Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I see here is people who used to say “the Whitman district” or “the BCC district” realizing that they are in fact all in the “MCPS district.” This is one organization that must think about one county’s needs as a whole.

Good schools are good schools because of the people that buy homes in the school. If you put all of Kennedy at Whitman and all of Whitman at Kennedy then Kennedy would be the highest performing school.

Making our best schools worse than they are doesn't do anything good for the county. All it does is drive away the people that prioritize schools.

We chose our DCC school very intentionally. It was what we could afford without overextending ourselves. We love the school our child attends.

+1 except we could have bought in Bethesda but preferred the DCC. Meanwhile we absolutely prioritize education. We just also prioritize diversity, walkability, short commutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

Why does it seem that way to you? Seems like a self-serving conclusion.

[Anonymous]

It is batsh** nuts to think that the County Council wouldn’t care about constituents property values decreasing.

Some of you have absolutely no faith in the power of constituent action, and no faith in your elected officials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

Property values should not be the priority. Student needs should be. You don’t care about the kids, just money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I see here is people who used to say “the Whitman district” or “the BCC district” realizing that they are in fact all in the “MCPS district.” This is one organization that must think about one county’s needs as a whole.

Good schools are good schools because of the people that buy homes in the school. If you put all of Kennedy at Whitman and all of Whitman at Kennedy then Kennedy would be the highest performing school.

Making our best schools worse than they are doesn't do anything good for the county. All it does is drive away the people that prioritize schools.

We chose our DCC school very intentionally. It was what we could afford without overextending ourselves. We love the school our child attends.

+1 except we could have bought in Bethesda but preferred the DCC. Meanwhile we absolutely prioritize education. We just also prioritize diversity, walkability, short commutes.

The flexibility for jobs was huge for us since jobs are no longer stable. We can easily go anywhere in md, va or dc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

Why does it seem that way to you? Seems like a self-serving conclusion.

Bc of economics. Decreasing property values in rich areas by 10% =\= increasing property values in poorer areas by 10%. In that scenario the whole tax base decreases.

And that’s just one possibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I see here is people who used to say “the Whitman district” or “the BCC district” realizing that they are in fact all in the “MCPS district.” This is one organization that must think about one county’s needs as a whole.

Good schools are good schools because of the people that buy homes in the school. If you put all of Kennedy at Whitman and all of Whitman at Kennedy then Kennedy would be the highest performing school.

Making our best schools worse than they are doesn't do anything good for the county. All it does is drive away the people that prioritize schools.

We chose our DCC school very intentionally. It was what we could afford without overextending ourselves. We love the school our child attends.

OK. Then you are fine without the bussing. Everybody chooses their school very intentionally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

Property values should not be the priority. Student needs should be. You don’t care about the kids, just money.

Property values fund schools. Caring about property values is actually caring about kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

Why does it seem that way to you? Seems like a self-serving conclusion.

Bc of economics. Decreasing property values in rich areas by 10% =\= increasing property values in poorer areas by 10%. In that scenario the whole tax base decreases.

And that’s just one possibility.

You'd have to take into account the numbers of properties on each side. It's a very complex calculation that you have not done. But you are demanding I prove you are wrong? GMAFB. Property values go up and down for a variety of reasons. Interest rates, DOGE, the overall economy. As a property owner you should know this and be prepared for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about Option 4 but send all of Viers Mill elementary to WJ and all of Garrett Park Elementary to Woodward (instead of that portion going to WJ)? Seems like that would mitigate the overcrowding at Wheaton with oversubscribing WJ and also makes the FARMs levels a little more comparable between WJ and Woodward. All without bussing kids long distances.

Finally, a post that discusses Options and how to improve them. I am hoping that something like this will be the end result.

The Option 3 was introduced as a warning to parents not to make too much noise once the final boundaries are reached because "there are much worse ideas - just look at Option 3."

They will choose one of the remaining three options as a basic framework, make some modifications to address comments and soften some blows and call it a day. In the end, the Woodward will be a weaker version of today's WJ but nothing nearly as drastic as commended here.

Well, that is my hope, at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

Property values should not be the priority. Student needs should be. You don’t care about the kids, just money.

Property values fund schools. Caring about property values is actually caring about kids.

Option 3 still has most kids going to a school close to them. Most property values will not be impacted. Some will go down, some will go up, and it will be a wash. Be more worried about DOGE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

Why does it seem that way to you? Seems like a self-serving conclusion.

Bc of economics. Decreasing property values in rich areas by 10% =\= increasing property values in poorer areas by 10%. In that scenario the whole tax base decreases.

And that’s just one possibility.

You'd have to take into account the numbers of properties on each side. It's a very complex calculation that you have not done. But you are demanding I prove you are wrong? GMAFB. Property values go up and down for a variety of reasons. Interest rates, DOGE, the overall economy. As a property owner you should know this and be prepared for it.

So just agree that school boundary changes could decrease the tax base and lead to less funding for schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Property values are something that any BOE member should care about.

Or at least the county council.

No. If some people's property values go down, others will go up. It's all the same to the Council. Sorry the government won't prop up your wealth.

Do you know that for a fact? Bc it seems like several options lead to overall decreases in property values versus a zero sum game.

Property values should not be the priority. Student needs should be. You don’t care about the kids, just money.

Property values fund schools. Caring about property values is actually caring about kids.

Option 3 still has most kids going to a school close to them. Most property values will not be impacted. Some will go down, some will go up, and it will be a wash. Be more worried about DOGE.

No it does not. And again you have no way of knowing it will be a wash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about Option 4 but send all of Viers Mill elementary to WJ and all of Garrett Park Elementary to Woodward (instead of that portion going to WJ)? Seems like that would mitigate the overcrowding at Wheaton with oversubscribing WJ and also makes the FARMs levels a little more comparable between WJ and Woodward. All without bussing kids long distances.

Finally, a post that discusses Options and how to improve them. I am hoping that something like this will be the end result.

The Option 3 was introduced as a warning to parents not to make too much noise once the final boundaries are reached because "there are much worse ideas - just look at Option 3."

They will choose one of the remaining three options as a basic framework, make some modifications to address comments and soften some blows and call it a day. In the end, the Woodward will be a weaker version of today's WJ but nothing nearly as drastic as commended here.

Well, that is my hope, at least.

+1