Anonymous wrote:For those Hardy people that don’t hate Maret, I would t even apply.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Maret doesn’t run the contract process. So stop saying maret pushed it through non transparent process. They did what was allowed by their existing contract. No, am not a maret parent.

Sorry, but that’s crap. It’s like someone who knowingly bought stolen goods claiming they did nothing wrong. The administrators at Maret are smart enough (by which I mean they are functioning adults) to know the deal they were doing had not been endorsed by the community and would deprive local schools of the ability to use it for after-school games.

Anonymous wrote: Maret doesn’t run the contract process. So stop saying maret pushed it through non transparent process. They did what was allowed by their existing contract. No, am not a maret parent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can understand why some might be frustrated by then jellef/maret issue, but DC should have invested in turf fields some time ago such as at the Hearst field, next to the lab school and at Duke Ellington. Neighbors of these areas object because they want their dog park or don’t want parking issues. The fact that DC did not do so makes the jelled filed issue more acute. Seems easy to want to reclaim the jellef field now that a private entity has fixed it up and maintained it for ten years but no effort has been made by Hardy parents or other dcps groups to get these other fields done.

Yes that is true. There are a number of fields in NW both public and private that the neighborhood restrict access. Jelleff has lights, also. That’s a big deal.

DPR has already allocated $7 million to fix up the rec center. Maret paid to fix up the field as the price of using it exclusively for 10 years. Now that deal is over, and there was no committment in the original agreement that Maret would get the contract renewed (which is why they pushed it through a backroom nontransparent contracting process.)

Maret doesn’t run the contract process. So stop saying maret pushed it through non transparent process. They did what was allowed by their existing contract. No, am not a maret parent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can understand why some might be frustrated by then jellef/maret issue, but DC should have invested in turf fields some time ago such as at the Hearst field, next to the lab school and at Duke Ellington. Neighbors of these areas object because they want their dog park or don’t want parking issues. The fact that DC did not do so makes the jelled filed issue more acute. Seems easy to want to reclaim the jellef field now that a private entity has fixed it up and maintained it for ten years but no effort has been made by Hardy parents or other dcps groups to get these other fields done.

Yes that is true. There are a number of fields in NW both public and private that the neighborhood restrict access. Jelleff has lights, also. That’s a big deal.

DPR has already allocated $7 million to fix up the rec center. Maret paid to fix up the field as the price of using it exclusively for 10 years. Now that deal is over, and there was no committment in the original agreement that Maret would get the contract renewed (which is why they pushed it through a backroom nontransparent contracting process.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps Mary Cheh is inexperienced
Jack Evans wants to keep his reputation intact, Mary Cheh is making a mistake by promising, obviously not delivering, pretending to care

In her relatively short political career, Mary Cheh has acquired a reputation as an expert politician. She will play both sides of an issue in private communications and then vacillate like crazy when she is in a forum with people representing both sides. All the while she doesn’t actually do anything.

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps Mary Cheh is inexperienced
Jack Evans wants to keep his reputation intact, Mary Cheh is making a mistake by promising, obviously not delivering, pretending to care

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a parent of a Hardy 6th grader, but a resident of Ward 3. I just sent Mary Cheh an e-mail about this, and she responded very quickly:

"I’m looking into how we can rescind this deal and if not how we can get better use for Hardy and the community.
Thanks for your note
Mary"

The way I interpret this is by reading in between the lines.
She is looking into it, not working on it
If not: she is telling you what the outcome is, as it has been already descended

Politicians are corrupt

Disagree. There's been a ton of bad press, and I think that's a very positive response from Mary Cheh. I on the other hand am a resident of Ward 2, and got no response from Jack Evans, author of the original Maret deal in advance of his son's attendance there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can understand why some might be frustrated by then jellef/maret issue, but DC should have invested in turf fields some time ago such as at the Hearst field, next to the lab school and at Duke Ellington. Neighbors of these areas object because they want their dog park or don’t want parking issues. The fact that DC did not do so makes the jelled filed issue more acute. Seems easy to want to reclaim the jellef field now that a private entity has fixed it up and maintained it for ten years but no effort has been made by Hardy parents or other dcps groups to get these other fields done.

Yes that is true. There are a number of fields in NW both public and private that the neighborhood restrict access. Jelleff has lights, also. That’s a big deal.

Anonymous wrote:I can understand why some might be frustrated by then jellef/maret issue, but DC should have invested in turf fields some time ago such as at the Hearst field, next to the lab school and at Duke Ellington. Neighbors of these areas object because they want their dog park or don’t want parking issues. The fact that DC did not do so makes the jelled filed issue more acute. Seems easy to want to reclaim the jellef field now that a private entity has fixed it up and maintained it for ten years but no effort has been made by Hardy parents or other dcps groups to get these other fields done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a parent of a Hardy 6th grader, but a resident of Ward 3. I just sent Mary Cheh an e-mail about this, and she responded very quickly:

"I’m looking into how we can rescind this deal and if not how we can get better use for Hardy and the community.
Thanks for your note
Mary"

The way I interpret this is by reading in between the lines.
She is looking into it, not working on it
If not: she is telling you what the outcome is, as it has been already descended

Politicians are corrupt