Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown 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:

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.

Yup! But apparently wise keyboard warriors on DCUM think they know better.

[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:

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.

Yup! But apparently wise keyboard warriors on DCUM think they know better.

Taylor has been losing at the State Board of Education.

[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:

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.

Yup! But apparently wise keyboard warriors on DCUM think they know better.

Taylor has been losing at the State Board of Education.

And at the Supreme Court too. Don’t forget about how much money he spent on legal fees for that debacle. He even had to pay $1.5M in damages and change policy. That money could have been spent on Wootton and Magruder, but Taylor just had to be right.

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

Nobody said it needed to be handled exactly like Blair, but the pro-H supporters keep bringing up Blair as an example, so if that’s the standard, MCPS fails miserably. Also, a court will consider historical examples as part of its inquiry, so again, not a good look for MCPS.

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

It is all about following Policy.
Taylor doesn’t.
He loses.
Taxpayers pay.

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

Nobody said it needed to be handled exactly like Blair, but the pro-H supporters keep bringing up Blair as an example, so if that’s the standard, MCPS fails miserably. Also, a court will consider historical examples as part of its inquiry, so again, not a good look for MCPS.

DP. Disagree that it "fails miserably." Blair is a good example of how a relocation of a school is not a closure. The context and timeline are different, yes, but that doesn't affect the relocation vs closure question.

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

Nobody said it needed to be handled exactly like Blair, but the pro-H supporters keep bringing up Blair as an example, so if that’s the standard, MCPS fails miserably. Also, a court will consider historical examples as part of its inquiry, so again, not a good look for MCPS.

DP. Disagree that it "fails miserably." Blair is a good example of how a relocation of a school is not a closure. The context and timeline are different, yes, but that doesn't affect the relocation vs closure question.

So you want it both ways. Cite Blair when it helps you, dismiss it when it doesn’t. Got it.

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

Nobody said it needed to be handled exactly like Blair, but the pro-H supporters keep bringing up Blair as an example, so if that’s the standard, MCPS fails miserably. Also, a court will consider historical examples as part of its inquiry, so again, not a good look for MCPS.

DP. Disagree that it "fails miserably." Blair is a good example of how a relocation of a school is not a closure. The context and timeline are different, yes, but that doesn't affect the relocation vs closure question.

So you want it both ways. Cite Blair when it helps you, dismiss it when it doesn’t. Got it.

lol this guy! Everything about Blair was different but it’s legally the exact same as this.

[Anonymous]

Happy 100 pages of crazy

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

Nobody said it needed to be handled exactly like Blair, but the pro-H supporters keep bringing up Blair as an example, so if that’s the standard, MCPS fails miserably. Also, a court will consider historical examples as part of its inquiry, so again, not a good look for MCPS.

DP. Disagree that it "fails miserably." Blair is a good example of how a relocation of a school is not a closure. The context and timeline are different, yes, but that doesn't affect the relocation vs closure question.

So you want it both ways. Cite Blair when it helps you, dismiss it when it doesn’t. Got it.

Nothing wrong with specifics and accuracy.

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

Nobody said it needed to be handled exactly like Blair, but the pro-H supporters keep bringing up Blair as an example, so if that’s the standard, MCPS fails miserably. Also, a court will consider historical examples as part of its inquiry, so again, not a good look for MCPS.

DP. Disagree that it "fails miserably." Blair is a good example of how a relocation of a school is not a closure. The context and timeline are different, yes, but that doesn't affect the relocation vs closure question.

So you want it both ways. Cite Blair when it helps you, dismiss it when it doesn’t. Got it.

I'm just citing Blair as a similar end result; a school got moved to a new location. I'm pushing back on the assertion that Wootton moving to Crown is a closure of Wootton.

A closure would be more like the initial Woodward closure, where Woodward was closed and combined with Walter Johnson; that student body joined an existing school.

But hey, maybe the legal definition is a different one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Happy 100 pages of crazy

Wootton forum > Woodward forum
This forum should be cited on board docs

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

Nobody said it needed to be handled exactly like Blair, but the pro-H supporters keep bringing up Blair as an example, so if that’s the standard, MCPS fails miserably. Also, a court will consider historical examples as part of its inquiry, so again, not a good look for MCPS.

DP. Disagree that it "fails miserably." Blair is a good example of how a relocation of a school is not a closure. The context and timeline are different, yes, but that doesn't affect the relocation vs closure question.

So you want it both ways. Cite Blair when it helps you, dismiss it when it doesn’t. Got it.

I'm just citing Blair as a similar end result; a school got moved to a new location. I'm pushing back on the assertion that Wootton moving to Crown is a closure of Wootton.

A closure would be more like the initial Woodward closure, where Woodward was closed and combined with Walter Johnson; that student body joined an existing school.

But hey, maybe the legal definition is a different one.

So let’s make a deal then. Let Crown be used as a holding school for 10 years while MCPS engages with the community the same way it did Blair - instead of the 2 months that Taylor provided. MCPS might even realize that its enrollment projections are wrong…again.

[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:

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.

Just because MCPS didn't use the same process as when they moved Blair doesn't mean that the process isn't legally sufficient.

Given the facts, this is moving Wootton, not closing it. The majority of the student body and boundaries are staying the same. The school is not being consolidated into another school, but is going to a new building.

Given that MCPS won a lawsuit recently against the Clarksburg families in another boundary study fight, I'm inclined to think that they'll prevail here. I guess we'll find out when the lawsuit happens.

Nobody said it needed to be handled exactly like Blair, but the pro-H supporters keep bringing up Blair as an example, so if that’s the standard, MCPS fails miserably. Also, a court will consider historical examples as part of its inquiry, so again, not a good look for MCPS.

DP. Disagree that it "fails miserably." Blair is a good example of how a relocation of a school is not a closure. The context and timeline are different, yes, but that doesn't affect the relocation vs closure question.

So you want it both ways. Cite Blair when it helps you, dismiss it when it doesn’t. Got it.

I'm just citing Blair as a similar end result; a school got moved to a new location. I'm pushing back on the assertion that Wootton moving to Crown is a closure of Wootton.

A closure would be more like the initial Woodward closure, where Woodward was closed and combined with Walter Johnson; that student body joined an existing school.

But hey, maybe the legal definition is a different one.

So let’s make a deal then. Let Crown be used as a holding school for 10 years while MCPS engages with the community the same way it did Blair - instead of the 2 months that Taylor provided. MCPS might even realize that its enrollment projections are wrong…again.

Deal - Wootton at Crown. Let’s revisit in 10 years.

We have reached cluster peace! Shut down the thread. Great work guys