To the lawyers here..

[Anonymous]

The 6 regional magnets were created for equity - but all the 6 regional magnets do not have the same program pathways.

Some program pathways are available just for that region - Wheaton engineering which is criteria based, the Aviation program in Magruder, the Video production pathway in Churchill and so on.

If my kid wanted to apply for those pathways but cannot apply since we don't belong to that region and the program is available only to the schools in that region, do I have a case if I sue MCPS and produce all the evidence where they stated that the regional magnets were created for equity.

[Anonymous]

My kid wants to do data science but it is not available in my region.

[Anonymous]

No

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No

Why?

[Anonymous]

No such thing as equity. Our school doesn't offer a lot of classes, like advanced math, that other schools offer. Its up to the principals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No

Why?

NP. Why would you have a case? What's the specific legal theory and under what authority would you sue? You generally can't use the courts to argue that an elected part of government isn't achieving their goals in the way you'd like.

[Anonymous]

There are 26 different schools now and most have different programs. Moving forward you will have more access to different programs, not less. Why would you sue?

[Anonymous]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we had schools that provided the services necessary to teach children where they are and where they aspire to be. We are not getting our tax dollars worth. What ever happened to the other E word, Excellence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are 26 different schools now and most have different programs. Moving forward you will have more access to different programs, not less. Why would you sue?

In the DCC, it will be less access due to transportation and distance.

[Anonymous]

Instead of reflexively getting angry about what your kid can't have, why don't you think about what would happen if every single MCPS high school was required to offer exactly the same classes?

There would be no specialization at all and fewer advanced courses, OP. Because no high school has the room to accommodate that many different classrooms. There is no money to pay for additions to all these buildings (and some don't have the room for additions anyway because they're squeezed in urban blocks). The budget isn't big enough to pay all the required teachers assigned to every school.

"If my kid can't have it, then no one can have it".

This is essentially what you're doing.

My kids are in college and high school, they won't see all that regional stuff. My oldest studied AP Latin at Walter Johnson, and as far as I know, it's the only MCPS high school that offers it - and it might not anymore, under the regional concept. My youngest attends a different high school that has IB, but since she's not in the IB programme, they don't have anything special. None of us in the family begrudge the fact that others have other opportunities.

[Anonymous]

I’m not a lawyer but I don’t think you have a case. Equity does not mean providing the exact same programs at every school. The school district is legally obligated to provide free access to a reasonable education approved by the state and it fulfills that requirement. As long as it is providing equivalent opportunities in each region, there is no basis to sue. Equivalent is different from identical. If only certain regions had access to specialized programming, then you could sue. But every region has specialized programs. You’re just not happy with the actual selection in your region. But it is impossible to satisfy every family in every region so the bar would be impossible to meet for MCPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a lawyer but I don’t think you have a case. Equity does not mean providing the exact same programs at every school. The school district is legally obligated to provide free access to a reasonable education approved by the state and it fulfills that requirement. As long as it is providing equivalent opportunities in each region, there is no basis to sue. Equivalent is different from identical. If only certain regions had access to specialized programming, then you could sue. But every region has specialized programs. You’re just not happy with the actual selection in your region. But it is impossible to satisfy every family in every region so the bar would be impossible to meet for MCPS

Then why not open up the access to these specialized programs the way they used to for Blair, Poolesville - have one upcounty and one down county school have it and 3 regions have access to each

Or make these specialized programs available to all in the county, make it criteria based like Richard Montgomery used to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Instead of reflexively getting angry about what your kid can't have, why don't you think about what would happen if every single MCPS high school was required to offer exactly the same classes?

There would be no specialization at all and fewer advanced courses, OP. Because no high school has the room to accommodate that many different classrooms. There is no money to pay for additions to all these buildings (and some don't have the room for additions anyway because they're squeezed in urban blocks). The budget isn't big enough to pay all the required teachers assigned to every school.

"If my kid can't have it, then no one can have it".

This is essentially what you're doing.

My kids are in college and high school, they won't see all that regional stuff. My oldest studied AP Latin at Walter Johnson, and as far as I know, it's the only MCPS high school that offers it - and it might not anymore, under the regional concept. My youngest attends a different high school that has IB, but since she's not in the IB programme, they don't have anything special. None of us in the family begrudge the fact that others have other opportunities.

My argument is open up the access to these specialized programs to all in the county and make it criteria based

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No

Why?

NP. Why would you have a case? What's the specific legal theory and under what authority would you sue? You generally can't use the courts to argue that an elected part of government isn't achieving their goals in the way you'd like.

That's the reason for this thread - are you a lawyer?

[Anonymous]

There’s no entitlement that all schools in the same district or all districts in the state have the same educational programs and opportunities available. If you could show a lack of access on the basis of race, national origin, or disability, you *might* have a claim. But you’d a) need to have a child from the harmed group and b) generally need to show an intent to discriminate (disparate impact claims are basically dead).