Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:please drive from fallsgrove to rm5 in the morning and tell me that you’d be ok with your kid doing that commute to school.

Fallsgrove is screwed regardless of its school assignment in this cluster. RMES#5 or RPES are very similar.

But they prefer RP because otherwise, it adds more time. And I don't believe it's another 2 min, especially during high traffic times. No way. I drive down Wootton Pkwy crossing Edmonston on a regular basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

If the FARMs number without CI at ES#5 was so important, why didn't the publish that in these new options like they did earlier? It really throws people off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

If the FARMs number without CI at ES#5 was so important, why didn't the publish that in these new options like they did earlier? It really throws people off.

Because it just starts argument and they have to do for all schools. But BOE is fully aware of this fact. MCPS even shared it with boundary advisory group. Not putting on website is one thing, but using available information is another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

If the FARMs number without CI at ES#5 was so important, why didn't the publish that in these new options like they did earlier? It really throws people off.

The precise kids and FARMs counts are out , anyone with half a brain can compute the percentages, unless they need to go back to an ES and learn how to add/ multiply all over again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is "standing ovation" lady troll again. I read the whole thing too. It says to integrate lower income housing within higher income neighborhoods. That is EXACTLY what MC does. In KF, PP, FG, RTC, and the new Tower Oaks. It NEVER once says to move walkable kids and bus them further them they they need to go. Not once. We are not talking about Potomac with no FARMS. This entire cluster is integrated with some FARMS and the middle school AND high school are both higher FARMS than 25% - and everyone is going there. Keep the kids close to home. That 1 child a class difference with extra hardship for more people is not what that report said. Not at all.

I've just proven that it is not one kid difference. Do you understand math at any reasonable level?

NP

How many kids is it then? I thought it was 1-2 kids per non CI class and no difference in overall school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

If the FARMs number without CI at ES#5 was so important, why didn't the publish that in these new options like they did earlier? It really throws people off.

Because it just starts argument and they have to do for all schools. But BOE is fully aware of this fact. MCPS even shared it with boundary advisory group. Not putting on website is one thing, but using available information is another.

My take is that they don't care just like all the other LI, IB, magnets, etc... don't care to have both. One school. One community.

[Anonymous]

Why so much hue and cry for Fallsgrove? It's not as if they have longest bus ride in MCPS. Plenty of routes take longer. You don't have to look even outside of RM cluster.


RP first stop in Fallsgove is at - Route: 5120 - RITCHIE PARK ES (SILVER) - 8:18 AM



I think high income parents are able to make so much noise as if no other kids take a long bus ride. Otherwise, just take a look at some of the bus routes starting within RM cluster for Beall elementary.

Here is start time for some Beall elementary,

BEALL ES (PURPLE GRAPES) - 8:15 AM

BEALL ES (BLACK CAT) - 8:09 AM

BEALL ES (GREEN SHAMROCK) - 8:15 AM

How many posters here raised issue for those kids? I guess none because those kids are not rich kids and don't attend RP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

If the FARMs number without CI at ES#5 was so important, why didn't the publish that in these new options like they did earlier? It really throws people off.

Because it just starts argument and they have to do for all schools. But BOE is fully aware of this fact. MCPS even shared it with boundary advisory group. Not putting on website is one thing, but using available information is another.

.
And th BOE specifically stated in the planning meeting that they don’t consider the farms numbers by stripping out the special programs. It was one of the previous arguments they found offensive, like the real estate values one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why so much hue and cry for Fallsgrove? It's not as if they have longest bus ride in MCPS. Plenty of routes take longer. You don't have to look even outside of RM cluster.


RP first stop in Fallsgove is at - Route: 5120 - RITCHIE PARK ES (SILVER) - 8:18 AM



I think high income parents are able to make so much noise as if no other kids take a long bus ride. Otherwise, just take a look at some of the bus routes starting within RM cluster for Beall elementary.

Here is start time for some Beall elementary,

BEALL ES (PURPLE GRAPES) - 8:15 AM

BEALL ES (BLACK CAT) - 8:09 AM

BEALL ES (GREEN SHAMROCK) - 8:15 AM

How many posters here raised issue for those kids? I guess none because those kids are not rich kids and don't attend RP.

Which yet again proves that "long commutes" are BS argument raised by RP to obscure their true intentions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

If the FARMs number without CI at ES#5 was so important, why didn't the publish that in these new options like they did earlier? It really throws people off.

Because it just starts argument and they have to do for all schools. But BOE is fully aware of this fact. MCPS even shared it with boundary advisory group. Not putting on website is one thing, but using available information is another.

My take is that they don't care just like all the other LI, IB, magnets, etc... don't care to have both. One school. One community.

They have released all FARMs information to advisory group after option A - E came out. If they don't care then they will never release it. It's just that putting it on website makes it harder to not put for other schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

If the FARMs number without CI at ES#5 was so important, why didn't the publish that in these new options like they did earlier? It really throws people off.

Because it just starts argument and they have to do for all schools. But BOE is fully aware of this fact. MCPS even shared it with boundary advisory group. Not putting on website is one thing, but using available information is another.

My take is that they don't care just like all the other LI, IB, magnets, etc... don't care to have both. One school. One community.

Not just your take. They explicitly stated that. I guarantee those who keep insisting that we talk about higher numbers are zoned for the new school and don’t want RP2 coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't consider ONLY proximity. That's one out of 4 criterion. Also, you can't take just FARMs and say that let's go with option C.

It's unrealistic to expect just one extreme with only one factor driving this. BOE has duty to consider all 4 factors.

Honestly, Option C should be completely off the table as it screws TB title 1 AND leaves two ESs over capacity (RP - with a 40% FARMS, and CG).

Option D, too is bad for TB as it loses its Title1 funding, and bad for proximity.

So that leaves A, B, E.

Option A: Pros - proxmity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 30%; CG a bit over capacity.
Option B: Pros - proximity Cons: ES#5 FARMs at 26%, and some insist closer to 30% for regular non CI classes
Option E: Pros - balances out FARMs much better CONS: proximity issues for at least 4 maybe 5 zones, and B8 becomes an island.

Comes down to B vs E, proximity vs FARMs.

I know some people think the extra travel time is not *that* bad, but honestly, I wouldn't want extra travel time, so I can't tell someone else it's fine just to balance out FARMs better. And I grew up low income.

Option A FARMS are at 37% at ES#5

If the FARMs number without CI at ES#5 was so important, why didn't the publish that in these new options like they did earlier? It really throws people off.

The precise kids and FARMs counts are out , anyone with half a brain can compute the percentages, unless they need to go back to an ES and learn how to add/ multiply all over again

I don't believe any of those FARMS or capacity numbers or potential capacity numbers are accurate. If it took 8 months to find out the first set are wrong, how do we truly know the new ones are?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why so much hue and cry for Fallsgrove? It's not as if they have longest bus ride in MCPS. Plenty of routes take longer. You don't have to look even outside of RM cluster.


RP first stop in Fallsgove is at - Route: 5120 - RITCHIE PARK ES (SILVER) - 8:18 AM



I think high income parents are able to make so much noise as if no other kids take a long bus ride. Otherwise, just take a look at some of the bus routes starting within RM cluster for Beall elementary.

Here is start time for some Beall elementary,

BEALL ES (PURPLE GRAPES) - 8:15 AM

BEALL ES (BLACK CAT) - 8:09 AM

BEALL ES (GREEN SHAMROCK) - 8:15 AM

How many posters here raised issue for those kids? I guess none because those kids are not rich kids and don't attend RP.

Wow . so much noise from RP. I was giving them benefit of doubt earlier, now I am getting more sure that this all drama is just to not have any FARMs kids from other side of 270. I didn't realize when they start and how many other buses are starting even earlier.