Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Bottom line: Hardy having a parking lot is 100% irrelevant. It is not Hardy's duty to find a way to accommodate Maret. If Maret wants to buy the Hardy parking lot it can make an offer for it to DC

It should be Hardy's job to find a way to accommodate its own students, which means putting them first ahead of staff convenience. Hardy has the space to build a large-sized playing field on its own campus. This would involve moving the court to where the parking area is. Hardy could decide to dispense with parking altogether, which is the preferred DDOT alternative. For example, John Eaton has no staff parking. Hardy instead could decide to dispense with the court (there is one available at Jelleff.). Or Hardy could ask DCPS to put the court on top of the parking.

I doubt, however, that many at Hardy would want to see Maret own a field on the Hardy campus instead of Hardy students having a field on their own campus.

No, it is Maret's job to find a way to accommodate its own students on its own facilities-it's not the job of the DC taxpayer. That's why parents pay $40k/year. Maret has the space to build a large-sized playing field on its own campus. Maret should be so ashamed of the way it's unable to do so or to move its campus to find a larger space as Sidwell and GDS have done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Bottom line: Hardy having a parking lot is 100% irrelevant. It is not Hardy's duty to find a way to accommodate Maret. If Maret wants to buy the Hardy parking lot it can make an offer for it to DC

It should be Hardy's job to find a way to accommodate its own students, which means putting them first ahead of staff convenience. Hardy has the space to build a large-sized playing field on its own campus. This would involve moving the court to where the parking area is. Hardy could decide to dispense with parking altogether, which is the preferred DDOT alternative. For example, John Eaton has no staff parking. Hardy instead could decide to dispense with the court (there is one available at Jelleff.). Or Hardy could ask DCPS to put the court on top of the parking.

I doubt, however, that many at Hardy would want to see Maret own a field on the Hardy campus instead of Hardy students having a field on their own campus.

No, it is Maret's job to find a way to accommodate its own students on its own facilities-it's not the job of the DC taxpayer. That's why parents pay $40k/year. Maret has the space to build a large-sized playing field on its own campus. Maret should be so ashamed of the way it's unable to do so or to move its campus to find a larger space as Sidwell and GDS have done.

Anonymous wrote:

Bottom line: Hardy having a parking lot is 100% irrelevant. It is not Hardy's duty to find a way to accommodate Maret. If Maret wants to buy the Hardy parking lot it can make an offer for it to DC

It should be Hardy's job to find a way to accommodate its own students, which means putting them first ahead of staff convenience. Hardy has the space to build a large-sized playing field on its own campus. This would involve moving the court to where the parking area is. Hardy could decide to dispense with parking altogether, which is the preferred DDOT alternative. For example, John Eaton has no staff parking. Hardy instead could decide to dispense with the court (there is one available at Jelleff.). Or Hardy could ask DCPS to put the court on top of the parking.

I doubt, however, that many at Hardy would want to see Maret own a field on the Hardy campus instead of Hardy students having a field on their own campus.

Bottom line: Hardy having a parking lot is 100% irrelevant. It is not Hardy's duty to find a way to accommodate Maret. If Maret wants to buy the Hardy parking lot it can make an offer for it to DC

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

Seriously? The inadequacies of the Maret campus are not a problem the kids at the BGCGW need to worry about. Neither should the staff at Hardy need to prioritize the needs of Maret students. If Maret can’t share, they should build their own facilities.

It seems apparent that staff at Hardy won't prioritize the needs of Hardy students either, over their free staff parking.

Your red herrings continue to stink up the place. Pls explain why Hardy staff should make up for Maret’s inadequate campus facilities and unwillingness to build their own fields or share the fields that exist with at-risk kids in aftercare.

Don't most public schools have their own fields? If not, how many prioritize free staff parking perks over the athletic needs of their students? That says that Hardy is more about the staff than the students. Sad.

Sure it is sad. But irrelevant to this discussion here. Maret wants to rent the field (which is what it is doing- blabbering about upgrades etc doesn't change the fact that it is renting the field, just paying in upgrades rather than all cash). Maret is not entitled to first dibs on the field because DPR is required to prioritize DCPS. DPR has not prioritized DCPS so the contract should be nullified. I am a DC voter and I live nowhere near Jelleff but you better believe that 1) I will never send my kids to Maret unless they back down here; and 2) I will remember which politicians were in favor of the Maret deal when it comes time to support new council members and mayorial candidates.

Bottom line: Hardy having a parking lot is 100% irrelevant. It is not Hardy's duty to find a way to accommodate Maret. If Maret wants to buy the Hardy parking lot it can make an offer for it to DC

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

Seriously? The inadequacies of the Maret campus are not a problem the kids at the BGCGW need to worry about. Neither should the staff at Hardy need to prioritize the needs of Maret students. If Maret can’t share, they should build their own facilities.

It seems apparent that staff at Hardy won't prioritize the needs of Hardy students either, over their free staff parking.

Your red herrings continue to stink up the place. Pls explain why Hardy staff should make up for Maret’s inadequate campus facilities and unwillingness to build their own fields or share the fields that exist with at-risk kids in aftercare.

Don't most public schools have their own fields? If not, how many prioritize free staff parking perks over the athletic needs of their students? That says that Hardy is more about the staff than the students. Sad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

Seriously? The inadequacies of the Maret campus are not a problem the kids at the BGCGW need to worry about. Neither should the staff at Hardy need to prioritize the needs of Maret students. If Maret can’t share, they should build their own facilities.

It seems apparent that staff at Hardy won't prioritize the needs of Hardy students either, over their free staff parking.

Your red herrings continue to stink up the place. Pls explain why Hardy staff should make up for Maret’s inadequate campus facilities and unwillingness to build their own fields or share the fields that exist with at-risk kids in aftercare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

Seriously? The inadequacies of the Maret campus are not a problem the kids at the BGCGW need to worry about. Neither should the staff at Hardy need to prioritize the needs of Maret students. If Maret can’t share, they should build their own facilities.

It seems apparent that staff at Hardy won't prioritize the needs of Hardy students either, over their free staff parking.

Anonymous wrote:It seems apparent that staff at Hardy won't prioritize the needs of Hardy students either, over their free staff parking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

So if Maret’s facilities are insufficient why doesn’t it move? GDS has. Sidwell has. Only Maret wants to stay in its same place while expecting DC taxpayers to pay for its students (nearly half of whom aren’t even DC residents) to play on a big field while many other public schools can’t have the same because Maret won’t share.

I’m sure that if you know of a bigger campus available in Northwest you will let Ms. Talbott know.

As for DC resident students, as you note more than half of Maret students live on the District. But given non-District residents who falsely claim DC residency to attend Hardy or Ellington (as well as official non-DC resident tuition payers at the latter), what’s your point ? One is reminded of the old people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones admonition. At least DC taxpayers aren’t paying to educate nonresident students - or any student for that matter — at Maret. DC taxpayers are paying to operate Hardy, Ellington and any number of schools where students mostly from MD are fraudulently (or in a few cases, transparently) enrolled.

Again, you try to focus the argument on Ellington which is irrelevant to the Jelleff issue and on Hardy which is only part of the larger picture.

Why does Maret refuse to share?

It is not Maret's decision on who uses and doesn't use Jelleff, with one exception. Even though Maret is entitled to use the field on Wednesday's during peak sports season, they have made the field available to Hardy on that day. DPR is responsible for scheduling of the field outside of Maret's limited hours.

Thousands of public school students, Boys and Girls club participants, Stoddert soccer league participants and others have shared in and benefitted from the turf field and other capital improvements, including to the swimming pool, that Maret has funded.

DCPS, DPR and several council members are working on an arrangement to give Hardy reserved priority at the Ellington field, which is playable now but is slated for improvement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

Seriously? The inadequacies of the Maret campus are not a problem the kids at the BGCGW need to worry about. Neither should the staff at Hardy need to prioritize the needs of Maret students. If Maret can’t share, they should build their own facilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

So if Maret’s facilities are insufficient why doesn’t it move? GDS has. Sidwell has. Only Maret wants to stay in its same place while expecting DC taxpayers to pay for its students (nearly half of whom aren’t even DC residents) to play on a big field while many other public schools can’t have the same because Maret won’t share.

I’m sure that if you know of a bigger campus available in Northwest you will let Ms. Talbott know.

As for DC resident students, as you note more than half of Maret students live on the District. But given non-District residents who falsely claim DC residency to attend Hardy or Ellington (as well as official non-DC resident tuition payers at the latter), what’s your point ? One is reminded of the old people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones admonition. At least DC taxpayers aren’t paying to educate nonresident students - or any student for that matter — at Maret. DC taxpayers are paying to operate Hardy, Ellington and any number of schools where students mostly from MD are fraudulently (or in a few cases, transparently) enrolled.

Again, you try to focus the argument on Ellington which is irrelevant to the Jelleff issue and on Hardy which is only part of the larger picture.

Why does Maret refuse to share?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the Hardy student didn't ask why DCPS doesn't make Ellington field available to Hardy ASAP. Then he might ask his principal and staff why they won't give up their free parking lot so that Hardy's existing kiddie field can be expanded to a proper, on campus field facility.

Too bad Maret can't act like a decent private school and puts its parking lot underground like Sidwell did, to make room for a proper athletic field for the good of its students (and the broader DC community who would like its public park back). Why is Maret so incompetent at planning for infrastructure?

Because if you bothered to check, you would see that Maret’s parking area is about 50 feet wide at most, pushed up against the Swiss embassy compound. Even if the parking were underground, you’d see that a second field wouldn’t fit. Indeed, if you overlay a regular sized field over the entire front lawn and driveway of Maret, it wouldn’t fit (putting aside slope and historic protections that would preclude a field there even if there were space). The bottom line is that even if Maret wished to put its parking underground, there is no room on the campus for a second field.

By contrast, a nearly Jelleff-sized field would fit snugly on a north-south orientation covering the present area of the Hardy court and its mini field. It would of course require moving the court to the area where the parking lot is. Or, if the staff insisted on free parking over kids’ sports needs, the court could be sacrificed to maintain the staff privileges. It is noteworthy that the staff parking lot is wider and about as long as the present Hardy mini-field.

So if Maret’s facilities are insufficient why doesn’t it move? GDS has. Sidwell has. Only Maret wants to stay in its same place while expecting DC taxpayers to pay for its students (nearly half of whom aren’t even DC residents) to play on a big field while many other public schools can’t have the same because Maret won’t share.

I’m sure that if you know of a bigger campus available in Northwest you will let Ms. Talbott know.

As for DC resident students, as you note more than half of Maret students live on the District. But given non-District residents who falsely claim DC residency to attend Hardy or Ellington (as well as official non-DC resident tuition payers at the latter), what’s your point ? One is reminded of the old people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones admonition. At least DC taxpayers aren’t paying to educate nonresident students - or any student for that matter — at Maret. DC taxpayers are paying to operate Hardy, Ellington and any number of schools where students mostly from MD are fraudulently (or in a few cases, transparently) enrolled.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret takes the field five days per week after school for the prime after school hours during the prime fall and spring athletic seasons - because, as their leadership says, the Maret students really need to get home at a reasonable hour for dinner and homework. These are the hours the BGCGW members are in the after-school program so those kids don’t get any access to the field. This occurs even if Maret doesn’t use the field. It sits empty on those afternoons. So this is a de facto monopoly of the entire space during the only time that others could use it and Maret refuses to share the space despite there being ten other interested parties. Maret doesn’t want to share even it is not using the space. What terrible example are they setting for their students? What sorts of values are the kids there learning?

Why not ask the Maret Board of Trustees what values their kids are learning? Because I see tons of language on their website about diversity and equity and they're not living their values.
https://www.maret.org/about-us/leadership
Ian Cameron, President
Leigh Comas, Vice President
Travis Allen ’93, Treasurer
Michael Kirshbaum ’94, Secretary
Mai Abdo
Alan Adler ’92
Esma Akin
David Burton
Steve Farina
Suzanne George
David Hall
Daniel Hartman
Margaret Johnson
Marc S. Lampkin
Tom Monahan
Vadim Nikitine
Lex Sant
Larry Siegel
Shooter Starr ’99, Alumni Council Representative
Ted Stettinius
Colin Stretch
Marjo Talbott
Aakash Thakkar
Tricia Primrose Wallace
Victoria Wassmer
Rachel Moore Weller
Sylvia White
Laily Zia, Parents Association Representative

Does Hardy have a parent advisory council? Let’s publish its member names.

No, it's a public school.

Right, not even an ADVISORY board. And we know at DCPS, it’s all about the administrators and the bureaucrats. The fact that the school administrator is called “Principal Pride” or “Principal Jones” as of s/he was like a medical doctor. The views of the parents don’t count for shit.