Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can't believe I'm saying this, but I am also voting for Clement. Missing Middle is so stupid, and their projections for how it will impact schools are laughable.
I hope you appreciate how awful Clement would be as a county board member. Don't expect her to advance any positive agenda, respond to constituent requests, show up to civic meetings, or do any of the other basic functions of an elected leader. Missing middle will be decided within the next few months. We'd be stuck with Clement for nearly four years after that. Is that really what you want?
Anonymous wrote:+1 on Clement. Audrey may finally get her turn.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can't believe I'm saying this, but I am also voting for Clement. Missing Middle is so stupid, and their projections for how it will impact schools are laughable.
I hope you appreciate how awful Clement would be as a county board member. Don't expect her to advance any positive agenda, respond to constituent requests, show up to civic meetings, or do any of the other basic functions of an elected leader. Missing middle will be decided within the next few months. We'd be stuck with Clement for nearly four years after that. Is that really what you want?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can't believe I'm saying this, but I am also voting for Clement. Missing Middle is so stupid, and their projections for how it will impact schools are laughable.
I hope you appreciate how awful Clement would be as a county board member. Don't expect her to advance any positive agenda, respond to constituent requests, show up to civic meetings, or do any of the other basic functions of an elected leader. Missing middle will be decided within the next few months. We'd be stuck with Clement for nearly four years after that. Is that really what you want?
Yes. The board has gotten more and more ridiculous. We need a break from one party rule. Losing Vihstadt really hurt our county.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can't believe I'm saying this, but I am also voting for Clement. Missing Middle is so stupid, and their projections for how it will impact schools are laughable.
I hope you appreciate how awful Clement would be as a county board member. Don't expect her to advance any positive agenda, respond to constituent requests, show up to civic meetings, or do any of the other basic functions of an elected leader. Missing middle will be decided within the next few months. We'd be stuck with Clement for nearly four years after that. Is that really what you want?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can't believe I'm saying this, but I am also voting for Clement. Missing Middle is so stupid, and their projections for how it will impact schools are laughable.
I hope you appreciate how awful Clement would be as a county board member. Don't expect her to advance any positive agenda, respond to constituent requests, show up to civic meetings, or do any of the other basic functions of an elected leader. Missing middle will be decided within the next few months. We'd be stuck with Clement for nearly four years after that. Is that really what you want?
Yes because I think it would shake up the one party rule that is beholden to developers and not residents.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can't believe I'm saying this, but I am also voting for Clement. Missing Middle is so stupid, and their projections for how it will impact schools are laughable.
I hope you appreciate how awful Clement would be as a county board member. Don't expect her to advance any positive agenda, respond to constituent requests, show up to civic meetings, or do any of the other basic functions of an elected leader. Missing middle will be decided within the next few months. We'd be stuck with Clement for nearly four years after that. Is that really what you want?
Anonymous wrote:I can't believe I'm saying this, but I am also voting for Clement. Missing Middle is so stupid, and their projections for how it will impact schools are laughable.
Anonymous wrote:Bumping this, as it should provide a nice baseline. We’ve got Ferranti, Theo and Clement. Thoughts?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What? You have to PAY to take (AP) exams?!
Why? How is that possible?!
That’s what you’re outraged about? Where have you been? The parents in most jurisdictions have (for as long as I’m aware) been on the hook for paying or seeking a fee waiver. Arlington has been unusual in its decision to pay the fee for the exams.
And in a crisis, this should be one of the first things to go. Certainly before increasing class sizes. They should extract every possible fee they can from parent who can afford it.
Agree it's one of the relatively small expenses that can go; but I'm tired of APS/government deciding who can afford things. Just because one household's income is above $80K/year doesn't mean they can afford all the fees for everything like a household with $200K/year income can.
That's why there should be a sliding scale. And that scale should go higher than $250,000.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What? You have to PAY to take (AP) exams?!
Why? How is that possible?!
That’s what you’re outraged about? Where have you been? The parents in most jurisdictions have (for as long as I’m aware) been on the hook for paying or seeking a fee waiver. Arlington has been unusual in its decision to pay the fee for the exams.
And in a crisis, this should be one of the first things to go. Certainly before increasing class sizes. They should extract every possible fee they can from parent who can afford it.
Agree it's one of the relatively small expenses that can go; but I'm tired of APS/government deciding who can afford things. Just because one household's income is above $80K/year doesn't mean they can afford all the fees for everything like a household with $200K/year income can.