Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I love how LAMB boosters monitor this thread and throw out “you don’t know what you’re talking about” quips to try and scare people off. It just Makes me feel more invested in seeing how this all works out. The “nothing here to see” tactic only makes people pay closer attention.
Maybe they are more than just boosters. Maybe they have intimate knowledge of the case. Maybe they know exactly what happened and how f*cked up it is. Maybe they want the school to be held accountable more than anyone. And maybe, just maybe, they still love the school because the teachers are amazing and the community is unparalleled. And, maybe they would also like people to STFU and stop throwing out assanine statements that have absolutely no merit. I would venture to say you will get bored really quick wasting your time paying attention to this.
Anonymous wrote:I love how LAMB boosters monitor this thread and throw out “you don’t know what you’re talking about” quips to try and scare people off. It just Makes me feel more invested in seeing how this all works out. The “nothing here to see” tactic only makes people pay closer attention.
Anonymous wrote:I love how LAMB boosters monitor this thread and throw out “you don’t know what you’re talking about” quips to try and scare people off. It just Makes me feel more invested in seeing how this all works out. The “nothing here to see” tactic only makes people pay closer attention.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why would a bank approve a loan to a school that’s about to get hammered in court?
Because it’s not going to go to court. It will be settled with the insurance company. You people really have no idea what you’re talking about.
Even so, these are significant lawsuits (closing in on $1B) that will have an impact on the school's finances and viability.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why would a bank approve a loan to a school that’s about to get hammered in court?
Because it’s not going to go to court. It will be settled with the insurance company. You people really have no idea what you’re talking about.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why would a bank approve a loan to a school that’s about to get hammered in court?
Because technically building hope will own it.
I love how families are correctly suing the school and their top priority is a pretty building. Disgraceful.
Why would Building Hope take the risk??
I wouldn't if I were them. Listen to the BLT talk at the reaccreditation hearing and you'll see how totally out of her element she is. She is an amateur.
Anonymous wrote:Why would a bank approve a loan to a school that’s about to get hammered in court?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We have a very strong charter board and they do shut down schools. Please don't exaggerate.
--- Hahahaha. As far as I can tell, using Mundo Verde (their campus expansion vote in spite of parents' opposition - in the end Mundo Verde listened to parents and good on them!) and LAMB PCS as examples, DCPCSB is a rubber stamp agency for Tier One schools. They only tank under-performing schools. Scott Pearson did jack squat for LAMB parents who reached out to him for help in the midst of the Fernandez crisis.
Jack. Squat.
Instead, he told parents to work with their own school board. A school board that none of the parents of victims felt they could trust to be truthful. Indeed, once the investigation on the Fernandez matter was completed, the school board released merely a SUMMARY of the results and then "fired" people. One of those fired people still has her job. This disgusts me.
I saw a tweet posted last night from someone who attended the DCPCSB meeting for reviewing charters that solidified the real purpose of the DCPCSB and of LAMB PCS: https://twitter.com/DCWard7teacher/status/968289947483607041
A strong charter school board would have policies in place to deal with negligent school administrations and complicit/negligent school board members. They would also have the will to enforce those policies. One LAMB parent has already reached out to Grosso on this. Pearson needs to be taken to task.
DC law would need to be amended to give the PCSB this authority -- so discussing with Grosso is the what needs to happen.
The PCSB only has authority over schools' academic performance and fiscal mismanagement. Pearson / the board members don't have the authority you think they do.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why would a bank approve a loan to a school that’s about to get hammered in court?
Because technically building hope will own it.
I love how families are correctly suing the school and their top priority is a pretty building. Disgraceful.
Why would Building Hope take the risk??
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why would a bank approve a loan to a school that’s about to get hammered in court?
Because technically building hope will own it.
I love how families are correctly suing the school and their top priority is a pretty building. Disgraceful.
Why would Building Hope take the risk??
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why would a bank approve a loan to a school that’s about to get hammered in court?
Because technically building hope will own it.
I love how families are correctly suing the school and their top priority is a pretty building. Disgraceful.
Anonymous wrote:Why would a bank approve a loan to a school that’s about to get hammered in court?