Anonymous wrote:There was no bullying. That’s not the reason at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you to the two PP. I haven't paid much attention to Suarez. I've been preoccupied with the car crash that is Nolan, Anderson, and Lorber.

That's also good to know about Reif too. I do have a favorable impression of her since she's living this with her kids and it shows. And I remember one time in the fall when Ramee Gentry criticized central office.

I think Reif and Alderton are the only ones with current ACPS students. Lorber got on a zoom with parents and said that she understood what we were going through because she was babysitting her daughter's newborn a few hours a day. And then she chastised us & told us we were wrong. So that's what our district has representing us. Anderson is definitely in the silent/never speaks category.

I've heard that there will be a retirement in B. I hope there are more.

Alderton's children do not attend ACPS schools. They attend Catholic schools. Nolan and Rief have children attending public schools in Alexandria.

So of the school board members is the list below right? And the SB chair doesn't send her kids to public school. Has anyone ever questioned her on this? Is this normal? Is it like this in other districts?

Alderton (chair) - kids in Catholic School
Nolan (vice chair) - kid(s) in ACPS
Anderson - no kids in ACPS
Lorber - no kids in ACPS
Greene - no kids in ACPS
Suarez - no kids in ACPS
Reif - kids in ACPS
Gentry - ?
Thornton - no kids in ACPS

And I'll include Hutchings in because he runs the SB:

Hutchings - one kid in ACPS, one kid in Catholic

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.


Or the residents in the city. If they cared, none of these people would be here, and ACPS wouldn't have the reputation it does. Clearly it is acceptable to people.


This has been posted about before.

His daughter was being bullied. Both he and staff at the original school went to great lengths to resolve the situation. Those efforts were unsuccessful because, as most people understand, bullying and relational aggression are learned behaviors, and generally the nexus and support is in the home environment. He made the only decision a good dad could, which was to remove his daughter from that environment.

I have a lot of respect for someone who will jeopardize his work reputation and open himself to public criticism when he is making the best choice he can for his daughter and not for himself. A bad dad would have forced his daughter to continue in an environment that was bad for her but good for him

I agree that this made me have respect for him as a dad, however, other actions he has taken and statements that he has made cause me to lack respect for him as a superintendent.

You're right. He made a decision about what was best for his daughter. But when other parents were making decisions about what was best for their kids, he called them "privileged" and told them they were responsible for the learning gap in ACPS. And he never acknowledged that or apologized for it. That's the problem I have with it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.

Or the residents in the city. If they cared, none of these people would be here, and ACPS wouldn't have the reputation it does. Clearly it is acceptable to people.

This has been posted about before.

His daughter was being bullied. Both he and staff at the original school went to great lengths to resolve the situation. Those efforts were unsuccessful because, as most people understand, bullying and relational aggression are learned behaviors, and generally the nexus and support is in the home environment. He made the only decision a good dad could, which was to remove his daughter from that environment.

I have a lot of respect for someone who will jeopardize his work reputation and open himself to public criticism when he is making the best choice he can for his daughter and not for himself. A bad dad would have forced his daughter to continue in an environment that was bad for her but good for him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.


Or the residents in the city. If they cared, none of these people would be here, and ACPS wouldn't have the reputation it does. Clearly it is acceptable to people.


This has been posted about before.

His daughter was being bullied. Both he and staff at the original school went to great lengths to resolve the situation. Those efforts were unsuccessful because, as most people understand, bullying and relational aggression are learned behaviors, and generally the nexus and support is in the home environment. He made the only decision a good dad could, which was to remove his daughter from that environment.

I have a lot of respect for someone who will jeopardize his work reputation and open himself to public criticism when he is making the best choice he can for his daughter and not for himself. A bad dad would have forced his daughter to continue in an environment that was bad for her but good for him

I agree that this made me have respect for him as a dad, however, other actions he has taken and statements that he has made cause me to lack respect for him as a superintendent.

You're right. He made a decision about what was best for his daughter. But when other parents were making decisions about what was best for their kids, he called them "privileged" and told them they were responsible for the learning gap in ACPS. And he never acknowledged that or apologized for it. That's the problem I have with it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.

Or the residents in the city. If they cared, none of these people would be here, and ACPS wouldn't have the reputation it does. Clearly it is acceptable to people.

This has been posted about before.

His daughter was being bullied. Both he and staff at the original school went to great lengths to resolve the situation. Those efforts were unsuccessful because, as most people understand, bullying and relational aggression are learned behaviors, and generally the nexus and support is in the home environment. He made the only decision a good dad could, which was to remove his daughter from that environment.

I have a lot of respect for someone who will jeopardize his work reputation and open himself to public criticism when he is making the best choice he can for his daughter and not for himself. A bad dad would have forced his daughter to continue in an environment that was bad for her but good for him.

Anonymous wrote:

I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.


Or the residents in the city. If they cared, none of these people would be here, and ACPS wouldn't have the reputation it does. Clearly it is acceptable to people.


This has been posted about before.

His daughter was being bullied. Both he and staff at the original school went to great lengths to resolve the situation. Those efforts were unsuccessful because, as most people understand, bullying and relational aggression are learned behaviors, and generally the nexus and support is in the home environment. He made the only decision a good dad could, which was to remove his daughter from that environment.

I have a lot of respect for someone who will jeopardize his work reputation and open himself to public criticism when he is making the best choice he can for his daughter and not for himself. A bad dad would have forced his daughter to continue in an environment that was bad for her but good for him

I agree that this made me have respect for him as a dad, however, other actions he has taken and statements that he has made cause me to lack respect for him as a superintendent.

I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.


Or the residents in the city. If they cared, none of these people would be here, and ACPS wouldn't have the reputation it does. Clearly it is acceptable to people.


This has been posted about before.

His daughter was being bullied. Both he and staff at the original school went to great lengths to resolve the situation. Those efforts were unsuccessful because, as most people understand, bullying and relational aggression are learned behaviors, and generally the nexus and support is in the home environment. He made the only decision a good dad could, which was to remove his daughter from that environment.

I have a lot of respect for someone who will jeopardize his work reputation and open himself to public criticism when he is making the best choice he can for his daughter and not for himself. A bad dad would have forced his daughter to continue in an environment that was bad for her but good for him

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.

Or the residents in the city. If they cared, none of these people would be here, and ACPS wouldn't have the reputation it does. Clearly it is acceptable to people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.

Or the residents in the city. If they cared, none of these people would be here, and ACPS wouldn't have the reputation it does. Clearly it is acceptable to people.

Anonymous wrote:I guess we know why no one on the SB blinked when it was revealed that Hutchings sends his kid to private.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh, and Virginia has no limits on campaign contributions.

Not exactly the issue. From the Washington Post, November 25, 2018:

"The amounts were eye-popping for a school board election in a system of fewer than 16,000 students. While most contenders for the Alexandria City School Board collected contributions of a few hundred dollars or less, Veronica Nolan and Christopher Suarez outraised some opponents more than tenfold.

The source of their financial boost: Leaders in Education Fund, the political giving arm of Leadership for Educational Equity, an organization that trains Teach for America alumni to run for public office and is tied to billionaire donors allied with the charter school lobby."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you to the two PP. I haven't paid much attention to Suarez. I've been preoccupied with the car crash that is Nolan, Anderson, and Lorber.

That's also good to know about Reif too. I do have a favorable impression of her since she's living this with her kids and it shows. And I remember one time in the fall when Ramee Gentry criticized central office.

I think Reif and Alderton are the only ones with current ACPS students. Lorber got on a zoom with parents and said that she understood what we were going through because she was babysitting her daughter's newborn a few hours a day. And then she chastised us & told us we were wrong. So that's what our district has representing us. Anderson is definitely in the silent/never speaks category.

I've heard that there will be a retirement in B. I hope there are more.

Alderton's children do not attend ACPS schools. They attend Catholic schools. Nolan and Rief have children attending public schools in Alexandria.