Anonymous wrote:Why fight against a relocation of Banneker, when the Shaw site isn't going to be a MS anyway?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a big push to “pause” the process to allow community input and to explore alternatives. The decision making process that led them here was flawed, but even if there is a “pause”, the same conclusion could be ultimately reached.
I think they are a little late in organizing, but it does seem like the boundary process outcome was Shaw MS, and now that is being whisked away with very little parent input at all. Why have a formal process if the outcome can be waved away like that? The boundary documents should mean something.
How many DMEs ago was that? How many Chancellors? How many mayors?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a big push to “pause” the process to allow community input and to explore alternatives. The decision making process that led them here was flawed, but even if there is a “pause”, the same conclusion could be ultimately reached.
I think they are a little late in organizing, but it does seem like the boundary process outcome was Shaw MS, and now that is being whisked away with very little parent input at all. Why have a formal process if the outcome can be waved away like that? The boundary documents should mean something.
How many DMEs ago was that? How many Chancellors? How many mayors?
I don't think that should matter. And I think they should be called out for not engaging parents in this decision even if there had been no prior commitment whatsoever. Their parent engagement is a joke.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a big push to “pause” the process to allow community input and to explore alternatives. The decision making process that led them here was flawed, but even if there is a “pause”, the same conclusion could be ultimately reached.
I think they are a little late in organizing, but it does seem like the boundary process outcome was Shaw MS, and now that is being whisked away with very little parent input at all. Why have a formal process if the outcome can be waved away like that? The boundary documents should mean something.
How many DMEs ago was that? How many Chancellors? How many mayors?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a big push to “pause” the process to allow community input and to explore alternatives. The decision making process that led them here was flawed, but even if there is a “pause”, the same conclusion could be ultimately reached.
I think they are a little late in organizing, but it does seem like the boundary process outcome was Shaw MS, and now that is being whisked away with very little parent input at all. Why have a formal process if the outcome can be waved away like that? The boundary documents should mean something.
Anonymous wrote:There is a big push to “pause” the process to allow community input and to explore alternatives. The decision making process that led them here was flawed, but even if there is a “pause”, the same conclusion could be ultimately reached.
Anonymous wrote:Why fight against a relocation of Banneker, when the Shaw site isn't going to be a MS anyway?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Initial cost estimate (which you know will end up higher): $115 million. New building for 800 students. 164,000 square feet, which is a TON of space for 800 students.
https://dgs.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dgs/event_content/attachments/DCAM-19-CS-RFI-0016%20-%20Banneker%20High%20School%20-%20RFI.pdf
DC builds big high schools -- Dunbar is 280,000 sq ft for 1100 students
Anonymous wrote:Initial cost estimate (which you know will end up higher): $115 million. New building for 800 students. 164,000 square feet, which is a TON of space for 800 students.
https://dgs.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dgs/event_content/attachments/DCAM-19-CS-RFI-0016%20-%20Banneker%20High%20School%20-%20RFI.pdf
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was at a public meeting a while back with the temp. Chancellor, she was ask a few times about high school for kids in Logan and Dupont, her response was " we need to fix Cardozo".
So I am not confident that she will be supportive of a middle school in the area that is not Cardozo either. Whatever the plan was, it is over now. Someone should ask her.
But I also think this should not rest entirely in hands of DCPS, this is a bigger city planning issue.
And Grosso is holding a hearing. Have you signed up to testify?
What hearing when?