Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we are saying we need to leave Twinbrook alone, keep them in their community, and their proximity close, why not for RP2? Just because they were pulled out of Beall and bussed to RP a decade or so ago doesn’t mean they have to stay there. New school in their neighborhood. Walkable communities are always closer. Getting out and getting to low each other. It is a positive. Like another person said, it all comes down to people not wanting a school to have low FARMS. Even in Laurie’s argument she says that. It isn’t what is easiest or best for families and kids in need. It is the numbers game.

This argument is completely bogus. Twinbrook and RP2 have extremely different circumstances. Twinbrook is already Title 1 school with extra funding for small classes and special programs. RP2 is not going to find those conditions in RPES or RMES5. They will be in a class with either 24% FARMS (RPES) or 32% FARMS (RMES5). Statistically speaking they have a better chance to a good education at RPES. Plus they have the bus - which seems to be an important factor for many of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is your point here. People have used it for camps already. Not just outside but inside. City of Rockville will be using it for aftercare. I have been inside it and outside multiple times. There is nothing that makes it “just for high schoolers.” It’s a great community facility that will work well for all the walkers at RM5. But you go ahead and keep pushing that agenda of how terrible Elwood smith is for elementary school kids.

Can you provide a link to support your claim that city of Rockville will use Elwood Smith for aftercare?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elwood Smith is not for elementary aged kids. I live in B2. Not sure why both of you are fighting over cost when in reality that center is useless for elementary aged kids. It;s good for middle school and high school kids.

?????? We use it for playground camp every summer. It is totally for grade school kids. Beautiful playground and fields too

I was not talking about summer camps here. Elementary school kids when school is running. You can go and check it yourself.

Can you clarify why Elwood Smith is not for elementary aged kids? What makes it good for middle school and high school kids, but not appropriate for elementary school kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we are saying we need to leave Twinbrook alone, keep them in their community, and their proximity close, why not for RP2? Just because they were pulled out of Beall and bussed to RP a decade or so ago doesn’t mean they have to stay there. New school in their neighborhood. Walkable communities are always closer. Getting out and getting to low each other. It is a positive. Like another person said, it all comes down to people not wanting a school to have low FARMS. Even in Laurie’s argument she says that. It isn’t what is easiest or best for families and kids in need. It is the numbers game.

This argument is completely bogus. Twinbrook and RP2 have extremely different circumstances. Twinbrook is already Title 1 school with extra funding for small classes and special programs. RP2 is not going to find those conditions in RPES or RMES5. They will be in a class with either 24% FARMS (RPES) or 32% FARMS (RMES5). Statistically speaking they have a better chance to a good education at RPES. Plus they have the bus - which seems to be an important factor for many of them.

Based on data shared by MCPS, It's 38% FARMS in regular class , not 32%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elwood Smith is not for elementary aged kids. I live in B2. Not sure why both of you are fighting over cost when in reality that center is useless for elementary aged kids. It;s good for middle school and high school kids.

?????? We use it for playground camp every summer. It is totally for grade school kids. Beautiful playground and fields too

I was not talking about summer camps here. Elementary school kids when school is running. You can go and check it yourself.

Can you clarify why Elwood Smith is not for elementary aged kids? What makes it good for middle school and high school kids, but not appropriate for elementary school kids?

Very little supervision.

Aftercare for preschool, elementary, Middle, and high school need different level of supervision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we are saying we need to leave Twinbrook alone, keep them in their community, and their proximity close, why not for RP2? Just because they were pulled out of Beall and bussed to RP a decade or so ago doesn’t mean they have to stay there. New school in their neighborhood. Walkable communities are always closer. Getting out and getting to low each other. It is a positive. Like another person said, it all comes down to people not wanting a school to have low FARMS. Even in Laurie’s argument she says that. It isn’t what is easiest or best for families and kids in need. It is the numbers game.

This argument is completely bogus. Twinbrook and RP2 have extremely different circumstances. Twinbrook is already Title 1 school with extra funding for small classes and special programs. RP2 is not going to find those conditions in RPES or RMES5. They will be in a class with either 24% FARMS (RPES) or 32% FARMS (RMES5). Statistically speaking they have a better chance to a good education at RPES. Plus they have the bus - which seems to be an important factor for many of them.

Based on data shared by MCPS, It's 38% FARMS in regular class , not 32%.

If you talk about Alternative A, you are correct, it is 38%. Alternative B has 32%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elwood Smith is not for elementary aged kids. I live in B2. Not sure why both of you are fighting over cost when in reality that center is useless for elementary aged kids. It;s good for middle school and high school kids.

?????? We use it for playground camp every summer. It is totally for grade school kids. Beautiful playground and fields too

I was not talking about summer camps here. Elementary school kids when school is running. You can go and check it yourself.

Can you clarify why Elwood Smith is not for elementary aged kids? What makes it good for middle school and high school kids, but not appropriate for elementary school kids?

Very little supervision.

Aftercare for preschool, elementary, Middle, and high school need different level of supervision.

What would happen if the city would hire more staff? Would it be appropriate for elementary aged kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we are saying we need to leave Twinbrook alone, keep them in their community, and their proximity close, why not for RP2? Just because they were pulled out of Beall and bussed to RP a decade or so ago doesn’t mean they have to stay there. New school in their neighborhood. Walkable communities are always closer. Getting out and getting to low each other. It is a positive. Like another person said, it all comes down to people not wanting a school to have low FARMS. Even in Laurie’s argument she says that. It isn’t what is easiest or best for families and kids in need. It is the numbers game.

This argument is completely bogus. Twinbrook and RP2 have extremely different circumstances. Twinbrook is already Title 1 school with extra funding for small classes and special programs. RP2 is not going to find those conditions in RPES or RMES5. They will be in a class with either 24% FARMS (RPES) or 32% FARMS (RMES5). Statistically speaking they have a better chance to a good education at RPES. Plus they have the bus - which seems to be an important factor for many of them.

Based on data shared by MCPS, It's 38% FARMS in regular class , not 32%.

If you talk about Alternative A, you are correct, it is 38%. Alternative B has 32%.

. You are right, for each alternative it's different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elwood Smith is not for elementary aged kids. I live in B2. Not sure why both of you are fighting over cost when in reality that center is useless for elementary aged kids. It;s good for middle school and high school kids.

?????? We use it for playground camp every summer. It is totally for grade school kids. Beautiful playground and fields too

I was not talking about summer camps here. Elementary school kids when school is running. You can go and check it yourself.

Can you clarify why Elwood Smith is not for elementary aged kids? What makes it good for middle school and high school kids, but not appropriate for elementary school kids?

Very little supervision.

Aftercare for preschool, elementary, Middle, and high school need different level of supervision.

What would happen if the city would hire more staff? Would it be appropriate for elementary aged kids?

It needs to be run the same way as other after care runs in many place for younger kids. Many elementary schools have it.

[Anonymous]

I will be honest here. Anyone talking about protecting neighborhood used to be racist person in early days. Now if anyone uses it it means let's keep our kids in bubble and not have them integrated.

It's a well documented scenario. Protecting neighborhood is simply a code word for keeping unwanted kids out.

WG vocal group is fighting so much because they think Beall is un-touchable and WG kids are elite kids who should not have to attend Beall.

I don't have any problem with any scenario because I am staying in Beall, but I am very close to WG. There are many nice parents who think otherwise, but they are not vocal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And what is the travel time for students on those buses now? It's not about bus pick up time, it's travel time. Are they 4 miles away from Beall (serious question, I have no idea)?

Since some trolls started talking that those bus route won't exist next year, let me stick to one example which will exist next year.

Route: 5313 - FALLSMEAD ES (GREEN) Start time : 8:07 A.M first stop End time 8:40 ..... That's 33 minutes of bus ride , right here in nearby school.

It was blown out of proportion by RP parents as if Fallsgrove is suffering too much and no other kids suffer this much and I actually believed it.

? I'm sorry, but why are you bringing in a different ES in a different cluster into this discussion? Lots of kids from all over have long bus rides because of the gerrymandering.

Because MCPS is one system. Many RP parents claimed that Fallsgrove kids got the worst deal in MCPS and cross XYZ elementary.

Just trying to put their ride time in perspective here. Many time question was asked "would you allow your kindergarten kids to ride 15-20 minutes.

I hope that question is not asked by any RP parent in future after looking at above bus times. Lots of kindergarten kids spend much longer than Falls grove kids. Many do it right now in Beall and many will do it in various MCPS schools.

Does that mean I advocate for long bus ride for Fallsgrove. Absolutely not. I was making sure that folks keep some perspective and not blow it out of proportion.

Agreed that there are plenty of kids who have long bus rides, BUT, if those kids were living in an area that is going to be rezoned, don't you think the parents would try to push for their area to be rezoned to a closer school, certainly not bused further away to increase their bus time.

Our cousins go to Fallsmead and are on that bus. They are only a 6-7 minute car ride from school, and walkable to Frost. However, it takes their kids 30-35 minutes to get home every day because of a 20 stop, winding bus route through a very spread out neighborhood with no sidewalks. It’s their choice and work schedules that mean their kids take a long bus ride rather than actually having to travel far to get to school every day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will be honest here. Anyone talking about protecting neighborhood used to be racist person in early days. Now if anyone uses it it means let's keep our kids in bubble and not have them integrated.

It's a well documented scenario. Protecting neighborhood is simply a code word for keeping unwanted kids out.

WG vocal group is fighting so much because they think Beall is un-touchable and WG kids are elite kids who should not have to attend Beall.

I don't have any problem with any scenario because I am staying in Beall, but I am very close to WG. There are many nice parents who think otherwise, but they are not vocal.

CG is the most racially diverse school in the cluster. So WG wanting to stay in the most racially diverse school in the cluster is racist? Or are you taking one aspect of diversity FARMS and placing weight on that factor above all others even though the differences are small amoung the schools. And we all meet at middle school and high school so these elite WG kids are going to the same elite middle school as beall in a few years. What a rediculous statement to make that WG is elite and not intergrated for wanting to stay in the most diverse community school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will be honest here. Anyone talking about protecting neighborhood used to be racist person in early days. Now if anyone uses it it means let's keep our kids in bubble and not have them integrated.

It's a well documented scenario. Protecting neighborhood is simply a code word for keeping unwanted kids out.

WG vocal group is fighting so much because they think Beall is un-touchable and WG kids are elite kids who should not have to attend Beall.

I don't have any problem with any scenario because I am staying in Beall, but I am very close to WG. There are many nice parents who think otherwise, but they are not vocal.

CG is the most racially diverse school in the cluster. So WG wanting to stay in the most racially diverse school in the cluster is racist? Or are you taking one aspect of diversity FARMS and placing weight on that factor above all others even though the differences are small amoung the schools. And we all meet at middle school and high school so these elite WG kids are going to the same elite middle school as beall in a few years. What a rediculous statement to make that WG is elite and not intergrated for wanting to stay in the most diverse community school.

There is no reason for WG to get an elite treatment. It's horrible to make so much noise to not go Beall when many parts of Beall are essentially in the same neighborhood as WG. Beall has some more FARMs students, but it's not bad. WG had insulting banners in front of their houses which was shared by many in Beall PTA.

I even has screenshots of houses having sign like "Don't send our kids to over crowded Beall" as if it made any sense with CG with 129% capacity utilization.

It reeks of selective entitlement to keep attending the same school. It may be an elite neighborhood with politicians living there, but MCPS needs to treat all neighborhood the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will be honest here. Anyone talking about protecting neighborhood used to be racist person in early days. Now if anyone uses it it means let's keep our kids in bubble and not have them integrated.

It's a well documented scenario. Protecting neighborhood is simply a code word for keeping unwanted kids out.

WG vocal group is fighting so much because they think Beall is un-touchable and WG kids are elite kids who should not have to attend Beall.

I don't have any problem with any scenario because I am staying in Beall, but I am very close to WG. There are many nice parents who think otherwise, but they are not vocal.

CG is the most racially diverse school in the cluster. So WG wanting to stay in the most racially diverse school in the cluster is racist? Or are you taking one aspect of diversity FARMS and placing weight on that factor above all others even though the differences are small amoung the schools. And we all meet at middle school and high school so these elite WG kids are going to the same elite middle school as beall in a few years. What a rediculous statement to make that WG is elite and not intergrated for wanting to stay in the most diverse community school.

There is no reason for WG to get an elite treatment. It's horrible to make so much noise to not go Beall when many parts of Beall are essentially in the same neighborhood as WG. Beall has some more FARMs students, but it's not bad. WG had insulting banners in front of their houses which was shared by many in Beall PTA.

I even has screenshots of houses having sign like "Don't send our kids to over crowded Beall" as if it made any sense with CG with 129% capacity utilization.

It reeks of selective entitlement to keep attending the same school. It may be an elite neighborhood with politicians living there, but MCPS needs to treat all neighborhood the same.

+1

WG is where all the elite 1%'ers live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will be honest here. Anyone talking about protecting neighborhood used to be racist person in early days. Now if anyone uses it it means let's keep our kids in bubble and not have them integrated.

It's a well documented scenario. Protecting neighborhood is simply a code word for keeping unwanted kids out.

WG vocal group is fighting so much because they think Beall is un-touchable and WG kids are elite kids who should not have to attend Beall.

I don't have any problem with any scenario because I am staying in Beall, but I am very close to WG. There are many nice parents who think otherwise, but they are not vocal.

CG is the most racially diverse school in the cluster. So WG wanting to stay in the most racially diverse school in the cluster is racist? Or are you taking one aspect of diversity FARMS and placing weight on that factor above all others even though the differences are small amoung the schools. And we all meet at middle school and high school so these elite WG kids are going to the same elite middle school as beall in a few years. What a rediculous statement to make that WG is elite and not intergrated for wanting to stay in the most diverse community school.

CG is the second least diverse ES in our cluster.