What does tabling the SSIMS closure mean for the boundary options?

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know this? Was it discussed at the Board meeting?

The obvious assumption would be that E-G are off the table-- but in the (likely) event that SSIMS does close, possibly still in 2030 as planned, then that will still mean that a bunch of elementary schools get newly assigned to SSIMS for a couple years and then it promptly closes down.a few years after. Plus E-G were designed with the assumption that kids would stay at SSIMS 2027-2030 anyway, so could they just use that version of the maps?

[Anonymous]

At the in-person boundary engagement session, they announced that the viability of the options are contingent upon a decision about closure of SIMS.

- If decision is that SIMS remains open - options A-D are viable
- If decision is that SIMS is closing - options E-G are viable

That said, the options can change at any time, and there’s nothing to prevent them from coming up with new or modified options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the in-person boundary engagement session, they announced that the viability of the options are contingent upon a decision about closure of SIMS.

- If decision is that SIMS remains open - options A-D are viable
- If decision is that SIMS is closing - options E-G are viable

That said, the options can change at any time, and there’s nothing to prevent them from coming up with new or modified options.

But instead neither of these are the case-- they decided not to decide for a couple years. They definitely did not make a final decision that SSIMS will stay open (and indeed it is more likely to close than stay open, albeit maybe a couple years later.) So what does that mean for the options?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the in-person boundary engagement session, they announced that the viability of the options are contingent upon a decision about closure of SIMS.

- If decision is that SIMS remains open - options A-D are viable
- If decision is that SIMS is closing - options E-G are viable

That said, the options can change at any time, and there’s nothing to prevent them from coming up with new or modified options.

The options are so different that it doesn't make sense. They made a lot of changes in E-G that have nothing to do with closing SSIMS. This is why everyone hates CO. They say ridiculous things, dig in and act like everyone questioning them is an idiot. I don't expect the BOE to call them out but also don't expect to vote for anyone that doesn't.

[Anonymous]

I think it means Woodlin and Flora Singer kids get screwed, is what it means.

At least the current SSIMS families like it and wanted to stay... we will get sent against our will to a crumbling building with teachers who are constantly looking for other jobs and live through the last gasps of SSIMS when they finally decide to close it. All for the charade of "Board independence" and "community involvement" when they're clearly just going to close SSIMS anyway and just want to kick the decision down the road a little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it means Woodlin and Flora Singer kids get screwed, is what it means.

At least the current SSIMS families like it and wanted to stay... we will get sent against our will to a crumbling building with teachers who are constantly looking for other jobs and live through the last gasps of SSIMS when they finally decide to close it. All for the charade of "Board independence" and "community involvement" when they're clearly just going to close SSIMS anyway and just want to kick the decision down the road a little.

They could just leave SSIMS, Sligo, Eastern, and Takoma Park boundaries as they are now, until they know what will happen with SSIMS.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I think they will be looking at some sort of variation of A-D.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it means Woodlin and Flora Singer kids get screwed, is what it means.

At least the current SSIMS families like it and wanted to stay... we will get sent against our will to a crumbling building with teachers who are constantly looking for other jobs and live through the last gasps of SSIMS when they finally decide to close it. All for the charade of "Board independence" and "community involvement" when they're clearly just going to close SSIMS anyway and just want to kick the decision down the road a little.

They could just leave SSIMS, Sligo, Eastern, and Takoma Park boundaries as they are now, until they know what will happen with SSIMS.

I don't think they can because of their stupid regional obsession. My understanding is that it is already pre-decided that Arcola is in region 1 and Odessa Shannon is in region 3, meaning that they have decreed that Arcola kids cannot go to Odessa Shannon anymore and instead must go to a region 1 middle school like Sligo or Newport Mill.

They definitely can't send all the Arcola kids to Sligo and also keep all the current kids there. Maybe if they split the Arcola kids between Sligo and Newport Mill they can fit them in without overcrowding Sligo too much? I dunno.

(Or they could of course just decide that it's okay for Arcola to cross "regional boundaries" for a few years, but I'm not holding my breath on that one...)

[Anonymous]

I agree that that they should not send any new kids to SSIMS given the uncertainty with the school. That would be unfair to them and too much disruption.

Can they just keep all of the middle schools the same, and only change the high school boundaries at this time? Would that result in too many split articulations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it means Woodlin and Flora Singer kids get screwed, is what it means.

At least the current SSIMS families like it and wanted to stay... we will get sent against our will to a crumbling building with teachers who are constantly looking for other jobs and live through the last gasps of SSIMS when they finally decide to close it. All for the charade of "Board independence" and "community involvement" when they're clearly just going to close SSIMS anyway and just want to kick the decision down the road a little.

They could just leave SSIMS, Sligo, Eastern, and Takoma Park boundaries as they are now, until they know what will happen with SSIMS.

I don't think they can because of their stupid regional obsession. My understanding is that it is already pre-decided that Arcola is in region 1 and Odessa Shannon is in region 3, meaning that they have decreed that Arcola kids cannot go to Odessa Shannon anymore and instead must go to a region 1 middle school like Sligo or Newport Mill.

They definitely can't send all the Arcola kids to Sligo and also keep all the current kids there. Maybe if they split the Arcola kids between Sligo and Newport Mill they can fit them in without overcrowding Sligo too much? I dunno.

(Or they could of course just decide that it's okay for Arcola to cross "regional boundaries" for a few years, but I'm not holding my breath on that one...)

They could proceed with some version of the Sligo addition project, to make room for Arcola.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it means Woodlin and Flora Singer kids get screwed, is what it means.

At least the current SSIMS families like it and wanted to stay... we will get sent against our will to a crumbling building with teachers who are constantly looking for other jobs and live through the last gasps of SSIMS when they finally decide to close it. All for the charade of "Board independence" and "community involvement" when they're clearly just going to close SSIMS anyway and just want to kick the decision down the road a little.

UGH. I love Sligo and was relieved that it looked like my younger could go there. No way I'm sending her to SSIMS--I really don't understand why a community is rallying around a dangerous building but I wish at least Woodlin & FS wouldn't get forced there.

[Anonymous]

The community is not rallying around a "dangerous building." It's rallying around making investments in the current school rather than creating two huge middle schools. It's saying that no one has looked at the traffic and safety implications of all the increased buses in the neighborhood. It's saying the timing for this was incredibly rushed and MCPS has not looked into other holding school options. It's saying Taylor and his team can't just push through a school closure without talking to the people most affected about it. And also, if the building is so unsafe, how is it safe for a holding school? The community is saying this didn't make sense and is asking questions that all of us should be asking as well.

I agree that there are a ton of unanswered questions re the boundary study and SSIMS. MCPS is rushing so fast that it's causing tons of confusion. But that is not the SSIMS community's fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The community is not rallying around a "dangerous building." It's rallying around making investments in the current school rather than creating two huge middle schools. It's saying that no one has looked at the traffic and safety implications of all the increased buses in the neighborhood. It's saying the timing for this was incredibly rushed and MCPS has not looked into other holding school options. It's saying Taylor and his team can't just push through a school closure without talking to the people most affected about it. And also, if the building is so unsafe, how is it safe for a holding school? The community is saying this didn't make sense and is asking questions that all of us should be asking as well.

I agree that there are a ton of unanswered questions re the boundary study and SSIMS. MCPS is rushing so fast that it's causing tons of confusion. But that is not the SSIMS community's fault.

It would be really frustrating and ironic if after all the effort of current SSiMS families to save their school and be able to stay at SSIMS rather than be sent to other middle schools, a ton of them get redistricted away to other middle schools anyway (as is the plan in options A-D) and instead SSIMS is filled with families currently assigned to other schools who do not at all want to go to SSIMS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it means Woodlin and Flora Singer kids get screwed, is what it means.

At least the current SSIMS families like it and wanted to stay... we will get sent against our will to a crumbling building with teachers who are constantly looking for other jobs and live through the last gasps of SSIMS when they finally decide to close it. All for the charade of "Board independence" and "community involvement" when they're clearly just going to close SSIMS anyway and just want to kick the decision down the road a little.

UGH. I love Sligo and was relieved that it looked like my younger could go there. No way I'm sending her to SSIMS--I really don't understand why a community is rallying around a dangerous building but I wish at least Woodlin & FS wouldn't get forced there.

SSIMS can be a safe, smaller, walkable (and transit adjacent), neighborhood middle school, but it requires renovating the building which MCPS will do regardless of SSIMS’s closure.

[Anonymous]

It would be really frustrating and ironic if after all the effort of current SSiMS families to save their school and be able to stay at SSIMS rather than be sent to other middle schools, a ton of them get redistricted away to other middle schools anyway (as is the plan in options A-D) and instead SSIMS is filled with families currently assigned to other schools who do not at all want to go to SSIMS.

It's mainly SCES families advocating to save SSIMS, and they are not getting rezoned to another middle school.