Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is a link to an image that shows what the typcial morning commute for fallsgrove to new school would be

https://ibb.co/kQwqF6


if you think thats reasonable, i dont know what else to tell you.

Here are the current bus times for kids in Ritchie Park. Notice that the earliest bus starts to pick up children at 8:18
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/transportation/busroutes/02227bus.pdf
Here are the current bus times for kids in Beall. Notice that the earliest bus starts to pick up children at 8:09
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/transportation/busroutes/02207bus.pdf

Let people who have worse commute whine.

Those stops are going to be zoned to closer schools which will significantly reduce their commute time.

This is completely irrelevant. Somebody WILL have the longest commute in the cluster.

DP.. it is relevant. The point is that people shouldn't have a LONGER commute than they already do. So, if being rezoned increases commute time for ANY of the Beall zones, then yes, it's a bad plan. Is this the case?

*except RP5 because what's a few minutes to their children

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is a link to an image that shows what the typcial morning commute for fallsgrove to new school would be

https://ibb.co/kQwqF6


if you think thats reasonable, i dont know what else to tell you.

Do you have a snapshot of the current commute for RP5?

Still waiting...

rather than waiting, why dont you just plug in the information into google maps yourself?

I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park to RMES5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is a link to an image that shows what the typcial morning commute for fallsgrove to new school would be

https://ibb.co/kQwqF6


if you think thats reasonable, i dont know what else to tell you.

Do you have a snapshot of the current commute for RP5?

Still waiting...

rather than waiting, why dont you just plug in the information into google maps yourself?

I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park to RMES5.

It was meant to read: I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park or RMES5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is a link to an image that shows what the typcial morning commute for fallsgrove to new school would be

https://ibb.co/kQwqF6


if you think thats reasonable, i dont know what else to tell you.

Do you have a snapshot of the current commute for RP5?

Still waiting...

rather than waiting, why dont you just plug in the information into google maps yourself?

I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park to RMES5.

It was meant to read: I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park or RMES5.

the difference is not 2 minutes in rush hour commute, i guarantee you this.

either way, if you're in the area, i encourage you to drive that route and tell me if you think if its reasonable for a kid to have to go that far to elementary school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is a link to an image that shows what the typcial morning commute for fallsgrove to new school would be

https://ibb.co/kQwqF6


if you think thats reasonable, i dont know what else to tell you.

Do you have a snapshot of the current commute for RP5?

Still waiting...

rather than waiting, why dont you just plug in the information into google maps yourself?

I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park to RMES5.

It was meant to read: I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park or RMES5.

And I did the *actual* commute 2 days ago (I posted about it then) and the time difference was 4 minutes and 40 seconds and I hit almost all green lights (5 green; 1 red) on the stretch between Falls Rd. and Edmonston Rd. That was on a sunny weekend day with no traffic. Anyone who says the time difference is 2 minutes is speeding (and will probably get pulled over by the cops coming out of the detention center on Seven Locks Rd.). As we all know, Wootton Pkwy on most weekday mornings has disastrous traffic, as do the alternate routes to RM ES #5 from Fallsgrove.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP.. it is relevant. The point is that people shouldn't have a LONGER commute than they already do. So, if being rezoned increases commute time for ANY of the Beall zones, then yes, it's a bad plan. Is this the case?

Is that stated MCPS policy?

Proximity is one of four factors. But, it doesn't which of the four factors is more important, if at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is a link to an image that shows what the typcial morning commute for fallsgrove to new school would be

https://ibb.co/kQwqF6


if you think thats reasonable, i dont know what else to tell you.

Do you have a snapshot of the current commute for RP5?

Still waiting...

rather than waiting, why dont you just plug in the information into google maps yourself?

I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park to RMES5.

It was meant to read: I compared the two routes several days ago on Google maps. The difference in commute is two minutes. The worst part of the traffic is the same, no matter if you go to Ritchie Park or RMES5.

And I did the *actual* commute 2 days ago (I posted about it then) and the time difference was 4 minutes and 40 seconds and I hit almost all green lights (5 green; 1 red) on the stretch between Falls Rd. and Edmonston Rd. That was on a sunny weekend day with no traffic. Anyone who says the time difference is 2 minutes is speeding (and will probably get pulled over by the cops coming out of the detention center on Seven Locks Rd.). As we all know, Wootton Pkwy on most weekday mornings has disastrous traffic, as do the alternate routes to RM ES #5 from Fallsgrove.

dp... I've posted this several times... I regularly drive down Wootton pkwy past Edmonston during rush hour. It is usually backed up.

However, I THINK what PP's are trying to say is that Fallsgrove to RP = X minutes, and Fallsgrove to ES#5 = Xmin + 2 min.

You have time the difference from Falls Rd and Wootton pkwy to ES#5 vs to RP because that is where the difference lies. Wootton + Falls rd to RP is about 5min because you have to go down Falls for a short distance. From Wootton Pkwy + Falls rd to new ES#5 would be more than 5 min. Is it 7min (that difference of 2min), that I don't know. Like I said, that area is usually pretty backed up during rush hour.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So parents in B2 should know that they will not have the bus service to RMES5. In these conditions, would they prefer to stay at RPES for a chance of better education (24% FARMS)? Or they would prefer to go to RMES5 for a worse deal (38% FARMS in option A and 32% FARMS in option B)? I don't know, I am just asking.

It is RP2

No other cluster has walkable zones being bussed away to a further school to change FARMS rates by 8%. So I don't think the point has validity either.
Let's see what science says about a difference of 8% in FARMS:
• Low-income students attending schools with a FARMs rate of less than 20% showed a math test score advantage over low-income students in other schools after just three years of attendance;
• Move that threshold to 25%, and it takes four years of attendance for low-income students to benefit from lower-poverty schools;
• At 30%, low-income students did not benefit until close to the end of their elementary years, and
• there was no performance difference at all between low-income students attending schools with less than 35% of peers eligible for FARMs and up to 85% eligible.

Okay then go to the board and ask that all neighborhoods that are walkable to one school but can get bussed to another school further to better FARMS rates, needs to do so.

Even though this study promotes mixed housing diversity and not sending kids to further schools or removing walkable kids from a neighborhood school. I am sure they will get to work away in evening out all FARMS in MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So parents in B2 should know that they will not have the bus service to RMES5. In these conditions, would they prefer to stay at RPES for a chance of better education (24% FARMS)? Or they would prefer to go to RMES5 for a worse deal (38% FARMS in option A and 32% FARMS in option B)? I don't know, I am just asking.

It is RP2

No other cluster has walkable zones being bussed away to a further school to change FARMS rates by 8%. So I don't think the point has validity either.

Let's see what science says about a difference of 8% in FARMS:
• Low-income students attending schools with a FARMs rate of less than 20% showed a math test score advantage over low-income students in other schools after just three years of attendance;
• Move that threshold to 25%, and it takes four years of attendance for low-income students to benefit from lower-poverty schools;
• At 30%, low-income students did not benefit until close to the end of their elementary years, and
• there was no performance difference at all between low-income students attending schools with less than 35% of peers eligible for FARMs and up to 85% eligible.[/quote]

You are doing a very selective read of this *one* research study (which, btw is advocating for economically integrated neighborhoods, NOT busing as a solution). The very same research study makes clear that "this study does not suggest that 35 percent school poverty is a tipping point, after which low-income students no longer benefit from socioeconomic integration. We cannot know from this study, for example, how students in 35 percent to 60 percent low-income schools perform compared with students in 60 percent to 100 percent low-income schools" - pg. 21

ALSO, the study says " if low-income students benefit most from positive peer models in economically integrated schools, research indicates that those effects might be greater at secondary rather than at primary grade levels." - pg. 35 - who has the outcomes for these students at JW and RM? Surely there are some statistics on that.

ALSO - since when did this boundary study become a referendum on school performance outcomes??? That is definitely NOT one of the FAA-RA criteria.

[Anonymous]

I think it's weird when fallsgrove people complain that moving them to the new school would make an "already long ride" so much worse. Didn't they move there knowing the elementary school was not very close? We looked there but that was a major deciding factor not to move there for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's weird when fallsgrove people complain that moving them to the new school would make an "already long ride" so much worse. Didn't they move there knowing the elementary school was not very close? We looked there but that was a major deciding factor not to move there for us.

yes i moved there knowing that the elementary school was not close. I didnt think in a million years that they would move us to a school further away though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RP2 - as with all zones, the walkability depends on where you are, there are close ends and farther ends. The walk from the Fields apartments to RMES#5 is about 17 minutes/.9 miles according to Google Maps, and that sounds about right to me. I've walked it before. For Fireside it's much closer.

Get a kindergartener and walk the .9 miles in 17 minutes.

Get a k student to walk the full mile in 3 feet of snow uphill with 50 mph winds.

EVERY school in MCPS has a 1 mile walker boundary if there are no main roads to cross. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Last time I checked, every school has K students too.

75% of D.C. Kids go to an elementary school outside of their neighborhood school due to charters. Even kids in their own neighborhood school walk far because so many have closed due to enrollment. There is no bus service. They have high FARMS. DC rarely even closes for snow. The kids get to school.

Kids in RP2 are just as capable as all the other schools and areas that have walkers. Stop being so dramatic.

So parents in B2 should know that they will not have the bus service to RMES5. In these conditions, would they prefer to stay at RPES for a chance of better education (24% FARMS)? Or they would prefer to go to RMES5 for a worse deal (38% FARMS in option A and 32% FARMS in option B)? I don't know, I am just asking.

It is RP2

No other cluster has walkable zones being bussed away to a further school to change FARMS rates by 8%. So I don't think the point has validity either.

And this is why I don't think E has any option being presented. Even the lady who presented all 5 options at the closed board meeting mentioned multiple times "this is a walking area to RM5 that we have being bussed to RP." when she was talking about options C, D, and E. She even said Option C was just thrown together. Her words exactly. I feel the C option was a "you want FARMS even?" threat by the board and the super feeling discouraged by the wrong numbers went ahead and approved it and quickly ha e 2 more crappy options. I do not think the board or the super on the same page at all. He is new. The board knows pulling a walkable zone costs money the county doesn't have.

[Anonymous]

Not the case for us, but I can imagine that if they go with option C people who can afford it will take their kids out of RItchie Park and move to a closer private school than twinbrook. How would that affect the precious FARMS rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's weird when fallsgrove people complain that moving them to the new school would make an "already long ride" so much worse. Didn't they move there knowing the elementary school was not very close? We looked there but that was a major deciding factor not to move there for us.

Hey when some purchased their plots of land, they were told Lakewood/Frost/Wootton. I know this because we looked heavily at Fallsgrove and the builders plans. 20-30K deposit for the plot you wanted your house put on. No refunds. We didn't buy there but I vividly remember that.

Also, by saying elementary proximity was a MAJOR decision in your finding a home and Fallsgrove didn't appeal to you, aren't you proving their point exactly? No one wants a far drive to school. Fallsgrove is not appealing in that way. They already put up with it. Doesn't mean they deserve to go longer and be the school that continuously gets displaced because "they already have a far drive" or "they are so cut off anyway." Now people are saying they will be first to go to the new Crown High School "because they are so far away from RM anyway." You would feel the same way if you lived there. It isn't right. I feel bad that their fight to stay closer and a part of one school community is getting so much backlash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not the case for us, but I can imagine that if they go with option C people who can afford it will take their kids out of RItchie Park and move to a closer private school than twinbrook. How would that affect the precious FARMS rate.

This is the "Oh yeah? I'm going to take my ball and go home" argument.