Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NO ONE WANTS BUSING.

Low-income families may not have reliable transportation to attend meetings and events at faraway schools.

You need to balance that dislike of long commutes in traffic with the desire for mixed socio-economic demographics in school buildings.

I think there’s actually people who want busing but only if kids they perceive as privileged. There’s a real attitude of not just doing whats good for poor kids but doing something bad to the UMC/MC.

Most will not because they can't afford to. But able buyers will graviate to the remaining low farms. And if people with the option of considering Maryland or Virginia, they will take the higher FARMs in Maryland into consideration.

Not having elite schools just makes the county less attractive for skilled workers and in turn businesses.

There are middle class families in all segments of the county and I don’t think anyone actually wants to punish the middle class. Wealthy families who complain about their property values, and I suppose who may prefer to pretend they are actually middle class, may provoke ire on their own with their blatantly self-interested participation in the discussion.

You don’t think MC people care about their property values?

Well yes of course but I also think that people like to claim they are MC when they are not at all that, and the people taking hits over this are mostly in wealthier areas.

Idk it’s going to be a weird road to suggest that people with $200k HHI should just move out of the county or send their kids to private.

Did I suggest that?

Not you that I know of, but certainly that has been suggested in this thread by people concerned about property values. People largely aren’t stating their HHI, it is just presumed that whoever is concerned about property values must be making like $500k.

Meanwhile, $200k is technically UMC for Moco. Idk are two teachers considered UMC?

I guess I don’t follow that raising the FARMS rate at some west county schools will force people to move or go private. That’s a choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UMC in Moco is basically above $175k HHI. That is generally not going to be a household that can easily pack up and move nor go private. It is a bad look to hope kids of these families (or any kids) are unhappy.

Why do they have to pack up and move?

[Anonymous]

I came across this March 2025 article about Kennedy. It outlines some very serious issues with violence, drugs, guns and, strangely, sewage that absolutely need to be addressed by MCPS - no child should be in this sort of learning environment. But how does sending the Farmland ES kids to Kennedy solve any of these issues?

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/11/is-this-high-school-safe/?fbclid=IwY2xjawKvKjtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFTbExVUDBReEFyeTNBczZhAR4KC8MgCJytr6LJ8LadVyi2TQgWB2OwDCNDEKIfU1ZaBns6aU2Sl_juTOm6_A_aem_uUkOT1zOfHdDAMw0UUTIoA

Separately, Farmland ES is made up of mostly dual working households. It's a lot of government workers - NIH, FDA, Walter Reed. The last At a Glance shows it is 18% FARMS, 28.1% EML, is relatively diverse and is in the walk zone for Tilden and Woodward. I don't think any child deserves to be bussed out of their community to fulfill the BOE's quotas but I wonder how Farmland specifically was targeted for this social experiment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NO ONE WANTS BUSING.

Low-income families may not have reliable transportation to attend meetings and events at faraway schools.

You need to balance that dislike of long commutes in traffic with the desire for mixed socio-economic demographics in school buildings.

I think there’s actually people who want busing but only if kids they perceive as privileged. There’s a real attitude of not just doing whats good for poor kids but doing something bad to the UMC/MC.

There are middle class families in all segments of the county and I don’t think anyone actually wants to punish the middle class. Wealthy families who complain about their property values, and I suppose who may prefer to pretend they are actually middle class, may provoke ire on their own with their blatantly self-interested participation in the discussion.

You don’t think MC people care about their property values?

Well yes of course but I also think that people like to claim they are MC when they are not at all that, and the people taking hits over this are mostly in wealthier areas.

Idk it’s going to be a weird road to suggest that people with $200k HHI should just move out of the county or send their kids to private.

Did I suggest that?

Not you that I know of, but certainly that has been suggested in this thread by people concerned about property values. People largely aren’t stating their HHI, it is just presumed that whoever is concerned about property values must be making like $500k.

Meanwhile, $200k is technically UMC for Moco. Idk are two teachers considered UMC?

I guess I don’t follow that raising the FARMS rate at some west county schools will force people to move or go private. That’s a choice.

Most won't be able to move or send to private because they can't afford to. But people that are buying and can afford it will graviate to the remaining low farms schools. And if someone is moving to the area and are considering both Virginia and Maryland, they will take the schools into consideration.

We need elite schools to attract skilled workers and we need skilled workers to attract jobs. Not having elite public schools just makes the county uncompetitive. It is a big mistake to stats at our best schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I came across this March 2025 article about Kennedy. It outlines some very serious issues with violence, drugs, guns and, strangely, sewage that absolutely need to be addressed by MCPS - no child should be in this sort of learning environment. But how does sending the Farmland ES kids to Kennedy solve any of these issues?

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/11/is-this-high-school-safe/?fbclid=IwY2xjawKvKjtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFTbExVUDBReEFyeTNBczZhAR4KC8MgCJytr6LJ8LadVyi2TQgWB2OwDCNDEKIfU1ZaBns6aU2Sl_juTOm6_A_aem_uUkOT1zOfHdDAMw0UUTIoA

Separately, Farmland ES is made up of mostly dual working households. It's a lot of government workers - NIH, FDA, Walter Reed. The last At a Glance shows it is 18% FARMS, 28.1% EML, is relatively diverse and is in the walk zone for Tilden and Woodward. I don't think any child deserves to be bussed out of their community to fulfill the BOE's quotas but I wonder how Farmland specifically was targeted for this social experiment.

Particularly since Farmland students can walk, bike or take public transportation to Woodward, and this buses them past not only Woodward but also Wheaton. But I agree - why Farmland?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UMC in Moco is basically above $175k HHI. That is generally not going to be a household that can easily pack up and move nor go private. It is a bad look to hope kids of these families (or any kids) are unhappy.

Presuming this was meant for me, I don’t wish ill on anyone’s kids. I commented that seeing some people worked up about their property values and only their property values provoked some more radical instincts in me. I do not think these people are actually doing themselves any favors, and people who oppose option 3 would do well to distance themselves from this perspective.

I have an expensive house too and would not be pleased to lose a lot of value, but these people are arguing that their livelihoods are tied up in continued school segregation, which is . . . a perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMC in Moco is basically above $175k HHI. That is generally not going to be a household that can easily pack up and move nor go private. It is a bad look to hope kids of these families (or any kids) are unhappy.

Why do they have to pack up and move?

People on this thread are telling them to move or go private as though it is easy. They are not suggesting it for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I came across this March 2025 article about Kennedy. It outlines some very serious issues with violence, drugs, guns and, strangely, sewage that absolutely need to be addressed by MCPS - no child should be in this sort of learning environment. But how does sending the Farmland ES kids to Kennedy solve any of these issues?

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/11/is-this-high-school-safe/?fbclid=IwY2xjawKvKjtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFTbExVUDBReEFyeTNBczZhAR4KC8MgCJytr6LJ8LadVyi2TQgWB2OwDCNDEKIfU1ZaBns6aU2Sl_juTOm6_A_aem_uUkOT1zOfHdDAMw0UUTIoA

Separately, Farmland ES is made up of mostly dual working households. It's a lot of government workers - NIH, FDA, Walter Reed. The last At a Glance shows it is 18% FARMS, 28.1% EML, is relatively diverse and is in the walk zone for Tilden and Woodward. I don't think any child deserves to be bussed out of their community to fulfill the BOE's quotas but I wonder how Farmland specifically was targeted for this social experiment.

Particularly since Farmland students can walk, bike or take public transportation to Woodward, and this buses them past not only Woodward but also Wheaton. But I agree - why Farmland?

Presumably bc Farmland can be sneered at as rich people whose voices don’t count.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMC in Moco is basically above $175k HHI. That is generally not going to be a household that can easily pack up and move nor go private. It is a bad look to hope kids of these families (or any kids) are unhappy.

Why do they have to pack up and move?

People on this thread are telling them to move or go private as though it is easy. They are not suggesting it for themselves.

I guess I saw it as more a retort that any of us who don’t like our zoned publics have that option, such as it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I came across this March 2025 article about Kennedy. It outlines some very serious issues with violence, drugs, guns and, strangely, sewage that absolutely need to be addressed by MCPS - no child should be in this sort of learning environment. But how does sending the Farmland ES kids to Kennedy solve any of these issues?

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/11/is-this-high-school-safe/?fbclid=IwY2xjawKvKjtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFTbExVUDBReEFyeTNBczZhAR4KC8MgCJytr6LJ8LadVyi2TQgWB2OwDCNDEKIfU1ZaBns6aU2Sl_juTOm6_A_aem_uUkOT1zOfHdDAMw0UUTIoA

Separately, Farmland ES is made up of mostly dual working households. It's a lot of government workers - NIH, FDA, Walter Reed. The last At a Glance shows it is 18% FARMS, 28.1% EML, is relatively diverse and is in the walk zone for Tilden and Woodward. I don't think any child deserves to be bussed out of their community to fulfill the BOE's quotas but I wonder how Farmland specifically was targeted for this social experiment.

Particularly since Farmland students can walk, bike or take public transportation to Woodward, and this buses them past not only Woodward but also Wheaton. But I agree - why Farmland?

We know why Chevy Chase was singled out. Same goes for Farmland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMC in Moco is basically above $175k HHI. That is generally not going to be a household that can easily pack up and move nor go private. It is a bad look to hope kids of these families (or any kids) are unhappy.

Presuming this was meant for me, I don’t wish ill on anyone’s kids. I commented that seeing some people worked up about their property values and only their property values provoked some more radical instincts in me. I do not think these people are actually doing themselves any favors, and people who oppose option 3 would do well to distance themselves from this perspective.

I have an expensive house too and would not be pleased to lose a lot of value, but these people are arguing that their livelihoods are tied up in continued school segregation, which is . . . a perspective.

You are basically arguing that everyone should be fine sending their kids to a high FARMS school. While simultaneously saying that we need to lower the FARMS rates at some places. Why would we need to lower the FARMS rates (and to what) if high FARMS schools are fine?

Obviously this is rhetorical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMC in Moco is basically above $175k HHI. That is generally not going to be a household that can easily pack up and move nor go private. It is a bad look to hope kids of these families (or any kids) are unhappy.

Presuming this was meant for me, I don’t wish ill on anyone’s kids. I commented that seeing some people worked up about their property values and only their property values provoked some more radical instincts in me. I do not think these people are actually doing themselves any favors, and people who oppose option 3 would do well to distance themselves from this perspective.

I have an expensive house too and would not be pleased to lose a lot of value, but these people are arguing that their livelihoods are tied up in continued school segregation, which is . . . a perspective.

You are basically arguing that everyone should be fine sending their kids to a high FARMS school. While simultaneously saying that we need to lower the FARMS rates at some places. Why would we need to lower the FARMS rates (and to what) if high FARMS schools are fine?

Obviously this is rhetorical.

This is public education. I’m actually saying that inequality isn’t fine, and balancing demographics across the county is a worthy goal. It’s not the only goal, so I’ll repeat that option 3 doesn’t make sense to me. And yes of course there is a huge difference between moderate and high farms, for issues ranging from parent engagement to high achieving children needing a cohort.

If you want to keep FARMS kids out of your school, how do you defend that? Segregation is fine as long as it benefits you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I came across this March 2025 article about Kennedy. It outlines some very serious issues with violence, drugs, guns and, strangely, sewage that absolutely need to be addressed by MCPS - no child should be in this sort of learning environment. But how does sending the Farmland ES kids to Kennedy solve any of these issues?

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/11/is-this-high-school-safe/?fbclid=IwY2xjawKvKjtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFTbExVUDBReEFyeTNBczZhAR4KC8MgCJytr6LJ8LadVyi2TQgWB2OwDCNDEKIfU1ZaBns6aU2Sl_juTOm6_A_aem_uUkOT1zOfHdDAMw0UUTIoA

Separately, Farmland ES is made up of mostly dual working households. It's a lot of government workers - NIH, FDA, Walter Reed. The last At a Glance shows it is 18% FARMS, 28.1% EML, is relatively diverse and is in the walk zone for Tilden and Woodward. I don't think any child deserves to be bussed out of their community to fulfill the BOE's quotas but I wonder how Farmland specifically was targeted for this social experiment.

We are on a team with Kennedy kids and they are great kids and doing well there. Many of those issues are at all schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMC in Moco is basically above $175k HHI. That is generally not going to be a household that can easily pack up and move nor go private. It is a bad look to hope kids of these families (or any kids) are unhappy.

Presuming this was meant for me, I don’t wish ill on anyone’s kids. I commented that seeing some people worked up about their property values and only their property values provoked some more radical instincts in me. I do not think these people are actually doing themselves any favors, and people who oppose option 3 would do well to distance themselves from this perspective.

I have an expensive house too and would not be pleased to lose a lot of value, but these people are arguing that their livelihoods are tied up in continued school segregation, which is . . . a perspective.

You are basically arguing that everyone should be fine sending their kids to a high FARMS school. While simultaneously saying that we need to lower the FARMS rates at some places. Why would we need to lower the FARMS rates (and to what) if high FARMS schools are fine?

Obviously this is rhetorical.

Some of us are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMC in Moco is basically above $175k HHI. That is generally not going to be a household that can easily pack up and move nor go private. It is a bad look to hope kids of these families (or any kids) are unhappy.

Presuming this was meant for me, I don’t wish ill on anyone’s kids. I commented that seeing some people worked up about their property values and only their property values provoked some more radical instincts in me. I do not think these people are actually doing themselves any favors, and people who oppose option 3 would do well to distance themselves from this perspective.

I have an expensive house too and would not be pleased to lose a lot of value, but these people are arguing that their livelihoods are tied up in continued school segregation, which is . . . a perspective.

You are basically arguing that everyone should be fine sending their kids to a high FARMS school. While simultaneously saying that we need to lower the FARMS rates at some places. Why would we need to lower the FARMS rates (and to what) if high FARMS schools are fine?

Obviously this is rhetorical.

This is public education. I’m actually saying that inequality isn’t fine, and balancing demographics across the county is a worthy goal. It’s not the only goal, so I’ll repeat that option 3 doesn’t make sense to me. And yes of course there is a huge difference between moderate and high farms, for issues ranging from parent engagement to high achieving children needing a cohort.

If you want to keep FARMS kids out of your school, how do you defend that? Segregation is fine as long as it benefits you?

But you are jumping from “some FARMS is fine” and “high farms have problems” to “caring about FARMS rates is promoting segregation.”

You are agreeing with the prior poster you don’t like (the segregationist, in your words).