Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a capitalistic country that rewards perpetuating inequality. There is no incentive for W parents to accept diversity and redistricting. In fact, there is only incentives tied to segregation. Segregation is tied to higher property values. Families that get redistricted to Woodward from WJ will be dinged in property values even though mixing high income students with low income students should be rewarded. Meanwhile, the values of those in WJ will be rewarded. Even if MCPS balances out Whitman, the fact that Langley in FCPS is low-FARMS will result in Whitman getting dinged for doing the right thing and Langley rewarded for being segregated, as more families will just move to Langley and McLean HS if Whitman becomes 20% FARMS.

If you want an end to segregation but support neoliberal politicians and policies, you are the problem. You can’t shame W parents for trying to do their best in a capitalistic society.

This is a rather convoluted justification for resource hoarding. Damn.

We live in a society that promotes resource hoarding and inequality. Until we embrace socialism, don’t expect W parents to be on board with redistricting. There is no incentive for UMC to not self segregate in this country.

Actually this is a good argument to out woke the MCPS board members in testimonies. W parents, take notes and frame your objections around this. Let’s accuse board members of being complicit in capitalism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People in Garrett Park are more hipster and liberal, I don’t think they’re going to mind the demographics of Woodward.

Oh we mind. It's all we talk about at our pool. (Privilege)

The folks in Garrett Park should worry more about advocating for their school than picketing against "Kings."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

So I don’t want to keep FARMS kids out of my kids school. They are already there. More can come, that is fine. I just rank transportation and proximity to schools as a more important factor than demographics. You rank demographics higher, that is fine.

My preference would be to balance demographics in schools via housing policy not school boundaries that necessitate long bus rides.

I would like to see kids having the shortest routes to school possible and as much walking options possible.
Maybe there is a way to have both by a change in zoning laws and an investment in moderate and low income housing options.

I don’t actually think demographics is the highest value, but I do think it’s important to consider. And I very strongly support changes to the zoning laws. You’re right that that is hugely needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Option 3 would be great for the bullhorn and poster board purveyors with all the protests that would happen.

North Farm to Kennedy HS
Old town Garrett Park to Wheaton HS

Amazeballs.

There is a real sentiment that this side of the WJ cluster is full of arrogant NIMBY loyalists. I think MCPS is going to call their bluff. I don't think there is any chance North Farm will go to Kennedy, but I think Garrett Park to Wheaton is close to a done deal.

[Anonymous]

I dont think rezoning can change capitalism.

[Anonymous]

The property values in Montgomery county will go down and the property values in Urbana will go up

[Anonymous]

If we are concerned about optics, spouting that capitalism must be replaced with socialism is going to be a no. But good luck to you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a capitalistic country that rewards perpetuating inequality. There is no incentive for W parents to accept diversity and redistricting. In fact, there is only incentives tied to segregation. Segregation is tied to higher property values. Families that get redistricted to Woodward from WJ will be dinged in property values even though mixing high income students with low income students should be rewarded. Meanwhile, the values of those in WJ will be rewarded. Even if MCPS balances out Whitman, the fact that Langley in FCPS is low-FARMS will result in Whitman getting dinged for doing the right thing and Langley rewarded for being segregated, as more families will just move to Langley and McLean HS if Whitman becomes 20% FARMS.

If you want an end to segregation but support neoliberal politicians and policies, you are the problem. You can’t shame W parents for trying to do their best in a capitalistic society.

This is a rather convoluted justification for resource hoarding. Damn.

We live in a society that promotes resource hoarding and inequality. Until we embrace socialism, don’t expect W parents to be on board with redistricting. There is no incentive for UMC to not self segregate in this country.

They are the ones who demanded a new school.

[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.

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.

If these issues are at all schools, how come there has only been coverage of what's happening at Kennedy? It seems like MCPS needs to sort out chronic issues for the benefit of its current and future student body.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/11/kennedy-ptsa-president-responds-to-mcps/

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/27/has-mcps-pulled-back-on-security-at-kennedy-hs/

https://wtop.com/montgomery-county/2024/05/safety-concerns-generate-community-discussion-at-montgomery-countys-kennedy-high-school/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a capitalistic country that rewards perpetuating inequality. There is no incentive for W parents to accept diversity and redistricting. In fact, there is only incentives tied to segregation. Segregation is tied to higher property values. Families that get redistricted to Woodward from WJ will be dinged in property values even though mixing high income students with low income students should be rewarded. Meanwhile, the values of those in WJ will be rewarded. Even if MCPS balances out Whitman, the fact that Langley in FCPS is low-FARMS will result in Whitman getting dinged for doing the right thing and Langley rewarded for being segregated, as more families will just move to Langley and McLean HS if Whitman becomes 20% FARMS.

If you want an end to segregation but support neoliberal politicians and policies, you are the problem. You can’t shame W parents for trying to do their best in a capitalistic society.

This is a rather convoluted justification for resource hoarding. Damn.

We live in a society that promotes resource hoarding and inequality. Until we embrace socialism, don’t expect W parents to be on board with redistricting. There is no incentive for UMC to not self segregate in this country.

They are the ones who demanded a new school.

Is Wheaton a “W”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

If these issues are at all schools, how come there has only been coverage of what's happening at Kennedy? It seems like MCPS needs to sort out chronic issues for the benefit of its current and future student body.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/11/kennedy-ptsa-president-responds-to-mcps/

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/03/27/has-mcps-pulled-back-on-security-at-kennedy-hs/

https://wtop.com/montgomery-county/2024/05/safety-concerns-generate-community-discussion-at-montgomery-countys-kennedy-high-school/

And if the issues are at all schools then aside from balancing utilization we shouldn’t be doing anything to balance demographics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a capitalistic country that rewards perpetuating inequality. There is no incentive for W parents to accept diversity and redistricting. In fact, there is only incentives tied to segregation. Segregation is tied to higher property values. Families that get redistricted to Woodward from WJ will be dinged in property values even though mixing high income students with low income students should be rewarded. Meanwhile, the values of those in WJ will be rewarded. Even if MCPS balances out Whitman, the fact that Langley in FCPS is low-FARMS will result in Whitman getting dinged for doing the right thing and Langley rewarded for being segregated, as more families will just move to Langley and McLean HS if Whitman becomes 20% FARMS.

If you want an end to segregation but support neoliberal politicians and policies, you are the problem. You can’t shame W parents for trying to do their best in a capitalistic society.

If you want to move to a certain neighborhood, that’s fine. In this capitalistic society your home value isn’t guaranteed. And I don’t begrudge anyone for choosing their neighborhood. I begrudge the people who mention their property value like it’s an actual argument in a conversation about what is best for kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard some Bethesda parents are going to propose an alternative option where no DCC students attend Woodward and a new consortium is formed that consists of Whitman, WJ, Churchill, Wootton, RM, BCC, and Woodward.

How would that address overcrowding in the DCC? Isn’t that one of the main problems here?

Troll. This is a bald faced lie

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a capitalistic country that rewards perpetuating inequality. There is no incentive for W parents to accept diversity and redistricting. In fact, there is only incentives tied to segregation. Segregation is tied to higher property values. Families that get redistricted to Woodward from WJ will be dinged in property values even though mixing high income students with low income students should be rewarded. Meanwhile, the values of those in WJ will be rewarded. Even if MCPS balances out Whitman, the fact that Langley in FCPS is low-FARMS will result in Whitman getting dinged for doing the right thing and Langley rewarded for being segregated, as more families will just move to Langley and McLean HS if Whitman becomes 20% FARMS.

If you want an end to segregation but support neoliberal politicians and policies, you are the problem. You can’t shame W parents for trying to do their best in a capitalistic society.

If you want to move to a certain neighborhood, that’s fine. In this capitalistic society your home value isn’t guaranteed. And I don’t begrudge anyone for choosing their neighborhood. I begrudge the people who mention their property value like it’s an actual argument in a conversation about what is best for kids.

lol 98% of comments on this thread (inclusive of the progressive ones) aren’t about whats best for kids. Please.

[Anonymous]

The proposed maps are not final and the affected populations are now mobilized to testify to the school board about these plans. Bussing may be the law of the land, and diversity the BOE’s exclusive goal but there is only so much that can be accomplished by moving great swaths of children from one side of the county to another. Where do they go when the schools they were sent to become overcrowded or too homogeneous for the BOE’s tastes? Shuffle them back to the other side of the county? It’s like cutting off the legs of a chair: an inch off this one now it leans the other way….ad infinitum, ad nauseam. I’m old enough to have seen this nonsense before and I remain unimpressed by its efficacy.