hearing? First, he has been publicly outed for being corrupt. Second, his son is/was at Maret. Isn’t that a conflict of interest?

Evans was allowed to vote on whether he should lose his committee post because of his multiple corruption investigations. He should have resigned long ago, but doesn’t have the character. But in the meantime, he continues, while his constituents attempt to remove him via recall vote.

Anonymous wrote:Why was Evans even allowed to participate in the hearing? First, he has been publicly outed for being corrupt. Second, his son is/was at Maret. Isn’t that a conflict of interest?

https://deadspin.com/private-school-that-pocketed-public-rec-center-is-tired-1839260457/amp
Jelleff neighbors and parents at the nearby public schools have spent the last several years watching and waiting for Maret’s 10-year deal to end so they could get more use out of the rec center. But Maret and the city’s Department of Parks and Recreation quietly made a back-door deal while schools were out that extended that sweetheart 2010 pact through 2029.

In August head of school Marjo Talbott told Deadspin that despite dubious contract language and protests, she never doubted the public field would remain under her control. “This is not a luxury. It was an expectation,” Talbott said of the no-bid extension. (Talbott comes from a very connected D.C. family: Her brother, Nelson Strobridge “Strobe” Talbott III, was deputy secretary of state in the Clinton administration.)

Connections seemed to be a big thing at Maret. Councilmember Jack Evans, D.C.’s longest-tenured elected official and a guy who is frequently hailed as the most corrupt politician in a city where corruption is as abundant as playing fields are scarce, was a leading force behind the 2010 deal relinquishing the government’s control over Jelleff; Evans’s son attended Maret.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
My understanding from talking to people in the DC government is that behind the scenes Maret put A LOT of pressure on DPR and the mayor's office to grant the extension.

What kind of pressure exactly? Did they threaten to sue if they didn't get their way? Did they mention campaign contributions? What did they have over DPR and Bowser to get them to sign off on this load of shit?

Anonymous wrote:
My understanding from talking to people in the DC government is that behind the scenes Maret put A LOT of pressure on DPR and the mayor's office to grant the extension.

Anonymous wrote:It looks like Bowser is going to be at the drag race on 17th tomorrow (a mini controversy has erupted over her trying to claim it as her own - https://dcist.com/story/18/10/08/mayor-bowser-to-present-annual-high/). Go there and harangue her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No ramifications. It's not like that.

In my opinion, the school still doesn't see what it's done that is wrong or is offending people. They are tone-deaf on this issue for some reason.

As another person who testified asked me (rhetorically) after speaking, why isn't Maret trying to rehabilitate Ellington or somewhere else? It's not like there's a logistical or cost difference between shuttling kids a few blocks further. To him, Maret keeps doubling down on Jelleff because it's the cheapest, which is a sad commentary from his view.

Appreciate the candor. Has there been any discussion to be clear that this wasn't actually a 19 year deal, that the option to extend was solely at the discretion of the District? Every talking point made it sound like the option was basically Maret's to ask for, and that the District was almost obligated to grant it. I think that's a big part of the disconnect here.

I don't think the district was obligated to grant it...that was just the easiest thing to do. Rubber stamp a management system that, in their eyes, has been working well. I really believe the Bowser administration think they know what's best for everyone in this case. They are being very paternalistic about it.

My understanding from talking to people in the DC government is that behind the scenes Maret put A LOT of pressure on DPR and the mayor's office to grant the extension.

The thing about this deal was that there really wasn't any management system to speak of. The deal was that Maret put up $2.4 million on day 1. The whole notion that Maret "held up their end of the bargain" is nonsensical, the only way they could have not done that was to not build the field in the first place, in which case they wouldn't be seeking an extension anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No ramifications. It's not like that.

In my opinion, the school still doesn't see what it's done that is wrong or is offending people. They are tone-deaf on this issue for some reason.

As another person who testified asked me (rhetorically) after speaking, why isn't Maret trying to rehabilitate Ellington or somewhere else? It's not like there's a logistical or cost difference between shuttling kids a few blocks further. To him, Maret keeps doubling down on Jelleff because it's the cheapest, which is a sad commentary from his view.

Appreciate the candor. Has there been any discussion to be clear that this wasn't actually a 19 year deal, that the option to extend was solely at the discretion of the District? Every talking point made it sound like the option was basically Maret's to ask for, and that the District was almost obligated to grant it. I think that's a big part of the disconnect here.

I don't think the district was obligated to grant it...that was just the easiest thing to do. Rubber stamp a management system that, in their eyes, has been working well. I really believe the Bowser administration think they know what's best for everyone in this case. They are being very paternalistic about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No ramifications. It's not like that.

In my opinion, the school still doesn't see what it's done that is wrong or is offending people. They are tone-deaf on this issue for some reason.

As another person who testified asked me (rhetorically) after speaking, why isn't Maret trying to rehabilitate Ellington or somewhere else? It's not like there's a logistical or cost difference between shuttling kids a few blocks further. To him, Maret keeps doubling down on Jelleff because it's the cheapest, which is a sad commentary from his view.

Appreciate the candor. Has there been any discussion to be clear that this wasn't actually a 19 year deal, that the option to extend was solely at the discretion of the District? Every talking point made it sound like the option was basically Maret's to ask for, and that the District was almost obligated to grant it. I think that's a big part of the disconnect here.

I don't think the district was obligated to grant it...that was just the easiest thing to do. Rubber stamp a management system that, in their eyes, has been working well. I really believe the Bowser administration think they know what's best for everyone in this case. They are being very paternalistic about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No ramifications. It's not like that.

In my opinion, the school still doesn't see what it's done that is wrong or is offending people. They are tone-deaf on this issue for some reason.

As another person who testified asked me (rhetorically) after speaking, why isn't Maret trying to rehabilitate Ellington or somewhere else? It's not like there's a logistical or cost difference between shuttling kids a few blocks further. To him, Maret keeps doubling down on Jelleff because it's the cheapest, which is a sad commentary from his view.

Appreciate the candor. Has there been any discussion to be clear that this wasn't actually a 19 year deal, that the option to extend was solely at the discretion of the District? Every talking point made it sound like the option was basically Maret's to ask for, and that the District was almost obligated to grant it. I think that's a big part of the disconnect here.

Anonymous wrote:No ramifications. It's not like that.

In my opinion, the school still doesn't see what it's done that is wrong or is offending people. They are tone-deaf on this issue for some reason.

As another person who testified asked me (rhetorically) after speaking, why isn't Maret trying to rehabilitate Ellington or somewhere else? It's not like there's a logistical or cost difference between shuttling kids a few blocks further. To him, Maret keeps doubling down on Jelleff because it's the cheapest, which is a sad commentary from his view.