"They decided not to go that way because: 1) the thought the back door was an easier, "hit and run" way; 2) these Hyde parents are not looking at Hardy as their middle school option (i.e. most likely switching to private schools after ES), so harming Hardy was not affecting them."

You are ascribing far, far more intent than is appropriate. Everything was being done as hoc and only because it was clear that DGS was not doing what it should have in evaluating the sites. I understand you feel slighted that it didn't occur to Hyde parents to call you up personally and plead. We wish we had! It just never occurred to us. There was never, ever any moment where we were sitting around and thought "Well the Hardy PTO won't like it, so we better go around them." All we wanted to do was to get everyone around the same table and talk it out. DGS never facilitated that and our improvised efforts obviously failed.

You clearly have a strong contempt for us. I'm sorry you've decided to assume the worst about us. I sure hope the next time you find yourself dealing with a difficult decision from DCPS those that you reach out to don't immediately think the worst of you.

Well, you can stop pushing to swing to Hardy, because it's not happening.

"It is a highly used field by the neighborhood and a wide range of youth sports - and when/if Ellington comes back, it's their PE space. It is not a 'dog park'. There was originally a look at Volta Park and other G-town options that the residents quickly got off the table."

That is what BCA said in order to rile up the neighborhood, but I can assure you that it is not true. We'd love it to be at Volta or Rose Park but DPR ruled out Volta and NPS ruled out Rose Park. DESA field was the only nearby DCPS property. And using it while Ellington was being renovated was the only scenario that made it possible. Once they return, I agree that using it wouldn't be fair to them. We had a window but BCA brought the torches out by spreading lies and here we are.

"
So this meeting between Trish Pride and Hyde parents took place in the spring? Were you guys also advocating to close Fillmore then? Because to co-locate at Hardy you'd have to close Fillmore. Interesting."

We weren't advocating the closure of Fillmore. We took Henderson at her word that Fillmore was closing and viewed that decision as an opportunity for Hyde to use the soon-to-be empty classrooms. No one was lobbying for the closure of Fillmore but don't act like the writing isn't on the wall for it. If Fillmore wasn't on the chopping block, Hyde parents wouldn't even be considering pushing to use Hardy.

Anonymous wrote:Last spring Hyde parents met with Principal Pride to see if she thought co-locating was possible. She said yes. I'm sorry they didn't reach out to you personally, whoever you are, but to continue to ascribe to us this idea that we were trying to screw your school over is bullshit. We were told it could work. And we tried to enlist to support of our Councilmember to push to get them to find a workable solution (a strategy surely you would also do). You think there is no workable solution. Fine. But stop being a dick about assuming the worst motives of other people.

Did this meeting take place? Really? Ms Pride stated that co-location was possible? Can anyone confirm with details? When/where did the meeting take place? Who attended?

Anonymous wrote:OK poster, ask who? And how exactly would Hardy feeders have supported Hyde's efforts? Keep your grubby paws off of what is "mine" is the order of the day it seems, at least for you.

Let me answer: Hyde is a Hardy feeder. Parent representatives in the Hyde renovation steering group have easy access to the Hardy PTO, who includes representatives from all feeder schools. It would have been an easy link. A stronger Hyde = a stronger Hardy.
The incentives were aligned and the channel was open.
They decided not to go that way because: 1) the thought the back door was an easier, "hit and run" way; 2) these Hyde parents are not looking at Hardy as their middle school option (i.e. most likely switching to private schools after ES), so harming Hardy was not affecting them.

Next time anyone is tempted to say that the private school board is spiteful and nasty, just take a look at this thread. No one in their right mind would want to touch either Hyde or Hardy with a 10-foot pole after reading this discussion.

--parent whose children are IB for Hardy

What about the hotel that closed on Wisconsin Ave just north of the British school? Any chance DCPS/DGS could lease that temporarily? I suggest this only because the H-A community seems so determined to find something close by. The rational part of of me says that Meyer is the right solution. It's a school, it's ready made for the purpose, it has outdoor play space, DCPS will provide busing, staff won't have too much trouble parking. It frankly seems silly to me to spend additional millions of dollars to try and avoid driving less than three miles for a couple of years. And speaking of a couple of years, why can't the construction be scheduled so that one building could be done after one year so that some of the grades could come back to Gtown after one year instead of two?

Anonymous wrote:Last spring Hyde parents met with Principal Pride to see if she thought co-locating was possible. She said yes. I'm sorry they didn't reach out to you personally, whoever you are, but to continue to ascribe to us this idea that we were trying to screw your school over is bullshit. We were told it could work. And we tried to enlist to support of our Councilmember to push to get them to find a workable solution (a strategy surely you would also do). You think there is no workable solution. Fine. But stop being a dick about assuming the worst motives of other people.

So this meeting between Trish Pride and Hyde parents took place in the spring? Were you guys also advocating to close Fillmore then? Because to co-locate at Hardy you'd have to close Fillmore. Interesting.

Anonymous wrote:"The Georgetown neighborhood (IB for Hyde) first rejected the idea of trailers there. "

What are you talking about? There was never a proposal for trailers in Georgetown. If there were we would be ecstatic.

I'm sorry you consider having the local school for Burleith be actually located in Burleith for a year or two a severe inconvenience. But it sounds like having a DCPS propoerty be used to walk your dogs instead of being used for educational purposes is more important to you.

It is a highly used field by the neighborhood and a wide range of youth sports - and when/if Ellington comes back, it's their PE space. It is not a 'dog park'. There was originally a look at Volta Park and other G-town options that the residents quickly got off the table.

"The Georgetown neighborhood (IB for Hyde) first rejected the idea of trailers there. "

What are you talking about? There was never a proposal for trailers in Georgetown. If there were we would be ecstatic.

I'm sorry you consider having the local school for Burleith be actually located in Burleith for a year or two a severe inconvenience. But it sounds like having a DCPS propoerty be used to walk your dogs instead of being used for educational purposes is more important to you.

Last spring Hyde parents met with Principal Pride to see if she thought co-locating was possible. She said yes. I'm sorry they didn't reach out to you personally, whoever you are, but to continue to ascribe to us this idea that we were trying to screw your school over is bullshit. We were told it could work. And we tried to enlist to support of our Councilmember to push to get them to find a workable solution (a strategy surely you would also do). You think there is no workable solution. Fine. But stop being a dick about assuming the worst motives of other people.

Anonymous wrote:To the Hardy fellow,
Nobody was having any secret meetings to screw Hardy. The Hyde community was denied the Ellington field due to selfish Burleith residents and the political connections of DESA. We were told it was totally off the table. We were also told that with the closing of Fillmore that Hardy could be possible. We begged with them to explore it. WE WANTED THEM TO WORK WITH PRINCIPAL PRIDE AND THE HARDY COMMUNITY TO MAKE IT WORK. We didn't "go behind your back" we were working with a DGS and DCPS that works in a complete black box. We can't make them do things. And the plan to take all of Hardy's space was not our idea nor our desire. It was clearly a plan put forward by DCPS to be objectionable to Hardy. It was way larger than necessary. DCPS doesn't want Hyde at Hardy and did everything possible to put forward an unacceptable plan. There was some hope that with the mayor behind it, DCPS might actually pursue a workable solution in concert with the Hardy community. But that's not going to happen now. So you win. But just stop being a fucking dick about it. We weren't trying to screw you over. We were just trying to make the best of a terrible situation and were working against an incompetent DCPS.

I know dealing with DCPS and DGS is difficult. But it's clear in your post above that you were happy to plan on moving into Hardy, undoing all the work there. You're just trying to make it seem like DCPS went overboard by suggesting the double decker trailers and bubble gymateria. I'm sure in your mind you wanted to be like that insistent guest who assures you "I won't take up any room!" But a 350 student elementary school needs space. You'd need before and aftercare. I am positive that if an elementary was moved in with Hardy, Hardy would become secondary, our needs and concerns would become secondary. So while I'm sorry H-A is in a tough spot, putting two school communities in that sort of tough uposition instead on one makes little sense.

Anonymous wrote:To the Hardy fellow,
Nobody was having any secret meetings to screw Hardy. The Hyde community was denied the Ellington field due to selfish Burleith residents and the political connections of DESA. We were told it was totally off the table. We were also told that with the closing of Fillmore that Hardy could be possible. We begged with them to explore it. WE WANTED THEM TO WORK WITH PRINCIPAL PRIDE AND THE HARDY COMMUNITY TO MAKE IT WORK. We didn't "go behind your back" we were working with a DGS and DCPS that works in a complete black box. We can't make them do things. And the plan to take all of Hardy's space was not our idea nor our desire. It was clearly a plan put forward by DCPS to be objectionable to Hardy. It was way larger than necessary. DCPS doesn't want Hyde at Hardy and did everything possible to put forward an unacceptable plan. There was some hope that with the mayor behind it, DCPS might actually pursue a workable solution in concert with the Hardy community. But that's not going to happen now. So you win. But just stop being a fucking dick about it. We weren't trying to screw you over. We were just trying to make the best of a terrible situation and were working against an incompetent DCPS.

OMG - who is calling who selfish! The Georgetown neighborhood (IB for Hyde) first rejected the idea of trailers there. Why is Burleith particularly more selfish than any other neighborhood working for self preservation. What benefit would they have for having their one park area overtaken by trailers for at least a year if not more, and all the added traffic, and the analysis that showed the added traffic would be enough to endanger the hospital route to Georgetown hospital (again where Hyde IB families would likely be taken during an emergency!) The issue here is how entitled the Hyde parents have been at expecting other schools and neighborhoods to be severely inconvenienced too. Of course no one wants to have their kids bussed across town and the options DCPS have laid out are not great - but trying to 'power grab' and expect others to bend over for you all is beyond the pale.

To the Hardy fellow,
Nobody was having any secret meetings to screw Hardy. The Hyde community was denied the Ellington field due to selfish Burleith residents and the political connections of DESA. We were told it was totally off the table. We were also told that with the closing of Fillmore that Hardy could be possible. We begged with them to explore it. WE WANTED THEM TO WORK WITH PRINCIPAL PRIDE AND THE HARDY COMMUNITY TO MAKE IT WORK. We didn't "go behind your back" we were working with a DGS and DCPS that works in a complete black box. We can't make them do things. And the plan to take all of Hardy's space was not our idea nor our desire. It was clearly a plan put forward by DCPS to be objectionable to Hardy. It was way larger than necessary. DCPS doesn't want Hyde at Hardy and did everything possible to put forward an unacceptable plan. There was some hope that with the mayor behind it, DCPS might actually pursue a workable solution in concert with the Hardy community. But that's not going to happen now. So you win. But just stop being a fucking dick about it. We weren't trying to screw you over. We were just trying to make the best of a terrible situation and were working against an incompetent DCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, not at all. This person is saying the Hyde-Addison principal opposes it.

Principal Pride has clearly stated she cannot and will not comment on (or take a position on) Fillmore in her current role. She does mention very fondly that her own children went to Fillmore and she still has their art from it!

Sorry, was a little confused since the person also said that Principal Pride wants to use the space that Fillmore is occupying for her growing school. That made it sound like Hardy wants Fillmore to vacate Hardy but perhaps that is not Principal Pride, maybe Hardy parents? I really do love the Fillmore program.

She mentioned at an open house in answer to questions about what could happen if the school population grows as expected if the plans to close Fillmore happens. She did not advocate for this - in context of different DCPS plans as they are being discussed. She said she had absolutely no role or involvement in discussions about Fillmore as PP said - and also talked about how she likes bed Fillmore as a parent.