Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[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.

The FARMS rate would from high 40's to high 50's
Capacity from 79% to 60's%

Option C won't happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The decision for Ritchie Park was made in 2000. Probably there aren't a lot of people who bought in Fallsgrove before that decision and have children in elementary school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP... but it's true. St. Raphael catholic school is right across the street from RP, and it's not that expensive for a private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I feel bad for FG too, and honestly, I don't live there. They are treated like an afterthought and then slammed for wanting to stay as close as possible to their community.

[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.

When presented with evidence that 8% FARMS makes a difference, people start changing the subject. In this case the difference is exactly at the point where the students would attend a 24% FARMS (with potential benefits) versus 32% FARMS (questionable benefits) versus 38% FARMS (no benefits). You think people were not bused to the schools in these studies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I feel bad for FG too, and honestly, I don't live there. They are treated like an afterthought and then slammed for wanting to stay as close as possible to their community.

its a fucking shame. i'm in fallsgrove and I don't care about FARMS. If iwas an elitist like everyone assumes fallsgrove residents are, I would have lived in a wootton school. I just want my kids to not have to go further for school.

[Anonymous]

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?

FYI, B7 is going to have a LONGER commute in all alternative.

How many of you now want to write letter to BOE for not making B7 commute longer?

[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?

FYI, B7 is going to have a LONGER commute in all alternative.

How many of you now want to write letter to BOE for not making B7 commute longer?

troll troll troll your boat

[Anonymous]

im watching the closed board meeting that was held a couple of weeks ago again.

im pretty sure that theyre going to pick alt B now.


alt A is a decent option, but they cant leave a new school undercapacity while other schools are over capacity. Regardless of what projected developments are .

alt B is gonna be it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It happened before and it affects numbers more than you think. Look at RP's numbers when they were moved out of Wootton to RM. They dropped over 100 kids (of their 340 kids) in a few year span.

Pretty sure B7 would look at Christ Episcopal or St Mary's too if C was picked. Both are closer than Twinbrook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

FYI, B7 is going to have a LONGER commute in all alternative.

How many of you now want to write letter to BOE for not making B7 commute longer?

troll troll troll your boat

You are the only one trolling here.

MCPS provided official estimate for all zones advisory group. Get hold of that data. B7 will have a longer commute in all alternatives.

[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?

FYI, B7 is going to have a LONGER commute in all alternative.

How many of you now want to write letter to BOE for not making B7 commute longer?

No one believes B7 will have a longer commute. Even B7

[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.

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.

There are kids who already have longer commutes. It's doable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

There are kids who already have longer commutes. It's doable.

There is no one that has a longer commute and the ones you are pulling and finding get there earlier and will also be changing as they move closer to RM5. So irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

That's called reductio ad absurdum fallacy. Read about it.