Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you missed the post from an AT parent.it was there.lots of concern about less access to cte classes for AT as I recall

I didn’t see that. Date?

Only saw some former AT parents “concerned” about Langston.

I assume you will just claim this is APE parents like always?

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/

McCaffrey is a hack.

This was two months ago. They didn’t bring up specific issues with the changes, just that they want more time and transparency in the process.

quote:

There’s a more recent statement from the Arlington Tech Advisory Committee that doesn’t really make sense. Lots of words to say they specifically have a problem with the Langston program and only want one school admin.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P1dquTBefwCJ1LjwmfQUtCYKXcByzrgw/view

The committee faces a challenging dilemma. They want to avoid transferring a program to their school, especially since it serves a high-needs student population. While there's concern about the potential impact on enrollment at their own school, opposing these sensitive students and program could also reflect poorly on them.

I think it's pretty clear. Here's a quote:
We oppose any narratives that stereotype, marginalize, or diminish Langston students in
a negative or exclusionary manner. Such views do not reflect the values or perspectives
of ATAC and misinterpret our concerns.

Of course they have to say this. They would vilified otherwise. They are banking on Langston wanting to stay in their own facility, so they can champion for them to not come to GHC.

Langston wants to move. They said so themselves. AT claimed they would support the move if Langston wanted to come. They said they do.

Your move AT. Will you deliver on your promise to support it now?

I’m fine with that.

-AT parent

Most current AT parents will be fine with it because they are already there and theirs kids will be 15 or older.

The problem will be attracting the 600 new students they need, entering at 13,14.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure sounds like AT parents are upset about this

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPx4gxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeMXzm5DuYVGE9hdgUZgH3I3cBS6JzWKwVPxZkKd9HMZyi-4kb-Vs84MsINqk_aem_cyZ5NANVpr4dBJ-zubSppQ

Fake news, pseudologia fantastica practitioner. That was right after the no plan plan was released. read their own words published 1/26.

+1 APS published a plan, has very few details and then immediately backtracked.

are we having fun playing with the fuzzy little troll? I didn't know that their moss covered selves were so soft.

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Are you saying I'm a troll because I posted the Arl Now article. I'm trying to understand the opposition to the plan from AT. First someone said no AT parents were opposed. Now we have shown that's clearly not true so I'm a troll?!

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Last night’s comments before school board were opposed. Is that recent enough for you?

Not without proof.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure sounds like AT parents are upset about this

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPx4gxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeMXzm5DuYVGE9hdgUZgH3I3cBS6JzWKwVPxZkKd9HMZyi-4kb-Vs84MsINqk_aem_cyZ5NANVpr4dBJ-zubSppQ

Fake news, pseudologia fantastica practitioner. That was right after the no plan plan was released. read their own words published 1/26.

+1 APS published a plan, has very few details and then immediately backtracked.

are we having fun playing with the fuzzy little troll? I didn't know that their moss covered selves were so soft.

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Are you saying I'm a troll because I posted the Arl Now article. I'm trying to understand the opposition to the plan from AT. First someone said no AT parents were opposed. Now we have shown that's clearly not true so I'm a troll?!

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Last night’s comments before school board were opposed. Is that recent enough for you?

Not without proof.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure sounds like AT parents are upset about this

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPx4gxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeMXzm5DuYVGE9hdgUZgH3I3cBS6JzWKwVPxZkKd9HMZyi-4kb-Vs84MsINqk_aem_cyZ5NANVpr4dBJ-zubSppQ

Fake news, pseudologia fantastica practitioner. That was right after the no plan plan was released. read their own words published 1/26.

+1 APS published a plan, has very few details and then immediately backtracked.

are we having fun playing with the fuzzy little troll? I didn't know that their moss covered selves were so soft.

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Are you saying I'm a troll because I posted the Arl Now article. I'm trying to understand the opposition to the plan from AT. First someone said no AT parents were opposed. Now we have shown that's clearly not true so I'm a troll?!

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Last night’s comments before school board were opposed. Is that recent enough for you?

What did they say?
What were their reasons?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure sounds like AT parents are upset about this

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPx4gxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeMXzm5DuYVGE9hdgUZgH3I3cBS6JzWKwVPxZkKd9HMZyi-4kb-Vs84MsINqk_aem_cyZ5NANVpr4dBJ-zubSppQ

Fake news, pseudologia fantastica practitioner. That was right after the no plan plan was released. read their own words published 1/26.

+1 APS published a plan, has very few details and then immediately backtracked.

are we having fun playing with the fuzzy little troll? I didn't know that their moss covered selves were so soft.

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Are you saying I'm a troll because I posted the Arl Now article. I'm trying to understand the opposition to the plan from AT. First someone said no AT parents were opposed. Now we have shown that's clearly not true so I'm a troll?!

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Last night’s comments before school board were opposed. Is that recent enough for you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you missed the post from an AT parent.it was there.lots of concern about less access to cte classes for AT as I recall

I didn’t see that. Date?

Only saw some former AT parents “concerned” about Langston.

I assume you will just claim this is APE parents like always?

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/

McCaffrey is a hack.

This was two months ago. They didn’t bring up specific issues with the changes, just that they want more time and transparency in the process.

quote:

There’s a more recent statement from the Arlington Tech Advisory Committee that doesn’t really make sense. Lots of words to say they specifically have a problem with the Langston program and only want one school admin.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P1dquTBefwCJ1LjwmfQUtCYKXcByzrgw/view

The committee faces a challenging dilemma. They want to avoid transferring a program to their school, especially since it serves a high-needs student population. While there's concern about the potential impact on enrollment at their own school, opposing these sensitive students and program could also reflect poorly on them.

I think it's pretty clear. Here's a quote:
We oppose any narratives that stereotype, marginalize, or diminish Langston students in
a negative or exclusionary manner. Such views do not reflect the values or perspectives
of ATAC and misinterpret our concerns.

Of course they have to say this. They would vilified otherwise. They are banking on Langston wanting to stay in their own facility, so they can champion for them to not come to GHC.

Langston wants to move. They said so themselves. AT claimed they would support the move if Langston wanted to come. They said they do.

Your move AT. Will you deliver on your promise to support it now?

I’m fine with that.

-AT parent

Most current AT parents will be fine with it because they are already there and theirs kids will be 15 or older.

The problem will be attracting the 600 new students they need, entering at 13,14.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you missed the post from an AT parent.it was there.lots of concern about less access to cte classes for AT as I recall

I didn’t see that. Date?

Only saw some former AT parents “concerned” about Langston.

I assume you will just claim this is APE parents like always?

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/

McCaffrey is a hack.

This was two months ago. They didn’t bring up specific issues with the changes, just that they want more time and transparency in the process.

quote:

There’s a more recent statement from the Arlington Tech Advisory Committee that doesn’t really make sense. Lots of words to say they specifically have a problem with the Langston program and only want one school admin.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P1dquTBefwCJ1LjwmfQUtCYKXcByzrgw/view

The committee faces a challenging dilemma. They want to avoid transferring a program to their school, especially since it serves a high-needs student population. While there's concern about the potential impact on enrollment at their own school, opposing these sensitive students and program could also reflect poorly on them.

I think it's pretty clear. Here's a quote:
We oppose any narratives that stereotype, marginalize, or diminish Langston students in
a negative or exclusionary manner. Such views do not reflect the values or perspectives
of ATAC and misinterpret our concerns.

Of course they have to say this. They would vilified otherwise. They are banking on Langston wanting to stay in their own facility, so they can champion for them to not come to GHC.

Langston wants to move. They said so themselves. AT claimed they would support the move if Langston wanted to come. They said they do.

Your move AT. Will you deliver on your promise to support it now?

I’m fine with that.

-AT parent

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you missed the post from an AT parent.it was there.lots of concern about less access to cte classes for AT as I recall

I didn’t see that. Date?

Only saw some former AT parents “concerned” about Langston.

I assume you will just claim this is APE parents like always?

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/

McCaffrey is a hack.

This was two months ago. They didn’t bring up specific issues with the changes, just that they want more time and transparency in the process.

quote:

There’s a more recent statement from the Arlington Tech Advisory Committee that doesn’t really make sense. Lots of words to say they specifically have a problem with the Langston program and only want one school admin.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P1dquTBefwCJ1LjwmfQUtCYKXcByzrgw/view

The committee faces a challenging dilemma. They want to avoid transferring a program to their school, especially since it serves a high-needs student population. While there's concern about the potential impact on enrollment at their own school, opposing these sensitive students and program could also reflect poorly on them.

I think it's pretty clear. Here's a quote:
We oppose any narratives that stereotype, marginalize, or diminish Langston students in
a negative or exclusionary manner. Such views do not reflect the values or perspectives
of ATAC and misinterpret our concerns.

Of course they have to say this. They would vilified otherwise. They are banking on Langston wanting to stay in their own facility, so they can champion for them to not come to GHC.

Langston wants to move. They said so themselves. AT claimed they would support the move if Langston wanted to come. They said they do.

Your move AT. Will you deliver on your promise to support it now?

Anonymous wrote:Well. AT students are speaking now in opposition to the move.

Still claim to not be opposed, AT?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure sounds like AT parents are upset about this

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPx4gxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeMXzm5DuYVGE9hdgUZgH3I3cBS6JzWKwVPxZkKd9HMZyi-4kb-Vs84MsINqk_aem_cyZ5NANVpr4dBJ-zubSppQ

Fake news, pseudologia fantastica practitioner. That was right after the no plan plan was released. read their own words published 1/26.

+1 APS published a plan, has very few details and then immediately backtracked.

are we having fun playing with the fuzzy little troll? I didn't know that their moss covered selves were so soft.

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Are you saying I'm a troll because I posted the Arl Now article. I'm trying to understand the opposition to the plan from AT. First someone said no AT parents were opposed. Now we have shown that's clearly not true so I'm a troll?!

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Last night’s comments before school board were opposed. Is that recent enough for you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure sounds like AT parents are upset about this

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPx4gxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeMXzm5DuYVGE9hdgUZgH3I3cBS6JzWKwVPxZkKd9HMZyi-4kb-Vs84MsINqk_aem_cyZ5NANVpr4dBJ-zubSppQ

Fake news, pseudologia fantastica practitioner. That was right after the no plan plan was released. read their own words published 1/26.

+1 APS published a plan, has very few details and then immediately backtracked.

are we having fun playing with the fuzzy little troll? I didn't know that their moss covered selves were so soft.

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Are you saying I'm a troll because I posted the Arl Now article. I'm trying to understand the opposition to the plan from AT. First someone said no AT parents were opposed. Now we have shown that's clearly not true so I'm a troll?!

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you missed the post from an AT parent.it was there.lots of concern about less access to cte classes for AT as I recall

I didn’t see that. Date?

Only saw some former AT parents “concerned” about Langston.

I assume you will just claim this is APE parents like always?

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/

McCaffrey is a hack.

This was two months ago. They didn’t bring up specific issues with the changes, just that they want more time and transparency in the process.

quote:

There’s a more recent statement from the Arlington Tech Advisory Committee that doesn’t really make sense. Lots of words to say they specifically have a problem with the Langston program and only want one school admin.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P1dquTBefwCJ1LjwmfQUtCYKXcByzrgw/view

The committee faces a challenging dilemma. They want to avoid transferring a program to their school, especially since it serves a high-needs student population. While there's concern about the potential impact on enrollment at their own school, opposing these sensitive students and program could also reflect poorly on them.

I think it's pretty clear. Here's a quote:
We oppose any narratives that stereotype, marginalize, or diminish Langston students in
a negative or exclusionary manner. Such views do not reflect the values or perspectives
of ATAC and misinterpret our concerns.

Of course they have to say this. They would vilified otherwise. They are banking on Langston wanting to stay in their own facility, so they can champion for them to not come to GHC.

Langston wants to move. They said so themselves. AT claimed they would support the move if Langston wanted to come. They said they do.

Your move AT. Will you deliver on your promise to support it now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure sounds like AT parents are upset about this

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPx4gxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeMXzm5DuYVGE9hdgUZgH3I3cBS6JzWKwVPxZkKd9HMZyi-4kb-Vs84MsINqk_aem_cyZ5NANVpr4dBJ-zubSppQ

Fake news, pseudologia fantastica practitioner. That was right after the no plan plan was released. read their own words published 1/26.

+1 APS published a plan, has very few details and then immediately backtracked.

are we having fun playing with the fuzzy little troll? I didn't know that their moss covered selves were so soft.

No post has demonstrated recent opposition.

Are you saying I'm a troll because I posted the Arl Now article. I'm trying to understand the opposition to the plan from AT. First someone said no AT parents were opposed. Now we have shown that's clearly not true so I'm a troll?!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then you missed the post from an AT parent.it was there.lots of concern about less access to cte classes for AT as I recall

I didn’t see that. Date?

Only saw some former AT parents “concerned” about Langston.

I assume you will just claim this is APE parents like always?

https://www.arlnow.com/2025/12/11/change-in-plans-for-new-career-center-facility-angers-arlington-tech-parents/

McCaffrey is a hack.

This was two months ago. They didn’t bring up specific issues with the changes, just that they want more time and transparency in the process.

quote:

There’s a more recent statement from the Arlington Tech Advisory Committee that doesn’t really make sense. Lots of words to say they specifically have a problem with the Langston program and only want one school admin.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P1dquTBefwCJ1LjwmfQUtCYKXcByzrgw/view

The committee faces a challenging dilemma. They want to avoid transferring a program to their school, especially since it serves a high-needs student population. While there's concern about the potential impact on enrollment at their own school, opposing these sensitive students and program could also reflect poorly on them.

I think it's pretty clear. Here's a quote:
We oppose any narratives that stereotype, marginalize, or diminish Langston students in
a negative or exclusionary manner. Such views do not reflect the values or perspectives
of ATAC and misinterpret our concerns.

Of course they have to say this. They would vilified otherwise. They are banking on Langston wanting to stay in their own facility, so they can champion for them to not come to GHC.