Where will new Sligo Creek ES be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCES needs to be rezoned end of story and it will. The boundaries make zero aense and are inequitable.

What’s inequitable about it? Don’t know the boundaries.

It is one of the wealthiest schools in the immediate area. It directly borders a title 1 school (ESS) as well as two focus schools (Woodlin and highland view). French immersion definitely keeps farms down at SCES, but the disparity is greater than that. The border is also wonky in shape and not intuitive on its own. Tbh I don’t actually think there needs to be an ES in the current spot — kids who walk to SCES could mostly walk to ESS or HV.

First, Woodlin is not a Focus school. It's FARMS rate as compared to other Silver Spring schools has it only above Rock Creek Forest (which includes Spanish immersion) and below Pine Crest, Rosemary Hills, Piney Branch, and Takoma Park ES. Second, I've had kids in both the French Immersion and "academy" (neighborhood) program and it's absolutely true that the FI program brings the FARMS rate down considerably. Without FI the FARMS rate would likely be a bit higher than Woodlin's.

Not sure why else you think the boundaries make "zero sense" or are "inequitable" although it's true that on the easternmost edge of the catchment, ESS is slightly walkable. Oak View and Highland View are also sort of walkable from certain areas (if you consider a mile to be walkable) but that doesn't necessarily mean the boundaries are nonsensical. It means there are a lot of elementary-aged children concentrated in 20910 and environs. I don't think any of these schools are severely undercapacity.

I live on the ESS/SCES border and have had kids attend both schools. ESS is not slightly but highly walkable for the SCES zone south of Wayne. SCES is so much nicer than ESS (much nicer and better funded PTA) and it is absolutely tragic given the proximity. All the affordable housing complexes are zoned for ESS, which makes PP’s claim that SCES is THE elementary school serving the urban core of DTSS problematic. Of course FI changes the balance at SCES. Looking at the numbers, I don’t think it fully accounts for the inequity.

French Immersion is about 40-45% of the school and accounts for maybe 80% of the PTA fundraising. I also don't know if folks realize there is also a very highly regarded autism program and students come from outside the catchment to attend - while it's small, the FARMS rate for this group is likely lower as well.

Also, I don't know what your definition of "highly walkable" is, but we are "south of Wayne" and the walk to ESS is maybe 25 minutes? About 5 to SCES. If you're on Thayer or whatever the boundary is, sure, it's close.

ESS articulates to TPMS and Blair which is a huge advantage! You get to attend the best MS and HS in east county while paying no Takoma Park property taxes. I suspect folks wouldn't object to being rezoned to ESS if the articulation was the same for everyone, but knowing MCPS, it will probably result in some split articulation thing where some ESS kids go to Eastern. [no knock on Eastern, it's a great school, but outside of the magnet I would rather my kid attend TMPS].

ESS is ~50 students below capacity, and shows that steadily. That is not enough to move a boundary line. Highland View ES boundary might move, given how small that school is.

If you're just looking on the boundary map, ESS looks close, but for a chunk of the ESS zone south of Wayne, Nolte Park gets in the way. There is a direct way to walk there which involves basically going through a path in the woods but I wouldn't want my older elementary schooler who walks by himself to SCES take that route alone. You can walk around it on city streets but it takes a lot longer.

Honestly looking at the zone you could just cede the little section north of Colesville but that includes the Parkside location which is one of the new school options.

If it is Parkside, I think ultimately that is the section of SCES that gets served by the new school. If the current location is out, does the population of DTSS currently zoned for Sligo prefer Parkside to (potentially long) walking to ESS or HVES? Keeping in mind the zoning changes the demographics of those schools.

I don't foresee the ESS boundary moving. That school is one classroom under enrollment currently. That boundary will likely remain as it is currently.

Is it? I thought the building was somewhat under capacity, with numbers moving downward slowly over the next few years. I had thought that part of the point of reviewing boundaries was to address demographic inequity. People screamed over Option 3, but this is an opportunity to address inequity locally. You could tweak these boundaries without making assignments crazy. Although it's silly that this wasn't done as part of the current study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCES needs to be rezoned end of story and it will. The boundaries make zero aense and are inequitable.

What’s inequitable about it? Don’t know the boundaries.

It is one of the wealthiest schools in the immediate area. It directly borders a title 1 school (ESS) as well as two focus schools (Woodlin and highland view). French immersion definitely keeps farms down at SCES, but the disparity is greater than that. The border is also wonky in shape and not intuitive on its own. Tbh I don’t actually think there needs to be an ES in the current spot — kids who walk to SCES could mostly walk to ESS or HV.

First, Woodlin is not a Focus school. It's FARMS rate as compared to other Silver Spring schools has it only above Rock Creek Forest (which includes Spanish immersion) and below Pine Crest, Rosemary Hills, Piney Branch, and Takoma Park ES. Second, I've had kids in both the French Immersion and "academy" (neighborhood) program and it's absolutely true that the FI program brings the FARMS rate down considerably. Without FI the FARMS rate would likely be a bit higher than Woodlin's.

Not sure why else you think the boundaries make "zero sense" or are "inequitable" although it's true that on the easternmost edge of the catchment, ESS is slightly walkable. Oak View and Highland View are also sort of walkable from certain areas (if you consider a mile to be walkable) but that doesn't necessarily mean the boundaries are nonsensical. It means there are a lot of elementary-aged children concentrated in 20910 and environs. I don't think any of these schools are severely undercapacity.

I live on the ESS/SCES border and have had kids attend both schools. ESS is not slightly but highly walkable for the SCES zone south of Wayne. SCES is so much nicer than ESS (much nicer and better funded PTA) and it is absolutely tragic given the proximity. All the affordable housing complexes are zoned for ESS, which makes PP’s claim that SCES is THE elementary school serving the urban core of DTSS problematic. Of course FI changes the balance at SCES. Looking at the numbers, I don’t think it fully accounts for the inequity.

French Immersion is about 40-45% of the school and accounts for maybe 80% of the PTA fundraising. I also don't know if folks realize there is also a very highly regarded autism program and students come from outside the catchment to attend - while it's small, the FARMS rate for this group is likely lower as well.

Also, I don't know what your definition of "highly walkable" is, but we are "south of Wayne" and the walk to ESS is maybe 25 minutes? About 5 to SCES. If you're on Thayer or whatever the boundary is, sure, it's close.

ESS articulates to TPMS and Blair which is a huge advantage! You get to attend the best MS and HS in east county while paying no Takoma Park property taxes. I suspect folks wouldn't object to being rezoned to ESS if the articulation was the same for everyone, but knowing MCPS, it will probably result in some split articulation thing where some ESS kids go to Eastern. [no knock on Eastern, it's a great school, but outside of the magnet I would rather my kid attend TMPS].

ESS is ~50 students below capacity, and shows that steadily. That is not enough to move a boundary line. Highland View ES boundary might move, given how small that school is.

If you're just looking on the boundary map, ESS looks close, but for a chunk of the ESS zone south of Wayne, Nolte Park gets in the way. There is a direct way to walk there which involves basically going through a path in the woods but I wouldn't want my older elementary schooler who walks by himself to SCES take that route alone. You can walk around it on city streets but it takes a lot longer.

Honestly looking at the zone you could just cede the little section north of Colesville but that includes the Parkside location which is one of the new school options.

If it is Parkside, I think ultimately that is the section of SCES that gets served by the new school. If the current location is out, does the population of DTSS currently zoned for Sligo prefer Parkside to (potentially long) walking to ESS or HVES? Keeping in mind the zoning changes the demographics of those schools.

I don't foresee the ESS boundary moving. That school is one classroom under enrollment currently. That boundary will likely remain as it is currently.

Is it? I thought the building was somewhat under capacity, with numbers moving downward slowly over the next few years. I had thought that part of the point of reviewing boundaries was to address demographic inequity. People screamed over Option 3, but this is an opportunity to address inequity locally. You could tweak these boundaries without making assignments crazy. Although it's silly that this wasn't done as part of the current study.

I guess 50 students may not be enough to move a boundary if facility utilization is the only concern. Is it?

[Anonymous]

Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

I’m glad someone has a spine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

I’m glad someone has a spine.

Well, this should make for an interesting meeting tomorrow!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

I’m glad someone has a spine.

Based on recent meetings I felt like she was the best hope to push back on this- why on earth no one else will join her, I don't know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

I’m glad someone has a spine.

Based on recent meetings I felt like she was the best hope to push back on this- why on earth no one else will join her, I don't know.

I feel like Stewart could join her in this amendment vote, but don't know if others will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

I’m glad someone has a spine.

Based on recent meetings I felt like she was the best hope to push back on this- why on earth no one else will join her, I don't know.

I feel like Stewart could join her in this amendment vote, but don't know if others will.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

I’m glad someone has a spine.

Well, this should make for an interesting meeting tomorrow!

I'm new to following the BOE... how rare is this, a member proposing an amendment like this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

I’m glad someone has a spine.

Based on recent meetings I felt like she was the best hope to push back on this- why on earth no one else will join her, I don't know.

I feel like Stewart could join her in this amendment vote, but don't know if others will.

No one will join Montoya in this amendment as the CIP domino line constructed by Taylor would then collapse. I think she is a one-and-done term member as she wants to have big influence in a system that doesn't allow that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya proposes amendments to at least delay action on SSIMS/SCES.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/11/19/montoya-proposes-major-changes-to-taylors-capital-budget/

I’m glad someone has a spine.

Well, this should make for an interesting meeting tomorrow!

I'm new to following the BOE... how rare is this, a member proposing an amendment like this?

Happens all the time.
And squashed by Superintendent.

[Anonymous]

Can’t they lease a holding school? Why was that not an option?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can’t they lease a holding school? Why was that not an option?

Do you have a building in mind?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t they lease a holding school? Why was that not an option?

Do you have a building in mind?

I'm not sure why MCPS thinks it's the public's responsibility to do their job for them. They should be coming up with potential alternatives. Presenting only ONE option for holding schools is not sufficient, especially when that one option is to close two existing schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t they lease a holding school? Why was that not an option?

Do you have a building in mind?

Doesn't the county itself lease buildings, several of which were former MCPS schools themselves?

Anyway, I've sometimes been critical of MCPS hiring outside consultants for tasks/studies that it seems they should be able to handle internally. However, I think this is a case where they could really use some independent thinkers who are willing to put in the work to come up with options that are less designed to screw over kids in the DCC and more aligned with the county's urban planning goals. Nothing I've heard from Taylor indicates that MCPS has seriously explored other options, it's clearly too hard for them.