Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Good points by other people, but also, they would need to find the money to make Wootton habitable for this scenario.

They would need to rehabilitate Wootton some if they decide to use it as a holding school, but that can be on a longer timeline and changed based on the CIP plan that the county will need to fund.

Are we sure there's a school that's ready to be sent to a holding school by 2027-2028? Otherwise the prospective holding school would sit empty for some time and it seems more efficient for that to be a school in need of repairs / rehabilitation rather than a brand new school or rebuilt school.

They use FY28 (2027-28 school year) to work on the empty current Wootton building to prep it for holding with both scope and cost considerably lower than they would be if they instead slated Wootton for renovation (beginning in FY34/2033-34 school year, after Magruder) for long-term use by the one HS community. Damascus would be the first to occupy the old facility as a holding school beginning in FY29, folllowed by Magruder in FY32. Instead of waiting for Wootton for another two years, then, whichever other school is next in line could start using the holding facility in FY34.

That's from last fall's CIP presentation, with current Wootton substituting for new Crown as the holding facility.

Damascus will be rebuilt onsite. Who will use it then? Wait until 2031? I think it’s more likely MCPS sells it for profit.

[Anonymous]

They say they need a holding school because there's a lot of schools that need to use it while they get repaired (Damascus and Magruder are just the first two). Why is the building in a condition to be used as a holding school for many years but not a real school? The argument has been that a holding school has lower standards because it is only used for 2 years, but that argument doesn't hold if the 2 years are repeated many times for all the different schools that need repairs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Good points by other people, but also, they would need to find the money to make Wootton habitable for this scenario.

They would need to rehabilitate Wootton some if they decide to use it as a holding school, but that can be on a longer timeline and changed based on the CIP plan that the county will need to fund.

Are we sure there's a school that's ready to be sent to a holding school by 2027-2028? Otherwise the prospective holding school would sit empty for some time and it seems more efficient for that to be a school in need of repairs / rehabilitation rather than a brand new school or rebuilt school.

They use FY28 (2027-28 school year) to work on the empty current Wootton building to prep it for holding with both scope and cost considerably lower than they would be if they instead slated Wootton for renovation (beginning in FY34/2033-34 school year, after Magruder) for long-term use by the one HS community. Damascus would be the first to occupy the old facility as a holding school beginning in FY29, folllowed by Magruder in FY32. Instead of waiting for Wootton for another two years, then, whichever other school is next in line could start using the holding facility in FY34.

That's from last fall's CIP presentation, with current Wootton substituting for new Crown as the holding facility.

Damascus will be rebuilt onsite. Who will use it then? Wait until 2031? I think it’s more likely MCPS sells it for profit.

Is an on-site Damascus renovation in the requested CIP? Because the presentation pointed pretty clearly to the time and financial savings of having it utilize a holding facility.

If Damascus stays on site during construction (and we've heard loud voices both for and against that), then Magruder could begin at the holding facility in its place, moving everyone else up in the queue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They say they need a holding school because there's a lot of schools that need to use it while they get repaired (Damascus and Magruder are just the first two). Why is the building in a condition to be used as a holding school for many years but not a real school? The argument has been that a holding school has lower standards because it is only used for 2 years, but that argument doesn't hold if the 2 years are repeated many times for all the different schools that need repairs.

Check that versus the conditions at the Fairland, Radnor & Grosvenor elementary holding schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Good points by other people, but also, they would need to find the money to make Wootton habitable for this scenario.

They would need to rehabilitate Wootton some if they decide to use it as a holding school, but that can be on a longer timeline and changed based on the CIP plan that the county will need to fund.

Are we sure there's a school that's ready to be sent to a holding school by 2027-2028? Otherwise the prospective holding school would sit empty for some time and it seems more efficient for that to be a school in need of repairs / rehabilitation rather than a brand new school or rebuilt school.

They use FY28 (2027-28 school year) to work on the empty current Wootton building to prep it for holding with both scope and cost considerably lower than they would be if they instead slated Wootton for renovation (beginning in FY34/2033-34 school year, after Magruder) for long-term use by the one HS community. Damascus would be the first to occupy the old facility as a holding school beginning in FY29, folllowed by Magruder in FY32. Instead of waiting for Wootton for another two years, then, whichever other school is next in line could start using the holding facility in FY34.

That's from last fall's CIP presentation, with current Wootton substituting for new Crown as the holding facility.

Damascus will be rebuilt onsite. Who will use it then? Wait until 2031? I think it’s more likely MCPS sells it for profit.

Yes, I'm hearing it will either be a data center or a data center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Good points by other people, but also, they would need to find the money to make Wootton habitable for this scenario.

They would need to rehabilitate Wootton some if they decide to use it as a holding school, but that can be on a longer timeline and changed based on the CIP plan that the county will need to fund.

Are we sure there's a school that's ready to be sent to a holding school by 2027-2028? Otherwise the prospective holding school would sit empty for some time and it seems more efficient for that to be a school in need of repairs / rehabilitation rather than a brand new school or rebuilt school.

They use FY28 (2027-28 school year) to work on the empty current Wootton building to prep it for holding with both scope and cost considerably lower than they would be if they instead slated Wootton for renovation (beginning in FY34/2033-34 school year, after Magruder) for long-term use by the one HS community. Damascus would be the first to occupy the old facility as a holding school beginning in FY29, folllowed by Magruder in FY32. Instead of waiting for Wootton for another two years, then, whichever other school is next in line could start using the holding facility in FY34.

That's from last fall's CIP presentation, with current Wootton substituting for new Crown as the holding facility.

Damascus will be rebuilt onsite. Who will use it then? Wait until 2031? I think it’s more likely MCPS sells it for profit.

MCPS can never sell school land. If the BOE votes to not use school property it is turned over to the County Council. They can then give it away for free to their political backers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Good points by other people, but also, they would need to find the money to make Wootton habitable for this scenario.

They would need to rehabilitate Wootton some if they decide to use it as a holding school, but that can be on a longer timeline and changed based on the CIP plan that the county will need to fund.

Are we sure there's a school that's ready to be sent to a holding school by 2027-2028? Otherwise the prospective holding school would sit empty for some time and it seems more efficient for that to be a school in need of repairs / rehabilitation rather than a brand new school or rebuilt school.

They use FY28 (2027-28 school year) to work on the empty current Wootton building to prep it for holding with both scope and cost considerably lower than they would be if they instead slated Wootton for renovation (beginning in FY34/2033-34 school year, after Magruder) for long-term use by the one HS community. Damascus would be the first to occupy the old facility as a holding school beginning in FY29, folllowed by Magruder in FY32. Instead of waiting for Wootton for another two years, then, whichever other school is next in line could start using the holding facility in FY34.

That's from last fall's CIP presentation, with current Wootton substituting for new Crown as the holding facility.

Damascus will be rebuilt onsite. Who will use it then? Wait until 2031? I think it’s more likely MCPS sells it for profit.

MCPS can never sell school land. If the BOE votes to not use school property it is turned over to the County Council. They can then give it away for free to their political backers.

Isn’t Frost Middle School in just as bad a shape as Wootton?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Good points by other people, but also, they would need to find the money to make Wootton habitable for this scenario.

They would need to rehabilitate Wootton some if they decide to use it as a holding school, but that can be on a longer timeline and changed based on the CIP plan that the county will need to fund.

Are we sure there's a school that's ready to be sent to a holding school by 2027-2028? Otherwise the prospective holding school would sit empty for some time and it seems more efficient for that to be a school in need of repairs / rehabilitation rather than a brand new school or rebuilt school.

They use FY28 (2027-28 school year) to work on the empty current Wootton building to prep it for holding with both scope and cost considerably lower than they would be if they instead slated Wootton for renovation (beginning in FY34/2033-34 school year, after Magruder) for long-term use by the one HS community. Damascus would be the first to occupy the old facility as a holding school beginning in FY29, folllowed by Magruder in FY32. Instead of waiting for Wootton for another two years, then, whichever other school is next in line could start using the holding facility in FY34.

That's from last fall's CIP presentation, with current Wootton substituting for new Crown as the holding facility.

Damascus will be rebuilt onsite. Who will use it then? Wait until 2031? I think it’s more likely MCPS sells it for profit.

MCPS can never sell school land. If the BOE votes to not use school property it is turned over to the County Council. They can then give it away for free to their political backers.

Isn’t Frost Middle School in just as bad a shape as Wootton?

Yeah I was kinda wondering if they’d move Frost to the Wootton building the way they had Tilden MS at the old Woodward building for years. That is, if they weren’t really planning for Wootton to be a holding school and do Damascus/Magruder etc. on site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Woodward is way too far along to pull back on opening it. Also, if Woodward does not open, WJ's overcrowding gets no relief. It's not gonna happen.

That being said, I do agree that if it's ok for Woodward's opening to cause WJ to be underutilized, then it shouldn't be a problem for Crown to open and also be underutilized.

MCPS is not being consistent.

It would be an embarrassment for MCPS to use Crown as a holding school after spending $400M to build it based on pre-Covid enrollment projections OR MCPS built Crown to avoid losing a valuable piece of property deeded in 2006 with a 20-year deadline to build a school.

Put simply, MCPS was either incompetent or evil - neither is a reason for kids to pay the price.

Wootton is so overwrought. What is the "price" that kids are going to pay?

[Anonymous]

Since Darnestown ES is being zoned for Poolesville HS, why can’t they go to John Poole MS instead of Kingsview? Seems weird to switch from Lakelands MS (QO cluster) to Kingsview (NW cluster) rather than John Poole MS.

[Anonymous]

With the poor shape that central office is in, what are the chances of Wootton being modernized and central moving into that space?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Good points by other people, but also, they would need to find the money to make Wootton habitable for this scenario.

They would need to rehabilitate Wootton some if they decide to use it as a holding school, but that can be on a longer timeline and changed based on the CIP plan that the county will need to fund.

Are we sure there's a school that's ready to be sent to a holding school by 2027-2028? Otherwise the prospective holding school would sit empty for some time and it seems more efficient for that to be a school in need of repairs / rehabilitation rather than a brand new school or rebuilt school.

They use FY28 (2027-28 school year) to work on the empty current Wootton building to prep it for holding with both scope and cost considerably lower than they would be if they instead slated Wootton for renovation (beginning in FY34/2033-34 school year, after Magruder) for long-term use by the one HS community. Damascus would be the first to occupy the old facility as a holding school beginning in FY29, folllowed by Magruder in FY32. Instead of waiting for Wootton for another two years, then, whichever other school is next in line could start using the holding facility in FY34.

That's from last fall's CIP presentation, with current Wootton substituting for new Crown as the holding facility.

Damascus will be rebuilt onsite. Who will use it then? Wait until 2031? I think it’s more likely MCPS sells it for profit.

Is an on-site Damascus renovation in the requested CIP? Because the presentation pointed pretty clearly to the time and financial savings of having it utilize a holding facility.

If Damascus stays on site during construction (and we've heard loud voices both for and against that), then Magruder could begin at the holding facility in its place, moving everyone else up in the queue.

No, the presentation slide shows the same cost for Damascus with or without holding school ( which doesn’t much sense, but it is what was presented). Last meeting Taylor announced Damascus will be rebuilt onsite as his recommendation.

[Anonymous]

If the recommendation is to rebuild Damascus on-site, then does Wootton sit empty or does the Magruder renovation get to happen sooner?

[Anonymous]

It's still amazing to me that MCPS is in constant need if rebuilding schools. The town I grew up in has 2HSs. One is much older than the other..but even the newer one was built in the 50s. They have been renovated, add to etc but never needed a tear down. I think 1 elementary was rebuilt in all the years ( and my parents still live there). It's a,wealthy NE town. Why is MCPS so different? Poor construction? Poor planning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's still amazing to me that MCPS is in constant need if rebuilding schools. The town I grew up in has 2HSs. One is much older than the other..but even the newer one was built in the 50s. They have been renovated, add to etc but never needed a tear down. I think 1 elementary was rebuilt in all the years ( and my parents still live there). It's a,wealthy NE town. Why is MCPS so different? Poor construction? Poor planning?

MCPS is no different than the rest of the country. The average age of school buildings in the US is 50 years. 46% of existing school buildings are either rebuilds or major overhaul renovations.
https://www.bdcnetwork.com/home/news/55166042/average-age-of-us-school-buildings-is-just-under-50-years
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=94


People just make up stuff to be mad at MCPS about...