BOE Spring Facilities and Boundaries Work Session #2

[Anonymous]

So there was that bit at the beginning about how if a Board member wants to propose an alternative, it has to be voted on and passed by the Board and then presented at a public hearing (last two scheduled are next Mon and Tues.). Given that no one did, is it safe to assume that the only options on the table are the two main recommendations, plus the alternative for Crown presented originally and the two possible adjustments presented by MCPS today?

Or is it still possible that a Board member could propose a change at the work session next Thursday?

[Anonymous]

WOWZER--(Wootton) Parkway People took a beating from MCPS in that meeting. Looks like MCPS actually WAS listening to their concerns and had just the information to quell those anxious Abbies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Julie Yang has mentioned and heard the criticisms of Woodward essentially being a performing arts school. She brought it up and asked Jeannie to explain their logic.

Apparently machine learning and data sciences was added to Woodward. Is that new???

Is this true? I didn’t see it in the slides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:WOWZER--(Wootton) Parkway People took a beating from MCPS in that meeting. Looks like MCPS actually WAS listening to their concerns and had just the information to quell those anxious Abbies.

Of course MCPS made up what ever they wanted. None of it can be verified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Julie Yang has mentioned and heard the criticisms of Woodward essentially being a performing arts school. She brought it up and asked Jeannie to explain their logic.

Apparently machine learning and data sciences was added to Woodward. Is that new???

Is this true? I didn’t see it in the slides.

Yes, Jeannie Franklin said it a couple of times during the meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WOWZER--(Wootton) Parkway People took a beating from MCPS in that meeting. Looks like MCPS actually WAS listening to their concerns and had just the information to quell those anxious Abbies.

Of course MCPS made up what ever they wanted. None of it can be verified.

What on earth are you talking about? I think you watched the wrong meeting. They named all of the places they get all the data from and even entertained the Rockville dummies by using all the fake Rockville numbers to show that even if they were true, it wouldn't be too much for them to absorb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WOWZER--(Wootton) Parkway People took a beating from MCPS in that meeting. Looks like MCPS actually WAS listening to their concerns and had just the information to quell those anxious Abbies.

Of course MCPS made up what ever they wanted. None of it can be verified.

What on earth are you talking about? I think you watched the wrong meeting. They named all of the places they get all the data from and even entertained the Rockville dummies by using all the fake Rockville numbers to show that even if they were true, it wouldn't be too much for them to absorb.

Yeah. I will say, as someone who doesn't know the ins and outs of Rockville to challenge the presentation, MCPS did a good job making their case.

[Anonymous]

Was there any mention of not changing the RM boundaries at all when it currently has 9 portables and is overcrowded?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was there any mention of not changing the RM boundaries at all when it currently has 9 portables and is overcrowded?

They said they aren't changing the boundaries. That was the extent. They didn't say anything about the overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh and the assumption that equal shares of kids from each school will leave for programs at other schools is laughable and embarrassing

OMG you must be kidding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was there any mention of not changing the RM boundaries at all when it currently has 9 portables and is overcrowded?

More, they calculated that RM will get a net outflow due to regional program while Churchill will get a surplus. Therefore, music program will be moved to RM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of the board members really pushed back on what MCPS presented. A lot of them complimented MCPS staff profusely on how amazing and incredible their presentation one. Especially Board President Grace Rivera-Oven.

Disappointing.

But certainly not surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WOWZER--(Wootton) Parkway People took a beating from MCPS in that meeting. Looks like MCPS actually WAS listening to their concerns and had just the information to quell those anxious Abbies.

Of course MCPS made up what ever they wanted. None of it can be verified.

Actually, all of it can be verified. It’s ridiculous how the Save Wootton proponents cite MCPS’ use of “bad data” when it’s City of Rockville data. Taking a worse case scenario with the data, it would only add 12 more students to Wootton!!!

[Anonymous]

I'm finding the slides to be obnoxious and unprofessional. It's totally inappropriate for MCPS to respond to concerns with: "Hmmmm….not so much."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm finding the slides to be obnoxious and unprofessional. It's totally inappropriate for MCPS to respond to concerns with: "Hmmmm….not so much."

+1 exactly