Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And of the two, Herrity is a much bigger problem for Fairfax than Shultz is. He and his father have caused insurmountable problems for Fairfax County.
What kind of joke is this? Jack was Chairman for 10 years and left office in 1988. Name one action that he took in that period that was "insurmountable."
And if you think Pat has one of 10 votes on the Board - 8 of which are held by Dems. I think we can say clearly whose fault the direction of the county is.
All the development during that time in Fairfax was in direct contrast to what was being planned over in Arlington. I don't remember all that he's did while on the board, but he's credited with much of Tyson's development which turned out to be a disaster. The new development isn't any better nor is any other part of Fairfax County that hasn't been incorporated other than a few large scale developments.
Pat is way to the right on local issues too. He governs over a wider area that extends into schools and all other areas of local government, so I think he's more dangerous than a school board member.
Anonymous wrote:And of the two, Herrity is a much bigger problem for Fairfax than Shultz is. He and his father have caused insurmountable problems for Fairfax County.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And of the two, Herrity is a much bigger problem for Fairfax than Shultz is. He and his father have caused insurmountable problems for Fairfax County.
What kind of joke is this? Jack was Chairman for 10 years and left office in 1988. Name one action that he took in that period that was "insurmountable."
And if you think Pat has one of 10 votes on the Board - 8 of which are held by Dems. I think we can say clearly whose fault the direction of the county is.
Anonymous wrote:And of the two, Herrity is a much bigger problem for Fairfax than Shultz is. He and his father have caused insurmountable problems for Fairfax County.
Anonymous wrote:I checked - Springfield District was 52% Obama, 48% Romney in 2012. I just don't think it is winnable for a Dem running in an off year as all local offices are.
Anonymous wrote:Schultz is much more vocal--and I agree, she is too vocal. However, without her, I doubt seriously that Hough or Wilson would have won.
She is brought items to the attention of the public that the others tried to hide. An example is the transgender bathroom issue. It was being handled case by case with little furor--but McElveen had to go out on a limb before the community was aware. That is a problem.
Anonymous wrote:The current fcps and last fcps school boards have been dominated by one monolithic viewpoint and have been terrible stewards of the taxpayers' money (their primary purpose).
I am happy for just about anyone who expands the perspective of the current school board and breaks apart one political party's monopoly.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:These are the interactions that Shultz and any other school board member should be judged. Their interactions with children, parents, administration, and other school board members. I see no reason for this democratic group to call for resignation because of someone she likes that they don't regard.
Others disagree, and I'm glad they are calling attention to her extreme right-wing views as well as her poor behavior. Springfield District deserves better.