Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where does Hardy have daytime physical education if it has no field?

In the gym.

And it's an entirely irrelevant question. The relevant question is why is Maret's administration so incompetent that it can't find a private market rate field for Maret to use when other private schools have no issue with this? Is Maret's head of Finance & Operations, Bill Hodgetts asleep at the wheel?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where does Hardy have daytime physical education if it has no field?

In the gym.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where does Hardy have daytime physical education if it has no field?

In the gym.

Anonymous wrote:Where does Hardy have daytime physical education if it has no field?

Anonymous wrote:Maret wanted a 20 year use agreement in consideration of making capital improvements at Jelleff. At the time, DC would only agree to a 10-year initial term with an option (if Maret met its financial commitments) to extend for another 9 years. At the same time DC negotiated for front-loaded investment by Maret to enhance the playing field, pool and other infrastructure like field lights to be enjoyed by all users. Maret took the risk with its up front investment that the use agreement would not be entended beyond the initial term. If you consider Maret’s initial, front-loaded investment and then the second payment stream for the additional term, it works out to a payment of $230,000 annually for less than four months’ use. This is pretty high for relatively few hours weekly during part of the fall and spring season. In fact, including weekdays and some Saturday games, Maret was a distant third among scheduled users using Jelleff (2017 Spring data, with the British School and Stoddert soccer (about 32 hours weekly each) and Maret at 14 hours.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret wanted a 20 year use agreement in consideration of making capital improvements at Jelleff. At the time, DC would only agree to a 10-year initial term with an option (if Maret met its financial commitments) to extend for another 9 years. At the same time DC negotiated for front-loaded investment by Maret to enhance the playing field, pool and other infrastructure like field lights to be enjoyed by all users. Maret took the risk with its up front investment that the use agreement would not be entended beyond the initial term. If you consider Maret’s initial, front-loaded investment and then the second payment stream for the additional term, it works out to a payment of $230,000 annually for less than four months’ use. This is pretty high for relatively few hours weekly during part of the fall and spring season. In fact, including weekdays and some Saturday games, Maret was a distant third among scheduled users using Jelleff (2017 Spring data, with the British School and Stoddert soccer (about 32 hours weekly each) and Maret at 14 hours.

That’s false. There was no written agreement to extend the deal for Jellef past the 10 year period. If there was such an agreement you would link to it, but you can’t because it doesn’t exist. And if Maret wanted to use Jelleff during school hours like the British school does, there would be less community opposition, but no, Maret wants to pay $95k/year and not share Jelleff at all. If Maret thinks that paying such a small sum is so meaningful, it should find another field to use. (But it can’t, so it hogs a public field.)

This. Do show us where that agreement (with an option to extend) is written because it only exists in the minds of Maret administrators and soon to be felon and Maret parent Jack Evans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret wanted a 20 year use agreement in consideration of making capital improvements at Jelleff. At the time, DC would only agree to a 10-year initial term with an option (if Maret met its financial commitments) to extend for another 9 years. At the same time DC negotiated for front-loaded investment by Maret to enhance the playing field, pool and other infrastructure like field lights to be enjoyed by all users. Maret took the risk with its up front investment that the use agreement would not be entended beyond the initial term. If you consider Maret’s initial, front-loaded investment and then the second payment stream for the additional term, it works out to a payment of $230,000 annually for less than four months’ use. This is pretty high for relatively few hours weekly during part of the fall and spring season. In fact, including weekdays and some Saturday games, Maret was a distant third among scheduled users using Jelleff (2017 Spring data, with the British School and Stoddert soccer (about 32 hours weekly each) and Maret at 14 hours.

That’s false. There was no written agreement to extend the deal for Jellef past the 10 year period. If there was such an agreement you would link to it, but you can’t because it doesn’t exist. And if Maret wanted to use Jelleff during school hours like the British school does, there would be less community opposition, but no, Maret wants to pay $95k/year and not share Jelleff at all. If Maret thinks that paying such a small sum is so meaningful, it should find another field to use. (But it can’t, so it hogs a public field.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret wanted a 20 year use agreement in consideration of making capital improvements at Jelleff. At the time, DC would only agree to a 10-year initial term with an option (if Maret met its financial commitments) to extend for another 9 years. At the same time DC negotiated for front-loaded investment by Maret to enhance the playing field, pool and other infrastructure like field lights to be enjoyed by all users. Maret took the risk with its up front investment that the use agreement would not be entended beyond the initial term. If you consider Maret’s initial, front-loaded investment and then the second payment stream for the additional term, it works out to a payment of $230,000 annually for less than four months’ use. This is pretty high for relatively few hours weekly during part of the fall and spring season. In fact, including weekdays and some Saturday games, Maret was a distant third among scheduled users using Jelleff (2017 Spring data, with the British School and Stoddert soccer (about 32 hours weekly each) and Maret at 14 hours.

Blah blah blah.

10 year deal signed and then renewed in a back room.

Value of prime weekday afternoon hours > value of nighttime and weekend hours.

Facts are stubborn things. Too bad that Hardy hucksters are so “uniform” in their misrepresentations.

Anonymous wrote:Maret wanted a 20 year use agreement in consideration of making capital improvements at Jelleff. At the time, DC would only agree to a 10-year initial term with an option (if Maret met its financial commitments) to extend for another 9 years. At the same time DC negotiated for front-loaded investment by Maret to enhance the playing field, pool and other infrastructure like field lights to be enjoyed by all users. Maret took the risk with its up front investment that the use agreement would not be entended beyond the initial term. If you consider Maret’s initial, front-loaded investment and then the second payment stream for the additional term, it works out to a payment of $230,000 annually for less than four months’ use. This is pretty high for relatively few hours weekly during part of the fall and spring season. In fact, including weekdays and some Saturday games, Maret was a distant third among scheduled users using Jelleff (2017 Spring data, with the British School and Stoddert soccer (about 32 hours weekly each) and Maret at 14 hours.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret wanted a 20 year use agreement in consideration of making capital improvements at Jelleff. At the time, DC would only agree to a 10-year initial term with an option (if Maret met its financial commitments) to extend for another 9 years. At the same time DC negotiated for front-loaded investment by Maret to enhance the playing field, pool and other infrastructure like field lights to be enjoyed by all users. Maret took the risk with its up front investment that the use agreement would not be entended beyond the initial term. If you consider Maret’s initial, front-loaded investment and then the second payment stream for the additional term, it works out to a payment of $230,000 annually for less than four months’ use. This is pretty high for relatively few hours weekly during part of the fall and spring season. In fact, including weekdays and some Saturday games, Maret was a distant third among scheduled users using Jelleff (2017 Spring data, with the British School and Stoddert soccer (about 32 hours weekly each) and Maret at 14 hours.

Blah blah blah.

10 year deal signed and then renewed in a back room.

Value of prime weekday afternoon hours > value of nighttime and weekend hours.

Anonymous wrote:Maret wanted a 20 year use agreement in consideration of making capital improvements at Jelleff. At the time, DC would only agree to a 10-year initial term with an option (if Maret met its financial commitments) to extend for another 9 years. At the same time DC negotiated for front-loaded investment by Maret to enhance the playing field, pool and other infrastructure like field lights to be enjoyed by all users. Maret took the risk with its up front investment that the use agreement would not be entended beyond the initial term. If you consider Maret’s initial, front-loaded investment and then the second payment stream for the additional term, it works out to a payment of $230,000 annually for less than four months’ use. This is pretty high for relatively few hours weekly during part of the fall and spring season. In fact, including weekdays and some Saturday games, Maret was a distant third among scheduled users using Jelleff (2017 Spring data, with the British School and Stoddert soccer (about 32 hours weekly each) and Maret at 14 hours.

the Maret pP sounds like they’ve never met a DC public school student and is just making up garbage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

One thing we can conclude is that even the top of the class at Hardy, if their parents are thinking of private school for high school, had better think of some other school that Maret. Hardy will be a scarlet letter with the Maret admissions director.

Hardy parents are unlikely to want to expose their children to Maret Values.

Right? Maret STILL doesn’t get what a PR disaster this is. One thing I’ve learned from this thread is that Maret isn’t the only school out there with sweetheart deals in DC. Just the only one willing to egg on bad impressions on this very easily searchable website! Google Maret right now — after their own website, a bunch of articles about their “special access” to a public field pop up. Terrible, terrible impressions for anyone looking for private school.

Exactly. Everyone is wondering what is wrong with Maret’s finances such that they prefer a shady low cost deal that gets them raked through the coals rather than a market priced field.

So it’s pretty clear that there is one individual, or several, whose mission is not to advance the interests of Hardy students or some group of supposedly poor kids locked in the Jelleff basement during sports season, but rather to cause Maret harm out of some personal animus.

And how have you reached this conclusion against evidence to the contrary? Perhaps you could visit their website or even drop by Jelleff? It might do you some good to get out for a bit and see the real world.

+1. I don’t care two figs about Maret. But Maret’s actions in taking public resources that should be public are deplorable. Not sure why the Maret PR person is trying to personalize this fight. We would criticize any public school that acted like Maret. But only Maret is behaving poorly in this scenario.

This. With all the many PR executives and journalists on Maret's board, you think they would be better at reading public opinion and realizing how far Maret has fallen in their reputation with the DC public due to their shady dealings and inability to pay a market price for land that meets the needs of their student body.

Most people don't care. Or if they do, they're grateful that Maret put in a turf field and other improvements when DC was wasting money on other things. Maret's limited practice time isn't relevant to most kids who use Jelleff at other times. And their kids benefit for free from the money that Maret has spent.

That’s your opinion, and not a particularly well-founded one. The thousands of DC residents who signed the petition requesting that public parks be public and the hundreds of community members who attended meetings to ask for public school student accesss to a public park that should be public in any functioning governance structure would suggest otherwise.

No one disputes the notion that public parks and facilities are public. But that doesn't obscure the fact that Jelleff was renovated as a public-private partnership, and numerous facilities in DC charge for access. You also forget that Maret students and families constitute the "public" as well. So are members of youth soccer and other sports that play at Jelleff, even if they are playing at reserved times.

Most of the public schools mentioned have their own fields on their own school yards. Hardy, which admittedly has a pitiful little field that is smaller than the staff parking lot, has been given preferred rights to Ellington field which is down the street. The British school, which unlike Maret is for-profit, seems to have a more expansive deal with Jelleff. So what's your point?

Great. Then the kids at Maret who are tax-paying DC residents can use the field and the others can stay on the Maret campus. Perhaps then Maret would feel like they can give that space to the kids at the BTCGW after-school program who otherwise don’t get to play on a field after school. Because, unlike schools like Maret, those kids only have the field at Jelleff after school. Because Maret won’t share with those kids, those kids don’t get to play outside after school. That is the point.

Your postings are increasingly illogical.

Sorry that you find it illogical that Dc taxpayers don’t want to be paying to subsidize the athletic field for the 40% of Maret students who live in VA and Md rather than letting the low income students from the DC Boys and Girls Club out of the basement to use the field.

It seems that it’s the other way around. Maret is subsidizing the field improvements enjoyed for free by other users. And speaking of DC taxpayer subsidies, what about the DC taxpayer subsidies to the large number of non-residents who attend Ellington either transparently or by fraud? Or the residence fraudsters who send their kids to Hardy while claiming a DC address?

You've got your tenses confused. Maret subsidized the field improvements ten years ago, but that deal is over. Now they're coming back and saying "I know we agreed to ten years but we really meant 19 years."