The Facts About the Districtwide Boundary Analysis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the lawsuit is about getting the word ESPECIALLY removed from the FAA so that kids aren't used as pawns in a social engineering experiment.

No, it's not. I guess you didn't read the Bethesda Beat piece.

But my SPLEEN!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the lawsuit is about getting the word ESPECIALLY removed from the FAA so that kids aren't used as pawns in a social engineering experiment.

No, it's not. I guess you didn't read the Bethesda Beat piece.

But my SPLEEN!!!!

I WILL NEVER LET YOU REMOVE MY SPLEEN!!!!!!1!1!1!!!

[Anonymous]

You guys, the thread for the lawsuit about Clarksburg is here: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/849654.page
Let’s keep this one about the countywide stuff.

[Anonymous]

The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

Sounds about right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

Sounds about right.

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

Sounds about right.

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

So first of all, not everyone in that Facebook group is there because they oppose the boundary analysis.

Second, the lawsuit in the top PP is about the upcounty boundary study - the one related to the August 2020 opening of a new Seneca Valley High School building. Are you saying that you don't think that MCPS should have changed any boundaries for that? They should have just opened the new building, with the existing boundaries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

Sounds about right.

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

That's less than 1% of MoCo's population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

Sounds about right.

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

That's less than 1% of MoCo's population.

6997 Russian bots

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

Sounds about right.

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

That's less than 1% of MoCo's population.

6997 Russian bots

It's not a laughing matter. The BOE is harvesting spleens!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

Sounds about right.

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

So first of all, not everyone in that Facebook group is there because they oppose the boundary analysis.

Second, the lawsuit in the top PP is about the upcounty boundary study - the one related to the August 2020 opening of a new Seneca Valley High School building. Are you saying that you don't think that MCPS should have changed any boundaries for that? They should have just opened the new building, with the existing boundaries?

Boundaries needed to be changed because SV opened. They didn't need to take kids halfway across the county though to Neelsville.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Clarksburg lawsuit is for all residents who don’t support the BOE changes to boundary.

Then apparently there are only 3 residents who don't support the boundary changes in the upcounty boundary study.

Sounds about right.

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

That's less than 1% of MoCo's population.

Enough to make a difference. Two or three parent groups with a tenth of that number made a difference in Fairfax County.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

So first of all, not everyone in that Facebook group is there because they oppose the boundary analysis.

Second, the lawsuit in the top PP is about the upcounty boundary study - the one related to the August 2020 opening of a new Seneca Valley High School building. Are you saying that you don't think that MCPS should have changed any boundaries for that? They should have just opened the new building, with the existing boundaries?

Boundaries needed to be changed because SV opened. They didn't need to take kids halfway across the county though to Neelsville.

Are you the PP? So actually, you do support boundary changes. Just not boundary changes you don't like.

Also you must not live in the upcounty, because nobody would describe a trip from southern Clarksburg or northern Germantown, to northern Germantown, as "halfway across the county."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No there are 7,000 in a FB group that don't support boundary changes. I'm one of them.

So first of all, not everyone in that Facebook group is there because they oppose the boundary analysis.

Second, the lawsuit in the top PP is about the upcounty boundary study - the one related to the August 2020 opening of a new Seneca Valley High School building. Are you saying that you don't think that MCPS should have changed any boundaries for that? They should have just opened the new building, with the existing boundaries?

Boundaries needed to be changed because SV opened. They didn't need to take kids halfway across the county though to Neelsville.

Are you the PP? So actually, you do support boundary changes. Just not boundary changes you don't like.

Also you must not live in the upcounty, because nobody would describe a trip from southern Clarksburg or northern Germantown, to northern Germantown, as "halfway across the county."

You must not live upcounty because Cabin Branch is North Clarksburg/border of Frederick County and Neelsville is closer to Gaithersburg border than to Germantown.