Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

No one hates Wootton but we do not like the behavior of the handful of advocates worried about their property taxes over the health of those on the building. Most want to go to crown. Brand new building with all the latest and greatest things. Breathe healthy air. Selfish.

Taking the new building is actually what is selfish. It is not good policy to just neglect and abandon buildings and infrastructure. How is this the right thing for other kids in the county including Magruder? The most selfish ones are those who can’t wait to occupy a new building instead of waiting their turn.

It is selfish. But what is the selfless approach you recommend for which there is funding and is realistic to pursue?

The recommendation is moving Wootton students and staff to Crown, then repairing the other high-priority schools. If needed, we can use Wootton as a holding school, as it's more cost-effective and safer to complete repairs or demolition in one go with no one in the building.

Do you even have kids at Wootton? It looks like most of the advocates don't have kids and those who want Crown are bullied and shamed into not speaking up.

I will have kids who go to Wootton in a few years. I am saying it is indeed selfish to take Crown for Wootton and I actually feel a little badly about it - compared to say Magruder. But I am good with it and will accept it!


The people who are saying it’s selfish and wanna stay on the Parkway, my point for them is… what’s the selfless thing to do? Stay in that nasty building and hope for funding later? It makes no sense. Let’s just be selfish and take Crown.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

How much support? The Wootton students and families I know want Crown but don’t want the drama of speaking up. How much did you fundraise? How many families donated? What about the health of those in the building?

That's what the pp was saying. There's a lot of support for the move.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

No one hates Wootton but we do not like the behavior of the handful of advocates worried about their property taxes over the health of those on the building. Most want to go to crown. Brand new building with all the latest and greatest things. Breathe healthy air. Selfish.

Taking the new building is actually what is selfish. It is not good policy to just neglect and abandon buildings and infrastructure. How is this the right thing for other kids in the county including Magruder? The most selfish ones are those who can’t wait to occupy a new building instead of waiting their turn.

It is selfish. But what is the selfless approach you recommend for which there is funding and is realistic to pursue?

The recommendation is moving Wootton students and staff to Crown, then repairing the other high-priority schools. If needed, we can use Wootton as a holding school, as it's more cost-effective and safer to complete repairs or demolition in one go with no one in the building.

Do you even have kids at Wootton? It looks like most of the advocates don't have kids and those who want Crown are bullied and shamed into not speaking up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

No one hates Wootton but we do not like the behavior of the handful of advocates worried about their property taxes over the health of those on the building. Most want to go to crown. Brand new building with all the latest and greatest things. Breathe healthy air. Selfish.

Taking the new building is actually what is selfish. It is not good policy to just neglect and abandon buildings and infrastructure. How is this the right thing for other kids in the county including Magruder? The most selfish ones are those who can’t wait to occupy a new building instead of waiting their turn.

It is selfish. But what is the selfless approach you recommend for which there is funding and is realistic to pursue?

So, Wottoon students and teachers should spend their days in a moldy, falling apart building as you are too selfish to agree that they should go to Crown and you'd rather Crown sit empty just for the principle of it. Do you understand what long-term exposure to mold can do to someone? Clearly not. This is one of the few changes that makes sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

No one hates Wootton but we do not like the behavior of the handful of advocates worried about their property taxes over the health of those on the building. Most want to go to crown. Brand new building with all the latest and greatest things. Breathe healthy air. Selfish.

Taking the new building is actually what is selfish. It is not good policy to just neglect and abandon buildings and infrastructure. How is this the right thing for other kids in the county including Magruder? The most selfish ones are those who can’t wait to occupy a new building instead of waiting their turn.

It is selfish. But what is the selfless approach you recommend for which there is funding and is realistic to pursue?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

How are things going with actually affected families signing the interest form for the legal team? Stacking up your thousands like that change.org petition?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

No one hates Wootton but we do not like the behavior of the handful of advocates worried about their property taxes over the health of those on the building. Most want to go to crown. Brand new building with all the latest and greatest things. Breathe healthy air. Selfish.

Taking the new building is actually what is selfish. It is not good policy to just neglect and abandon buildings and infrastructure. How is this the right thing for other kids in the county including Magruder? The most selfish ones are those who can’t wait to occupy a new building instead of waiting their turn.

It’s not selfish to take the new building. Students and staff of Wootton get a new safer building and that allows others schools in equal or worse shape to get repairs. Selfish is demanding a new building in a new location when this one is available and other schools are worse off.

LOL “the Wootton movement” — it’s anti-movement, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

No one hates Wootton but we do not like the behavior of the handful of advocates worried about their property taxes over the health of those on the building. Most want to go to crown. Brand new building with all the latest and greatest things. Breathe healthy air. Selfish.

Taking the new building is actually what is selfish. It is not good policy to just neglect and abandon buildings and infrastructure. How is this the right thing for other kids in the county including Magruder? The most selfish ones are those who can’t wait to occupy a new building instead of waiting their turn.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

How much support? The Wootton students and families I know want Crown but don’t want the drama of speaking up. How much did you fundraise? How many families donated? What about the health of those in the building?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

No one hates Wootton but we do not like the behavior of the handful of advocates worried about their property taxes over the health of those on the building. Most want to go to crown. Brand new building with all the latest and greatest things. Breathe healthy air. Selfish.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looking at the thread, it seems like it was sidetracked by Wootton haters.

Anyways, DCUM continues to be absolutely clueless as to how much support is behind the Wootton movement.

Anonymous wrote:Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Wootton advocates sidetracked as they keep changing their reasons.

Looks like AI got pretty sidetracked from the topic here. Happens.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are we even talking about? The teen pregnancy rate is vanishingly small everywhere. My kids are at Einstein and have never even heard of a pregnant high schooler there.

There are everywhere but most end up doing other programs to graduate.

Yes there is an alternative school they can go to or they sometimes get the option to finish at home.

And some drop out.