Option B Alternate - Adding extra ES to WJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BALANCED SCHOOLS ARE BETTER SCHOOLS! Both WJ and Woodward will be great schools but they should absolutely be more balanced. There is no gross “token” aspect. Drop that. The goal should always be to balance the schools when it makes sense logistically. Which it does when 2 schools are a mile apart.

VMES is a wonderful elementary school and our kids will succeed in whichever high school we are assigned.

Absolutely reach out to BOE. Ideally before their Feb 24 meeting but consider using this email:

[e-mail]

You can register to make your voice heard at the BOE March 9 and 10 meetings - register by Feb 26:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/community/participation/

Please just remember to speak for what is best for ALL KIDS not just your kids. We are all in this together.

I generally agree with the substance of this, but it rings kinda hollow knowing that the people saying this probably never said anything if favor of balancing in the past and likely never will again except when it personally benefits you. Are you going to be singing the same tune if they propose changing your ES boundaries to balance the number of FARMS kids with a nearby poorer schools? I doubt it.

DP here

How do you know who is saying this? I agree with the PP and I wanted KPES to be zoned for Einstein

Also when you resort to personal attacks like this it tells me you are trying to distract from a.valkd argument that you can't refute. We are talking about people's education here. Your sad little comeback is pathetic and self serving.

That's why I said 'probably" and "I doubt it.". And how is it self serving? I live in Silver Spring and none of this really affects me... it's just annoying to see WJ parents (and sure, they might not actually be WJ parents, I know,) who have fought for years to keep their schools better-off than other schools suddenly pretend like they care about balancing FARMS rate when in all likelihood they are just saying it because they want a lower FARMS rate of their own personal school.

Just be honest about that if that's the case-- don't pretend that you're being principled and care about all kids for just long enough to win something that you think helps your kids, and then drop those principles like a hot potato as soon as changes are proposed that aren't what you would pick for your own kids.

I mean, if this is about WJ/Woodward families developing real principles about valuing the well-being of all MCPS kids, then wonderful, welcome to the party, and I look forward to your support in the upcoming elementary school boundary study which really ought to include some big but controversial changes to support more balanced elementary schools. I'm just skeptical.

Get over yourself. I also live in Silver Spring but thankfully most of my neighbors are not as insufferable as you are. Jfc

[Anonymous]

It's completely insane that anyone thinks that it's ok to do the wrong thing that will hurt kids from low income families simply because they don't like Luxmanor and Farmland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's completely insane that anyone thinks that it's ok to do the wrong thing that will hurt kids from low income families simply because they don't like Luxmanor and Farmland.

What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's completely insane that anyone thinks that it's ok to do the wrong thing that will hurt kids from low income families simply because they don't like Luxmanor and Farmland.

What?

You are essentially arguing AGAINST demographically balanced schools on basis that you don't like the person who is arguing in favor of demographically balanced schools (even though you have no clue who you are actually arguing against)

So be honest, what do YOU want and why?

[Anonymous]

I don’t think anyone is trying to stick it to Luxmanor or Farmland. I don’t get that impression. That being said, there are ideas floating around that would clearly benefit them. These ideas are narrowly applied to “balance” FARMs in their favor. That is what is being called out.

It is fine that they are advocating for lower FARMs for themselves or for maintaining property values. But, it would be refreshing if they were honest about the actual reasons. That way, we don’t have to go in circles.

Of course, it isn’t clear who is writing any of this. So I use “they” loosely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is trying to stick it to Luxmanor or Farmland. I don’t get that impression. That being said, there are ideas floating around that would clearly benefit them. These ideas are narrowly applied to “balance” FARMs in their favor. That is what is being called out.

It is fine that they are advocating for lower FARMs for themselves or for maintaining property values. But, it would be refreshing if they were honest about the actual reasons. That way, we don’t have to go in circles.

Of course, it isn’t clear who is writing any of this. So I use “they” loosely.

Of course it isn't clear..it's an anonymous forum. You don't know who I am and clearly don't care..you want me to be from particular community so you can use that to subtly argue in favor of perpetuating racial segregation. I am from Silver Spring and not directly impacted by this, but I have an opinion. That doesn't fit your disgusting narrative, so you just pretend it's not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is trying to stick it to Luxmanor or Farmland. I don’t get that impression. That being said, there are ideas floating around that would clearly benefit them. These ideas are narrowly applied to “balance” FARMs in their favor. That is what is being called out.

It is fine that they are advocating for lower FARMs for themselves or for maintaining property values. But, it would be refreshing if they were honest about the actual reasons. That way, we don’t have to go in circles.

Of course, it isn’t clear who is writing any of this. So I use “they” loosely.

Of course it isn't clear..it's an anonymous forum. You don't know who I am and clearly don't care..you want me to be from particular community so you can use that to subtly argue in favor of perpetuating racial segregation. I am from Silver Spring and not directly impacted by this, but I have an opinion. That doesn't fit your disgusting narrative, so you just pretend it's not true.

I wrote the quoted text, but nothing prior. I’m not sure what narrative you're following, as this thread is a mess. Do what you want with that information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is trying to stick it to Luxmanor or Farmland. I don’t get that impression. That being said, there are ideas floating around that would clearly benefit them. These ideas are narrowly applied to “balance” FARMs in their favor. That is what is being called out.

It is fine that they are advocating for lower FARMs for themselves or for maintaining property values. But, it would be refreshing if they were honest about the actual reasons. That way, we don’t have to go in circles.

Of course, it isn’t clear who is writing any of this. So I use “they” loosely.

Of course it isn't clear..it's an anonymous forum. You don't know who I am and clearly don't care..you want me to be from particular community so you can use that to subtly argue in favor of perpetuating racial segregation. I am from Silver Spring and not directly impacted by this, but I have an opinion. That doesn't fit your disgusting narrative, so you just pretend it's not true.

I wrote the quoted text, but nothing prior. I’m not sure what narrative you're following, as this thread is a mess. Do what you want with that information.

You know exactly which narrative I am referring to. That narrative is that the people who want to balance FARMS between Walter Johnson and Woodward are all people set on Taylor's recommendation to be zoned to Woodward and facing a higher FARMS rate unless this is changed.

That is not true. I know because I am one of the posters who wants them to balance FARMS between WJ and Woodward, and my child is and will continue to be zoned for Einstein.

Oddly you are insisting that everyone reveal their personal interests in what they are advocating for, but you aren't revealing yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is trying to stick it to Luxmanor or Farmland. I don’t get that impression. That being said, there are ideas floating around that would clearly benefit them. These ideas are narrowly applied to “balance” FARMs in their favor. That is what is being called out.

It is fine that they are advocating for lower FARMs for themselves or for maintaining property values. But, it would be refreshing if they were honest about the actual reasons. That way, we don’t have to go in circles.

Of course, it isn’t clear who is writing any of this. So I use “they” loosely.

Of course it isn't clear..it's an anonymous forum. You don't know who I am and clearly don't care..you want me to be from particular community so you can use that to subtly argue in favor of perpetuating racial segregation. I am from Silver Spring and not directly impacted by this, but I have an opinion. That doesn't fit your disgusting narrative, so you just pretend it's not true.

I wrote the quoted text, but nothing prior. I’m not sure what narrative you're following, as this thread is a mess. Do what you want with that information.

You know exactly which narrative I am referring to. That narrative is that the people who want to balance FARMS between Walter Johnson and Woodward are all people set on Taylor's recommendation to be zoned to Woodward and facing a higher FARMS rate unless this is changed.

That is not true. I know because I am one of the posters who wants them to balance FARMS between WJ and Woodward, and my child is and will continue to be zoned for Einstein.

Oddly you are insisting that everyone reveal their personal interests in what they are advocating for, but you aren't revealing yours.

I am in RM cluster. I wrote an email to BOE about balancing FARMS in WJ and Woodward as well. I will have no direct impact from any scenario.

Sure, most Woodward families will prefer lower FARMS and it will benefit house value as well, but for a minute lets forget about house value and who is giving ideas. Just do what's best for kids. I don't think concentrating poverty in one HS is good when we can easily balance FARMS between WJ and Woodward.

Just becasue idea is coming from Woodward community, which benefits them, we shouldn't be ignoring it. We should see if idea has any merit. Merit of ideas should be discussed and not who is bringing the ideas.

[Anonymous]

RM poster here. I have been reading the thread but it was my first post here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is trying to stick it to Luxmanor or Farmland. I don’t get that impression. That being said, there are ideas floating around that would clearly benefit them. These ideas are narrowly applied to “balance” FARMs in their favor. That is what is being called out.

It is fine that they are advocating for lower FARMs for themselves or for maintaining property values. But, it would be refreshing if they were honest about the actual reasons. That way, we don’t have to go in circles.

Of course, it isn’t clear who is writing any of this. So I use “they” loosely.

Of course it isn't clear..it's an anonymous forum. You don't know who I am and clearly don't care..you want me to be from particular community so you can use that to subtly argue in favor of perpetuating racial segregation. I am from Silver Spring and not directly impacted by this, but I have an opinion. That doesn't fit your disgusting narrative, so you just pretend it's not true.

I wrote the quoted text, but nothing prior. I’m not sure what narrative you're following, as this thread is a mess. Do what you want with that information.

You know exactly which narrative I am referring to. That narrative is that the people who want to balance FARMS between Walter Johnson and Woodward are all people set on Taylor's recommendation to be zoned to Woodward and facing a higher FARMS rate unless this is changed.

That is not true. I know because I am one of the posters who wants them to balance FARMS between WJ and Woodward, and my child is and will continue to be zoned for Einstein.

Oddly you are insisting that everyone reveal their personal interests in what they are advocating for, but you aren't revealing yours.

I am in RM cluster. I wrote an email to BOE about balancing FARMS in WJ and Woodward as well. I will have no direct impact from any scenario.

Sure, most Woodward families will prefer lower FARMS and it will benefit house value as well, but for a minute lets forget about house value and who is giving ideas. Just do what's best for kids. I don't think concentrating poverty in one HS is good when we can easily balance FARMS between WJ and Woodward.

Just becasue idea is coming from Woodward community, which benefits them, we shouldn't be ignoring it. We should see if idea has any merit. Merit of ideas should be discussed and not who is bringing the ideas.

Yes, the idea shouldn’t be ignored. But its sincerity should be in question. Were they advocating before the issue directly impacted them? I would hope so, but doubt it.

[Anonymous]

I'm on the PTA board at Viers Mill and we have asked for feedback from our community in multiple channels since the boundary studies began. The overwhelming majority of responses prefer Woodward. A smaller bit prefer to remain Wheaton/DCC. And I don't think we've gotten a single response choosing WJ as the preference (so, PPs who said they were VM families and want WJ, come to the PTA meetings and make your voices heard! We're missing you.)

[Anonymous]

I live in Randolph Hills (VMES) but my kids are out of elementary. We definitely prefer WJ as do a bunch of our neighbors. These decisions affect way more kids than those currently enrolled at VMES!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm on the PTA board at Viers Mill and we have asked for feedback from our community in multiple channels since the boundary studies began. The overwhelming majority of responses prefer Woodward. A smaller bit prefer to remain Wheaton/DCC. And I don't think we've gotten a single response choosing WJ as the preference (so, PPs who said they were VM families and want WJ, come to the PTA meetings and make your voices heard! We're missing you.)

Discussions that you are referring to happened before the recommendation. VM families were worried about split articulation and felt that going to Woodward was their best chance to avoid it. WJ was not really on their radar. It was also before it was known that Woodward will be getting another high FARMs school and be weakened compared to any of the seven options previously under consideration. With the new development, VM families should reevaluate what is in their best interest.

BTW, everything said on this thread (pro WJ and pro Woodward) should be taken with a grain a salt. It has been completely corrupted by WJ and Woodward posters pretending to speak for VM families.

[Anonymous]

But it’s beside the point. This isn’t just about our kids. It’s not about the VMES PTA preferences. The most important thing is balancing schools when it is possible. Spread the resources to lift up as many kids as we can.