Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was shocked to see this from Frumin yesterday. I am a supporter of his but this is a terrible idea. One of his opponents in the election, Goulet who is now on the school board, basically ran on this idea and was defeated and criticized for it as presenting, among other things, a bad real estate deal. Now Frumin is promoting it? And suggesting we scuttle MacArthur school barely a month after its seemingly successful and good-start opening? Way to abandon MacArthur at a time it need support. This location is much too close to J-R to be viable as another HS without undermining J-R itself. And a complete distraction from pressing priorities. I hope he can find a way to detract this.

We’d rather see Matt Frumin spend his time to get school bus service from Ward 3 neighborhoods rezoned to MacArthur. It’s impractical to get to and from school by Metro bus now.

WMATA has proposed to add a new bus that would connect many of the in-boundary neighborhoods and two Metro stations to MacArthur HS. Guess who wrote a letter to WMATA asking them not to create the new line? Matt Frumin.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Buying the building is fine, but the idea of moving MacArthur HS there now is nuttier than the original decision to put the school there in the first place. This idea - and the uncertainty it will create - will completely scuttle MacArthur for the foreseeable future and therefore J-R as well. It's really dumb stuff.

No it isn't. It makes zero sense to have an essentially private public school on the furthest west, non metro accessible corner of the city. That property can become the new elementary school so Hardy Park doesn't have to be developed.

It also makes zero sense to have two public high schools within a 5 minute drive. The location is great for those in Chevy Chase and Cathedral Heights, but it'd be a disaster for almost every in-boundary family in the Hardy feeder pattern. Hardy Park was never going to be touched by the Foxhall ES plans - that the park needed "saving" was a myth propagated by scurrilous NIMBYs who didn't want a public school anywhere near them. It's a shame that you apparently bought into it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so close to JR. It doesn't make sense. The idea of MacArthur was that it would be a local school for those in Palisades, Kent, etc.

The problem is not so much the idea but that i struggle to have confidence in him right now. I'm worried that his policies would bring more instability and possibly reduced security into a neighborhood severely reeling from the voucher policy.

Also, this kind of grab concerns me that it could be more about developers and right now the thing we need is for developers to back off. Why didn't the city buy it years ago for UDC or whatever if it was such a great find?

Which makes it like the way Mann is, but for high school. No, that isn't equity, that is a private school you don't have to pay for.

So "private" public = high quality
"equity" must mean lower quality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was shocked to see this from Frumin yesterday. I am a supporter of his but this is a terrible idea. One of his opponents in the election, Goulet who is now on the school board, basically ran on this idea and was defeated and criticized for it as presenting, among other things, a bad real estate deal. Now Frumin is promoting it? And suggesting we scuttle MacArthur school barely a month after its seemingly successful and good-start opening? Way to abandon MacArthur at a time it need support. This location is much too close to J-R to be viable as another HS without undermining J-R itself. And a complete distraction from pressing priorities. I hope he can find a way to detract this.

We’d rather see Matt Frumin spend his time to get school bus service from Ward 3 neighborhoods rezoned to MacArthur. It’s impractical to get to and from school by Metro bus now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Buying the building is fine, but the idea of moving MacArthur HS there now is nuttier than the original decision to put the school there in the first place. This idea - and the uncertainty it will create - will completely scuttle MacArthur for the foreseeable future and therefore J-R as well. It's really dumb stuff.

No it isn't. It makes zero sense to have an essentially private public school on the furthest west, non metro accessible corner of the city. That property can become the new elementary school so Hardy Park doesn't have to be developed.

Anonymous wrote:I was shocked to see this from Frumin yesterday. I am a supporter of his but this is a terrible idea. One of his opponents in the election, Goulet who is now on the school board, basically ran on this idea and was defeated and criticized for it as presenting, among other things, a bad real estate deal. Now Frumin is promoting it? And suggesting we scuttle MacArthur school barely a month after it’s seemingly successful and good-start opening? Way to abandon MacArthur at a time it need support. This location is much too close to J-R to be viable as another HS without undermining J-R itself. And a complete distraction from pressing priorities. I hope he can find a way to detract this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting idea, but the Intelsat site contains virtually no outdoor space for organized sports. The site is generally hilly. Students would have to use the fields at nearby UDC and we know the UDC doesn't like to share.

Neither does Maret.

If you love Maret’s arrangement then be on notice that DC is actively considering a similar arrangement with a for-profit sports group for a longterm preferential lockup on the Hearst Park field. Although DC recently spent millions to redo the park, including its large natural turf soccer field, the private group wants to tear out the grass and install artificial turf. In exchange for their “generosity” they will get a longterm lease that effectively shuts out the community during prime hours. It makes the Maret deal seem reasonable by comparison.

Anonymous wrote:The whole school boundary system is screwed up. There is no reason why in-boundary Eaton students, who used to be able to take a short bus ride to Wilson, are now forced into a 90 minute bus ride to Macarthur. It makes no sense. In the last boundary discussion roughly 10 years ago, Frumin referred to Eaton students as collateral damage in his broader view of school boundaries. A high school at Intelsat would help to address that wrong and offer a truly great facility.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so close to JR. It doesn't make sense. The idea of MacArthur was that it would be a local school for those in Palisades, Kent, etc.

The problem is not so much the idea but that i struggle to have confidence in him right now. I'm worried that his policies would bring more instability and possibly reduced security into a neighborhood severely reeling from the voucher policy.

Also, this kind of grab concerns me that it could be more about developers and right now the thing we need is for developers to back off. Why didn't the city buy it years ago for UDC or whatever if it was such a great find?

Which makes it like the way Mann is, but for high school. No, that isn't equity, that is a private school you don't have to pay for.

Anonymous wrote:The whole school boundary system is screwed up. There is no reason why in-boundary Eaton students, who used to be able to take a short bus ride to Wilson, are now forced into a 90 minute bus ride to Macarthur. It makes no sense. In the last boundary discussion roughly 10 years ago, Frumin referred to Eaton students as collateral damage in his broader view of school boundaries. A high school at Intelsat would help to address that wrong and offer a truly great facility.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what he is devoting his energy to?! Not the crime that is devastating the city, or the insane truancy rates, or the fact that we basically do not have a functioning 911 service?
What planet does he live on?

The one that understands that in addition to crime, we have overcrowded schools and other needs that can be met by the city acquiring this building. People can walk and chew gum at the same time, believe it or not.

Also, he floated this idea during the campaign and at least the events I attended, people liked the idea.

Really? What steps has he taken to address car jackings, truancy, the voucher loopholes, and a failed-state 911 system? Asking here since he refuses to answer any of my emails.
Not only can he not walk and chew gum at the same time, he can’t even tie his shoes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The idea of DC purchasing the property has merit. The idea that we should scuttle the MacArthur plan as it's being implemented, and hope that Lab School will go along with this plan, is asinine. As we've seen for years, the Lab School only cares about one thing: the Lab School and its wealthy benefactors (most of whom don't live in DC).

There's only so much DC can do with the Intelsat property if it bought it, because it has historic protection, for some stupid reason. So how about this: DC buys Intelsat and repurposes it into the new UDC.

As it stands now, the UDC campus is a hilarious misuse of that land; the area is a ghost town most of the time. By moving UDC to Intelsat, DC would get a huge parcel of land with more or less a blank slate. It could build schools, housing and retail on the property, right on top of a Metro station. It certainly would be a better use than the current UDC campus.

The Intelsat building is landmarked under historic preservation law. And the community will fight to keep the park, as will Frumin. So put aside your Smart Growth wet dream.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was shocked to see this from Frumin yesterday. I am a supporter of his but this is a terrible idea. One of his opponents in the election, Goulet who is now on the school board, basically ran on this idea and was defeated and criticized for it as presenting, among other things, a bad real estate deal. Now Frumin is promoting it? And suggesting we scuttle MacArthur school barely a month after its seemingly successful and good-start opening? Way to abandon MacArthur at a time it need support. This location is much too close to J-R to be viable as another HS without undermining J-R itself. And a complete distraction from pressing priorities. I hope he can find a way to detract this.

We’d rather see Matt Frumin spend his time to get school bus service from Ward 3 neighborhoods rezoned to MacArthur. It’s impractical to get to and from school by Metro bus now.

Anonymous wrote:I was shocked to see this from Frumin yesterday. I am a supporter of his but this is a terrible idea. One of his opponents in the election, Goulet who is now on the school board, basically ran on this idea and was defeated and criticized for it as presenting, among other things, a bad real estate deal. Now Frumin is promoting it? And suggesting we scuttle MacArthur school barely a month after it’s seemingly successful and good-start opening? Way to abandon MacArthur at a time it need support. This location is much too close to J-R to be viable as another HS without undermining J-R itself. And a complete distraction from pressing priorities. I hope he can find a way to detract this.

Anonymous wrote:The idea of DC purchasing the property has merit. The idea that we should scuttle the MacArthur plan as it's being implemented, and hope that Lab School will go along with this plan, is asinine. As we've seen for years, the Lab School only cares about one thing: the Lab School and its wealthy benefactors (most of whom don't live in DC).

There's only so much DC can do with the Intelsat property if it bought it, because it has historic protection, for some stupid reason. So how about this: DC buys Intelsat and repurposes it into the new UDC.

As it stands now, the UDC campus is a hilarious misuse of that land; the area is a ghost town most of the time. By moving UDC to Intelsat, DC would get a huge parcel of land with more or less a blank slate. It could build schools, housing and retail on the property, right on top of a Metro station. It certainly would be a better use than the current UDC campus.