Option H is permanent and the old Wootton HS campus will be closed for good?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has become clear that many (not all) anti-H posters on this thread are concerned about this plan not because of walkability, or making the most fiscally prudent choice for ALL of MCPS at this moment..but rather the potential for a change in the population of students that their kids will go to school with.

In this instance, the population would shift because the geographic location of the building would shift...but really they are arguing for segregation. I notice that nobody responded earlier when I asked if there would be similar opposition if a large low-income housing project went in close to the current building. The "results" that some posters seem concerned about are the same. I wonder if people would be this vocal if the county's proposal was to build more housing.

Well, Scotland is low income housing and it’s in the heart of Potomac. Nobody has a problem with it.

PP here. Help me understand how this connects to my question please?

Look up Scotland (100 townhomes) in Potomac and where that low income neighborhood goes to school. There’s even a historic black church nearby that was recently rebuilt and expanded.

You’re saying that rich, privileged Wootton families in Potomac and North Potomac don’t want low income minorities going to their school, and that’s why they’re opposed to Crown. Scotland proves this isn’t the case.

Got it. But I don't know that it proves that. Of course there are existing low income areas now that impact the current population and demographics of Wootton. I'm positing a significant increase in the amount of that, on par with the increase that many think will result from Option H.

It isn’t a question of demographics. Rather one of projected academic performance based on past academic performance. GHS is not in the same league as Wootton based on academic performance. Some GHS students may be, but on average they are not.

It would be like a high-performing major sports team being forced to accept 30%+ more players from a much lower performing team in exchange for a new stadium. Would you expect the resulting team to perform at the same level as before? It might eventually, but the odds would be against that, especially if other high performing teams were not forced to do so. Also, a new stadium does guarantee championships.

Fair point on terminology. Let's sub in "population with historically low(er) academic performance" for demographics.

And as to your analogy, seems you are arguing that the average performance population of the institution should not change...regardless of the reason?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Actually it is. And, MCPS has closed schools over the years. Not unlawful. Reopened some.

I see we’re back to this.

Please go back in this thread.

It is lawful to close schools.
It is not lawful to close schools without going through the required processes and procedures to close a school.
MCPS has not started the procedures necessary to formally close Wootton—those procedures are completely separate and distinct from school boundaries.

Before you say something is legal, perhaps check the law first. Go read the state regulations. I’ll even cite you which one: COMAR 13A.02.09

Option H is de facto closure. It is a school closure disguised in a boundary study.

Couple things here.
1. It is not clear that this qualifies as a closure. There is no definition in the code, but counties and municipalities have defined as "decision to permanently end use of a facility as a school." Don't think that is established here.
2. There is no full analysis of whether what is occurring right now meets those obligations under the code.
3. There is nothing that violates the code if those procedures occur subsequent to this process.

1 & 2 that’s why I said this is a de facto closure and that’s also exactly why Wootton parents will sue. Let the courts answer this. At a minimum this will cause a 2 year delay.
3. This is just factually wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has become clear that many (not all) anti-H posters on this thread are concerned about this plan not because of walkability, or making the most fiscally prudent choice for ALL of MCPS at this moment..but rather the potential for a change in the population of students that their kids will go to school with.

In this instance, the population would shift because the geographic location of the building would shift...but really they are arguing for segregation. I notice that nobody responded earlier when I asked if there would be similar opposition if a large low-income housing project went in close to the current building. The "results" that some posters seem concerned about are the same. I wonder if people would be this vocal if the county's proposal was to build more housing.

Well, Scotland is low income housing and it’s in the heart of Potomac. Nobody has a problem with it.

PP here. Help me understand how this connects to my question please?

Look up Scotland (100 townhomes) in Potomac and where that low income neighborhood goes to school. There’s even a historic black church nearby that was recently rebuilt and expanded.

You’re saying that rich, privileged Wootton families in Potomac and North Potomac don’t want low income minorities going to their school, and that’s why they’re opposed to Crown. Scotland proves this isn’t the case.

Got it. But I don't know that it proves that. Of course there are existing low income areas now that impact the current population and demographics of Wootton. I'm positing a significant increase in the amount of that, on par with the increase that many think will result from Option H.

It isn’t a question of demographics. Rather one of projected academic performance based on past academic performance. GHS is not in the same league as Wootton based on academic performance. Some GHS students may be, but on average they are not.

It would be like a high-performing major sports team being forced to accept 30%+ more players from a much lower performing team in exchange for a new stadium. Would you expect the resulting team to perform at the same level as before? It might eventually, but the odds would be against that, especially if other high performing teams were not forced to do so. Also, a new stadium does guarantee championships.

Fair point on terminology. Let's sub in "population with historically low(er) academic performance" for demographics.

And as to your analogy, seems you are arguing that the average performance population of the institution should not change...regardless of the reason?

Not PP.

I’m ok with natural population change over time—that’s the only reasonable take.

I’m not okay with forced change jammed down my throat simply because MCPS messed up and opened a school without having the enrollment or funds to do so.

Low income housing does not bother me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has become clear that many (not all) anti-H posters on this thread are concerned about this plan not because of walkability, or making the most fiscally prudent choice for ALL of MCPS at this moment..but rather the potential for a change in the population of students that their kids will go to school with.

In this instance, the population would shift because the geographic location of the building would shift...but really they are arguing for segregation. I notice that nobody responded earlier when I asked if there would be similar opposition if a large low-income housing project went in close to the current building. The "results" that some posters seem concerned about are the same. I wonder if people would be this vocal if the county's proposal was to build more housing.

Bruh…no one answered you because your question makes no sense and is irrelevant

Alterntively, when this argument complaint is distilled down to the essence and reflected back, people don't know how to respond because it reveals something distasteful.

Nah, they usually just say development is fine as long as it's only million dollar SFHs. In order to maintain the "character" of the neighborhood, of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Actually it is. And, MCPS has closed schools over the years. Not unlawful. Reopened some.

I see we’re back to this.

Please go back in this thread.

It is lawful to close schools.
It is not lawful to close schools without going through the required processes and procedures to close a school.
MCPS has not started the procedures necessary to formally close Wootton—those procedures are completely separate and distinct from school boundaries.

Before you say something is legal, perhaps check the law first. Go read the state regulations. I’ll even cite you which one: COMAR 13A.02.09

Option H is de facto closure. It is a school closure disguised in a boundary study.

Couple things here.
1. It is not clear that this qualifies as a closure. There is no definition in the code, but counties and municipalities have defined as "decision to permanently end use of a facility as a school." Don't think that is established here.
2. There is no full analysis of whether what is occurring right now meets those obligations under the code.
3. There is nothing that violates the code if those procedures occur subsequent to this process.

1 & 2 that’s why I said this is a de facto closure and that’s also exactly why Wootton parents will sue. Let the courts answer this. At a minimum this will cause a 2 year delay.
3. This is just factually wrong.

My point is that you can't conclude that it is a "de facto closure." In fact relevant definitions indicate that it is not. Sure you can ask the question, and even sue to get an answer. (If filed now the suit would likely be dismissed on procedural grounds as not ripe, if not on the merits.) But it is wrong to assume that it is a closure that violates process. There is little evidence that the current situation violates process, or is even a "closure" under the code at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Actually it is. And, MCPS has closed schools over the years. Not unlawful. Reopened some.

I see we’re back to this.

Please go back in this thread.

It is lawful to close schools.
It is not lawful to close schools without going through the required processes and procedures to close a school.
MCPS has not started the procedures necessary to formally close Wootton—those procedures are completely separate and distinct from school boundaries.

Before you say something is legal, perhaps check the law first. Go read the state regulations. I’ll even cite you which one: COMAR 13A.02.09

Option H is de facto closure. It is a school closure disguised in a boundary study.

Couple things here.
1. It is not clear that this qualifies as a closure. There is no definition in the code, but counties and municipalities have defined as "decision to permanently end use of a facility as a school." Don't think that is established here.
2. There is no full analysis of whether what is occurring right now meets those obligations under the code.
3. There is nothing that violates the code if those procedures occur subsequent to this process.

1 & 2 that’s why I said this is a de facto closure and that’s also exactly why Wootton parents will sue. Let the courts answer this. At a minimum this will cause a 2 year delay.
3. This is just factually wrong.

DP. All the board has to do in March is adjust Wootton's boundaries to include Crown. That is perfectly within their scope. Then, if desired, Taylor can proceed with plans to relocate the building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has become clear that many (not all) anti-H posters on this thread are concerned about this plan not because of walkability, or making the most fiscally prudent choice for ALL of MCPS at this moment..but rather the potential for a change in the population of students that their kids will go to school with.

In this instance, the population would shift because the geographic location of the building would shift...but really they are arguing for segregation. I notice that nobody responded earlier when I asked if there would be similar opposition if a large low-income housing project went in close to the current building. The "results" that some posters seem concerned about are the same. I wonder if people would be this vocal if the county's proposal was to build more housing.

Well, Scotland is low income housing and it’s in the heart of Potomac. Nobody has a problem with it.

PP here. Help me understand how this connects to my question please?

Look up Scotland (100 townhomes) in Potomac and where that low income neighborhood goes to school. There’s even a historic black church nearby that was recently rebuilt and expanded.

You’re saying that rich, privileged Wootton families in Potomac and North Potomac don’t want low income minorities going to their school, and that’s why they’re opposed to Crown. Scotland proves this isn’t the case.

Got it. But I don't know that it proves that. Of course there are existing low income areas now that impact the current population and demographics of Wootton. I'm positing a significant increase in the amount of that, on par with the increase that many think will result from Option H.

It isn’t a question of demographics. Rather one of projected academic performance based on past academic performance. GHS is not in the same league as Wootton based on academic performance. Some GHS students may be, but on average they are not.

It would be like a high-performing major sports team being forced to accept 30%+ more players from a much lower performing team in exchange for a new stadium. Would you expect the resulting team to perform at the same level as before? It might eventually, but the odds would be against that, especially if other high performing teams were not forced to do so. Also, a new stadium does guarantee championships.

Fair point on terminology. Let's sub in "population with historically low(er) academic performance" for demographics.

And as to your analogy, seems you are arguing that the average performance population of the institution should not change...regardless of the reason?

Not PP.

I’m ok with natural population change over time—that’s the only reasonable take.

I’m not okay with forced change jammed down my throat simply because MCPS messed up and opened a school without having the enrollment or funds to do so.

Low income housing does not bother me.

Thanks for this answer. So just to be clear, if Wootton stayed exactly where it is, with improvements, and the underenrollment were addressed by redistricting to add 15% population from current GHS feeders, that would be OK? Sincere question. I assume many would agree with this, and you may be one of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Actually it is. And, MCPS has closed schools over the years. Not unlawful. Reopened some.

I see we’re back to this.

Please go back in this thread.

It is lawful to close schools.
It is not lawful to close schools without going through the required processes and procedures to close a school.
MCPS has not started the procedures necessary to formally close Wootton—those procedures are completely separate and distinct from school boundaries.

Before you say something is legal, perhaps check the law first. Go read the state regulations. I’ll even cite you which one: COMAR 13A.02.09

Option H is de facto closure. It is a school closure disguised in a boundary study.

Couple things here.
1. It is not clear that this qualifies as a closure. There is no definition in the code, but counties and municipalities have defined as "decision to permanently end use of a facility as a school." Don't think that is established here.
2. There is no full analysis of whether what is occurring right now meets those obligations under the code.
3. There is nothing that violates the code if those procedures occur subsequent to this process.

1 & 2 that’s why I said this is a de facto closure and that’s also exactly why Wootton parents will sue. Let the courts answer this. At a minimum this will cause a 2 year delay.
3. This is just factually wrong.

My point is that you can't conclude that it is a "de facto closure." In fact relevant definitions indicate that it is not. Sure you can ask the question, and even sue to get an answer. (If filed now the suit would likely be dismissed on procedural grounds as not ripe, if not on the merits.) But it is wrong to assume that it is a closure that violates process. There is little evidence that the current situation violates process, or is even a "closure" under the code at all.

No shit there’s no lawsuit law. You would’ve heard it on the news if there were. Yes obviously you can’t sue before harm is done. But make no mistake the Wootton cluster will sue within minutes if H is the decided proposal.

You and I clearly disagree on what constitutes a closure. That’s fine, I’m not interested in convincing you. Let the courts decide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Actually it is. And, MCPS has closed schools over the years. Not unlawful. Reopened some.

I see we’re back to this.

Please go back in this thread.

It is lawful to close schools.
It is not lawful to close schools without going through the required processes and procedures to close a school.
MCPS has not started the procedures necessary to formally close Wootton—those procedures are completely separate and distinct from school boundaries.

Before you say something is legal, perhaps check the law first. Go read the state regulations. I’ll even cite you which one: COMAR 13A.02.09

Option H is de facto closure. It is a school closure disguised in a boundary study.

The required elements of that process are being done. And we're still just building up to a recommendation to the board. If moving Wootton is the recommendation, there's no reason MCPS couldn't provide notice and hold a subsequent hearing before making a final decision.

That being said, I suspect their lawyers know but the legal obligations truly are. This looks like moving a school, not closing a school.

[Anonymous]

Was it considered a closure back when Blair was moved?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has become clear that many (not all) anti-H posters on this thread are concerned about this plan not because of walkability, or making the most fiscally prudent choice for ALL of MCPS at this moment..but rather the potential for a change in the population of students that their kids will go to school with.

In this instance, the population would shift because the geographic location of the building would shift...but really they are arguing for segregation. I notice that nobody responded earlier when I asked if there would be similar opposition if a large low-income housing project went in close to the current building. The "results" that some posters seem concerned about are the same. I wonder if people would be this vocal if the county's proposal was to build more housing.

Well, Scotland is low income housing and it’s in the heart of Potomac. Nobody has a problem with it.

PP here. Help me understand how this connects to my question please?

Look up Scotland (100 townhomes) in Potomac and where that low income neighborhood goes to school. There’s even a historic black church nearby that was recently rebuilt and expanded.

You’re saying that rich, privileged Wootton families in Potomac and North Potomac don’t want low income minorities going to their school, and that’s why they’re opposed to Crown. Scotland proves this isn’t the case.

Got it. But I don't know that it proves that. Of course there are existing low income areas now that impact the current population and demographics of Wootton. I'm positing a significant increase in the amount of that, on par with the increase that many think will result from Option H.

It isn’t a question of demographics. Rather one of projected academic performance based on past academic performance. GHS is not in the same league as Wootton based on academic performance. Some GHS students may be, but on average they are not.

It would be like a high-performing major sports team being forced to accept 30%+ more players from a much lower performing team in exchange for a new stadium. Would you expect the resulting team to perform at the same level as before? It might eventually, but the odds would be against that, especially if other high performing teams were not forced to do so. Also, a new stadium does guarantee championships.

Fair point on terminology. Let's sub in "population with historically low(er) academic performance" for demographics.

And as to your analogy, seems you are arguing that the average performance population of the institution should not change...regardless of the reason?

Not PP.

I’m ok with natural population change over time—that’s the only reasonable take.

I’m not okay with forced change jammed down my throat simply because MCPS messed up and opened a school without having the enrollment or funds to do so.

Low income housing does not bother me.

Thanks for this answer. So just to be clear, if Wootton stayed exactly where it is, with improvements, and the underenrollment were addressed by redistricting to add 15% population from current GHS feeders, that would be OK? Sincere question. I assume many would agree with this, and you may be one of them.

Me personally: absolutely.
I rather add to the school that is in my community and walkable, then see it become used as a holding school and then god knows what happens afterwards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was it considered a closure back when Blair was moved?

Not the same analogy at all.
Blair kept its name.
Blair’s move was closer.
Blair’s feeder pattern didn’t change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has become clear that many (not all) anti-H posters on this thread are concerned about this plan not because of walkability, or making the most fiscally prudent choice for ALL of MCPS at this moment..but rather the potential for a change in the population of students that their kids will go to school with.

In this instance, the population would shift because the geographic location of the building would shift...but really they are arguing for segregation. I notice that nobody responded earlier when I asked if there would be similar opposition if a large low-income housing project went in close to the current building. The "results" that some posters seem concerned about are the same. I wonder if people would be this vocal if the county's proposal was to build more housing.

Well, Scotland is low income housing and it’s in the heart of Potomac. Nobody has a problem with it.

PP here. Help me understand how this connects to my question please?

Did you even look it up? You seem completely unaware about the makeup of the clusters that you have no problem criticizing the parents of. There is an entire set of low income housing that goes to Churchill and middle school with at least part of the Wootton cluster. Low income housing is what it is. I think it’s very different than shipping kids away from their home area to help diversify other areas. So to answer your question-I would care a lot less about building a low income housing area than I would about H.

Kind of besides the point but just wanted to throw out there that Tobytown, another historically Black community similar to Scotland, feeds into Wootton too.

But I know some people that lived in both communities that weren't crazy about their experiences at either of the schools and while still in the area wouldn't go to those specific areas. Some of them played sports and said that the schools only cared about them during the sports seasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was it considered a closure back when Blair was moved?

Not the same analogy at all.
Blair kept its name.
Blair’s move was closer.
Blair’s feeder pattern didn’t change.

We're not sure whether the Wootton name would change
Fair enough, the schools are 1.6 miles away, not 2.7mi
I think the feeders must have changed, since the new Blair building is MUCH bigger