Third round options on Woodward Boundary study

[Anonymous]

Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

I doubt it, someone here quoted MCPS saying the first 4 options weren't meant to be real options just to illustrate some sh$t (like how much MCPS is willing to waste people's time to manipulate the outcome of their so called community engagement)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

Ugh, please no

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I thought he just said that the survey would be expanded to include all of the options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I was super confused by that. Why would we still be considering the first set of options when the second set was a refinement of those first options.

I'm hoping it just wants to present the first set for comparison/contrast purposes but if the first set is being considered still, then this process makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I was super confused by that. Why would we still be considering the first set of options when the second set was a refinement of those first options.

I'm hoping it just wants to present the first set for comparison/contrast purposes but if the first set is being considered still, then this process makes no sense.

The first set of options had a lot of nonstarters and flaws. While there are definitely people who are rightfully unhappy about personally being redistricted in the second set of options, they are all at least realistic and workable for the most part. Someone is going to get moved no matter what and those people will probably be unhappy. It’s not productive to make even more people unhappy to give schadenfreude to the folks impacted in the second set of options. They ironed out a variety of kinks to get to the second set. The third set should really only be to incorporate the SSIMS potential changes and any other refinements that popped up in the feedback from round 2. It should not revert back to the crazy pants first options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I was super confused by that. Why would we still be considering the first set of options when the second set was a refinement of those first options.

I'm hoping it just wants to present the first set for comparison/contrast purposes but if the first set is being considered still, then this process makes no sense.

The first set of options had a lot of nonstarters and flaws. While there are definitely people who are rightfully unhappy about personally being redistricted in the second set of options, they are all at least realistic and workable for the most part. Someone is going to get moved no matter what and those people will probably be unhappy. It’s not productive to make even more people unhappy to give schadenfreude to the folks impacted in the second set of options. They ironed out a variety of kinks to get to the second set. The third set should really only be to incorporate the SSIMS potential changes and any other refinements that popped up in the feedback from round 2. It should not revert back to the crazy pants first options.

Especially since we weren’t even supposed to go three rounds of options and we only changed the scope because of the possible SSIMS situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I was super confused by that. Why would we still be considering the first set of options when the second set was a refinement of those first options.

I'm hoping it just wants to present the first set for comparison/contrast purposes but if the first set is being considered still, then this process makes no sense.

My guess is he is saying that because Montoya is unhappy with the second set. No worries, he has some kind of death grip on the rest of the board so it won't be an issue except for Montoya to vote for the option she likes, which won't pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I was super confused by that. Why would we still be considering the first set of options when the second set was a refinement of those first options.

I'm hoping it just wants to present the first set for comparison/contrast purposes but if the first set is being considered still, then this process makes no sense.

My guess is he is saying that because Montoya is unhappy with the second set. No worries, he has some kind of death grip on the rest of the board so it won't be an issue except for Montoya to vote for the option she likes, which won't pass.

When has Montoya identified which option she likes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I was super confused by that. Why would we still be considering the first set of options when the second set was a refinement of those first options.

I'm hoping it just wants to present the first set for comparison/contrast purposes but if the first set is being considered still, then this process makes no sense.

My guess is he is saying that because Montoya is unhappy with the second set. No worries, he has some kind of death grip on the rest of the board so it won't be an issue except for Montoya to vote for the option she likes, which won't pass.

When has Montoya identified which option she likes?

I recall her making comments about the new set of options increasing segregation. I don't remember her exact words. I don't know which option she would advocate for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I was super confused by that. Why would we still be considering the first set of options when the second set was a refinement of those first options.

I'm hoping it just wants to present the first set for comparison/contrast purposes but if the first set is being considered still, then this process makes no sense.

My guess is he is saying that because Montoya is unhappy with the second set. No worries, he has some kind of death grip on the rest of the board so it won't be an issue except for Montoya to vote for the option she likes, which won't pass.

When has Montoya identified which option she likes?

I recall her making comments about the new set of options increasing segregation. I don't remember her exact words. I don't know which option she would advocate for.

where is it in the record? any link to the video recording?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will Option 1-4 come back into play or is it just Options A-D plus whatever comes out to address closing if SSIMS? Dr. Taylor said something at the last BOE meeting that made it sound like all options are on the table, but it wasn’t clear if he literally meant all of the ones released so far.

He went out of his way to say they would be presenting all the boundary options again -- and when pressed about whether that included the first four, he said yes. So I presume everything is on the table.

I thought he just said that the survey would be expanded to include all of the options.

+1. Taylor said the survey would include A, B, C, D...and presumably E (and F? depending how many options they have). Sounds like a flawed survey when the initial 4 had 2 months for responses. Might as well have a new survey. But, it will also show you which is in the lead.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have the link saved for the interactive boundary options for the second round? I found it for the first round here:
https://maulfoster.maps.arcgis.com/apps/insta...4d30938bd4868af3d0cc

I noticed MCPS took it down for the second round..."under construction". Anyone have the URL saved?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These will be the leaders. If your neighborhood is zoned to something that makes you unhappy with, quickly get in your private school applications. Expect to be unhappy bc the equity train trumps all other concerns.

What specifically do you mean by "equity" here? What do you think MCPS is doing to promote equity?

Compare A, B, C and D borders for Woodward and WJ and it will be crystal clear for you.

When new option(s) come out next week, it will be closest to the most “equitable” of those 4.

Why do you put "equitable" in quotes? What does "equity" mean to you and what are the competing priorities?

Examples include: Social and economic engineering. Redistribution of wealth.