Anonymous wrote:The March, 2019, issue of the Foxhall Community Citizens Association newsletter had a letter from the FCCA Board to the Mayor, saying that they are “very concerned that the present ‘Keep Hardy Public’ effort will lead to driving the current occupant — the LAB School — out of the Hardy School property for no good purpose.”

https://www.kohp.org/2019/03/19/fcca-board-backs-lab-school-lease/

The letter claims that the "FCCA represents the neighbors who would be most impacted by any change to the current beneficial use of Hardy School by the LAB School."

Of course, public school children who live in the neighborhood and attend classes in trailers might beg to differ . . . I guess it's a nice irony that they are now going to lose their park, partly perhaps as a result of telling lies to suit their own selfish ends.

The March, 2019, issue of the Foxhall Community Citizens Association newsletter had a letter from the FCCA Board to the Mayor, saying that they are “very concerned that the present ‘Keep Hardy Public’ effort will lead to driving the current occupant — the LAB School — out of the Hardy School property for no good purpose.”

https://www.kohp.org/2019/03/19/fcca-board-backs-lab-school-lease/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Saturday I talked to a friend who lives over by Hardy Park, who doesn't have kids but has been receiving the FCCA side of the story. He said, "isn't the only reason the schools are crowded that DCPS buses kids in from other parts of the city?"

I set him straight, but this is the kind of talking point that's going around.

The Foxhall / Palisades NIMBY playbook is as predictable as it is reprehensible. The essence of the operation is for those who don't want a proposed project (whether that be improving a trail or building a new elementary school) to go ahead for their own selfish reasons to whip up community opposition by scaring their neighbors into believing that said project will result in an invasion of (non-white) kids and teens from the rest of the city. Because those neighbors are terrified of the everything and everybody that lies east of Foundry Branch and Glover Archbold Parks and are don't possess the knowledge or reasoning to understand that the claims are not only crafted to appeal to their own base racism but are also blatantly misleading, they buy into them. They are the local equivalent of those who want to build a wall on the southern border to keep out the illegals.

I'm from Palisades. Don't go lumping us in with those Foxhall nut cases. People are much saner here.

Palisades Trolley Trail? Not a lot of sanity coming out of Sherier Place on that one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On Saturday I talked to a friend who lives over by Hardy Park, who doesn't have kids but has been receiving the FCCA side of the story. He said, "isn't the only reason the schools are crowded that DCPS buses kids in from other parts of the city?"

I set him straight, but this is the kind of talking point that's going around.

The Foxhall / Palisades NIMBY playbook is as predictable as it is reprehensible. The essence of the operation is for those who don't want a proposed project (whether that be improving a trail or building a new elementary school) to go ahead for their own selfish reasons to whip up community opposition by scaring their neighbors into believing that said project will result in an invasion of (non-white) kids and teens from the rest of the city. Because those neighbors are terrified of the everything and everybody that lies east of Foundry Branch and Glover Archbold Parks and are don't possess the knowledge or reasoning to understand that the claims are not only crafted to appeal to their own base racism but are also blatantly misleading, they buy into them. They are the local equivalent of those who want to build a wall on the southern border to keep out the illegals.

I'm from Palisades. Don't go lumping us in with those Foxhall nut cases. People are much saner here.

Anonymous wrote:On Saturday I talked to a friend who lives over by Hardy Park, who doesn't have kids but has been receiving the FCCA side of the story. He said, "isn't the only reason the schools are crowded that DCPS buses kids in from other parts of the city?"

I set him straight, but this is the kind of talking point that's going around.

The Foxhall / Palisades NIMBY playbook is as predictable as it is reprehensible. The essence of the operation is for those who don't want a proposed project (whether that be improving a trail or building a new elementary school) to go ahead for their own selfish reasons to whip up community opposition by scaring their neighbors into believing that said project will result in an invasion of (non-white) kids and teens from the rest of the city. Because those neighbors are terrified of the everything and everybody that lies east of Foundry Branch and Glover Archbold Parks and are don't possess the knowledge or reasoning to understand that the claims are not only crafted to appeal to their own base racism but are also blatantly misleading, they buy into them. They are the local equivalent of those who want to build a wall on the southern border to keep out the illegals.

On Saturday I talked to a friend who lives over by Hardy Park, who doesn't have kids but has been receiving the FCCA side of the story. He said, "isn't the only reason the schools are crowded that DCPS buses kids in from other parts of the city?"

I set him straight, but this is the kind of talking point that's going around.

Anonymous wrote:

FCCA is a pack of disingenuous clowns.

Fact check: True.

Anonymous wrote:
FCCA is a pack of disingenuous clowns... It’s hard to resist the conclusion that they just don’t like public school kids..

At previous meetings the FCCA has made it clear why they prefer a private school at that location. A private school in a residential area requires a zoning variance, which gives local civic organizations the opportunity to make demands upon them in return for their not opposing the variance. Public schools can be in a residential neighborhood as a matter of right so there's no opportunity for groups like FCCA to "offer input."

Anonymous wrote:

FCCA is a pack of disingenuous clowns. The increase in traffic won’t register a blip on rush hour along Foxhall or MacArthur, particularly as - unlike LAB - people won’t be driving their kids in from MD or VA to drop them off. It’s hard to resist the conclusion that they just don’t like public school kids..

DCPS is projecting they can fill the new school with an attendance boundary where no family is more than 1.2 miles from the school. Many of those families travel significantly further than that to their current school. Many families who now drive to school will be able to walk to the new school. The new school will result in a significant drop in travel for those families, which should reduce overall neighborhood traffic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: These same people then claim that they're the most impacted. Them, not the students going to school in trailers on a playground. Them. Not the students who don't have enough time to eat lunch because there are too many students in the cafeteria. Them. Not the students that no longer have a gymnasium. They're the most impacted, my rear end.

Thank you for posting this. I get so angry when the FCCA people refer to themselves as "the most impacted." No, the kids who will go to this new school are the most impacted.

They just can't hear themselves.

The quote is from Troy Kravitz. He’s not a commissioner anymore but still appears to be engaged. This is good because he is without peer when it comes to calling his neighbors out on their bullshit. And he had a truckload to feast on in this instance.

FCCA is a pack of disingenuous clowns. The increase in traffic won’t register a blip on rush hour along Foxhall or MacArthur, particularly as - unlike LAB - people won’t be driving their kids in from MD or VA to drop them off. It’s hard to resist the conclusion that they just don’t like public school kids..

And the Foxhall commissioner? Votes against an ANC resolution in 2019 in support of calls for greater transparency re the renewal of the Old Hardy lease. And then in 2021 he introduces a resolution purporting to ask for greater transparency re the renewal of the Old Hardy lease? Come on now, son . . .

Anonymous wrote: These same people then claim that they're the most impacted. Them, not the students going to school in trailers on a playground. Them. Not the students who don't have enough time to eat lunch because there are too many students in the cafeteria. Them. Not the students that no longer have a gymnasium. They're the most impacted, my rear end.

Thank you for posting this. I get so angry when the FCCA people refer to themselves as "the most impacted." No, the kids who will go to this new school are the most impacted.

They just can't hear themselves.

Some nice excerpts:

"I'll start by taking a breath and lamenting the state of our society. One of the more pernicious aspects of modern life is that people think they can act with impunity without ever having to own an iota of their blatant hypocrisy. I'm finding the stance of those in the Foxhall Community Citizens Association disgusting. We hear that this proposal for two schools came out of nowhere, but of course that's not the case. Just read the FCCA newsletter. We hear that there was no community engagement. Again, the FCCA newsletter invited community members to advise the mayor. We heard in previous meetings about the city not having an interest in the building currently leased to Lab. Once again, left unsaid is that the FCCA worked behind the scenes to have this building deemed historic, thereby making it less attractive for the return of a public school, a decision that was lauded and welcomed by the FCCA. And now when we listen to JP express concern about the lease terms for Lab, there is no mention that the FCCA sent a letter to the mayor lauding Lab as a good neighbor, or that the FCCA declined to join the campaign raising concern about the Lab lease two years ago. Or that JP voted against the ANC joining the Keep Old Hardy public campaign . . . I don't view schools as threats, but rather community assets. To what end? Why these contortions? Let's listen to the FCCA president on why they like Lab from March 2019. Quote, "We have a very low impact usage of that school right now in terms of community, negative impact. I don't get any complaints about it, and there's no traffic." End quote. These same people then claim that they're the most impacted. Them, not the students going to school in trailers on a playground. Them. Not the students who don't have enough time to eat lunch because there are too
many students in the cafeteria. Them. Not the students that no longer have a gymnasium. They're the most impacted, my rear end. The ANC should not be part and parcel of this travesty by sending any letter to the city
built upon these falsehoods. You're better than this, each and every one of you, including JP. If you look at the argumentation you see what this is about. This is about maintaining a low impact, no traffic use of that site, everyone else be damned. You can see the argumentation. There's no engagement with the fact that there are two thousand seat deficit now in Ward 3. That there was a community group for years recommending multiple
new schools are needed. None of that's mentioned. That's all you need to know."

And another:

"What we're seeing here is a classic NIMBY
playbook. I think it needs to be called out. It's used in many contexts when projects you don't like are going forward, you demand more process, process, process. And you pound the table. "I want more process." And when the process doesn't work out, then you sue and litigate. And that's what happens with residential developments in this part, in this ANC and in Ward 3, and it's what is seemingly happening right now."

The transcript for the meeting is now up here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/o9q4ffrlwmnaym1/2021-03-03%20transcript.pdf?dl=0

The discussion about the Old Hardy site is on pages 33 through 47. Happy reading!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Metro is pushing to end the only bus line to that area.

Traffic will be epic

The closure of that bus line - which serves two hospitals and countless schools - is never going to happen. But it's a smart move by WMATA to propose closing it will result in a lot of letters being sent and calls made on their behalf to the funding agencies.

Metro announced today that due to the stimulus package it won't be reducing any service.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we should put public housing there. It’s only fair to make up for the history of racism in fox hall.

You may yet have your wish: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hwmc2dlfcq3156b/Housing%20Sign.jpg?dl=0

. . . or maybe not: https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzyd867g89crwrg/OAG_OHR%20Letter%20-%20Final.pdf?dl=0

Hell yeah!!! Let’s yank their property values. F rich people
They got rich off the back of black and indigenous and brown people. Take everything from them so they know what it’s like to eat canned tuna for dinner