Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

I am actually fully familiar with all roads in this area due to my job.

What's your estimate for additional time for Fallsgrove to Rm#5 when compared to RP?

Not PP here, but I estimate 12-15 minutes traffic RP5 to RP and 15-20 to RMES5, depending on whether the light at Falls Rd is red. The time to make the left onto Edmonston is about the same as the time to make the left onto Dunster. The time from Falls Rd to Edmonston and Edmonston to RMES5 is probably 5 minutes more than the time down Falls rd to Dunster (common to hit lees at Kersey). The variable is whether the bus could make a right on red at Falls vs waiting to cross

So it will be 3-5 minutes extra.

Which zone are you in? Since a 20 minute commute doesn't sound like a big deal to you, we can bus your child to a school 4-5 miles away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

I am actually fully familiar with all roads in this area due to my job.

What's your estimate for additional time for Fallsgrove to Rm#5 when compared to RP?

Not PP here, but I estimate 12-15 minutes traffic RP5 to RP and 15-20 to RMES5, depending on whether the light at Falls Rd is red. The time to make the left onto Edmonston is about the same as the time to make the left onto Dunster. The time from Falls Rd to Edmonston and Edmonston to RMES5 is probably 5 minutes more than the time down Falls rd to Dunster (common to hit lees at Kersey). The variable is whether the bus could make a right on red at Falls vs waiting to cross

So it will be 3-5 minutes extra.

Yes and 6-10 minutes would only be 3-5 more than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Right here. YOU are the reason I hope A or B gets picked. Your mother f'ing association cherry picked neighborhoods to make B and then E comes out and you go gaga over that and abandon YOUR own changes.

It disrupts B5 who is walkable and sends them on a bus to RM5 down the pike AND RP2 (in your neighborhood) which is 100% walkable gets turned away to keep getting bussed. It also magically makes your FARMS in the teens which is insane considering your closest school across 355 has 70%.

You are disgusting.

You seem upset. Alternative E came out to find a more equitable FARMS distribution that keeps most current assignments. It was not Hungerford proposal. And the FARMS rate in regular classrooms at RMES5 is 21.6 (not in the teens), pretty comparable with the rest of the cluster. Except Twinbrook, who wanted to keep its boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There's no way parents in the rest of the cluster will vote on the name "Hungerford ES" after this debacle.

I vote for Alternative D and some other name as well. D at least makes some attempt for FARMs diversity without being too disruptive for communities. No other option does that. E does it, but without involving TB.

Yes, except it royally screws the most vulnerable of the ES - TB losing Title 1 status.

MCPS is supposed to share what exact resources TB will lose by going to 50% FARMs from 70%. I am not aware of of exact details and if anyone can share it it will help.

Title 1 status provides extra funding from the federal government for such schools. I don't know how much money we are talking about though. For mcps, they also provide additional services and smaller class sizes. Big thing for high poverty schools imo.

They also get more highly trained teachers, free summer school, and they have been piloting a new curriculum which one of the parents noted last night. Any students bussed to a different school will lose all of those services plus the new curriculum.

As Twinbrook and the cluster reps repeatedly stated last night, what they need is not lower FARMS and a broken up community but a RENOVATES building. Their building is in serious disrepair and MCPS has repeatedly passed over Twinbrook for renovations for years. With the new Rev/Ex system, Twinbrook keeps losing out, AND one of the new data points for priority on renovations is capacity issues, which Twinbrook definitely won't have if a bunch of their students get taken away.

When writing to the BoE, asking for Twinbrook to get its renovations is a concrete way of ACTUALLY helping the students at Twinbrook instead of calling them a failing school and trying to split them all up.

Thanks for adding this details here. It's always good to know all details. Twinbrook should keep it's boundary. Not sure why E is not the choice of everyone here? I do think most folks don't want to change schools, but that's a short sighted way to look at things. No one likes to change schools mid way, but new boundary means doing it the best possible way and change. I watched the last night testimony and I saw a large group simply advocating for not wanting to change their current schools. It was very disappointing to see so many only thinking about their kids for the next few years. Understandable , but disappointing.

Why don't you try driving from the Fallsgrove Safeway to RM ES #5 at 8:30 a.m. on a weekday. Then you can tell us why Option E is not popular.

I have driven it many times. I wanted to hear from Fallsgrove folks who seems outraged about idea of going to RM#5.

It takes 2-3 minutes extra on average. I work for a logistics company and I do have an advantage of looking at all past data at different times.

Are we really saying that 2-3 extra minutes of bus ride can't be tolerated and there should be no weight given to FARMs distribution?

I could understand where 30-60 minutes of extra is being added for 100s of kids in option C. That one just considers FARMs and discard proximity. D does a good balance between these two, but can't be done due to Twinbrook losing title 1. E pretty much puts proximity at front and very little weight for FARMs diversity is left.

Do we want to put 100% weight behind proximity and 0% for SES Diversity even eliminate option E? If that's the way you see it then E is not acceptable. If that's the way MCPS sees it then E is not acceptable.

After putting so much attention to this serious issue, if MCPS puts ZERO weight for SES diversity then E won't happen. But that will be a disappointing outcome and it means all the previous steps were just drama by MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

I am actually fully familiar with all roads in this area due to my job.

What's your estimate for additional time for Fallsgrove to Rm#5 when compared to RP?

Not PP here, but I estimate 12-15 minutes traffic RP5 to RP and 15-20 to RMES5, depending on whether the light at Falls Rd is red. The time to make the left onto Edmonston is about the same as the time to make the left onto Dunster. The time from Falls Rd to Edmonston and Edmonston to RMES5 is probably 5 minutes more than the time down Falls rd to Dunster (common to hit lees at Kersey). The variable is whether the bus could make a right on red at Falls vs waiting to cross

The intersection of Edmonston and Wotten pkwy is pretty messed , they better study it and add a lane.

How about the Edmonston and Pike intersection? That is a nightmare backed up every morning and evening 2-3 lights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

I am actually fully familiar with all roads in this area due to my job.

What's your estimate for additional time for Fallsgrove to Rm#5 when compared to RP?

Not PP here, but I estimate 12-15 minutes traffic RP5 to RP and 15-20 to RMES5, depending on whether the light at Falls Rd is red. The time to make the left onto Edmonston is about the same as the time to make the left onto Dunster. The time from Falls Rd to Edmonston and Edmonston to RMES5 is probably 5 minutes more than the time down Falls rd to Dunster (common to hit lees at Kersey). The variable is whether the bus could make a right on red at Falls vs waiting to cross

The intersection of Edmonston and Wotten pkwy is pretty messed , they better study it and add a lane.

How about the Edmonston and Pike intersection? That is a nightmare backed up every morning and evening 2-3 lights.

That intersection isn’t on the RP5 path

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

I am actually fully familiar with all roads in this area due to my job.

What's your estimate for additional time for Fallsgrove to Rm#5 when compared to RP?

Not PP here, but I estimate 12-15 minutes traffic RP5 to RP and 15-20 to RMES5, depending on whether the light at Falls Rd is red. The time to make the left onto Edmonston is about the same as the time to make the left onto Dunster. The time from Falls Rd to Edmonston and Edmonston to RMES5 is probably 5 minutes more than the time down Falls rd to Dunster (common to hit lees at Kersey). The variable is whether the bus could make a right on red at Falls vs waiting to cross

So it will be 3-5 minutes extra.

Which zone are you in? Since a 20 minute commute doesn't sound like a big deal to you, we can bus your child to a school 4-5 miles away.

My kids takes a longer bus ride and he goes to preschool in PEP program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

I am actually fully familiar with all roads in this area due to my job.

What's your estimate for additional time for Fallsgrove to Rm#5 when compared to RP?

Not PP here, but I estimate 12-15 minutes traffic RP5 to RP and 15-20 to RMES5, depending on whether the light at Falls Rd is red. The time to make the left onto Edmonston is about the same as the time to make the left onto Dunster. The time from Falls Rd to Edmonston and Edmonston to RMES5 is probably 5 minutes more than the time down Falls rd to Dunster (common to hit lees at Kersey). The variable is whether the bus could make a right on red at Falls vs waiting to cross

The intersection of Edmonston and Wotten pkwy is pretty messed , they better study it and add a lane.

How about the Edmonston and Pike intersection? That is a nightmare backed up every morning and evening 2-3 lights.

Why will RP5 bus will ever go there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

Here is what Google maps says:

Monday @8:30AM Safeway - RPES 10-24 minutes
Monday @8:30AM Safeway - RMES5 12-26 minutes

Monday @3:30PM RPES - Safeway 10-16 minutes
Monday @3:30PM RMES5 - Safeway 12-18 minutes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The intersection of Edmonston and Wotten pkwy is pretty messed , they better study it and add a lane.

I wrote to the city about it a couple weeks ago. This was the response:

"I reached out to staff in the City’s Traffic and Transportation Division regarding your concern. Staff shared that MCPS was required to perform a traffic study for the school, and this intersection was included in their study. The exiting (current) level of service (LOS) for the intersection was B (0.65) and A (0.56) during the AM and PM peak period, respectively. For the projected LOS after school is built, the analysis showed the LOS to be C (0.72) and A (0.59) during the AM and PM peak period, respectively.

Based on these results, the intersection is operating (and is expected to continue to operate after school is built) at an acceptable level of service, and the City has no plans to modify the intersection at this time. City staff will monitor the intersection and modify the green time for traffic coming out of W. Edmonston Drive, if needed to reduce the amount of delay or back-up."

[Anonymous]

Option E isn't just about Fallsgrove increased bus time.

It is about moving a walkable neighborhood surrounded by other RM sections and bussing them to RP.

It increases RP6 bus time

It increases B5 bus time and doesn't allow the closest kids to walk/bike to school.

It islands B8

It increases everyone but B3 who is going to school in every option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There's no way parents in the rest of the cluster will vote on the name "Hungerford ES" after this debacle.

I vote for Alternative D and some other name as well. D at least makes some attempt for FARMs diversity without being too disruptive for communities. No other option does that. E does it, but without involving TB.

Yes, except it royally screws the most vulnerable of the ES - TB losing Title 1 status.

MCPS is supposed to share what exact resources TB will lose by going to 50% FARMs from 70%. I am not aware of of exact details and if anyone can share it it will help.

Title 1 status provides extra funding from the federal government for such schools. I don't know how much money we are talking about though. For mcps, they also provide additional services and smaller class sizes. Big thing for high poverty schools imo.

They also get more highly trained teachers, free summer school, and they have been piloting a new curriculum which one of the parents noted last night. Any students bussed to a different school will lose all of those services plus the new curriculum.

As Twinbrook and the cluster reps repeatedly stated last night, what they need is not lower FARMS and a broken up community but a RENOVATES building. Their building is in serious disrepair and MCPS has repeatedly passed over Twinbrook for renovations for years. With the new Rev/Ex system, Twinbrook keeps losing out, AND one of the new data points for priority on renovations is capacity issues, which Twinbrook definitely won't have if a bunch of their students get taken away.

When writing to the BoE, asking for Twinbrook to get its renovations is a concrete way of ACTUALLY helping the students at Twinbrook instead of calling them a failing school and trying to split them all up.

Thanks for adding this details here. It's always good to know all details. Twinbrook should keep it's boundary. Not sure why E is not the choice of everyone here? I do think most folks don't want to change schools, but that's a short sighted way to look at things. No one likes to change schools mid way, but new boundary means doing it the best possible way and change. I watched the last night testimony and I saw a large group simply advocating for not wanting to change their current schools. It was very disappointing to see so many only thinking about their kids for the next few years. Understandable , but disappointing.

Why don't you try driving from the Fallsgrove Safeway to RM ES #5 at 8:30 a.m. on a weekday. Then you can tell us why Option E is not popular.

I have driven it many times. I wanted to hear from Fallsgrove folks who seems outraged about idea of going to RM#5.

It takes 2-3 minutes extra on average. I work for a logistics company and I do have an advantage of looking at all past data at different times.

Are we really saying that 2-3 extra minutes of bus ride can't be tolerated and there should be no weight given to FARMs distribution?

I could understand where 30-60 minutes of extra is being added for 100s of kids in option C. That one just considers FARMs and discard proximity. D does a good balance between these two, but can't be done due to Twinbrook losing title 1. E pretty much puts proximity at front and very little weight for FARMs diversity is left.

Do we want to put 100% weight behind proximity and 0% for SES Diversity even eliminate option E? If that's the way you see it then E is not acceptable. If that's the way MCPS sees it then E is not acceptable.

After putting so much attention to this serious issue, if MCPS puts ZERO weight for SES diversity then E won't happen. But that will be a disappointing outcome and it means all the previous steps were just drama by MCPS.

If you do a Google Maps search right now (at 10 p.m. on a Friday night) it shows the fastest route from the Fallsgrove Safeway (note: NOT the farthest point or the farthest bus stop in the neighborhood) it predicts a 12 minute travel time to RM ES #5 taking 270 via Exit 8 (which wouldn't be possible on a weekday morning) and traveling for 6.2 miles to the school. Other options are to take Wootton Parkway (more likely bus route) which is 4.9 miles and 13 minutes away, 3rd option is to take 270 but get on at exit 6 (also not a likely option during weekday morning rush hour) clocking in at 13 minutes and 5.7 miles.

If these are the travel times on a Friday night, they will be much longer on a weekday morning. Anyone who drives in the area during morning rush hour, whether down Wootton Parkway or on 270 (they'd always be late to school!!) knows that estimating 10 minutes of additional traffic time is a pretty conservative estimate.

Fallsgrove parents put up with the commute to Ritchie Park even though it is farther away than 7 other elementary schools (4 of which they would pass by on the way to RM ES #5), but RP is the limit in terms of time and distance. RM ES #5 pushes people past their breaking point, even if it is *just* and extra 3-5 minutes past Ritchie Park (when there's no traffic).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Right here. YOU are the reason I hope A or B gets picked. Your mother f'ing association cherry picked neighborhoods to make B and then E comes out and you go gaga over that and abandon YOUR own changes.

It disrupts B5 who is walkable and sends them on a bus to RM5 down the pike AND RP2 (in your neighborhood) which is 100% walkable gets turned away to keep getting bussed. It also magically makes your FARMS in the teens which is insane considering your closest school across 355 has 70%.

You are disgusting.

Not sure why you are so upset, but yeah the HCA did a kick-ass job under the circumstances. Thank you for acknowledging that.

Your mother f'ing association cherry picked neighborhoods to make B

Why didn't your association do that ? I believe someone from the association was asked by the BOE to come with an alternative ,hence they proposed a flawed option which they abandoned when a better one came about.

It disrupts B5 who is walkable and sends them on a bus to RM5 down the pike AND RP2 (in your neighborhood) which is 100% walkable gets turned away to keep getting bussed

Walkability must be important to you , but not to me or probably the board... sorry

It also magically makes your FARMS in the teens which is insane considering your closest school across 355 has 70%.

factually incorrect , no point refuting .. tons been written on the topic

You are disgusting.

I'm sorry you feel this way . I'm not that bad , really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

Here is what Google maps says:

Monday @8:30AM Safeway - RPES 10-24 minutes
Monday @8:30AM Safeway - RMES5 12-26 minutes

Monday @3:30PM RPES - Safeway 10-16 minutes
Monday @3:30PM RMES5 - Safeway 12-18 minutes

So it adds, 2 minutes in Google maps for the best case and also for the worst case situation. Matches with what other poster working with logistics company was saying.

I guess for some parents, 4 minutes of extra round trip may be nothing and for some it will be too much. Parents are just coming from different views here, but it's an extra 4 minutes of round trip after a long bus ride. We all need to remember that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you believe those commute times I have some free land in Russia for you. Don't be naive about traffic in this area.

Here is what Google maps says:

Monday @8:30AM Safeway - RPES 10-24 minutes
Monday @8:30AM Safeway - RMES5 12-26 minutes

Monday @3:30PM RPES - Safeway 10-16 minutes
Monday @3:30PM RMES5 - Safeway 12-18 minutes

So it adds, 2 minutes in Google maps for the best case and also for the worst case situation. Matches with what other poster working with logistics company was saying.

I guess for some parents, 4 minutes of extra round trip may be nothing and for some it will be too much. Parents are just coming from different views here, but it's an extra 4 minutes of round trip after a long bus ride. We all need to remember that.

RP5 is a problem child added to RP to satisfy capacity shortcomings, sorry for all the kids enduring the long bus ride. You truly do not belong in this cluster.