Woodward boundary study public hearing

[Anonymous]

Anyone have highlights to share? Anything surprising?

[Anonymous]

Nothing surprising. Farmland/Luxmanor property value complainers not wanting brown or poor kids at new Woodward. Same old.

MCPS staff and Taylor gave justified answers regarding how they look at the entire region for parity/equity so the complaints are unfounded.

Taylor mentioned the year+ of engagement and how the modification represents the engagement. They were attempting to reduce overcrowding at Wheaton.

They look at approved development too in terms of the utliization red herring. It was factored in...

[Anonymous]

I just skimmed the testimony and it looks like several folks brought up the proposed low SSIMS utilization. How did Taylor/Board members respond?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just skimmed the testimony and it looks like several folks brought up the proposed low SSIMS utilization. How did Taylor/Board members respond?

Maybe a couple. No response, but there has only been 1 QA session thus far. Not the focus thus far. It's just farmland realtors complaining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just skimmed the testimony and it looks like several folks brought up the proposed low SSIMS utilization. How did Taylor/Board members respond?

Maybe a couple. No response, but there has only been 1 QA session thus far. Not the focus thus far. It's just farmland realtors complaining.

Not even close. Lots of parents across the County upset that Taylor tossed $1M boundary study process, delayed his recommendation and surprised them with a new option.

But as we know, Taylor doesn’t give a f**k.

[Anonymous]

Did Taylor acknowledge that the extra 500 seats for Wheaton HS listed in the boundary options and his recommendations do not actually exist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did Taylor acknowledge that the extra 500 seats for Wheaton HS listed in the boundary options and his recommendations do not actually exist?

You again? Hi. No. He mentioned how they were alleviating crowding at Wheaton High though with his recommendation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just skimmed the testimony and it looks like several folks brought up the proposed low SSIMS utilization. How did Taylor/Board members respond?

Maybe a couple. No response, but there has only been 1 QA session thus far. Not the focus thus far. It's just farmland realtors complaining.

Not even close. Lots of parents across the County upset that Taylor tossed $1M boundary study process, delayed his recommendation and surprised them with a new option.

But as we know, Taylor doesn’t give a f**k.

There was AMPLE notice and comment. Farmland and Luxmanor decided to sit my the sideline the entire time? Well, everyone else was commenting for a year. They had survey after survey, extension after extension. So much opportunity. Those communities who are nagging knew they were getting a new school. They just do not like the racial and socioeconomic composition of that new school.

Slight modification based on the feedback was expected. That's what happened here! There were options that had WW and VM at Woodward. Now you pretend that didn't exist. Go back and look at 1,2,3,4,A,B,C,D,E,F,G...and you will see. What was proposed is not a surprise.

[Anonymous]

Stewart and Montoya pretending they care about Wheaton Woods. They do not if they want to shove those children into an overcrowded Wheaton High School.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did Taylor acknowledge that the extra 500 seats for Wheaton HS listed in the boundary options and his recommendations do not actually exist?

You again? Hi. No. He mentioned how they were alleviating crowding at Wheaton High though with his recommendation.

His recommendation leaves Wheaton HS overcrowded unless they eliminate Edison HS and convert that space into a second Wheaton HS building

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did Taylor acknowledge that the extra 500 seats for Wheaton HS listed in the boundary options and his recommendations do not actually exist?

You again? Hi. No. He mentioned how they were alleviating crowding at Wheaton High though with his recommendation.

His recommendation leaves Wheaton HS overcrowded unless they eliminate Edison HS and convert that space into a second Wheaton HS building

No it doesn't? Here's the data. Go away gnat. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cdtTBaAd7ZcPh5mczdbJc4MS_HkOVfuJ/view

Wheaton is one of the lowest utilized

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did Taylor acknowledge that the extra 500 seats for Wheaton HS listed in the boundary options and his recommendations do not actually exist?

You again? Hi. No. He mentioned how they were alleviating crowding at Wheaton High though with his recommendation.

His recommendation leaves Wheaton HS overcrowded unless they eliminate Edison HS and convert that space into a second Wheaton HS building

No it doesn't? Here's the data. Go away gnat. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cdtTBaAd7ZcPh5mczdbJc4MS_HkOVfuJ/view

Wheaton is one of the lowest utilized

Only if MCPS goes ahead with a not yet proposed or approved construction project to add classroom space at Edison for Wheaton students.

[Anonymous]

These orange shirts from Farmland remind me of prison jump suits.

North Farm with Orange is the New Black

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just skimmed the testimony and it looks like several folks brought up the proposed low SSIMS utilization. How did Taylor/Board members respond?

Laura Stewart asked about it but said to Taylor that he could wait until the work session next week to cover it.

[Anonymous]

Rita Montoya stated the truth at the end! All those Farmland people speaking ill about our poor neighbors and children who receive Free and Reduced Meals. Shame on you!!!! Farmland just cares about their property values. That was clear.