Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC government (mayor or council) has no appetite to replace the DE Board.

They LIKE the school and think it is doing a good job with the students they have.

Just go see Grosso and see how far you get. I'll wait for you to report back.

About 25% of the students live in PG. How screwed up is that, when DC taxpayers are stuck with Ellington's bill?

Anonymous wrote:DC government (mayor or council) has no appetite to replace the DE Board.

They LIKE the school and think it is doing a good job with the students they have.

Just go see Grosso and see how far you get. I'll wait for you to report back.

Anonymous wrote:DC government (mayor or council) has no appetite to replace the DE Board.

They LIKE the school and think it is doing a good job with the students they have.

Just go see Grosso and see how far you get. I'll wait for you to report back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should the Murch principal or LSAT be held responsible for the budget shortfall there? No.

DCPS owns the building and with DGS is managing the project. The DE board didn't sign the contract or hire the architects or contractors. And they can't be held accountable for these overruns no matter how many times you all say it.

Find another scapegoat.

Whether or not the board should be held liable or even prosecuted (all should be investigated) is one issue. There is no question but that the board should be replaced and going forward, the DC government should exercise control over the appointment of a majority of the new board.

Anonymous wrote:Should the Murch principal or LSAT be held responsible for the budget shortfall there? No.

DCPS owns the building and with DGS is managing the project. The DE board didn't sign the contract or hire the architects or contractors. And they can't be held accountable for these overruns no matter how many times you all say it.

Find another scapegoat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should the Murch principal or LSAT be held responsible for the budget shortfall there? No.

DCPS owns the building and with DGS is managing the project. The DE board didn't sign the contract or hire the architects or contractors. And they can't be held accountable for these overruns no matter how many times you all say it.

Find another scapegoat.

This is a $130 MILLION SHORTFALL and still climbing. The board is unaccountable and incompetent and perhaps some are even getting a piece of the construction action on the side. Look at how they spent like drunken sailors on the ex-principal's compensation package (2x comparables) when the school was laying of teachers.

Anonymous wrote:Should the Murch principal or LSAT be held responsible for the budget shortfall there? No.

DCPS owns the building and with DGS is managing the project. The DE board didn't sign the contract or hire the architects or contractors. And they can't be held accountable for these overruns no matter how many times you all say it.

Find another scapegoat.

Anonymous wrote:Should the Murch principal or LSAT be held responsible for the budget shortfall there? No.

DCPS owns the building and with DGS is managing the project. The DE board didn't sign the contract or hire the architects or contractors. And they can't be held accountable for these overruns no matter how many times you all say it.

Find another scapegoat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can this system continue? IF DE is a public school, it should be treated like one. Is the council at least working on changing the governance structure?

The school is legally a joint venture between the Kennedy Center, GWU, and DCPS.

DCPS could seek to renegotiate the agreement but never heard anyone express interest in that.

Here. All three joint venture partners could and should be held accountable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can this system continue? IF DE is a public school, it should be treated like one. Is the council at least working on changing the governance structure?

The school is legally a joint venture between the Kennedy Center, GWU, and DCPS.

DCPS could seek to renegotiate the agreement but never heard anyone express interest in that.

Anonymous wrote:DE needs to function more like a quasi-governmental instrumentality like the Kennedy Center, whose Trustees include Government officials and private citizens appointed by the President. The are different rules for funds appropriated by Congress and those obtained by private donations and ticket sales. Is there any oversight by the Council or DCPS in terms of how funds are spent?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In theory (and as this be DC, so that's a big assumption), the Ellington board members are supposed to act as fiduciaries.

Fiduciary to the school, not to DCPS or the taxpayers of the city.

Being a publicly-supported school fiduciary doesn't confer a duty to steal the taxpayers blind! And the Ellington board doesn't exactly have a good record in providing oversight even just of the school. Several years ago, the Ellington board agreed to pay its principal, for a school of only 500 pupils, over twice the highest comparable salary for a DCPS high school principal. It turned out it was also twice the national scale, when the Ellington principal then left to accept only half of his former Ellington compensation in a job with system-wide responsibility for the LA Unified School District, the second largest system in the country with almost 700,000 students. And the most outrageous part is that the Ellington board agreed to pay such an above-scale compensation package for its head at the same time when Ellington was laying off full-time teaching staff, citing budget pressures. Oy!

This is indeed outrageous behavior, hijacking public money.

Who's the enabler in the Mayor's office or in City Council?