What does tabling the SSIMS closure mean for the boundary options?

[Anonymous]

Oops -- quoted area got messed up. Trying to say:

It's mainly SCES families advocating to save SSIMS, and they are not getting rezoned to another middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The community is not rallying around a "dangerous building." It's rallying around making investments in the current school rather than creating two huge middle schools. It's saying that no one has looked at the traffic and safety implications of all the increased buses in the neighborhood. It's saying the timing for this was incredibly rushed and MCPS has not looked into other holding school options. It's saying Taylor and his team can't just push through a school closure without talking to the people most affected about it. And also, if the building is so unsafe, how is it safe for a holding school? The community is saying this didn't make sense and is asking questions that all of us should be asking as well.

I agree that there are a ton of unanswered questions re the boundary study and SSIMS. MCPS is rushing so fast that it's causing tons of confusion. But that is not the SSIMS community's fault.

💯 The false choice the community is being given- make it a holding school or keep it how it is without any building upgrades. I’m glad the gym was renovated. The misuse of funds and poor planning are infuriating.

[Anonymous]

I agree that keeping SSIMS and SCES open but renovating them would be the best option. But how much does that cost? Is it more feasible to tear them down and rebuild a new school or schools on the land? And if so, where do SSIMS students attend school during the 2+ year time period that takes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that keeping SSIMS and SCES open but renovating them would be the best option. But how much does that cost? Is it more feasible to tear them down and rebuild a new school or schools on the land? And if so, where do SSIMS students attend school during the 2+ year time period that takes?

I think the oldest parts of the building can't be torn down because they're considered historic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that keeping SSIMS and SCES open but renovating them would be the best option. But how much does that cost? Is it more feasible to tear them down and rebuild a new school or schools on the land? And if so, where do SSIMS students attend school during the 2+ year time period that takes?

I think the oldest parts of the building can't be torn down because they're considered historic.

Well I'm sorry, but that's dumb. Safety and cost-efficiency should be prioritized over "historic."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oops -- quoted area got messed up. Trying to say:

It's mainly SCES families advocating to save SSIMS, and they are not getting rezoned to another middle school.

Really? The other families don't care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that keeping SSIMS and SCES open but renovating them would be the best option. But how much does that cost? Is it more feasible to tear them down and rebuild a new school or schools on the land? And if so, where do SSIMS students attend school during the 2+ year time period that takes?

Taylor presented these cost estimates at one of the CIP work sessions last month (p. 22):

● The preliminary costs to renovate Silver Spring International MS (154,386 SF) and Sligo Creek ES (87,744 SF):

○ If we budgeted for a SSIMS-only Major Capital Project:
■ If we started planning in FY 2027, there’s a preliminary estimate of $145M and anticipated completion date of 2031
■ If we started planning in FY 2035, there’s a preliminary estimate of $215M and anticipated completion date of 2039

○ If we budgeted for a SSIMS and Sligo Creek ES Major Capital Project:
■ If we started planning in FY 2027, there’s a preliminary estimate of $240M and anticipated completion date of 2033
■ If we started planning in FY 2035, there’s a preliminary estimate of $350M and anticipated completion date of 2041

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DN4KQG52F8D6/$file/FY2027%20Cap%20Bdgt%20FY2027-2032%20CIP%20251104%20PPT.pdf

[Anonymous]

I think they are not historic. It also seems wild to tear down SSIMS after renovating the gym- which was completed while students attended?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that keeping SSIMS and SCES open but renovating them would be the best option. But how much does that cost? Is it more feasible to tear them down and rebuild a new school or schools on the land? And if so, where do SSIMS students attend school during the 2+ year time period that takes?

Taylor presented these cost estimates at one of the CIP work sessions last month (p. 22):

● The preliminary costs to renovate Silver Spring International MS (154,386 SF) and Sligo Creek ES (87,744 SF):

○ If we budgeted for a SSIMS-only Major Capital Project:
■ If we started planning in FY 2027, there’s a preliminary estimate of $145M and anticipated completion date of 2031
■ If we started planning in FY 2035, there’s a preliminary estimate of $215M and anticipated completion date of 2039

○ If we budgeted for a SSIMS and Sligo Creek ES Major Capital Project:
■ If we started planning in FY 2027, there’s a preliminary estimate of $240M and anticipated completion date of 2033
■ If we started planning in FY 2035, there’s a preliminary estimate of $350M and anticipated completion date of 2041

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DN4KQG52F8D6/$file/FY2027%20Cap%20Bdgt%20FY2027-2032%20CIP%20251104%20PPT.pdf

I think they should renovate and keep SSIMS but not SCES... with enrollment shrinking they can easily just drop one elementary school and send the kids to the many other schools nearby. So that would just be $145M (or probably a little more since I doubt it would start in FY27 at this point.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that keeping SSIMS and SCES open but renovating them would be the best option. But how much does that cost? Is it more feasible to tear them down and rebuild a new school or schools on the land? And if so, where do SSIMS students attend school during the 2+ year time period that takes?

Taylor presented these cost estimates at one of the CIP work sessions last month (p. 22):

● The preliminary costs to renovate Silver Spring International MS (154,386 SF) and Sligo Creek ES (87,744 SF):

○ If we budgeted for a SSIMS-only Major Capital Project:
■ If we started planning in FY 2027, there’s a preliminary estimate of $145M and anticipated completion date of 2031
■ If we started planning in FY 2035, there’s a preliminary estimate of $215M and anticipated completion date of 2039

○ If we budgeted for a SSIMS and Sligo Creek ES Major Capital Project:
■ If we started planning in FY 2027, there’s a preliminary estimate of $240M and anticipated completion date of 2033
■ If we started planning in FY 2035, there’s a preliminary estimate of $350M and anticipated completion date of 2041

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DN4KQG52F8D6/$file/FY2027%20Cap%20Bdgt%20FY2027-2032%20CIP%20251104%20PPT.pdf

And it looks like those are the costs with the SSISM and SCES students off-site. Where would they go?

[Anonymous]

Also just noticing it would be a 4-year time frame that students would need to be moved offsite. I suppose if the Takoma & Eastern magnets were moved elsewhere that would create space? Plus Sligo is already a little under capacity so Forest Knolls could go there..

[Anonymous]

Wait so every other Elementary school is estimated around $70 million in the CIP. But this “preliminary” guesstimate says an ES is $95 million? Or $135 in 2035?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also just noticing it would be a 4-year time frame that students would need to be moved offsite. I suppose if the Takoma & Eastern magnets were moved elsewhere that would create space? Plus Sligo is already a little under capacity so Forest Knolls could go there..

Not after they add Arcola to Sligo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also just noticing it would be a 4-year time frame that students would need to be moved offsite. I suppose if the Takoma & Eastern magnets were moved elsewhere that would create space? Plus Sligo is already a little under capacity so Forest Knolls could go there..

Not after they add Arcola to Sligo.

Yes, they would need to not do that, but there is enough space at Odessa Shannon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that keeping SSIMS and SCES open but renovating them would be the best option. But how much does that cost? Is it more feasible to tear them down and rebuild a new school or schools on the land? And if so, where do SSIMS students attend school during the 2+ year time period that takes?

Taylor presented these cost estimates at one of the CIP work sessions last month (p. 22):

● The preliminary costs to renovate Silver Spring International MS (154,386 SF) and Sligo Creek ES (87,744 SF):

○ If we budgeted for a SSIMS-only Major Capital Project:
■ If we started planning in FY 2027, there’s a preliminary estimate of $145M and anticipated completion date of 2031
■ If we started planning in FY 2035, there’s a preliminary estimate of $215M and anticipated completion date of 2039

○ If we budgeted for a SSIMS and Sligo Creek ES Major Capital Project:
■ If we started planning in FY 2027, there’s a preliminary estimate of $240M and anticipated completion date of 2033
■ If we started planning in FY 2035, there’s a preliminary estimate of $350M and anticipated completion date of 2041

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DN4KQG52F8D6/$file/FY2027%20Cap%20Bdgt%20FY2027-2032%20CIP%20251104%20PPT.pdf

I think they should renovate and keep SSIMS but not SCES... with enrollment shrinking they can easily just drop one elementary school and send the kids to the many other schools nearby. So that would just be $145M (or probably a little more since I doubt it would start in FY27 at this point.)

I think SCES has the biggest K they’ve ever had.