Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under modified H, Lakeland park MS can absorb all kids from ridgeview MS (will be closed?), so that means all Rachel carson ES, thurgood ES, Jones Lane ES and Diamond ES go to Lakeland Park MS?

The Elementary School / Middle School boundary study will start after this round is over. There are probably going to be changes given that Lakelands Park will go to 55% utilization under the current Superintendent Recommendation.

Ny youngest is 1st grader now, will he be affected by ES/MS boundary study? I am confused with the timing.

the MS's are part of the current boundary study. They would be affected if their current ES zone switched to a different ES with a different MS. One of the study goals is to remove some of the long standing island assignments that don't make sense geographically or to maybe close some of the underutilized schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under modified H, Lakeland park MS can absorb all kids from ridgeview MS (will be closed?), so that means all Rachel carson ES, thurgood ES, Jones Lane ES and Diamond ES go to Lakeland Park MS?

The Elementary School / Middle School boundary study will start after this round is over. There are probably going to be changes given that Lakelands Park will go to 55% utilization under the current Superintendent Recommendation.

Ny youngest is 1st grader now, will he be affected by ES/MS boundary study? I am confused with the timing.

They are targeting 2029-2030 for implementation of the ES/MS boundary study, so your child would be in 5th grade; they'll make a recommendation by April 2027 about which schools they want to close.

You can see the recommendation here starting in slide 54.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Between ridgeview MS & lakeland park MS, which one is better to be kept or closed? Not sure which one is older/newer or better/worse in academic rating or other programs or they both are similar. They are quite close to each other. Just curious about it if in case they bring it up at ES/MS boundary study.

Ridgeview was built in 1975
Lakelands Park was built in 2005

Looks like neither Lakelands Park or Ridgeview had the FCI completed yet.

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/facilities/FCI/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't fallsgrove getting moved to wootton at crown? They're one of the closest neighborhoods to crown.

Because it’s currently zoned to Ritchie Park and they’re trying to avoid ES split articulations. That will be resolved in the ES boundary study, whether it means moving Fallsgrove to a diff RM school or into a Wootton @ Crown one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't fallsgrove getting moved to wootton at crown? They're one of the closest neighborhoods to crown.

Because it’s currently zoned to Ritchie Park and they’re trying to avoid ES split articulations. That will be resolved in the ES boundary study, whether it means moving Fallsgrove to a diff RM school or into a Wootton @ Crown one.

If they do this, would fallsmead people be happier to go to RM? Because logically that makes a lot of sense and move Falls Grove to Wootton at Crown. Once this is done the arguments over geography are pretty moot aside from no longer being walkable the same way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't fallsgrove getting moved to wootton at crown? They're one of the closest neighborhoods to crown.

Because it’s currently zoned to Ritchie Park and they’re trying to avoid ES split articulations. That will be resolved in the ES boundary study, whether it means moving Fallsgrove to a diff RM school or into a Wootton @ Crown one.

If they do this, would fallsmead people be happier to go to RM? Because logically that makes a lot of sense and move Falls Grove to Wootton at Crown. Once this is done the arguments over geography are pretty moot aside from no longer being walkable the same way.

Split articulation after MS would be terrible, unless they also move the ES to JWMS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't fallsgrove getting moved to wootton at crown? They're one of the closest neighborhoods to crown.

Because it’s currently zoned to Ritchie Park and they’re trying to avoid ES split articulations. That will be resolved in the ES boundary study, whether it means moving Fallsgrove to a diff RM school or into a Wootton @ Crown one.

If they do this, would fallsmead people be happier to go to RM? Because logically that makes a lot of sense and move Falls Grove to Wootton at Crown. Once this is done the arguments over geography are pretty moot aside from no longer being walkable the same way.

I think this is unlikely. Most of Fallsmead isn’t really that much closer to RM than Crown.

It more becomes a question of, if Fallsgrove moved out of Ritchie Park, what new zone would Ritchie Park pick up as an ES and move into RM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't fallsgrove getting moved to wootton at crown? They're one of the closest neighborhoods to crown.

Because it’s currently zoned to Ritchie Park and they’re trying to avoid ES split articulations. That will be resolved in the ES boundary study, whether it means moving Fallsgrove to a diff RM school or into a Wootton @ Crown one.

If they do this, would fallsmead people be happier to go to RM? Because logically that makes a lot of sense and move Falls Grove to Wootton at Crown. Once this is done the arguments over geography are pretty moot aside from no longer being walkable the same way.

Split articulation after MS would be terrible, unless they also move the ES to JWMS.

Sure whatever, my point was do the local walkers want to be at Wootton at Crown with the rest of Wootton or at RM?

If Rockville high schools consist of Wootton, RM, and Rockville, but half of Wootton comes from North Potomac currently and 15% currently from Potomac, it almost seems to me like that’s too much capacity for Rockville. I do not know whether RM pulls from out of Rockville aside from IB or not, but if so it almost seems like Fallsmead and Rockville part of Lakewood should attend RM moving non Rockville RM students to Crown or elsewhere. Then Wootton students from North Potomac go to either Crown or QO with Potomac students from Wootton moving to Churchill. This would require a small addition at Churchill or being ok with 110% of capacity or shifting some Bethesda students at Seven Locks to WJ or Whitman feeders.

I don’t understand why so many elementary schools have been built with so much extra capacity like Churchill cluster all elementary schools were redone I believe since 2005 and they are all under enrolled. If they were all near capacity where the hell would all those students go? Were they expecting so much growth and that they’d need to do additions?

I think this same occurred in Whitman but perhaps growth has been stronger in Bethesda than Potomac.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't fallsgrove getting moved to wootton at crown? They're one of the closest neighborhoods to crown.

Because it’s currently zoned to Ritchie Park and they’re trying to avoid ES split articulations. That will be resolved in the ES boundary study, whether it means moving Fallsgrove to a diff RM school or into a Wootton @ Crown one.

If they do this, would fallsmead people be happier to go to RM? Because logically that makes a lot of sense and move Falls Grove to Wootton at Crown. Once this is done the arguments over geography are pretty moot aside from no longer being walkable the same way.

I think this is unlikely. Most of Fallsmead isn’t really that much closer to RM than Crown.

It more becomes a question of, if Fallsgrove moved out of Ritchie Park, what new zone would Ritchie Park pick up as an ES and move into RM.

Cold Spring possibly? Seems like RM is a mile closer to part of Fallsmead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are pissed and deserve answers. If you want people to accept what you call is a done deal, then answer their questions. Obfuscation and evasion only make things worse.

If people wanted answers, they wouldn’t have yelled over Taylor every time he tried to speak. I’m not against yelling at public officials as therapy, but let’s not pretend that the main source of obfuscation wasn’t mostly just the crowd’s own boos.

The problem is that Taylor didn’t want to answer the questions to which Wootton families wanted answers.

If a public official was deliberately not answering your questions, at an event intended to facilitate those answers, you would be very annoyed as well.

Like what?

He pre-screened questions. If he wanted to answer questions actually asked by the parents hm who attended, he wouldn’t have done that. He was trying to control the narrative like a typical politician.

Were you even there? The 2nd half was all questions from the room except he couldn’t even get an answer in without rude parents screaming above him. Someone shouted out for him to move on when he was answering a question about safety in the building following the shooting! These people are CRINGE AF, their kids are 100% embarrassed by them!

It’s called running out the clock. And of course, there can be plants in the audience. Again, politicians do this all the time. President Biden was famous for this, as he had written instructions to call on certain reporters with pre-vetted questions by name.

Taylor and MCPS only answered the questions they wanted to answer. As for the unanswered ones, I’d be happy if they answered every question that was submitted in advance. I’m sure there are questions along the same lines, so it wouldn’t be 400 individual answers. Besides, MCPS has had over 3 months to answer some of these (ie since announcement of Option H), so one would think they already know the answers but are avoiding them. The government does this for proposed regulations all the time.

Here are a couple questions off the top of my head:

When did you actually decide moving Wootton was on the table (or even contemplated), and why wasn’t that possibility clearly spelled out as part of the boundary proposal commissioning effort in Novém 2024, or even in the first version of Option H issued on December 1, 2025 (until people complained, requiring MCPS to finally come clean about its intentions for Wootton)?

When Blair was moved, it was part of a long-term, clearly planned project that everyone knew about and understood years in advance. Here, you’re closing a long-standing (55 years) neighborhood high school and moving it several miles away (requiring boundary movement to do it). Where is the same level of planning and transparency for doing something that significant?

For the latter question, my guess is that relocating Wootton was actually part of the Crown development project, just not disclosed to the public until it was too late (ie Crown was 40% constructed). This is because there would be massive opposition had this been disclosed right after Wootton was taken off the CIP in May 2024. Such opposition would have prevented MCPS from breaking ground on Crown in July 2024, and MCPS would lose the land because it couldn’t build and open Crown within the 20 year time limit.

I don’t get what you want - it’s just constant criticism where the answers don’t actually matter unless it somehow changes the outcome.

For the first question, even if they say oops we messed up and should have said more but then we did clarify because of community feedback, that still wont be enough. For question 2, they plan to use it as a holding school at some point. There is no money to fix it faster right now so there isn’t some grand plan with a timeline. Nobody is going to commit to something more concrete because they can’t - and you will definitely sue them then.

Now what other questions?

There is a lot of pretending that people wouldn’t be going crazy if you JUST had answers and it’s whack.

But they will change the outcome. Failure to follow legal procedures means a court could grant an injunction blocking the relocation of Wootton to Crown and force Crown to be used as a holding school to preserve the status quo. Then MCPS can do what it was supposed to have done (ie like Blair). If Wootton ultimately moves, so be it. Just do it the right way.

Thirty+ years ago, did the Silver Spring community support by a considerable majority the move of Blair, or was there a more or less clear break along similar lines -- walkers mostly not supporting the move, staff/teachers mostly wanting to work in a new building, others of varying opinions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't fallsgrove getting moved to wootton at crown? They're one of the closest neighborhoods to crown.

Because it’s currently zoned to Ritchie Park and they’re trying to avoid ES split articulations. That will be resolved in the ES boundary study, whether it means moving Fallsgrove to a diff RM school or into a Wootton @ Crown one.

If they do this, would fallsmead people be happier to go to RM? Because logically that makes a lot of sense and move Falls Grove to Wootton at Crown. Once this is done the arguments over geography are pretty moot aside from no longer being walkable the same way.

Split articulation after MS would be terrible, unless they also move the ES to JWMS.

Sure whatever, my point was do the local walkers want to be at Wootton at Crown with the rest of Wootton or at RM?

If Rockville high schools consist of Wootton, RM, and Rockville, but half of Wootton comes from North Potomac currently and 15% currently from Potomac, it almost seems to me like that’s too much capacity for Rockville. I do not know whether RM pulls from out of Rockville aside from IB or not, but if so it almost seems like Fallsmead and Rockville part of Lakewood should attend RM moving non Rockville RM students to Crown or elsewhere. Then Wootton students from North Potomac go to either Crown or QO with Potomac students from Wootton moving to Churchill. This would require a small addition at Churchill or being ok with 110% of capacity or shifting some Bethesda students at Seven Locks to WJ or Whitman feeders.

I don’t understand why so many elementary schools have been built with so much extra capacity like Churchill cluster all elementary schools were redone I believe since 2005 and they are all under enrolled. If they were all near capacity where the hell would all those students go? Were they expecting so much growth and that they’d need to do additions?

I think this same occurred in Whitman but perhaps growth has been stronger in Bethesda than Potomac.

Answer to the latter issues: they're rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They think that the state needed to grant permission to use Wootton as a holding facility. Spoiler: they dont--they already own the building and can do whatever they want with it. They needed to get permission from the state for Crown to be used as a holding facility because of the language in the deed that required it to be used as a permanent high school. Completely different things but just like you, they can do whatever they like with the property they own.

You are 100% wrong. State approval is an issue.

State approval is indeed 100% an issue. The PP who was saying it’s not because Wootton is owned by MCPS doesn’t even understand the issue at hand. But keep talking as if you actually understand the law! I find it cute and funny!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are pissed and deserve answers. If you want people to accept what you call is a done deal, then answer their questions. Obfuscation and evasion only make things worse.

If people wanted answers, they wouldn’t have yelled over Taylor every time he tried to speak. I’m not against yelling at public officials as therapy, but let’s not pretend that the main source of obfuscation wasn’t mostly just the crowd’s own boos.

The problem is that Taylor didn’t want to answer the questions to which Wootton families wanted answers.

If a public official was deliberately not answering your questions, at an event intended to facilitate those answers, you would be very annoyed as well.

Like what?

He pre-screened questions. If he wanted to answer questions actually asked by the parents hm who attended, he wouldn’t have done that. He was trying to control the narrative like a typical politician.

Were you even there? The 2nd half was all questions from the room except he couldn’t even get an answer in without rude parents screaming above him. Someone shouted out for him to move on when he was answering a question about safety in the building following the shooting! These people are CRINGE AF, their kids are 100% embarrassed by them!

It’s called running out the clock. And of course, there can be plants in the audience. Again, politicians do this all the time. President Biden was famous for this, as he had written instructions to call on certain reporters with pre-vetted questions by name.

Taylor and MCPS only answered the questions they wanted to answer. As for the unanswered ones, I’d be happy if they answered every question that was submitted in advance. I’m sure there are questions along the same lines, so it wouldn’t be 400 individual answers. Besides, MCPS has had over 3 months to answer some of these (ie since announcement of Option H), so one would think they already know the answers but are avoiding them. The government does this for proposed regulations all the time.

Here are a couple questions off the top of my head:

When did you actually decide moving Wootton was on the table (or even contemplated), and why wasn’t that possibility clearly spelled out as part of the boundary proposal commissioning effort in Novém 2024, or even in the first version of Option H issued on December 1, 2025 (until people complained, requiring MCPS to finally come clean about its intentions for Wootton)?

When Blair was moved, it was part of a long-term, clearly planned project that everyone knew about and understood years in advance. Here, you’re closing a long-standing (55 years) neighborhood high school and moving it several miles away (requiring boundary movement to do it). Where is the same level of planning and transparency for doing something that significant?

For the latter question, my guess is that relocating Wootton was actually part of the Crown development project, just not disclosed to the public until it was too late (ie Crown was 40% constructed). This is because there would be massive opposition had this been disclosed right after Wootton was taken off the CIP in May 2024. Such opposition would have prevented MCPS from breaking ground on Crown in July 2024, and MCPS would lose the land because it couldn’t build and open Crown within the 20 year time limit.

I don’t get what you want - it’s just constant criticism where the answers don’t actually matter unless it somehow changes the outcome.

For the first question, even if they say oops we messed up and should have said more but then we did clarify because of community feedback, that still wont be enough. For question 2, they plan to use it as a holding school at some point. There is no money to fix it faster right now so there isn’t some grand plan with a timeline. Nobody is going to commit to something more concrete because they can’t - and you will definitely sue them then.

Now what other questions?

There is a lot of pretending that people wouldn’t be going crazy if you JUST had answers and it’s whack.

But they will change the outcome. Failure to follow legal procedures means a court could grant an injunction blocking the relocation of Wootton to Crown and force Crown to be used as a holding school to preserve the status quo. Then MCPS can do what it was supposed to have done (ie like Blair). If Wootton ultimately moves, so be it. Just do it the right way.

Thirty+ years ago, did the Silver Spring community support by a considerable majority the move of Blair, or was there a more or less clear break along similar lines -- walkers mostly not supporting the move, staff/teachers mostly wanting to work in a new building, others of varying opinions?

The Blair process took nearly a decade. It was thoughtful and deliberate. The community was deeply engaged before a location even broke ground. It had a lot of community support, including approvals for site location for the new school. I’m sure there was at least one person who wasn’t happy but it wasn’t anything like this. Everyone knew from the start it was to relocate Blair. It wasn’t reassign first and then justify to community afterwards.

It was also aligned with CIP not commingled with a boundary study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are pissed and deserve answers. If you want people to accept what you call is a done deal, then answer their questions. Obfuscation and evasion only make things worse.

If people wanted answers, they wouldn’t have yelled over Taylor every time he tried to speak. I’m not against yelling at public officials as therapy, but let’s not pretend that the main source of obfuscation wasn’t mostly just the crowd’s own boos.

The problem is that Taylor didn’t want to answer the questions to which Wootton families wanted answers.

If a public official was deliberately not answering your questions, at an event intended to facilitate those answers, you would be very annoyed as well.

Like what?

He pre-screened questions. If he wanted to answer questions actually asked by the parents hm who attended, he wouldn’t have done that. He was trying to control the narrative like a typical politician.

Were you even there? The 2nd half was all questions from the room except he couldn’t even get an answer in without rude parents screaming above him. Someone shouted out for him to move on when he was answering a question about safety in the building following the shooting! These people are CRINGE AF, their kids are 100% embarrassed by them!

It’s called running out the clock. And of course, there can be plants in the audience. Again, politicians do this all the time. President Biden was famous for this, as he had written instructions to call on certain reporters with pre-vetted questions by name.

Taylor and MCPS only answered the questions they wanted to answer. As for the unanswered ones, I’d be happy if they answered every question that was submitted in advance. I’m sure there are questions along the same lines, so it wouldn’t be 400 individual answers. Besides, MCPS has had over 3 months to answer some of these (ie since announcement of Option H), so one would think they already know the answers but are avoiding them. The government does this for proposed regulations all the time.

Here are a couple questions off the top of my head:

When did you actually decide moving Wootton was on the table (or even contemplated), and why wasn’t that possibility clearly spelled out as part of the boundary proposal commissioning effort in Novém 2024, or even in the first version of Option H issued on December 1, 2025 (until people complained, requiring MCPS to finally come clean about its intentions for Wootton)?

When Blair was moved, it was part of a long-term, clearly planned project that everyone knew about and understood years in advance. Here, you’re closing a long-standing (55 years) neighborhood high school and moving it several miles away (requiring boundary movement to do it). Where is the same level of planning and transparency for doing something that significant?

For the latter question, my guess is that relocating Wootton was actually part of the Crown development project, just not disclosed to the public until it was too late (ie Crown was 40% constructed). This is because there would be massive opposition had this been disclosed right after Wootton was taken off the CIP in May 2024. Such opposition would have prevented MCPS from breaking ground on Crown in July 2024, and MCPS would lose the land because it couldn’t build and open Crown within the 20 year time limit.

I don’t get what you want - it’s just constant criticism where the answers don’t actually matter unless it somehow changes the outcome.

For the first question, even if they say oops we messed up and should have said more but then we did clarify because of community feedback, that still wont be enough. For question 2, they plan to use it as a holding school at some point. There is no money to fix it faster right now so there isn’t some grand plan with a timeline. Nobody is going to commit to something more concrete because they can’t - and you will definitely sue them then.

Now what other questions?

There is a lot of pretending that people wouldn’t be going crazy if you JUST had answers and it’s whack.

But they will change the outcome. Failure to follow legal procedures means a court could grant an injunction blocking the relocation of Wootton to Crown and force Crown to be used as a holding school to preserve the status quo. Then MCPS can do what it was supposed to have done (ie like Blair). If Wootton ultimately moves, so be it. Just do it the right way.

Thirty+ years ago, did the Silver Spring community support by a considerable majority the move of Blair, or was there a more or less clear break along similar lines -- walkers mostly not supporting the move, staff/teachers mostly wanting to work in a new building, others of varying opinions?

The Blair process took nearly a decade. It was thoughtful and deliberate. The community was deeply engaged before a location even broke ground. It had a lot of community support, including approvals for site location for the new school. I’m sure there was at least one person who wasn’t happy but it wasn’t anything like this. Everyone knew from the start it was to relocate Blair. It wasn’t reassign first and then justify to community afterwards.

It was also aligned with CIP not commingled with a boundary study.

Not MCPS saying this isn’t closure, it’s a relocation just like Blair, when this is literally nothing like Blair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are pissed and deserve answers. If you want people to accept what you call is a done deal, then answer their questions. Obfuscation and evasion only make things worse.

If people wanted answers, they wouldn’t have yelled over Taylor every time he tried to speak. I’m not against yelling at public officials as therapy, but let’s not pretend that the main source of obfuscation wasn’t mostly just the crowd’s own boos.

The problem is that Taylor didn’t want to answer the questions to which Wootton families wanted answers.

If a public official was deliberately not answering your questions, at an event intended to facilitate those answers, you would be very annoyed as well.

Like what?

He pre-screened questions. If he wanted to answer questions actually asked by the parents hm who attended, he wouldn’t have done that. He was trying to control the narrative like a typical politician.

Were you even there? The 2nd half was all questions from the room except he couldn’t even get an answer in without rude parents screaming above him. Someone shouted out for him to move on when he was answering a question about safety in the building following the shooting! These people are CRINGE AF, their kids are 100% embarrassed by them!

It’s called running out the clock. And of course, there can be plants in the audience. Again, politicians do this all the time. President Biden was famous for this, as he had written instructions to call on certain reporters with pre-vetted questions by name.

Taylor and MCPS only answered the questions they wanted to answer. As for the unanswered ones, I’d be happy if they answered every question that was submitted in advance. I’m sure there are questions along the same lines, so it wouldn’t be 400 individual answers. Besides, MCPS has had over 3 months to answer some of these (ie since announcement of Option H), so one would think they already know the answers but are avoiding them. The government does this for proposed regulations all the time.

Here are a couple questions off the top of my head:

When did you actually decide moving Wootton was on the table (or even contemplated), and why wasn’t that possibility clearly spelled out as part of the boundary proposal commissioning effort in Novém 2024, or even in the first version of Option H issued on December 1, 2025 (until people complained, requiring MCPS to finally come clean about its intentions for Wootton)?

When Blair was moved, it was part of a long-term, clearly planned project that everyone knew about and understood years in advance. Here, you’re closing a long-standing (55 years) neighborhood high school and moving it several miles away (requiring boundary movement to do it). Where is the same level of planning and transparency for doing something that significant?

For the latter question, my guess is that relocating Wootton was actually part of the Crown development project, just not disclosed to the public until it was too late (ie Crown was 40% constructed). This is because there would be massive opposition had this been disclosed right after Wootton was taken off the CIP in May 2024. Such opposition would have prevented MCPS from breaking ground on Crown in July 2024, and MCPS would lose the land because it couldn’t build and open Crown within the 20 year time limit.

I don’t get what you want - it’s just constant criticism where the answers don’t actually matter unless it somehow changes the outcome.

For the first question, even if they say oops we messed up and should have said more but then we did clarify because of community feedback, that still wont be enough. For question 2, they plan to use it as a holding school at some point. There is no money to fix it faster right now so there isn’t some grand plan with a timeline. Nobody is going to commit to something more concrete because they can’t - and you will definitely sue them then.

Now what other questions?

There is a lot of pretending that people wouldn’t be going crazy if you JUST had answers and it’s whack.

But they will change the outcome. Failure to follow legal procedures means a court could grant an injunction blocking the relocation of Wootton to Crown and force Crown to be used as a holding school to preserve the status quo. Then MCPS can do what it was supposed to have done (ie like Blair). If Wootton ultimately moves, so be it. Just do it the right way.

Thirty+ years ago, did the Silver Spring community support by a considerable majority the move of Blair, or was there a more or less clear break along similar lines -- walkers mostly not supporting the move, staff/teachers mostly wanting to work in a new building, others of varying opinions?

The Blair process took nearly a decade. It was thoughtful and deliberate. The community was deeply engaged before a location even broke ground. It had a lot of community support, including approvals for site location for the new school. I’m sure there was at least one person who wasn’t happy but it wasn’t anything like this. Everyone knew from the start it was to relocate Blair. It wasn’t reassign first and then justify to community afterwards.

It was also aligned with CIP not commingled with a boundary study.

Not MCPS saying this isn’t closure, it’s a relocation just like Blair, when this is literally nothing like Blair.

So if it’s not a relocation, then it’s a closure and Taylor violated the COMAR.